Recent Updates
Recently added Catalysts

Celecoxib+ Exemestane

Phase 3

Arthritis, Juvenile Rheumatoid | Small molecule | Immunology |Pfizer, Inc.|Trials Updated: Aug 11, 2020

Celecoxib+ Exemestane target and mechanism

Molecular targetPTGS2
Target classInhibitor
ModalitySmall molecule
ChEMBLCHEMBL118

Also known as Celecoxib

Success Probability

Subscribe to view

Market & Valuation

Subscribe to view

Trial Design

RandomizedDouble-BlindACTIVE_CONTROLLEDDMC
Total Trials6
Total Enrollment2,833

FDA Designations

No designations recorded

Celecoxib+ Exemestane clinical trials

Celecoxib+ Exemestane · 6 trials · 6 indications

Phase 3 4Phase 2 2
NCT02725411Long Term Safety and Efficacy Study of Tanezumab in Japanese Adult Subjects With Chronic Low Back PainLow Back Pain
COMPLETED277 Analytics
NCT00648141Safety and Efficacy of Celecoxib Versus Diclofenac in the Treatment of Ankylosing SpondylitisSpondylitis, Ankylosing
COMPLETED458 Analytics
NCT00652925A Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Celecoxib Suspension Compared to Naproxen Suspension in Patients With JRAArthritis, Juvenile Rheumatoid
COMPLETED225 Analytics
NCT00141193Prevention of Colorectal Sporadic Adenomatous Polyps (PRESAP)Colorectal Adenoma
COMPLETED1,561 Analytics
PHASE3COMPLETED
Long Term Safety and Efficacy Study of Tanezumab in Japanese Adult Subjects With Chronic Low Back Pain
Low Back PainUnlock trial analytics
PHASE3COMPLETED
Safety and Efficacy of Celecoxib Versus Diclofenac in the Treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis
Spondylitis, AnkylosingUnlock trial analytics
PHASE3COMPLETED
A Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Celecoxib Suspension Compared to Naproxen Suspension in Patients With JRA
Arthritis, Juvenile RheumatoidUnlock trial analytics
PHASE3COMPLETED
Prevention of Colorectal Sporadic Adenomatous Polyps (PRESAP)
Colorectal AdenomaUnlock trial analytics

Study Endpoints

Primary Endpoints

Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
Baseline (Day 1) up to 24 weeks after last dose of study drug (up to Week 80)

An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent were events between first dose of study drug and up to 24 weeks after last dose of study drug (up to Week 80) that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pretreatment state. AEs included both serious and non-serious AEs.

Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Treatment Related Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
Baseline up to 24 weeks after last dose of study drug (up to Week 80)

Treatment-related AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in participant who received study drug. SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent were events between first dose of study drug and up to 24 weeks after last dose of study drug (up to Week 80). Relatedness to study drug was assessed by the investigator. AEs included both serious and non-serious AEs.

Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Laboratory Test Abnormalities
Baseline up to Week 80

Abnormality criteria included: hemoglobin (HGB); hematocrit; erythrocytes \< 0.8\*lower limit of normal (LLN); erythrocyte mean corpuscular volume/HGB/ HGB concentration, erythrocytes distribution width \<0.9\*LLN, \>1.1\*upper limit of normal (ULN); platelets \<0.5\*LLN,\>1.75\* ULN; white blood cell count\<0.6\*LLN, \>1.5\*ULN; lymphocytes, leukocytes, neutrophils \<0.8\*LLN, \>1.2\*ULN; basophils, eosinophils, monocytes \>1.2\*ULN; total bilirubin\>1.5\*ULN; aspartate aminotransferase (AT), alanine AT, gamma glutamyl transferase, lactate dehydrogenase, alkaline phosphatase \>3.0\*ULN; total protein; albumin\<0.8\*LLN, \>1.2\*ULN; blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, cholesterol, triglycerides \>1.3\*ULN; urate \>1.2\*ULN; sodium \<0.95\*LLN,\>1.05\*ULN; potassium, chloride, calcium, magnesium, bicarbonate \<0.9\*LLN, \>1.1\*ULN; phosphate \<0.8\*LLN, \>1.2\*ULN; glucose \<0.6\*LLN, \>1.5\*ULN; HGB A1C \>1.3\*ULN; creatine kinase \>2.0\*ULN; nitrite \>=1. Investigator judged clinical significance of laboratory test abnormalities.

Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Vital Signs Abnormalities
Baseline up to Week 80

Vital signs included systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and pulse rate. Investigator judged clinical significance of vital signs' abnormalities.

Number of Participants With Confirmed Orthostatic Hypotension From Baseline up to Week 80
Baseline up to Week 80

Orthostatic hypotension was defined as postural change (supine to standing) that met the following criteria: for systolic blood pressure (BP) less than or equal to (\<=) 150 millimeter of mercury (mmHg) (mean supine): reduction in systolic BP \>=20 mmHg or reduction in diastolic BP \>=10 mmHg at the 1 and/or 3 minute standing BP measurements. For systolic BP greater than (\>) 150 mmHg (mean supine): reduction in systolic BP \>=30 mmHg or reduction in diastolic BP \>=15 mmHg at the 1 and/or 3 minute standing BP measurements. If the 1 minute or 3 minute standing BP in a sequence met the orthostatic hypotension criteria, then that sequence was considered positive. If 2 of 2 or 2 of 3 sequences were positive, then orthostatic hypotension was considered confirmed.

Change From Screening in Mean Total Symptom Impact Score as Per Survey of Autonomic Symptoms (SAS) at Week 24
Screening (up to 37 days before Day 1), Week 24

SAS is a participant rated 12 items questionnaire for males and 11 items questionnaire for females. SAS measures autonomic symptoms of neuropathy and their impact on participants' well-being, during the past 6 months. Each item was related to a symptom/health problem. At scheduled time points, participants were asked to answer "Yes" or "No" for each of symptoms/health problems experienced during past 6 months. If a participant answered "Yes" for a symptom, then impact of that symptom was rated on a 5 point scale, ranged from 1 (least sever impact) to 5 (most severe impact), where higher scores signified more severe impact of symptoms. The total symptom impact score was calculated as the sum of impact of all symptoms. Overall possible range for the total symptom impact score was 0 (no impact) to 60 (extreme impact) for males and 0 (no impact) to 55 (extreme impact) for females, higher scores indicated more severe impact of symptoms on participants' well-being.

Change From Screening in Mean Total Symptom Impact Score as Per Survey of Autonomic Symptoms (SAS) at Week 56
Screening, Week 56

SAS is a participant rated 12 items questionnaire for males and 11 items questionnaire for females. SAS measures autonomic symptoms of neuropathy and their impact on participants' well-being, during the past 6 months. Each item was related to a symptom/health problem. At scheduled time points, participants were asked to answer "Yes" or "No" for each of symptoms/health problems experienced during past 6 months. If a participant answered "Yes" for a symptom, then impact of that symptom was rated on a 5 point scale, ranged from 1 (least sever impact) to 5 (most severe impact), where higher scores signified more severe impact of symptoms. The total symptom impact score was calculated as the sum of impact of all symptoms. Overall possible range for the total symptom impact score was 0 (no impact) to 60 (extreme impact) for males and 0 (no impact) to 55 (extreme impact) for females, higher scores indicated more severe impact of symptoms on participants' well-being.

Change From Screening in Mean Total Symptom Impact Scores as Per Survey of Autonomic Symptoms (SAS) at Week 80
Screening, Week 80

SAS is a participant rated 12 items questionnaire for males and 11 items questionnaire for females. SAS measures autonomic symptoms of neuropathy and their impact on participants' well-being, during the past 6 months. Each item was related to a symptom/health problem. At scheduled time points, participants were asked to answer "Yes" or "No" for each of symptoms/health problems experienced during past 6 months. If a participant answered "Yes" for a symptom, then impact of that symptom was rated on a 5 point scale, ranged from 1 (least sever impact) to 5 (most severe impact), where higher scores signified more severe impact of symptoms. The total symptom impact score was calculated as the sum of impact of all symptoms. Overall possible range for the total symptom impact score was 0 (no impact) to 60 (extreme impact) for males and 0 (no impact) to 55 (extreme impact) for females, higher scores indicated more severe impact of symptoms on participants' well-being.

Change From Screening in Mean Total Symptom Impact Score as Per Survey of Autonomic Symptoms (SAS) at Early Termination Follow-up Visit 1
Screening, Early Termination Follow-up Visit 1 (at 8 weeks after last dose of tanezumab or placebo matched to tanezumab)

SAS: participant rated 12 items questionnaire for males; 11 items questionnaire for females. SAS measures autonomic symptoms of neuropathy and their impact on participants' well-being, during past 6 months. Each item was related to a symptom/health problem. At scheduled time points, participants answered "Yes" or "No" for each of symptoms/health problems experienced during past 6 months. If participant answered "Yes" for a symptom, then impact of that symptom was rated on 5 point scale (1 \[least sever impact\] to 5 \[most severe impact\]); higher scores = more severe impact of symptoms. Total impact score = sum of impact of all symptoms; range for males =0 (no impact) to 60 (extreme impact); females =0 (no impact) to 55 (extreme impact); higher scores = more severe impact of symptoms on participants' well-being. Participants discontinuing from study treatment before Week 56, had early termination follow-up visit 1 at 8 weeks after last dose of tanezumab or placebo matched to tanezumab.

Change From Screening in Mean Total Symptom Impact Scores as Per Survey of Autonomic Symptoms (SAS) at Early Termination Follow-up Visit 3
Screening, Early Termination Follow-up Visit 3 (at 24 weeks after last dose of tanezumab or placebo matched to tanezumab)

SAS: participant rated 12 items questionnaire for males; 11 items questionnaire for females. SAS measures autonomic symptoms of neuropathy and their impact on participants' well-being, during past 6 months. Each item was related to a symptom/health problem. At scheduled time points, participants answered "Yes" or "No" for each of symptoms/health problems experienced during past 6 months. If participant answered "Yes" for a symptom, then impact of that symptom was rated on 5 point scale (1 \[least sever impact\] to 5 \[most severe impact\]); higher scores = more severe impact of symptoms. Total impact score = sum of impact of all symptoms; range for males =0 (no impact) to 60 (extreme impact); females =0 (no impact) to 55 (extreme impact); higher scores = more severe impact of symptoms on participants' well-being. Participants discontinuing from study treatment before Week 56, had early termination follow-up visit 3 at 24 weeks after last dose of tanezumab or placebo matched to tanezumab.

Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Electrocardiogram (ECG) Assessments
Baseline up to Week 16

Electrocardiogram assessment included PR, QRS, QT, QT interval corrected using Fridericia's formula (QTcF), QT interval corrected using Bazett's formula (QTcB), RR intervals, and heart rate. Investigator judged clinical significance of electrocardiogram assessment.

Percentage of Participants With Individual Adjudicated Joint Safety Outcome/Event
Baseline up to Week 80

Percentage of participants with individual joint safety adjudication outcomes: rapidly progressive osteoarthritis (OA) type-1 only, rapidly progressive OA type-2 only, primary osteonecrosis, pathological fracture and subchondral insufficiency fracture is reported. Rapidly progressive (RP) OA type 1 events were those that the adjudication committee considered to have significant loss of joint space width \>= 2 millimeter within approximately 1 year without gross structural failure. RP OA type 2 events were those considered to have destruction of bone including limited or total collapse of at least 1 subchondral surface that is not normally present in conventional end-stage osteoarthritis. Subchondral insufficiency fractures are a type of stress fractures which occur below the cartilage on the weight bearing surface of a bone.

Observation Time-Adjusted Event Rate for an Individual Adjudicated Joint Safety Outcome/Event
Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 80

Individual adjudicated joint safety outcomes/event: rapidly progressive OA (type-1,type-2), primary osteonecrosis, pathological fracture and subchondral insufficiency fracture. Observation time was defined as the start day of first SC study medication until either the (i) date of completion of or withdrawal from study, if a participant did not have the event, or (ii) date of the event (earliest event within each participant in the case of multiple events). Event rate for any individual adjudicated joint safety outcome/event = the number of events per 1000 participant-years at risk.

Percentage of Participants With At Least 1 Total Joint Replacement
Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 80

Percentage of participants with at least 1 total knee, total hip or total shoulder joint replacement were reported.

Observation Time-Adjusted Event Rate for Total Joint Replacement (TJR) Event
Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 80

Observation time was defined as the start day of first SC study medication until either the (i) date of completion of or withdrawal from study, if a participant had no TJR, or (ii) date of TJR (earliest TJR within each participant in the case of multiple TJRs). Event rate = number of events per 1000 participant-years at risk.

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 2
Baseline, Week 2

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate signs of peripheral neuropathy in participants. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side of following 4 domains: cranial nerves (5 items), muscle weakness (19 items), reflexes (5 items) and sensation (8 items). Each of 24 items related to cranial nerves and muscle weakness, scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis); higher scores indicated higher abnormality/impairment. Each of 13 items related to reflexes and sensation, scored as 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent); higher scores indicated lesser reflexes and sensation. For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits.

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 4
Baseline, Week 4

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate signs of peripheral neuropathy in participants. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side of following 4 domains: cranial nerves (5 items), muscle weakness (19 items), reflexes (5 items) and sensation (8 items). Each of 24 items related to cranial nerves and muscle weakness, scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis); higher scores indicated higher abnormality/impairment. Each of 13 items related to reflexes and sensation, scored as 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent); higher scores indicated lesser reflexes and sensation. For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits.

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 8
Baseline, Week 8

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate signs of peripheral neuropathy in participants. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side of following 4 domains: cranial nerves (5 items), muscle weakness (19 items), reflexes (5 items) and sensation (8 items). Each of 24 items related to cranial nerves and muscle weakness, scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis); higher scores indicated higher abnormality/impairment. Each of 13 items related to reflexes and sensation, scored as 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent); higher scores indicated lesser reflexes and sensation. For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits.

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 16
Baseline, Week 16

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate signs of peripheral neuropathy in participants. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side of following 4 domains: cranial nerves (5 items), muscle weakness (19 items), reflexes (5 items) and sensation (8 items). Each of 24 items related to cranial nerves and muscle weakness, scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis); higher scores indicated higher abnormality/impairment. Each of 13 items related to reflexes and sensation, scored as 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent); higher scores indicated lesser reflexes and sensation. For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits.

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 24
Baseline, Week 24

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate signs of peripheral neuropathy in participants. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side of following 4 domains: cranial nerves (5 items), muscle weakness (19 items), reflexes (5 items) and sensation (8 items). Each of 24 items related to cranial nerves and muscle weakness, scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis); higher scores indicated higher abnormality/impairment. Each of 13 items related to reflexes and sensation, scored as 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent); higher scores indicated lesser reflexes and sensation. For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits.

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 32
Baseline, Week 32

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate signs of peripheral neuropathy in participants. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side of following 4 domains: cranial nerves (5 items), muscle weakness (19 items), reflexes (5 items) and sensation (8 items). Each of 24 items related to cranial nerves and muscle weakness, scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis); higher scores indicated higher abnormality/impairment. Each of 13 items related to reflexes and sensation, scored as 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent); higher scores indicated lesser reflexes and sensation. For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits.

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 40
Baseline, Week 40

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate signs of peripheral neuropathy in participants. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side of following 4 domains: cranial nerves (5 items), muscle weakness (19 items), reflexes (5 items) and sensation (8 items). Each of 24 items related to cranial nerves and muscle weakness, scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis); higher scores indicated higher abnormality/impairment. Each of 13 items related to reflexes and sensation, scored as 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent); higher scores indicated lesser reflexes and sensation. For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits.

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 48
Baseline, Week 48

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate signs of peripheral neuropathy in participants. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side of following 4 domains: cranial nerves (5 items), muscle weakness (19 items), reflexes (5 items) and sensation (8 items). Each of 24 items related to cranial nerves and muscle weakness, scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis); higher scores indicated higher abnormality/impairment. Each of 13 items related to reflexes and sensation, scored as 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent); higher scores indicated lesser reflexes and sensation. For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits.

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 56
Baseline, Week 56

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate signs of peripheral neuropathy in participants. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side of following 4 domains: cranial nerves (5 items), muscle weakness (19 items), reflexes (5 items) and sensation (8 items). Each of 24 items related to cranial nerves and muscle weakness, scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis); higher scores indicated higher abnormality/impairment. Each of 13 items related to reflexes and sensation, scored as 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent); higher scores indicated lesser reflexes and sensation. For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits.

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 64
Baseline, Week 64

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate signs of peripheral neuropathy in participants. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side of following 4 domains: cranial nerves (5 items), muscle weakness (19 items), reflexes (5 items) and sensation (8 items). Each of 24 items related to cranial nerves and muscle weakness, scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis); higher scores indicated higher abnormality/impairment. Each of 13 items related to reflexes and sensation, scored as 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent); higher scores indicated lesser reflexes and sensation. For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits.

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Week 80
Baseline, Week 80

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate signs of peripheral neuropathy in participants. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side of following 4 domains: cranial nerves (5 items), muscle weakness (19 items), reflexes (5 items) and sensation (8 items). Each of 24 items related to cranial nerves and muscle weakness, scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis); higher scores indicated higher abnormality/impairment. Each of 13 items related to reflexes and sensation, scored as 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent); higher scores indicated lesser reflexes and sensation. For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits.

Largest Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) to Any Post-baseline Visit
Baseline to any post-baseline visit (until Week 80)

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate signs of peripheral neuropathy in participants. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side of following 4 domains: cranial nerves (5 items), muscle weakness (19 items), reflexes (5 items) and sensation (8 items). Each of 24 items related to cranial nerves and muscle weakness, scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis); higher scores indicated higher abnormality/impairment. Each of 13 items related to reflexes and sensation, scored as 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent); higher scores indicated lesser reflexes and sensation. For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits. Largest change from baseline here means worst post- baseline change value (among all change from baseline values).

Number of Participants With Anti Tanezumab Antibodies From Baseline up to Week 80
Baseline up to Week 80

Human serum samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of anti-tanezumab antibodies by using a validated analytical method. Number of participants with presence of anti-tanezumab antibodies are reported.

Number of Participants With Abnormal Physical Examination Findings
At Screening

Physical examination included assessment of general appearance, skin, head, neck, eyes, ears, nose, throat, abdomen, lungs, heart, thyroid, and extremities. Investigator judged abnormality in physical examinations. Only those rows have been reported which had at least 1 participant with abnormality data in any of the reporting arms.

Change from baseline in global pain intensity as assessed by visual analog scale (VAS)
Week 12
Responder rates, defined as 50% improvement in VAS from baseline
Week 12
ACR Pediatric 30
12 weeks
To evaluate the effects of celecoxib in reducing the proportion of subjects with new colorectal adenomas post baseline polypectomy after Month 13 (Year 1) and Month 37 (Year 3) of study drug administration.
3 years
Change from baseline in total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score
Week 11
To evaluate the efficacy of celecoxib in subjects with Early or Advanced oral premalignant lesion (OPL)
by both clinical response (reduction in size of all lesions,
prevention of growth in the index lesion and of any new lesions)
and histological response (change in histological grade).
To evaluate the safety of chronic multiple dosing of celecoxib in this patient population.

Secondary Endpoints

Change From Baseline in Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56: Multiple Imputation
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Change From Baseline in Average Low Back Pain Intensity (LBPI) at Week 64: Observed Data
Baseline, Week 64
Change From Baseline in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Total Scores at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56: Multiple Imputation
Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56
Unlock Study Endpoints

Study Design & Arms

AllocationRANDOMIZED
MaskingDOUBLE
ModelPARALLEL
PurposeTREATMENT

Treatment Arms

ArmTypeDescription
CelecoxibACTIVE_COMPARATORSubcutaneous injection of placebo for tanezumab every 8 weeks plus oral celecoxib 100 mg twice daily for 56 weeks
Tanezumab 5 mgEXPERIMENTALSubcutaneous injection of tanezumab 5 mg every 8 weeks plus oral placebo for celecoxib twice daily for 56 weeks
Tanezumab 10 mgEXPERIMENTALSubcutaneous injection of tanezumab 10 mg every 8 weeks plus oral placebo for celecoxib twice daily for 56 weeks
AEXPERIMENTAL -
BEXPERIMENTAL -
CACTIVE_COMPARATOR -
High DoseEXPERIMENTAL -
Low DoseEXPERIMENTAL -
NaproxenACTIVE_COMPARATORControl comparator, 15 mg/kg/dy target dose

Interventions

NameTypeDescription
CelecoxibDRUGOrally administered Celecoxib 100 mg twice daily for 56 weeks
Tanezumab 5 mgBIOLOGICALSubcutaneous injection of tanezumab 5 mg every 8 weeks for 56 weeks
Tanezumab 10 mgBIOLOGICALSubcutaneous injection of tanezumab 10 mg every 8 weeks for 56 weeks
Placebo for celecoxibDRUGOrally administered the placebo twice daily for 56 weeks
Placebo for tanezumabBIOLOGICALSubcutaneous injection of the placebo every 8 weeks for 56 weeks
DiclofenacDRUG75 mg oral capsule twice daily for 12 weeks
NaproxenDRUGControl comparator, 15 mg/kg/dy target dose
PlaceboDRUGMatched oral placebo as add-on to risperidone twice daily (range 2-8 mg/day) for 11 weeks
Unlock Study Design Details

Eligibility Criteria

Age Range18 Years to N/A
SexALL
Healthy VolunteersNo
Study Sites55

Inclusion Criteria: * Duration of chronic low back pain for ≥3 months, and treatment with agents for low back pain for ≥3 months. * Primary location of low back pain must be between the 12th thoracic vertebra and the lower gluteal folds, with or without radiation into the posterior thigh, classifie...

Countries:JapanGermanyUnited StatesBelgiumBrazilCanadaDenmarkFranceMexicoPeruPortugalRussiaSlovakiaSloveniaSpainSwedenAustraliaChileChinaCzechiaFinlandHong KongHungaryIrelandIsraelItalyNetherlandsNorwayPolandSingaporeSouth AfricaSwitzerlandTaiwanUnited KingdomUruguayArgentinaPhilippines
Unlock Eligibility Criteria

Frequently asked questions about Celecoxib+ Exemestane

What is celecoxib reference formulation?

Celecoxib reference formulation is the reference version of celecoxib, a small molecule drug developed by Pfizer, Inc. (PFE). It is being studied in Phase 3 clinical trials for several conditions, including ankylosing spondylitis, arthritis, gouty arthritis, juvenile rheumatoid arthritis, colorectal adenoma, low back pain, and pain.

What is celecoxib reference formulation used for?

Celecoxib reference formulation is being investigated for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis, arthritis, gouty arthritis, juvenile rheumatoid arthritis, colorectal adenoma, low back pain, and pain. It is in Phase 3 clinical development, and its safety and efficacy for these indications are being evaluated in clinical trials.

What does celecoxib reference formulation target?

Celecoxib reference formulation targets PTGS2, also known as cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2). It acts as an inhibitor of this enzyme. By inhibiting PTGS2, celecoxib reference formulation is designed to reduce inflammation and pain associated with the conditions being studied.

Who makes celecoxib reference formulation?

Celecoxib reference formulation is developed by Pfizer, Inc., which trades under the ticker symbol PFE. Pfizer is a global pharmaceutical company that discovers, develops, and manufactures medicines, including this small molecule inhibitor of PTGS2.

What phase is celecoxib reference formulation in?

Celecoxib reference formulation is in Phase 3 clinical development. It is an investigational drug and has not been approved by the FDA for the indications being studied. The Phase 3 trials are designed to further assess its safety and efficacy in larger patient populations.

What clinical trials is celecoxib reference formulation in?

Celecoxib reference formulation has been studied in several clinical trials, including NCT02725411 for chronic low back pain, NCT01062113 for post-tooth extraction pain, NCT00976716 for posttraumatic pain, and NCT00762463 for ankylosing spondylitis. These trials are completed and were conducted in Japan and China.

Is celecoxib reference formulation the same as Celecoxib?

Yes, celecoxib reference formulation is also known as celecoxib. It may also be referred to as Celecoxib + Exemestane, celecoxib and ibuprofen SR, celecoxib and ibuprofen, or a COX-2 inhibitor. These names refer to the same active ingredient, celecoxib, in various combinations or formulations.