CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
Clinical Studies
Study Design
The safety and effectiveness of SUPARTZ FX was
based on an integrated analysis of five randomized,
multi-center, blinded, "placebo controlled" clinical
trials. Entry criteria are described for all studies
(See Table 2). The treatment regimen consisted of
5 weekly injections in all studies. All patients in
these studies (including those injected with the
control) received arthrocentesis of the knee prior
to an injection of SUPARTZ FX or vehicle
(phosphate buffered saline) or, in the German
study only, a dilute (1%) form of the SUPARTZ FX
formulation. The French study included an additional
treatment arm: 3 SUPARTZ FX injections followed
by 2 injections of the control per patient. (Table 3
describes the study design and the treatment and
follow-up schedules.)
Measures Of Effectiveness
Table 3 provides details of the primary and
secondary effectiveness parameters used in each
study. The Lequesne Index2, although a primary
measure of effectiveness in only three studies
(France, Germany, and Sweden) was common to
all five studies. It was used for the integrated
analysis of effectiveness across all five studies.
The primary measure used in the other two studies
was the WOMAC Index in Australia3, and VAS pain
ratings in the United Kingdom.
Results
Patient Population and Demographics
The demographics of study participants were
comparable across treatment groups with respect
to age, sex, mean body mass index, and baseline
scores, with the exception of gender in the
German study (see Table 4).
Individual Study Results
Medication use results are presented in Table 5.
The results for the Australian study for the protocolspecific
primary analysis are presented in Table
6A. The results for all studies of analysis of the
Lequesne score as repeated measures analysis
of covariance (ANCOVA) of mean reduction from
baseline over all visits at or following the 5 week
visit are presented in table 6B. Other analyses are
as follows: The results for the German study of the
paracetamol consumption performed as a nonparametric
ranking procedure (stratified Wilcoxon
rank-sum test), over weeks 1-5, are SUPARTZ FX
= 0.85 and Control = 0.89 (p > 0.05). The results
for the Swedish and UK studies for the protocolspecific
primary analysis = VAS ratings as analysis
of covariance (ANCOVA) at weeks 1-5, 13 and 20
(Swedish study), and repeated measures analysis
of variance (ANOVA), over weeks 10, 14, and 18,
(UK study) are the following: SUPARTZ FX = 10.11
and Control = 9.76 for the Swedish study
(p > 0.05); and SUPARTZ FX = 13.47 and Control
= 12.89 for the UK study (p > 0.05).
Integrated Analysis
An integrated longitudinal analysis was conducted
to examine results across all five studies. See
Table 6C. This method of analyzing data with
repeated measurements takes into account the
correlation structure of the repeated measurements
and examines the effects of treatment over time.
The integrated longitudinal analysis showed a
reduction in the total Lequesne score of 2.68 in the
SUPARTZ FX treatment groups compared to a
reduction in the total Lequesne score of 2.00 in the
control groups (p=0.0026). The 95% confidence
interval for the difference of the reduction in total Lequesne score between SUPARTZ FX and
control is (0.56, 0.79).
Summary Of Results
The difference in reduction in total Lequesne scores
between the SUPARTZ FX treated group and the
control group is 0.68, which is statistically significant
in the integrated analysis (p=0.0026). Additionally,
the Australian study shows a significant difference
between SUPARTZ FX and control in both the
WOMAC pain (p=0.045) and stiffness (p=0.024)
scores and Lequesne total scores (p=0.0114).
Detailed Device Description
Each 2.5 mL prefilled syringe of SUPARTZ FX
contains:
Sodium Hyaluronate
(hyaluronan) |
25.0 mg |
Sodium Chloride |
21.25 mg |
Dibasic Sodium
Phosphate Dodecahydrate |
1.343 mg |
Sodium Dihydrogen
Phosphate Dihydrate |
0.04 mg |
Water for Injection |
q.s. |
Table 2: Entry Criteria
|
Inclusion |
Exclusion |
Study |
Baseline
pain
level |
Duration of pain
prior to study
entry |
Unilateral
versus
bilateral |
Radiologic criteria |
Effusion |
Australia |
Not specified |
≥ 3 months |
Unilateral or
predominantly
unilateral** |
Evidence of one or more of the following features in an
x-ray taken during the previous 6 months: femorotibial
osteophytes, osteosclerosis of the femoral or tibial
endplates, or joint space narrowing |
> 50 mL |
France |
Lequesne total
score = 4 - 12
Global pain ≥
35 mm on VAS |
≥ 3 months |
Unilateral or
Predominantly
unilateral** |
Narrowing of femorotibial space > 20% and < 90% in
at least 1 of the appropriate angles and/or OA and/or
osteocondensation, and/or geode(s) |
Severe (tight,
distending
effusion) |
Germany |
Moderate to
medium* |
Not specified |
Unilateral or
bilateral |
Osteophytes |
Osteophytes |
Sweden |
Not specified |
Not specified |
Unilateral |
Knee flexion angle of 10 - 15°; 50 - 100% obliteration
(= 400 mm) of the joint space (standing radiographs)
without any bone erosion |
Not specified |
United
Kingdom |
Moderate* |
> 3 months |
Unilateral or
predominantly
unilateral** |
Femorotibial osteophytes |
> 50 mL |
* Definition not specified in protocol.
** Predominantly unilateral means that even in the case of bilateral disease it is possible for the patient to identify one predominant knee that is affected, as
reported by the investigator. |
Table 3: Prospective, Randomized Clinical Studies of Symptomatic OA Patients - Study Design
Study |
Control |
Effectiveness Parameters |
Evaluation
Timepoints |
Protocol-Specified Analysis Plan for
Primary Effectiveness Analysis |
Concurrent
OA therapy |
Australia |
Arthrocentesis
Injection with
phosphate buffered
saline |
Primary - WOMAC pain, stiffness,
and disability
Secondary - Lequesne,
Paracetamol Consumption,
Investigator Global Assessment,
Patient Global Assessment |
Week 0, 1*,
2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
10, 14, 18 |
Repeated measures analysis of
covariance (ANCOVA) of mean
reduction from baseline for WOMAC
pain, stiffness, and disability, over
weeks6, 10, 14, and 18. |
Paracetamol
Rescue |
France** |
Arthrocentesis
Injection with
phosphate buffered
saline |
Primary - Lequesne
Secondary - VAS Ratings,
Paracetamol Consumption,
Investigator Global Assessment |
Screen, Day
0*, 7, 14, 21,
28, 35, 60, 90 |
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) of
mean reduction from baseline
for Lequesne scores, at days 35, 60,
and 90. |
Paracetamol
Rescue |
Germany |
Arthrocentesis
Injection with a
dilute (1%)
formulation of
SUPARTZ FX |
Primary - Lequesne, Paracetamol
Consumption
Secondary - VAS Ratings,
Investigator Global Assessment,
Patient Global Assessment |
Week 0, 1*,
2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
10, 14 |
1. Repeated measures ANCOVA of
mean reduction from baseline for
Lequesne scores, over weeks 4, 5,
and 6.
2. Non-parametric ranking procedure
applied to mean reduction from
baseline for paracetamol
consumption, over weeks 1-5. |
Paracetamol
Rescue |
Sweden |
Arthrocentesis
Injection with
phosphate buffered
saline |
Primary - Lequesne, VAS Ratings
for knee function, knee pain, range of
motion, and activity level
Secondary - Paracetamol Consumption,
Investigator Global Assessment,
Patient Global Assessment |
Week -1 , 0*,
1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
13, 20 |
ANCOVA of mean reduction from
baseline for both Lequesne scores
and VAS pain ratings, at weeks 1-5,
13, and 20. |
Paracetamol
Rescue |
United
Kingdom |
Arthrocentesis
Injection with
phosphate buffered
saline |
Primary - VAS Pain Ratings
Secondary - Lequesne, Paracetamol
Consumption, Investigator Global
Assessment, Patient Global
Assessment |
Week 0, 1*,
2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
10, 14, 18, 26 |
Repeated measures ANOVA of mean
VAS pain ratings, over weeks 10, 14,
and 18. |
Co-Proxamol
Rescue |
* First injection given
** This study had 3 treatment arms: 3 injections of SUPARTZ FX, 5 injections of SUPARTZ FX, control |
Table 4: Patient* Demographics by Treatment Group
Country |
# of
Centers |
# of Patients |
Age
(Mean) |
% Female |
BMI |
Baseline
Total
Lequesne |
Total |
SUPARTZ FX |
Control |
Australia |
17 |
223 |
108 |
115 |
A = 62.4
C = 63.0 |
A = 56.5
C = 61.7 |
A = 29.5
C = 29.2 |
A = 12.1
C = 13.0 |
France |
54 |
254 |
(5) 87
(3) 87 |
80 |
A (5) = 64.7
A (3) = 63.9
C = 65.2 |
A (5) = 60.9
A (3) = 73.6
C = 68.8 |
A (5) = 27.4
A (3) = 28.3
C = 28.5 |
A (5) = 9.8
A (3) = 9.8
C = 10.1 |
Germany |
25 |
280 |
102 |
106 |
A = 62.0
C = 60.5 |
A = 70.6**
C = 56.6 |
A = 26.2
C = 26.8 |
A = 10.5
C = 9.6 |
Sweden |
8 |
239 |
119 |
120 |
A = 58.5
C = 58.0 |
A = 55.5
C = 55.8 |
A = 27.7
C = 27.2 |
A = 9.9
C = 9.6 |
UK |
19 |
231 |
116 |
115 |
A = 60.8
C = 61.6 |
A = 60.3
C = 53.9 |
A = 28.7
C = 28.2 |
A = 13.5
C = 13.5 |
Total |
123 |
1155 |
619 |
536*** |
|
* All ITT Patients
** Percent female was statistically significantly higher in the SUPARTZ FX group
*** One patient is excluded from this table since no efficacy data was collected/available
A = SUPARTZ FX (5) = 5 Injections, France
C = Control (3) = 3 Injections, France |
Table 5: % Distribution of Patients* Using Analgesic and Anti-inflammatory Drugs by Treatment Group
Medication |
Country |
Australia
Total #s of Patients
SUPARTZ FX = 108
Control = 115 |
France
Total #s of Patients
SUPARTZ FX = (5)87/(3)87
Control = 80 |
Germany
Total #s of Patients
SUPARTZ FX = 102
Control = 106 |
Sweden
Total #s of Patients
SUPARTZ FX = 119
Control = 120 |
UK
Total #s of Patients
SUPARTZ FX = 116
Control = 115 |
n |
% |
n |
% |
n |
% |
n |
% |
n |
% |
Aspirin |
SUPARTZ FX |
5 |
4.6% |
2 |
2.3% |
1 |
1.0% |
29 |
24.4% |
9 |
7.8% |
SUPARTZ FX (3)** |
|
|
3 |
3.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Control |
10 |
8.7% |
0 |
0.0% |
1 |
0.9% |
37 |
30.8% |
15 |
3.0% |
Paracetamol*** |
SUPARTZ FX |
85 |
78.7% |
74 |
85.1% |
73 |
71.6% |
59 |
49.6% |
108 |
93.1% |
SUPARTZ FX (3)** |
|
|
74 |
85.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Control |
97 |
84.3% |
71 |
88.8% |
81 |
76.4% |
56 |
46.7% |
106 |
92.2% |
Codeine Compounds |
SUPARTZ FX |
25 |
23.1% |
18 |
20.7% |
0 |
0% |
19 |
16.0% |
56 |
48.3% |
SUPARTZ FX (3)** |
|
|
18 |
20.7% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Control |
30 |
26.1% |
21 |
26.3% |
0 |
0% |
24 |
20.0% |
46 |
40.0% |
Dextropropoxyphene |
SUPARTZ FX |
0 |
0.0% |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0% |
11 |
9.2% |
0 |
0% |
SUPARTZ FX (3)** |
|
|
0 |
0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Control |
2 |
1.7% |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0% |
20 |
16.7% |
0 |
0% |
NSAIDs |
SUPARTZ FX |
42 |
38.9% |
47 |
54.0% |
1 |
1.0% |
59 |
49.6% |
41 |
35.3% |
SUPARTZ FX (3)** |
|
|
41 |
47.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Control |
49 |
42.6% |
49 |
61.3% |
1 |
0.9% |
48 |
20.0% |
48 |
41.7% |
Methylprednisolone |
SUPARTZ FX |
2 |
1.9% |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0% |
SUPARTZ FX (3)** |
|
|
0 |
0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Control |
5 |
4.3% |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0% |
* All ITT Patients, patients with multiple types of medication use are counted for each type of medication
** All studies had 5 SUPARTZ FX injections. In the French study, there was an additional treatment arm with 3 SUPARTZ FX injections.
*** Includes paracetamol consumption as provided per protocol as rescue medication, as well as any additional paracetamol use. |
Table 6A: Australia Study Results for WOMAC (Pain, Stiffness, & Disability) as Repeated Measures Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Mean
Reduction from Baseline Over Weeks 6, 10, 14, and 18
Treatment |
Pain |
Stiffness |
Disability |
SUPARTZ FX |
2.72* |
1.37* |
9.21 |
Control |
2.23 |
0.99 |
7.51 |
* = p-value < 0.05 |
Table 6B: Individual Study Results for Lequesne Score as Repeated Measures Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Mean Reduction from
Baseline Over All Visits at or Following the 5 Week Visit
Study |
SUPARTZ FX
(5 Injections) |
SUPARTZ FX
(3 Injections) |
Control |
Australia |
2.85* |
|
1.98 |
France |
3.08 |
3.14 |
2.64 |
Germany |
3.87 |
|
2.74 |
Sweden |
1.68 |
|
1.77 |
UK |
2.19* |
|
1.53 |
* = p-value < 0.05 |
Table 6C: Integrated Analysis (All Five Studies) for Lequesne Score as Repeated Measures Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) of Mean Reduction
from Baseline Over All Visits at or Following the 5 Week Visit
Study |
SUPARTZ FX |
Control |
All Studies |
2.68* |
2.00 |
* = p-value < 0.05 |
Table 6D: Mean Changes from Baseline at 5, 9 and 13 weeks for VAS Pain and Lequesne Scores in the French Study ITT Population
Outcome
Measure |
Treatment
Group |
N |
Evaluation |
Baseline |
Week 5* |
Week 9* |
Week 13* |
Lequesne
|
Control |
80 |
10.1 |
-2.6 |
-3.0 |
-3.1 |
Index |
SUARTZ FX (3) |
87 |
9.8 |
-2.6 |
-3.3 |
-3.5 |
|
SUARTZ FX (5) |
87 |
9.8 |
-2.7 |
-3.1 |
-3.3 |
|
SUARTZ FX (5) |
87 |
9.8 |
-2.7 |
-3.1 |
-3.3 |
VAS Pain |
Control |
80 |
59.8 |
-23.1 |
-26.5 |
-24.2 |
|
SUARTZ FX (3) |
87 |
57.9 |
-22.3 |
-26.0 |
-29.1 |
|
SUARTZ FX (5) |
87 |
56.9 |
-23.0 |
-26.2 |
-27.5 |
* All changes from baseline for all 3 treatment groups were statistically significant (p < 0.0001 , Paired t-test).
SUPARTZ FX(3) = 3 SUPARTZ FX injections + 2 Control
SUPARTZ FX(5) = 5 SUPARTZ FX injections
Negative change indicates an improvement from baseline |
REFERENCE
2 Lequesne MG: The algofunctional indices for hip
and knee osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol 24: 779-81,
1997.
3 Day, R. et al. A double blind, randomized,
multicenter, parallel group study of the effectiveness
and tolerance of intraarticular hyaluronan in
osteoarthritis of the knee. J Rheumatol 31:755-782,
2004.