<clinical_study>
  <!-- This xml conforms to an XML Schema at:
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/html/images/info/public.xsd -->
  <required_header>
    <download_date>ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on September 20, 2023</download_date>
    <link_text>Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record.</link_text>
    <url>https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04485325</url>
  </required_header>
  <id_info>
    <org_study_id>TMP-0731-2018</org_study_id>
    <nct_id>NCT04485325</nct_id>
  </id_info>
  <brief_title>Capability of Tofacitinib or Etanercept to Accelerate Tapering of NSAID and Treat-to-target Guided De-escalation of Corticosteroids in RA Patients</brief_title>
  <acronym>AcceleRAte</acronym>
  <official_title>Capability of Tofacitinib or Etanercept to Accelerate Clinical Relevant Tapering of Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAID) and Treat-to-target Guided De-escalation of Corticosteroids in Patients With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and an Inadequate Response to Previous csDMARD Therapy (AcceleRAte)</official_title>
  <sponsors>
    <lead_sponsor>
      <agency>Dr. Frank Behrens</agency>
      <agency_class>Other</agency_class>
    </lead_sponsor>
    <collaborator>
      <agency>Pfizer</agency>
      <agency_class>Industry</agency_class>
    </collaborator>
  </sponsors>
  <source>Fraunhofer Institute for Molecular Biology and Applied Ecology</source>
  <oversight_info>
    <has_dmc>No</has_dmc>
    <is_fda_regulated_drug>No</is_fda_regulated_drug>
    <is_fda_regulated_device>No</is_fda_regulated_device>
    <is_us_export>No</is_us_export>
  </oversight_info>
  <brief_summary>
    <textblock>
      Patients with active rheumatic arthritis (RA) and lack of efficacy of at least one csDMARD&#xD;
      (Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug) treatment will be randomized to receive either&#xD;
      Tofacitinib (TOFA) or etanercept (ETA). The study will be separated into two parts: The&#xD;
      capability to decrease and discontinue pain-reducing treatment with a NSAID (non-steroidal&#xD;
      anti-inflammatory drug) over the first 12 weeks of treatment will be measured for primary&#xD;
      outcome measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS) at week 12 compared to baseline between&#xD;
      the two treatment groups.&#xD;
&#xD;
      Starting at week 12, the capability to taper corticosteroid (CS) treatment using a&#xD;
      treat-to-target strategy, i.e. when at least low disease activity (LDA-DAS28) is achieved,&#xD;
      will be measured in both groups.&#xD;
    </textblock>
  </brief_summary>
  <detailed_description>
    <textblock>
      In this clinical study, a design was chosen to reflect European standards recommended by&#xD;
      EULAR for treatment of active RA by comparison of a Treat-to- target (T2T) approach in two&#xD;
      treatment groups: Patients with active RA and lack of efficacy of at least one csDMARD&#xD;
      treatment will be randomized to receive either TOFA or ETA. The study will be separated into&#xD;
      two parts: The capability to decrease and discontinue pain-reducing treatment with a NSAID&#xD;
      (Celecoxib, two times 200 mg as maximum standard dosage for RA) over the first 12 weeks of&#xD;
      treatment will be measured for primary outcome. The proportion of patients with successful&#xD;
      discontinuation of Celecoxib and significant and clinical relevant decrease of pain-levels&#xD;
      measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS) with a reduction of at least 30% at week 12&#xD;
      compared to baseline will be compared between the two treatment groups.&#xD;
&#xD;
      Starting at week 12, the capability to taper CS treatment using a treat-to-target strategy,&#xD;
      i.e. when at least low disease activity (LDA-DAS28) is achieved, will be measured in both&#xD;
      groups. In addition to efficacy assessments (DAS28, ACR-response, SJC, TJC), patient reported&#xD;
      outcomes, Quality of Life (QoL) measurements and patient satisfaction will be evaluated.&#xD;
      Safety (severity and frequency of adverse events) will be evaluated over the 24-week&#xD;
      treatment period.&#xD;
    </textblock>
  </detailed_description>
  <overall_status>Recruiting</overall_status>
  <start_date type="Actual">November 4, 2019</start_date>
  <completion_date type="Anticipated">June 2022</completion_date>
  <primary_completion_date type="Anticipated">June 2022</primary_completion_date>
  <phase>Phase 4</phase>
  <study_type>Interventional</study_type>
  <has_expanded_access>No</has_expanded_access>
  <study_design_info>
    <allocation>Randomized</allocation>
    <intervention_model>Parallel Assignment</intervention_model>
    <intervention_model_description>two arm, randomized, open-label, parallel group</intervention_model_description>
    <primary_purpose>Treatment</primary_purpose>
    <masking>None (Open Label)</masking>
  </study_design_info>
  <primary_outcome>
    <measure>Discontinuation of Celecoxib treatment and clinically relevant improvement in pain</measure>
    <time_frame>Baseline to week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who can discontinue Celecoxib treatment and in whom clinically relevant improvement in pain levels are measured, defined as reduction in VAS pain of ≥ 30%</description>
  </primary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Mean dosage of Celecoxib in patients</measure>
    <time_frame>at 12 weeks</time_frame>
    <description>Mean dosage of Celecoxib in patients</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>discontinuation of CS-treatment</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients with discontinuation of CS-treatment at week 24</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>rescue treatment</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who require rescue treatment at week 12</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Mean dosage of Corticosteroids (CS) in the patients who achieve Low Disease activity (LDA) in the two treatment groups</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Mean dosage of CS in the patients who achieve LDA at week 24 in the two treatment groups</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Mean dosage of Corticosteroids (CS)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Mean dosage of CS at week 24 (W24)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>NSAID treatment</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Number of patients with NSAID treatment at W24</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>re-started NSAID treatment</measure>
    <time_frame>week 12 to week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who re-started NSAID treatment after week 12 (W12) until W24</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Absolute pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 2</time_frame>
    <description>Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Absolute pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Absolute pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 8</time_frame>
    <description>Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Absolute pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Absolute pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Absolute pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Absolute pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>relative (percent) pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 2</time_frame>
    <description>relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>relative (percent) pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>relative (percent) pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 8</time_frame>
    <description>relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>relative (percent) pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>relative (percent) pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>relative (percent) pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>relative (percent) pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 2</time_frame>
    <description>Change in pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Change in pain levels visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 8</time_frame>
    <description>Change in pain levels visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Change in pain levels visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Change in pain levels visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Change in pain levels visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in pain levels</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Change in pain levels visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Determination of flares</measure>
    <time_frame>between week 12 and week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Determination of flares (measured by FLARE questionnaire) between week 12 and week 24</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of LDA</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve LDA (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) (DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 3.2)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of LDA</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve LDA (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) (DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 3.2)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of LDA</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve LDA (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) (DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 3.2)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of LDA</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve LDA (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) (DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 3.2)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of LDA</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve LDA (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) (DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 3.2)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of DAS remission</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve DASremission (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 2.6)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of DAS remission</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve DASremission (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 2.6)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of DAS remission</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve DASremission (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 2.6)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of DAS remission</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve DASremission (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 2.6)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of DAS remission</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve DASremission (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 2.6)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR20 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR20 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 20%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR20 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR20 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 20%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR20 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR20 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 20%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR20 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR20 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 20%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR20 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR20 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 20%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR 50 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR50 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 50%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR 50 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR50 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 50%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR 50 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR50 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 50%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR 50 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR50 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 50%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR 50 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR50 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 50%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR 70 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR70 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 70%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR 70 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR70 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 70%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR 70 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR70 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 70%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR 70 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR70 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 70%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proportion of ACR 70 response</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Proportion of patients who achieve ACR70 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 70%</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Changes in ACR core set</measure>
    <time_frame>at baseline</time_frame>
    <description>Changes in ACR core set</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Changes in ACR core set</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Changes in ACR core set</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Changes in ACR core set</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Changes in ACR core set</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Changes in ACR core set</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Changes in ACR core set</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Changes in ACR core set</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Changes in ACR core set</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Changes in ACR core set</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Changes in ACR core set change</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>DAS28 (ESR)</measure>
    <time_frame>at baseline</time_frame>
    <description>DAS28 (ESR) change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>DAS28 (ESR)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>DAS28 (ESR) change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>DAS28 (ESR)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>DAS28 (ESR) change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>DAS28 (ESR)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>DAS28 (ESR) change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>DAS28 (ESR)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>DAS28 (ESR) change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>DAS28 (ESR)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>DAS28 (ESR) change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>SJC (66),</measure>
    <time_frame>at baseline</time_frame>
    <description>Swollen joint count (66 joints) change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>SJC (66),</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Swollen joint count (66 joints) change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>SJC (66),</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Swollen joint count (66 joints) change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>SJC (66),</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Swollen joint count (66 joints) change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>SJC (66),</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Swollen joint count (66 joints) change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>SJC (66),</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Swollen joint count (SJC) (66 joints) change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>TJC (68)</measure>
    <time_frame>at baseline</time_frame>
    <description>tender joint count (TJC) - 68 joints change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>TJC (68)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>tender joint count (TJC) - 68 joints change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>TJC (68)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>tender joint count (TJC) - 68 joints change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>TJC (68)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>tender joint count (TJC) - 68 joints change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>TJC (68)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>tender joint count (TJC) - 68 joints change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>TJC (68)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>tender joint count (TJC) - 68 joints change compared to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)</measure>
    <time_frame>at baseline</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life: SF36 scores</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life: SF36 scores.SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life: SF36 change to BL. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life: SF36 scores. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life: SF36 change to BL. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life: SF36 scores. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life: SF36 change to BL. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life: SF36 scores. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life: SF36 change to BL. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life: SF36 scores. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life: SF36 change to BL. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)</measure>
    <time_frame>at baseline</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life HAQ-DI scores The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life HAQ-DI scores. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change in Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life HAQ-DI change to BL. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life HAQ-DI scores. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change of Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life HAQ-DI change to BL. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life HAQ-DI scores. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change of Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life HAQ-DI change to BL. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life HAQ-DI scores.The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change of Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life HAQ-DI change to BL. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life HAQ-DI scores. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Change of Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Quality of Life HAQ-DI change to BL. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Correlation of SF36 and HAQ-DI results</measure>
    <time_frame>through study completion, an average of 24 weeks</time_frame>
    <description>Correlation of SF36 and HAQ-DI results. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do). SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Treatment satisfaction: TSQM-14 scores</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-14) scores. The TSQM items are answered on 5- or 7-point Likert type scale and cover four domains: effectiveness; side effects; convenience and global satisfaction. A score can be obtained for each domain by summing of the corresponding items transformed on a 0-100 scale; higher values indicate higher satisfaction, better perceived effectiveness, lower burden associated to side-effects, better convenience.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Treatment satisfaction: TSQM-14 scores</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-14) scores. The TSQM items are answered on 5- or 7-point Likert type scale and cover four domains: effectiveness; side effects; convenience and global satisfaction. A score can be obtained for each domain by summing of the corresponding items transformed on a 0-100 scale; higher values indicate higher satisfaction, better perceived effectiveness, lower burden associated to side-effects, better convenience.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Treatment satisfaction: TSQM-14 scores</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-14) scores. The TSQM items are answered on 5- or 7-point Likert type scale and cover four domains: effectiveness; side effects; convenience and global satisfaction. A score can be obtained for each domain by summing of the corresponding items transformed on a 0-100 scale; higher values indicate higher satisfaction, better perceived effectiveness, lower burden associated to side-effects, better convenience.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Treatment satisfaction: TSQM-14 scores</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-14) scores. The TSQM items are answered on 5- or 7-point Likert type scale and cover four domains: effectiveness; side effects; convenience and global satisfaction. A score can be obtained for each domain by summing of the corresponding items transformed on a 0-100 scale; higher values indicate higher satisfaction, better perceived effectiveness, lower burden associated to side-effects, better convenience.</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Patient's expectation on treatment</measure>
    <time_frame>at baseline</time_frame>
    <description>Patient's expectation on treatment asked and documented as free text</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Patient's expectation on treatment</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Patient's expectation on treatment asked and documented as free text</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Patient's expectation on treatment</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Patient's expectation on treatment asked and documented as free text</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Correlation of TSQM-14 results and patient's expectation on treatment</measure>
    <time_frame>through study completion, an average of 24 weeks</time_frame>
    <description>Correlation of TSQM-14 results and patient's expectation on treatment</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>drug accountability</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Evaluation of results of treatment adherence (drug accountability) using patient diary</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>drug accountability</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Evaluation of results of treatment adherence (drug accountability) using patient diary</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>drug accountability</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>Evaluation of results of treatment adherence (drug accountability) using patient diary</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>drug accountability</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>Evaluation of results of treatment adherence (drug accountability) using patient diary</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>drug accountability</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Evaluation of results of treatment adherence (drug accountability) using patient diary</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)</measure>
    <time_frame>at baseline</time_frame>
    <description>eGFR value</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>eGFR value</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>change in eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>eGFR change to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>eGFR value</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>change in eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>eGFR change to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>change in eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>eGFR change to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>eGFR value</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>change in eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>eGFR change to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>eGFR value</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>change in eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>eGFR change to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>blood pressure (mmHg)</measure>
    <time_frame>at baseline</time_frame>
    <description>blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>blood pressure (mmHg)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>change in blood pressure (mmHg)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure change to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>blood pressure (mmHg)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>change in blood pressure (mmHg)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure change to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>blood pressure (mmHg)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>change in blood pressure (mmHg)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 16</time_frame>
    <description>blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure change to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>blood pressure (mmHg)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>change in blood pressure (mmHg)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 20</time_frame>
    <description>blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure change to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>blood pressure (mmHg)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>change in blood pressure (mmHg)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure change to BL</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>pain characteristics measured by QST (quantitative sensory testing)</measure>
    <time_frame>at Baseline</time_frame>
    <description>Correlation of pain characteristics measured by QST, VAS pain and pain relief</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>pain characteristics measured by QST (quantitative sensory testing)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 4</time_frame>
    <description>Correlation of pain characteristics measured by QST, VAS pain and pain relief</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>pain characteristics measured by QST (quantitative sensory testing)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 8</time_frame>
    <description>Correlation of pain characteristics measured by QST, VAS pain and pain relief</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>pain characteristics measured by QST (quantitative sensory testing)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 12</time_frame>
    <description>Correlation of pain characteristics measured by QST, VAS pain and pain relief</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>pain characteristics measured by QST (quantitative sensory testing)</measure>
    <time_frame>at week 24</time_frame>
    <description>Correlation of pain characteristics measured by QST, VAS pain and pain relief</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>adverse events (AEs)</measure>
    <time_frame>through study completion, an average of 24 weeks</time_frame>
    <description>Documentation of type, frequency and seriousness of adverse events (AEs)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Infections</measure>
    <time_frame>through study completion, an average of 24 weeks</time_frame>
    <description>Incidence rates of serious infection events (SIEs),</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Documentation of all lab abnormalities</measure>
    <time_frame>through study completion, an average of 24 weeks</time_frame>
    <description>incidence rates of lab abnormalities</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Cardiovascular events</measure>
    <time_frame>through study completion, an average of 24 weeks</time_frame>
    <description>incidence rates of cardio vascular events</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Malignencies</measure>
    <time_frame>through study completion, an average of 24 weeks</time_frame>
    <description>incidence rates of malignancies</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <number_of_arms>2</number_of_arms>
  <enrollment type="Anticipated">192</enrollment>
  <condition>Rheumatic Arthritis</condition>
  <arm_group>
    <arm_group_label>Tofacitinib</arm_group_label>
    <arm_group_type>Active Comparator</arm_group_type>
    <description>Tofacitinib (Xeljanz®; 5 mg twice daily, p.o.)</description>
  </arm_group>
  <arm_group>
    <arm_group_label>Etanercept</arm_group_label>
    <arm_group_type>Active Comparator</arm_group_type>
    <description>Etanercept (Enbrel®; 50 mg once per week, s.c.)</description>
  </arm_group>
  <intervention>
    <intervention_type>Drug</intervention_type>
    <intervention_name>Tofacitinib</intervention_name>
    <description>5 mg twice daily, p.o.</description>
    <arm_group_label>Tofacitinib</arm_group_label>
    <other_name>TOFA, Xeljanz</other_name>
  </intervention>
  <intervention>
    <intervention_type>Biological</intervention_type>
    <intervention_name>Etanercept</intervention_name>
    <description>50 mg once per week, s.c.</description>
    <arm_group_label>Etanercept</arm_group_label>
    <other_name>Enbrel, ETA</other_name>
  </intervention>
  <eligibility>
    <criteria>
      <textblock>
        Inclusion Criteria:&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Patients with active RA and an inadequate response to up to two previous conventional&#xD;
             synthetic Disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (csDMARD) treatments (methotrexate&#xD;
             (MTX), leflunomide (LEF),sulfasalazine (SSZ)) with or without ongoing csDMARD therapy&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  RA according to ACR classification criteria&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Age 18 - 65 years&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Active RA is defined as&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  DAS28 &gt; 3.2 and&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  TJC ≥ 3 and SJC ≥ 3&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  VAS-pain ≥ 60 mm (0-100 mm)&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Accompanying CS treatment for RA with a stable dosage of ≥ 2mg/d and ≤ 10 mg/d 2 weeks&#xD;
             prior to BL (not more than 30% of patients without CS)&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Accompanying need of NSAID or analgesic treatment due to arthritis and in dosages not&#xD;
             exceeding the maximum dose according to Summary of Product characteristics (SmPC)&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  If ongoing csDMARD treatment, stable treatment will be defined as either&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  MTX treatment with a dosage of ≥ 10 mg/week and ≤ 25 mg/week, continuously for at&#xD;
                  least 12 weeks prior to Screening (SCR) with a stable dose of MTX for at least 2&#xD;
                  weeks prior to BL or&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  LEF treatment with a dosage between 10 to 20 mg/day, continuously for at least 12&#xD;
                  weeks prior to SCR with a stable dose of LEF for at least 2 weeks prior to BL or&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  SSZ treatment with dosage between 1 to 3 g/day, continuously for at least 12&#xD;
                  weeks prior to SCR with a stable dose of SSZ for at least 2 weeks prior to BL&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Presence of documented negative results for testing of Hepatitis B and C&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Completed SARS-CoV-2-immunisation as currently recommended by the Standing Committee&#xD;
             of Vaccination&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Written informed consent obtained prior to the initiation of any protocol-required&#xD;
             procedures&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Willingness to comply to study procedures and study protocol&#xD;
&#xD;
        Exclusion Criteria:&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Previous use of Tofacitinib or other Janus-Kinase (JAK)-inhibitors&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Previous use of Etanercept&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Previous use of any biological agent for RA&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  which was stopped due to lack of efficacy&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  one previous use of biological stopped due to intolerance will be allowed&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  CS treatment with dosages &gt;10 mg at BL&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Known hypersensitivity to any component of the study medication (TOFA, ETA, Celecoxib)&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Previous use of Celecoxib as analgesic therapy which was stopped due to lack of&#xD;
             efficacy or intolerance&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Concomitant diseases with chronic pain syndrome or need of extended dosages or&#xD;
             long-term treatment with the maximum dosages of NSAID/analgesics (according to SmPC)&#xD;
             due to other concomitant diseases/pain symptoms in discretion of the treating&#xD;
             physician Exclusion criteria related to general health&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Patients with other chronic inflammatory articular disease or systemic autoimmune&#xD;
             disease&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Patients with active Tuberculosis (Tb) (evaluation of Tb according to local standards&#xD;
             in clinical care)&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Patients with latent Tb, that are not pre-treated for at least 1 month and planned to&#xD;
             be treated 9 months in total with Isozid once a day&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Any active infection, a history of recurrent clinically significant infections (e.g.&#xD;
             human immune deficiency virus (HIV)), or a history of recurrent bacterial infections&#xD;
             with encapsulated organisms&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Primary or secondary immunodeficiency&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Current malignancy or history of malignancies except adequately treated or excised&#xD;
             basal cell or squamous cell carcinoma or cervical carcinoma in situ.&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Patients of 50 years and older, if they have one or more cardiovascular risk factors&#xD;
             (CVRF) defined as:&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  Current cigarette smoking,&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  Known diagnosis of hypertension,&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  HDL &lt;40 mg/dl,&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  Diabetes mellitus,&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  History of coronary artery disease: history of revascularization procedure,&#xD;
                  coronary artery bypass grafting, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, unstable&#xD;
                  angina, acute coronary syndrome or&#xD;
&#xD;
               -  History of premature coronary heart disease or sudden death documented in first&#xD;
                  degree relatives (male relative before 55 years, female relative before 65 years)&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Evidence of significant uncontrolled concomitant diseases or serious and/or&#xD;
             uncontrolled diseases that are likely to interfere with the evaluation of the&#xD;
             patient's safety and with the study outcome&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  History of a severe psychological illness or condition&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Known hypersensitivity to sulfonamides&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Active peptic ulceration or gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Patients who have experienced asthma, acute rhinitis, nasal polyps, angioneurotic&#xD;
             oedema, urticaria or other allergic-type reactions after taking acetylsalicylic acid&#xD;
             (aspirin) or other NSAIDs including Cyclooxigenase (COX)-2 inhibitors&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Risk for or history of thrombotic events (e.g. pulmonary embolism or thrombosis)&#xD;
             Severe hepatic dysfunction (serum albumin &lt; 25 g/L or Child-Pugh score ≥ 10)&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Patients with estimated creatinine clearance &lt; 30 mL/min&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Inflammatory bowel disease&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Congestive heart failure (New York Heart Association (NYHA) II-IV)&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Established ischaemic heart disease, peripheral arterial disease and/or&#xD;
             cerebrovascular disease&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Women lactating, pregnant, nursing or of childbearing potential with a positive&#xD;
             pregnancy test&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Males or females of reproductive potential not willing to use effective contraception&#xD;
             (e.g. contraceptive pill, intrauterine device (IUD), physical barrier)&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Alcohol, drug or chemical abuse Exclusion criteria related to prior treatments&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Current participation in another interventional clinical trial or participation within&#xD;
             the last 90 days Exclusion criteria related to formal aspects&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Underage or incapable patients&#xD;
      </textblock>
    </criteria>
    <gender>All</gender>
    <minimum_age>18 Years</minimum_age>
    <maximum_age>65 Years</maximum_age>
    <healthy_volunteers>No</healthy_volunteers>
  </eligibility>
  <overall_official>
    <last_name>Harald Burkhardt, MD</last_name>
    <role>Principal Investigator</role>
    <affiliation>Fraunhofer IME</affiliation>
  </overall_official>
  <overall_contact>
    <last_name>Anja Kuehne</last_name>
    <phone>00 49 69 6301</phone>
    <phone_ext>80225</phone_ext>
    <email>anja.kuehne@ime.fraunhofer.de</email>
  </overall_contact>
  <overall_contact_backup>
    <last_name>Tanja Rossmanith, PhD</last_name>
    <email>tanja.rossmanith@ime.fraunhofer.de</email>
  </overall_contact_backup>
  <location>
    <facility>
      <name>Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Med. Klinik mit Schwerpunkt Rheumatologie und klinische Immunologie</name>
      <address>
        <city>Berlin</city>
        <country>Germany</country>
      </address>
    </facility>
    <status>Recruiting</status>
    <contact>
      <last_name>Gerd Burmester, MD</last_name>
    </contact>
    <investigator>
      <last_name>Gerd Burmester, MD</last_name>
      <role>Principal Investigator</role>
    </investigator>
  </location>
  <location>
    <facility>
      <name>Rheumatologische Schwerpunktpraxis im Ärztehaus am Walter-Schreiber-Platz</name>
      <address>
        <city>Berlin</city>
        <country>Germany</country>
      </address>
    </facility>
    <status>Recruiting</status>
    <contact>
      <last_name>Jan Brandt-Jürgens, MD</last_name>
    </contact>
    <investigator>
      <last_name>Jan Brandt-Jürgens, MD</last_name>
      <role>Principal Investigator</role>
    </investigator>
  </location>
  <location>
    <facility>
      <name>CIRI - Centrum für innovative Diagnostik &amp; Therapie, Rheumatologie/ Immunologie GmbH</name>
      <address>
        <city>Frankfurt</city>
        <country>Germany</country>
      </address>
    </facility>
    <status>Active, not recruiting</status>
  </location>
  <location>
    <facility>
      <name>Katholische Kliniken Rhein-Ruhr, St. Elisabeth Gruppe GmbH, Rheumazentrum Ruhrgebiet</name>
      <address>
        <city>Herne</city>
        <country>Germany</country>
      </address>
    </facility>
    <status>Active, not recruiting</status>
  </location>
  <location>
    <facility>
      <name>Praxis Prof. Dr. Kellner</name>
      <address>
        <city>München</city>
        <country>Germany</country>
      </address>
    </facility>
    <status>Recruiting</status>
    <contact>
      <last_name>Herbert Kellner, MD</last_name>
    </contact>
    <investigator>
      <last_name>Herbert Kellner, MD</last_name>
      <role>Principal Investigator</role>
    </investigator>
  </location>
  <location>
    <facility>
      <name>Rheumazentrum Ratingen</name>
      <address>
        <city>Ratingen</city>
        <country>Germany</country>
      </address>
    </facility>
    <status>Recruiting</status>
    <contact>
      <last_name>Siegfried Wassenberg, MD</last_name>
    </contact>
    <investigator>
      <last_name>Siegfried Wassenberg, MD</last_name>
      <role>Principal Investigator</role>
    </investigator>
  </location>
  <location_countries>
    <country>Germany</country>
  </location_countries>
  <verification_date>March 2022</verification_date>
  <study_first_submitted>April 30, 2020</study_first_submitted>
  <study_first_submitted_qc>July 22, 2020</study_first_submitted_qc>
  <study_first_posted type="Actual">July 24, 2020</study_first_posted>
  <last_update_submitted>March 1, 2022</last_update_submitted>
  <last_update_submitted_qc>March 1, 2022</last_update_submitted_qc>
  <last_update_posted type="Actual">March 16, 2022</last_update_posted>
  <responsible_party>
    <responsible_party_type>Sponsor-Investigator</responsible_party_type>
    <investigator_affiliation>Fraunhofer Institute for Molecular Biology and Applied Ecology</investigator_affiliation>
    <investigator_full_name>Dr. Frank Behrens</investigator_full_name>
    <investigator_title>Representative of the Sponsor</investigator_title>
  </responsible_party>
  <keyword>treat-to-target</keyword>
  <keyword>pain</keyword>
  <condition_browse>
    <!-- CAUTION:  The following MeSH terms are assigned with an imperfect algorithm            -->
    <mesh_term>Rheumatic Fever</mesh_term>
    <mesh_term>Arthritis</mesh_term>
  </condition_browse>
  <intervention_browse>
    <!-- CAUTION:  The following MeSH terms are assigned with an imperfect algorithm            -->
    <mesh_term>Etanercept</mesh_term>
    <mesh_term>Tofacitinib</mesh_term>
  </intervention_browse>
  <!-- Results have not yet been posted for this study                                          -->
</clinical_study>


download date: ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on September 20, 2023
link text: Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record.
url: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04485325
org study id: TMP-0731-2018
nct id: NCT04485325
lead sponsor: 
collaborator: 
has dmc: No
is fda regulated drug: No
is fda regulated device: No
is us export: No
Patients with active rheumatic arthritis (RA) and lack of efficacy of at least one csDMARD
      (Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug) treatment will be randomized to receive either
      Tofacitinib (TOFA) or etanercept (ETA). The study will be separated into two parts: The
      capability to decrease and discontinue pain-reducing treatment with a NSAID (non-steroidal
      anti-inflammatory drug) over the first 12 weeks of treatment will be measured for primary
      outcome measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS) at week 12 compared to baseline between
      the two treatment groups.

      Starting at week 12, the capability to taper corticosteroid (CS) treatment using a
      treat-to-target strategy, i.e. when at least low disease activity (LDA-DAS28) is achieved,
      will be measured in both groups.
In this clinical study, a design was chosen to reflect European standards recommended by
      EULAR for treatment of active RA by comparison of a Treat-to- target (T2T) approach in two
      treatment groups: Patients with active RA and lack of efficacy of at least one csDMARD
      treatment will be randomized to receive either TOFA or ETA. The study will be separated into
      two parts: The capability to decrease and discontinue pain-reducing treatment with a NSAID
      (Celecoxib, two times 200 mg as maximum standard dosage for RA) over the first 12 weeks of
      treatment will be measured for primary outcome. The proportion of patients with successful
      discontinuation of Celecoxib and significant and clinical relevant decrease of pain-levels
      measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS) with a reduction of at least 30% at week 12
      compared to baseline will be compared between the two treatment groups.

      Starting at week 12, the capability to taper CS treatment using a treat-to-target strategy,
      i.e. when at least low disease activity (LDA-DAS28) is achieved, will be measured in both
      groups. In addition to efficacy assessments (DAS28, ACR-response, SJC, TJC), patient reported
      outcomes, Quality of Life (QoL) measurements and patient satisfaction will be evaluated.
      Safety (severity and frequency of adverse events) will be evaluated over the 24-week
      treatment period.
allocation: Randomized
intervention model: Parallel Assignment
intervention model description: two arm, randomized, open-label, parallel group
primary purpose: Treatment
masking: None (Open Label)
measure: Discontinuation of Celecoxib treatment and clinically relevant improvement in pain
time frame: Baseline to week 12
description: Proportion of patients who can discontinue Celecoxib treatment and in whom clinically relevant improvement in pain levels are measured, defined as reduction in VAS pain of ≥ 30%
measure: Mean dosage of Celecoxib in patients
time frame: at 12 weeks
description: Mean dosage of Celecoxib in patients
measure: discontinuation of CS-treatment
time frame: at week 24
description: Proportion of patients with discontinuation of CS-treatment at week 24
measure: rescue treatment
time frame: at week 12
description: Proportion of patients who require rescue treatment at week 12
measure: Mean dosage of Corticosteroids (CS) in the patients who achieve Low Disease activity (LDA) in the two treatment groups
time frame: at week 24
description: Mean dosage of CS in the patients who achieve LDA at week 24 in the two treatment groups
measure: Mean dosage of Corticosteroids (CS)
time frame: at week 24
description: Mean dosage of CS at week 24 (W24)
measure: NSAID treatment
time frame: at week 24
description: Number of patients with NSAID treatment at W24
measure: re-started NSAID treatment
time frame: week 12 to week 24
description: Proportion of patients who re-started NSAID treatment after week 12 (W12) until W24
measure: Absolute pain levels
time frame: at week 2
description: Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Absolute pain levels
time frame: at week 4
description: Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Absolute pain levels
time frame: at week 8
description: Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Absolute pain levels
time frame: at week 12
description: Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Absolute pain levels
time frame: at week 16
description: Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Absolute pain levels
time frame: at week 20
description: Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Absolute pain levels
time frame: at week 24
description: Absolute pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: relative (percent) pain levels
time frame: at week 2
description: relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: relative (percent) pain levels
time frame: at week 4
description: relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: relative (percent) pain levels
time frame: at week 8
description: relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: relative (percent) pain levels
time frame: at week 12
description: relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: relative (percent) pain levels
time frame: at week 16
description: relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: relative (percent) pain levels
time frame: at week 20
description: relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: relative (percent) pain levels
time frame: at week 24
description: relative (percent) pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Change in pain levels
time frame: at week 2
description: Change in pain levels measured by visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Change in pain levels
time frame: at week 4
description: Change in pain levels visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Change in pain levels
time frame: at week 8
description: Change in pain levels visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Change in pain levels
time frame: at week 12
description: Change in pain levels visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Change in pain levels
time frame: at week 16
description: Change in pain levels visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Change in pain levels
time frame: at week 20
description: Change in pain levels visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Change in pain levels
time frame: at week 24
description: Change in pain levels visual analogue scale (VAS) compared to BL. minimum is 0 mm, maximum is 100 mm whereas 0 is no pain and 100 is worst
measure: Determination of flares
time frame: between week 12 and week 24
description: Determination of flares (measured by FLARE questionnaire) between week 12 and week 24
measure: Proportion of LDA
time frame: at week 4
description: Proportion of patients who achieve LDA (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) (DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 3.2)
measure: Proportion of LDA
time frame: at week 12
description: Proportion of patients who achieve LDA (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) (DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 3.2)
measure: Proportion of LDA
time frame: at week 16
description: Proportion of patients who achieve LDA (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) (DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 3.2)
measure: Proportion of LDA
time frame: at week 20
description: Proportion of patients who achieve LDA (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) (DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 3.2)
measure: Proportion of LDA
time frame: at week 24
description: Proportion of patients who achieve LDA (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) (DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 3.2)
measure: Proportion of DAS remission
time frame: at week 4
description: Proportion of patients who achieve DASremission (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 2.6)
measure: Proportion of DAS remission
time frame: at week 12
description: Proportion of patients who achieve DASremission (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 2.6)
measure: Proportion of DAS remission
time frame: at week 16
description: Proportion of patients who achieve DASremission (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 2.6)
measure: Proportion of DAS remission
time frame: at week 20
description: Proportion of patients who achieve DASremission (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 2.6)
measure: Proportion of DAS remission
time frame: at week 24
description: Proportion of patients who achieve DASremission (Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) calculated by Erythrocyte sediment rate (ESR) DAS28 (ESR) ≤ 2.6)
measure: Proportion of ACR20 response
time frame: at week 4
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR20 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 20%
measure: Proportion of ACR20 response
time frame: at week 12
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR20 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 20%
measure: Proportion of ACR20 response
time frame: at week 16
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR20 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 20%
measure: Proportion of ACR20 response
time frame: at week 20
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR20 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 20%
measure: Proportion of ACR20 response
time frame: at week 24
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR20 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 20%
measure: Proportion of ACR 50 response
time frame: at week 4
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR50 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 50%
measure: Proportion of ACR 50 response
time frame: at week 12
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR50 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 50%
measure: Proportion of ACR 50 response
time frame: at week 16
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR50 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 50%
measure: Proportion of ACR 50 response
time frame: at week 20
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR50 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 50%
measure: Proportion of ACR 50 response
time frame: at week 24
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR50 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 50%
measure: Proportion of ACR 70 response
time frame: at week 4
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR70 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 70%
measure: Proportion of ACR 70 response
time frame: at week 12
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR70 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 70%
measure: Proportion of ACR 70 response
time frame: at week 16
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR70 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 70%
measure: Proportion of ACR 70 response
time frame: at week 20
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR70 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 70%
measure: Proportion of ACR 70 response
time frame: at week 24
description: Proportion of patients who achieve ACR70 response - measure based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria improvement of at least 70%
measure: Changes in ACR core set
time frame: at baseline
description: Changes in ACR core set
measure: Changes in ACR core set
time frame: at week 4
description: Changes in ACR core set
measure: Changes in ACR core set
time frame: at week 12
description: Changes in ACR core set
measure: Changes in ACR core set
time frame: at week 16
description: Changes in ACR core set
measure: Changes in ACR core set
time frame: at week 20
description: Changes in ACR core set
measure: Changes in ACR core set
time frame: at week 24
description: Changes in ACR core set change
measure: DAS28 (ESR)
time frame: at baseline
description: DAS28 (ESR) change compared to BL
measure: DAS28 (ESR)
time frame: at week 4
description: DAS28 (ESR) change compared to BL
measure: DAS28 (ESR)
time frame: at week 12
description: DAS28 (ESR) change compared to BL
measure: DAS28 (ESR)
time frame: at week 16
description: DAS28 (ESR) change compared to BL
measure: DAS28 (ESR)
time frame: at week 20
description: DAS28 (ESR) change compared to BL
measure: DAS28 (ESR)
time frame: at week 24
description: DAS28 (ESR) change compared to BL
measure: SJC (66),
time frame: at baseline
description: Swollen joint count (66 joints) change compared to BL
measure: SJC (66),
time frame: at week 4
description: Swollen joint count (66 joints) change compared to BL
measure: SJC (66),
time frame: at week 12
description: Swollen joint count (66 joints) change compared to BL
measure: SJC (66),
time frame: at week 16
description: Swollen joint count (66 joints) change compared to BL
measure: SJC (66),
time frame: at week 20
description: Swollen joint count (66 joints) change compared to BL
measure: SJC (66),
time frame: at week 24
description: Swollen joint count (SJC) (66 joints) change compared to BL
measure: TJC (68)
time frame: at baseline
description: tender joint count (TJC) - 68 joints change compared to BL
measure: TJC (68)
time frame: at week 4
description: tender joint count (TJC) - 68 joints change compared to BL
measure: TJC (68)
time frame: at week 12
description: tender joint count (TJC) - 68 joints change compared to BL
measure: TJC (68)
time frame: at week 16
description: tender joint count (TJC) - 68 joints change compared to BL
measure: TJC (68)
time frame: at week 20
description: tender joint count (TJC) - 68 joints change compared to BL
measure: TJC (68)
time frame: at week 24
description: tender joint count (TJC) - 68 joints change compared to BL
measure: Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)
time frame: at baseline
description: Quality of Life: SF36 scores
measure: Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)
time frame: at week 4
description: Quality of Life: SF36 scores.SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.
measure: Change in Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)
time frame: at week 4
description: Quality of Life: SF36 change to BL. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.
measure: Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)
time frame: at week 12
description: Quality of Life: SF36 scores. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.
measure: Change in Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)
time frame: at week 12
description: Quality of Life: SF36 change to BL. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.
measure: Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)
time frame: at week 16
description: Quality of Life: SF36 scores. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.
measure: Change in Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)
time frame: at week 16
description: Quality of Life: SF36 change to BL. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.
measure: Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)
time frame: at week 20
description: Quality of Life: SF36 scores. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.
measure: Change in Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)
time frame: at week 20
description: Quality of Life: SF36 change to BL. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.
measure: Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)
time frame: at week 24
description: Quality of Life: SF36 scores. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.
measure: Change in Quality of Life: SF36 (36 items short form health survey)
time frame: at week 24
description: Quality of Life: SF36 change to BL. SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.
measure: Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)
time frame: at baseline
description: Quality of Life HAQ-DI scores The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).
measure: Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)
time frame: at week 4
description: Quality of Life HAQ-DI scores. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).
measure: Change in Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)
time frame: at week 4
description: Quality of Life HAQ-DI change to BL. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).
measure: Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)
time frame: at week 12
description: Quality of Life HAQ-DI scores. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).
measure: Change of Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)
time frame: at week 12
description: Quality of Life HAQ-DI change to BL. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).
measure: Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)
time frame: at week 16
description: Quality of Life HAQ-DI scores. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).
measure: Change of Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)
time frame: at week 16
description: Quality of Life HAQ-DI change to BL. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).
measure: Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)
time frame: at week 20
description: Quality of Life HAQ-DI scores.The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).
measure: Change of Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)
time frame: at week 20
description: Quality of Life HAQ-DI change to BL. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).
measure: Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)
time frame: at week 24
description: Quality of Life HAQ-DI scores. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).
measure: Change of Quality of Life HAQ-DI (health assessment questionnaire - disability index)
time frame: at week 24
description: Quality of Life HAQ-DI change to BL. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).
measure: Correlation of SF36 and HAQ-DI results
time frame: through study completion, an average of 24 weeks
description: Correlation of SF36 and HAQ-DI results. The HAQ-DI is a health assessment questionnaire - disability index that consists of 8 subcategories. For each the single scales range from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (unable to do). SF36 is a 36 items short form health survey and consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.
measure: Treatment satisfaction: TSQM-14 scores
time frame: at week 4
description: Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-14) scores. The TSQM items are answered on 5- or 7-point Likert type scale and cover four domains: effectiveness; side effects; convenience and global satisfaction. A score can be obtained for each domain by summing of the corresponding items transformed on a 0-100 scale; higher values indicate higher satisfaction, better perceived effectiveness, lower burden associated to side-effects, better convenience.
measure: Treatment satisfaction: TSQM-14 scores
time frame: at week 12
description: Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-14) scores. The TSQM items are answered on 5- or 7-point Likert type scale and cover four domains: effectiveness; side effects; convenience and global satisfaction. A score can be obtained for each domain by summing of the corresponding items transformed on a 0-100 scale; higher values indicate higher satisfaction, better perceived effectiveness, lower burden associated to side-effects, better convenience.
measure: Treatment satisfaction: TSQM-14 scores
time frame: at week 16
description: Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-14) scores. The TSQM items are answered on 5- or 7-point Likert type scale and cover four domains: effectiveness; side effects; convenience and global satisfaction. A score can be obtained for each domain by summing of the corresponding items transformed on a 0-100 scale; higher values indicate higher satisfaction, better perceived effectiveness, lower burden associated to side-effects, better convenience.
measure: Treatment satisfaction: TSQM-14 scores
time frame: at week 24
description: Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-14) scores. The TSQM items are answered on 5- or 7-point Likert type scale and cover four domains: effectiveness; side effects; convenience and global satisfaction. A score can be obtained for each domain by summing of the corresponding items transformed on a 0-100 scale; higher values indicate higher satisfaction, better perceived effectiveness, lower burden associated to side-effects, better convenience.
measure: Patient's expectation on treatment
time frame: at baseline
description: Patient's expectation on treatment asked and documented as free text
measure: Patient's expectation on treatment
time frame: at week 12
description: Patient's expectation on treatment asked and documented as free text
measure: Patient's expectation on treatment
time frame: at week 24
description: Patient's expectation on treatment asked and documented as free text
measure: Correlation of TSQM-14 results and patient's expectation on treatment
time frame: through study completion, an average of 24 weeks
description: Correlation of TSQM-14 results and patient's expectation on treatment
measure: drug accountability
time frame: at week 4
description: Evaluation of results of treatment adherence (drug accountability) using patient diary
measure: drug accountability
time frame: at week 12
description: Evaluation of results of treatment adherence (drug accountability) using patient diary
measure: drug accountability
time frame: at week 16
description: Evaluation of results of treatment adherence (drug accountability) using patient diary
measure: drug accountability
time frame: at week 20
description: Evaluation of results of treatment adherence (drug accountability) using patient diary
measure: drug accountability
time frame: at week 24
description: Evaluation of results of treatment adherence (drug accountability) using patient diary
measure: eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)
time frame: at baseline
description: eGFR value
measure: eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)
time frame: at week 4
description: eGFR value
measure: change in eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)
time frame: at week 4
description: eGFR change to BL
measure: eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)
time frame: at week 12
description: eGFR value
measure: change in eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)
time frame: at week 12
description: eGFR change to BL
measure: change in eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)
time frame: at week 16
description: eGFR change to BL
measure: eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)
time frame: at week 16
description: eGFR value
measure: change in eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)
time frame: at week 20
description: eGFR change to BL
measure: eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)
time frame: at week 24
description: eGFR value
measure: change in eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate)
time frame: at week 24
description: eGFR change to BL
measure: blood pressure (mmHg)
time frame: at baseline
description: blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure
measure: blood pressure (mmHg)
time frame: at week 4
description: blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure
measure: change in blood pressure (mmHg)
time frame: at week 4
description: blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure change to BL
measure: blood pressure (mmHg)
time frame: at week 12
description: blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure
measure: change in blood pressure (mmHg)
time frame: at week 12
description: blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure change to BL
measure: blood pressure (mmHg)
time frame: at week 16
description: blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure
measure: change in blood pressure (mmHg)
time frame: at week 16
description: blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure change to BL
measure: blood pressure (mmHg)
time frame: at week 20
description: blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure
measure: change in blood pressure (mmHg)
time frame: at week 20
description: blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure change to BL
measure: blood pressure (mmHg)
time frame: at week 24
description: blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure
measure: change in blood pressure (mmHg)
time frame: at week 24
description: blood pressure (mmHg) Systolic or Diastolic Blood Pressure change to BL
measure: pain characteristics measured by QST (quantitative sensory testing)
time frame: at Baseline
description: Correlation of pain characteristics measured by QST, VAS pain and pain relief
measure: pain characteristics measured by QST (quantitative sensory testing)
time frame: at week 4
description: Correlation of pain characteristics measured by QST, VAS pain and pain relief
measure: pain characteristics measured by QST (quantitative sensory testing)
time frame: at week 8
description: Correlation of pain characteristics measured by QST, VAS pain and pain relief
measure: pain characteristics measured by QST (quantitative sensory testing)
time frame: at week 12
description: Correlation of pain characteristics measured by QST, VAS pain and pain relief
measure: pain characteristics measured by QST (quantitative sensory testing)
time frame: at week 24
description: Correlation of pain characteristics measured by QST, VAS pain and pain relief
measure: adverse events (AEs)
time frame: through study completion, an average of 24 weeks
description: Documentation of type, frequency and seriousness of adverse events (AEs)
measure: Infections
time frame: through study completion, an average of 24 weeks
description: Incidence rates of serious infection events (SIEs),
measure: Documentation of all lab abnormalities
time frame: through study completion, an average of 24 weeks
description: incidence rates of lab abnormalities
measure: Cardiovascular events
time frame: through study completion, an average of 24 weeks
description: incidence rates of cardio vascular events
measure: Malignencies
time frame: through study completion, an average of 24 weeks
description: incidence rates of malignancies
arm group label: Tofacitinib
arm group type: Active Comparator
description: Tofacitinib (Xeljanz®; 5 mg twice daily, p.o.)
arm group label: Etanercept
arm group type: Active Comparator
description: Etanercept (Enbrel®; 50 mg once per week, s.c.)
intervention type: Drug
intervention name: Tofacitinib
description: 5 mg twice daily, p.o.
arm group label: Tofacitinib
other name: TOFA, Xeljanz
intervention type: Biological
intervention name: Etanercept
description: 50 mg once per week, s.c.
arm group label: Etanercept
other name: Enbrel, ETA
criteria: 
gender: All
minimum age: 18 Years
maximum age: 65 Years
healthy volunteers: No
last name: Harald Burkhardt, MD
role: Principal Investigator
affiliation: Fraunhofer IME
last name: Anja Kuehne
phone: 00 49 69 6301
phone ext: 80225
email: anja.kuehne@ime.fraunhofer.de
last name: Tanja Rossmanith, PhD
email: tanja.rossmanith@ime.fraunhofer.de
facility: 
status: Recruiting
contact: 
investigator: 
facility: 
status: Recruiting
contact: 
investigator: 
facility: 
status: Active, not recruiting
facility: 
status: Active, not recruiting
facility: 
status: Recruiting
contact: 
investigator: 
facility: 
status: Recruiting
contact: 
investigator: 
country: Germany
responsible party type: Sponsor-Investigator
investigator affiliation: Fraunhofer Institute for Molecular Biology and Applied Ecology
investigator full name: Dr. Frank Behrens
investigator title: Representative of the Sponsor
mesh term: Rheumatic Fever
mesh term: Arthritis
mesh term: Etanercept
mesh term: Tofacitinib