Completed

A Study of PEGASYS (Peginterferon Alfa-2a (40KD)) in Combination With COPEGUS (Ribavirin) in Interferon-Naive Patients With Chronic Hepatitis C Infection (CHC).

0 criteria met from your profileSee at a glance how your profile meets each eligibility criteria.
What is being tested

ribavirin [Copegus]

+ ribavirin [Copegus]
+ peginterferon alfa-2a (PEG-IFN alfa-2a) [Pegasys]
Drug
Who is being recruted

Hepatitis C, Chronic

Over 18 Years
+11 Eligibility Criteria
How is the trial designed

Treatment Study

Phase 4
Interventional
Study Start: January 2004

Summary

Principal SponsorHoffmann-La Roche
Last updated: April 18, 2016
Sourced from a government-validated database.Claim as a partner
Study start date: January 1, 2004Actual date on which the first participant was enrolled.

The effects of treatment with different doses of PEGASYS in combination with different doses of ribavirin will be evaluated in patients with CHC genotype 1 who have a high viral titer, body weight greater than 85kg (187lbs) and no prior treatment with interferon. The anticipated time on study treatment is 3-12 months and the target sample size is 100-500 individuals.

Official TitleRandomized, Multicenter, Double-blind, Phase IV Pilot Study Evaluating the Effect of PEGASYS Doses of 180 ug or 270 ug in Combination With Copegus Doses of 1200 mg or 1600 mg on Viral Kinetics, Virological Response, Pharmacokinetics, and Safety in Interferon-naïve Patients With Chronic Hepatitis C Genotype 1 Virus Infection of High Viral Titer and Body Weight Greater Than 85 kg 
Principal SponsorHoffmann-La Roche
Last updated: April 18, 2016
Sourced from a government-validated database.Claim as a partner

Protocol

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.
Design Details
188 patients to be enrolledTotal number of participants that the clinical trial aims to recruit.
Treatment Study
These studies test new ways to treat a disease, condition, or health issue. The goal is to see if a new drug, therapy, or approach works better or has fewer side effects than existing options.

How participants are assigned to different groups/arms
In this clinical study, participants are placed into groups randomly, like flipping a coin. This ensures that the study is fair and unbiased, making the results more reliable. By assigning participants by chance, researchers can better compare treatments without external influences.

Other Ways to Assign Participants
Non-randomized allocation
: Participants are assigned based on specific factors, such as their medical condition or a doctor's decision.

None (Single-arm trial)
: If the study has only one group, all participants receive the same treatment, and no allocation is needed.

How treatments are given to participants
Participants are divided into different groups, each receiving a specific treatment at the same time. This helps researchers compare how well different treatments work against each other.

Other Ways to Assign Treatments
Single-group assignment
: Everyone gets the same treatment.

Cross-over assignment
: Participants switch between treatments during the study.

Factorial assignment
: Participants receive different combinations of treatments.

Sequential assignment
: Participants receive treatments one after another in a specific order, possibly based on individual responses.

Other assignment
: Treatment assignment does not follow a standard or predefined design.

How the effectiveness of the treatment is controlled
In a non placebo-controlled study, no participants receive an inert substance (placebo) to compare outcomes. Instead, all participants receive either the experimental treatment or an alternative treatment (often the Standard of Care). This method allows researchers to compare the effects of the experimental treatment with those of a different active intervention, rather than a placebo.

Other Options
Placebo-Controlled
: A placebo is used to compare the effects of the experimental treatment with those of an inert substance, isolating the true treatment effect.

How the interventions assigned to participants is kept confidential
Neither participants nor researchers know who is receiving which treatment. This is the most rigorous way to reduce bias, ensuring that expectations do not influence the results.

Other Ways to Mask Information
Open-label
: Everyone knows which treatment is being given.

Single-blind
: Participants do not know which treatment they are receiving, but researchers do.

Triple-blind
: Participants, researchers, and outcome assessors do not know which treatment is given.

Quadruple-blind
: Participants, researchers, outcome assessors, and care providers all do not know which treatment is given.

Eligibility

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria: person's general health condition or prior treatments.
Conditions
Criteria
Any sexBiological sex of participants that are eligible to enroll.
Over 18 YearsRange of ages for which participants are eligible to join.
Healthy volunteers not allowedIf individuals who are healthy and do not have the condition being studied can participate.
Conditions
Pathology
Hepatitis C, Chronic
Criteria
5 inclusion criteria required to participate
adult patients >=18 years of age

body weight >85kg (187lbs)

CHC (genotype 1)

liver biopsy (in <24 calendar months of first dose), with results consistent with CHC infection


6 exclusion criteria prevent from participating
women who are pregnant or breastfeeding

male partners of women who are pregnant

conditions associated with decompensated liver disease

other forms of liver disease, including liver cancer


Study Plan

Find out more about all the medication administered in this study, their detailed description and what they involve.
Treatment Groups
Study Objectives
4 intervention groups 

are designated in this study

This study does not include a placebo group 

Treatment Groups
Group I
Active Comparator
Participants received 180 μg of PEG-IFN \[peginterferon\] alfa-2a in 1 mL solution administered \[subcutaneously\] sc, once weekly + 1200 mg of ribavirin (200 mg/tablet) + ribavirin placebo (2 tablets) administered \[orally \] po daily in split doses for 48 weeks
Group II
Experimental
Participants received 180 μg of PEG-IFN \[peginterferon\] alfa-2a in 1 mL solution administered \[subcutaneously\] sc, once weekly + 1200 mg of ribavirin (200 mg/tablet) + ribavirin placebo (2 tablets) administered \[orally \] po daily in split doses for 48 weeks
Group III
Experimental
Participants received 270 μg of PEG-IFN alfa-2a in 1-mL solution administered sc once weekly + 1200 mg of ribavirin (200 mg/tablet) + ribavirin placebo (2 tablets) administered po daily in split doses for 48 weeks
Group IV
Experimental
Participants received 270 μg of PEG-IFN alfa-2a in 1-mL solution administered sc once weekly + 1600 mg of ribavirin (200 mg/tablet) administered po daily in split doses for 48 weeks.
Study Objectives
Primary Objectives

Viral loads (quantitative HCV RNA) collected during the initial 24 weeks were first logarithmically (based 10) transformed. Results falling below the assay sensitivity level were set to the assay sensitivity level before the analyses. Thus, a qualitative HCV RNA negative result was set to 50 IU/mL (or 100 copies/mL). A qualitative HCV RNA positive result along with an unquantifiable HCV RNA result from the quantitative assay corresponded to a numeric HCV RNA result of 600 IU/mL (or 1000 copies/mL).

Virological response over time to Week 24 is defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable HCV RNA as measured by the Roche Amplicor HCV Test, V. 2.0 (detection limit = 50 IU/mL) at 72 hours and at weeks 1, 2, 12, and 24.

The predicted sustained virological response (SVR) for each treatment group, is determined using a model based on the log10-transformed HCV viral load in copies/mL at Week 4 and the virological response status at Week 12. Each participant was classified as a predicted SVR if p was ≥ 0.5 or as a non-SVR if p was \<0.5. The percentage was calculated from the number of participant (N) analyzed under "Distribution of the predicted probability of an SVR."
Secondary Objectives

SVR is defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable HCV RNA as measured by the Roche Amplicor HCV Test, v 2.0 (detection limit = 50 IU/ml) at the end of the 24-week untreated follow-up period.

Virological response at the end of the treatment period is defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable HCV RNA as measured by the Roche Amplicor HCV Test, v 2.0 (detection limit = 50 IU/mL) at the completion of the treatment period.

Virological response at 12 weeks after the end of the treatment period is defined as the percentage of participants with undetectable HCV RNA as measured by the Roche Amplicor HCV Test, v 2.0 (detection limit = 50 IU/mL) at 12 weeks after completion of the treatment period.

An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a pharmaceutical product and which does not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with the treatment. An adverse event can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding, for example), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a pharmaceutical product, whether or not considered related to the pharmaceutical product. Preexisting conditions which worsen during a study are also considered as adverse events. A serious adverse event is any adverse event (SAE) that can result in death or is Life-threatening or required in-patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization or results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or is medically significant or requires intervention to prevent one or other of the outcomes listed above.

Marked laboratory abnormalities are the values outside the roche defined reference range.It is hemoglobin 11.0 - 20.0 (g/dL),platelets 100 - 700 (10\^9/L), lymphocyte 1.00 - 6.30 (10\^9/L),neutrophils 1.50 or more (10\^9/L), white blood cells(WBC) 3.0 - 18.0 (10\^9/L),serum glutamic-pyruvic transaminase (SGPT) 0 - 60 (U/L), serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT) 0 - 50 (U/L), alkaline phosphatase 0 - 190 (U/L),albumin was 27.0 or more (g/L),gamma glutamyl transferases (GGT) 0 - 120 (U/L),Total protein 55 - 87 (g/L),total bilirubin 0 - 34.2 (μmol/L),BUN 0 - 14.3 (mmol/L),creatinine 0 - 154 (μmol/L),chloride 95 - 115 (mmol/L),potassium 3.0 - 6.0 (mmol/L), sodium 130 - 150 (mmol/L),thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) 0.0 - 10.0 (mU/L),triglycerides 0.00 - 2.83 (mmol/L), calcium 2.00 - 2.90 (mmol/L),phosphate 0.75 - 1.60 (mmol/L),Blood Glucose 2.80 - 11.10 (mmol/L),Uric Acid 0 - 600 (μmol/L),proteinuria 0 - 1 (0 to 4+), glycosuria 0 - 1 (0 to 4+), hematuria 0 - 1 (0 to 4+).

Vital signs (Systolic blood pressure, Diastolic blood pressure, Pulse rate) were considered to be abnormal and of potential clinical relevance if the values measured for these parameters represented a change from baseline of greater than 20% in the direction of worsening. High diastolic blood pressure is defined as \>110 mmhg and \>20% increase from baseline. High systolic blood pressure is defined as \>180 mmhg and \>20% increase from baseline. Low systolic blood pressure is defined as \<85 mmhg and \>20% decrease from baseline. High heart rate is defined as \>120 beats/minute and \>20% increase from baseline. Low heart rate is defined as \< 50 beats/minute and \>20% decrease from baseline.

The BDI-II is a self-reported assessment of 21 items which included sadness, pessimism, past failure, loss of pleasure, guilty feelings, punishment feelings, self-dislike, self-criticalness, suicidal thoughts or wishes, crying, agitation, loss of interest, indecisiveness, worthlessness, loss of energy, changes in sleeping pattern, irritability, changes in appetite, concentration difficulty, tiredness or fatigue, loss of interest in sex that are summarized by treatment group. All except two items had four statements that were scored on a scale ranging from 0 to 3. The maximum total score was 63. The scores for each item were summed to obtain the total for that assessment. The participants neurological status could then be categorized as follows: minimal depression: 0 to 13; mild depression: 14 to 19; moderate depression: 20 to 28; and severe depression: 29 to 63. The BDI-II questionnaire was self-administered by the patient at each visit.

Study Centers

These are the hospitals, clinics, or research facilities where the trial is being conducted. You can find the location closest to you and its status.
This study has 25 locations
Suspended
Unknown FacilityLa Jolla, United StatesSee the location
Suspended
Unknown FacilityLong Beach, United States
Suspended
Unknown FacilitySan Diego, United States
Suspended
Unknown FacilitySan Diego, United States

Completed25 Study Centers