Phlogenzym® in the Treatment of a
Monoarticular Gonarthritis
(MU-696401)
Efficacy and Tolerance
Randomised double-blind study
phase III with parallel groups vs. diclofenac according to the
guidelines of good clinical practice (GCP)
Integrated final report according to ICH E3 guidelines
Primary Investigator: Univ.-Prof. Gert Klein, M.D.
Rehabilitation Center of Rheumatic Diseases and Diseases of the
Cardiovascular System Thorerstrasse 26, A-5760 Saalfelden, Austria
Evaluation by: MUCOS Pharma GmbH & Co Clinical Research Dpt.
Malvenweg 2, D-82538 Geretsried, Germany
Report by: PharmaScript, Primelweg 2, D-82538 Geretsried, Germany
Synopsis
|
Name of Sponsor/Company: |
Individual Study Table Referring to Part at the Dossier |
(For National Authority Use Only) |
|
|
Name of Finished Product: |
Volume: |
|
|
|
Name of Active Ingredient(s): |
Page: |
|
|
|
Title of Study: |
|||
|
Investigator(s): |
|||
|
Study centre(s): |
|||
|
Publication (reference/s): |
|||
|
Studied period (mo/years): 1 year |
Phase of development: |
||
|
Objectives: |
|||
|
Methodology: |
|||
|
Number of patients (planned and analysed): |
|||
|
Diagnosis and main criteria for inclusion: |
|||
|
Test product, dose and mode of administration, batch number: |
|||
|
Duration of treatment: |
|||
|
Reference therapy, dose and mode of administration, batch
number. |
|||
|
Name of Sponsor/Company: |
Individual Study Table Referring to Part at the Dossier |
(For National Authority Use Only) |
|
Name of Finished Product: |
Volume: |
|
|
Name of Active Ingredient(s): |
Page: |
|
|
Criteria for evaluation |
||
|
Statistical methods: |
||
|
SUMMARY - CONCLUSIONS |
||
Date of the report: September 25th, 1997
1. Summary
A double-blind clinical study to prove efficacy and tolerance of
Phlogenzym® for equivalence with the nonsteroidal
anti-inflammatory drug diclofenac in monoarticular gonarthritis was
performed.
72 patients were planned, 73 patients with monoarticular
gonarthritis were included and randomised into two groups: 36
patients received the enzyme preparation Phlogenzym®
(enzyme group), and 37 patients diclofenac (diclofenac group). The
data of all patients was evaluable.
The principal investigator of this center was Prim. Univ.-Prof. Gert
Klein, M.D., rehabilitation center of rheumatic diseases and
diseases of the cardiovascular system, Ludwig Boltzmann-Institut,
Thorerstrasse 26, A-5760 Saalfelden, Austria.
To make the compared drugs suitable for the double blind design, the
study material had to be prepared following the "double dummy"
method: all patients received 2 tablets t.i.d. (i.e. 6 tablets per
day) of the "enzyme tablets" and in the first week 1 tablet t.i.d.
(i.e. 3 tablets) diclofenac, in the second and third week 1 tablet
b.i.d. (i.e. 2 tablets). In the enzyme group the patients received
active enzyme and placebo diclofenac tablets, in the diclofenac
group enzyme placebos and active diclofenac.
At baseline the patients were comparable with regard to age, sex,
weight, height and duration of complaints (p > 0.05, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney-U-test).
As main endpoints for statistical evaluation the Lesquesne index and
the sum score of the self-judgement (rest pain, pain on movement,
restricted movement) by the patients using a "visual analog scale" (Huskisson
score) 4 weeks after the end of therapy was defined.
As secondary criteria the self-judgement by the patients, the result
of the therapy, the motility of the knee without pain, the
circumference (cm) of the knee and the global judgements by the
physician and by the patients were evaluated descriptively. The main
endpoint "Lesquesne index 4 weeks after end of therapy" has proven
for equivalence of both groups: the Mann-Whitney statistics yielded
a value of 0.5459 with a lower limit of the 95% confidence interval
of 0.4568, which is above 0.44, the limit for proven equivalence.
The second main endpoint, the sum score of the symptoms, also proved
for equivalence: the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval was
with 0.4608 above the limit (0.44).
The efficacy of the drug was judged in the enzyme group by the
physician and by the patients as 1.5 ("very good" to "good"). In the
diclofenac group the physician judged the efficacy of the drug as
1.3 ("very good" to "good") and the patients as 1.4 ("very good" to
"good"). The tolerance of the drugs was judged in the enzyme group
by the physician and by the patients as 1.2 ("very good") and in the
diclofenac group as 1.3 ("very good" to "good"). There were no
differences between the groups (p > 0.05).
Adverse events were documented in two patients in the enzyme group
(headache, diarrhea) and in three patients in the diclofenac group
(sinus bradycardia, pain in the stomach due to a duodenal ulcer,
nausea). They started on average after 6.5 days in the enzyme group
and after 9.3 days in the diclofenac group. The duration was on
average 5.5 days in the enzyme group and 3.0 days in the diclofenac
group. They were all judged as "moderate". In the enzyme group they
were without sequelae and in the diclofenac group the adverse events
were in two patients without sequelae, the patient with the ulcer
was in need of ambulatory treatment.