To compare the analgesic effectiveness of celecoxib and tramadol in subjects with Chronic Low Back Pain measured by the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS-Pain) at Week 6
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
802
200 mg capsules BID for 6 weeks
50 mg capsules QID for 6 weeks
Treatment Responders Based on the Numerical Rating Scale-Pain (NRS-Pain)
A subject who met the following criteria was considered as a successful responder at Week 6: completed 6 weeks of treatment with study medication and had a 30% improvement from Baseline to Week 6/ET on the NRS-Pain. NRS-Pain scale assessed the severity of a subject's lower back pain on a scale of 0 (No pain) and 10 (Worst possible pain).
Time frame: Week 6 or Early Termination (ET)
Change From Baseline in Severity of Chronic Low Back Pain as Measured by NRS-Pain
NRS-Pain scale assessed the severity of a subject's lower back pain on a scale of 0 (No pain) and 10 (Worst possible pain). NRS-Pain scale: Change = mean score at Week 6/ET minus mean score at Baseline.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET
Change From Baseline in Severity of Low Back Pain as Measured by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)
VAS was a 100 millimeter (mm) scale that subjects used to assess the severity of their lower back pain. Based on the following question, "During the past day, how much back pain did you have?", the subject was instructed to place a vertical line on the VAS to indicate the magnitude of his/her lower back pain. 0 mm = no pain and 100 mm = worst possible pain. VAS: Change = mean score at Week 6/ET minus mean score at Baseline.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET
Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity
Number of subjects with a graded level of disease activity using the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity 5-point scale (1=very good, 2=good, 3=fair, 4=poor, and 5=very poor). Subjects were classified as "Improved" if their assessment reduced at least 2 grades from baseline or if their assessment changed to Grade 1 (Very Good). Subjects were classified as "Worsened" if their assessment increased at least 2 grades from baseline or if their assessment changed to Grade 5 (Very Poor). Subjects were classified as "No Change" otherwise.
Time frame: Week 6/ET
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Pfizer Investigational Site
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
Pfizer Investigational Site
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
Pfizer Investigational Site
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
Pfizer Investigational Site
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
Pfizer Investigational Site
Little Rock, Arkansas, United States
Pfizer Investigational Site
Anaheim, California, United States
Pfizer Investigational Site
Long Beach, California, United States
Pfizer Investigational Site
Oceanside, California, United States
Pfizer Investigational Site
Sacramento, California, United States
Pfizer Investigational Site
Sacramento, California, United States
...and 50 more locations
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity
Number of subjects with a physician's grading of disease activity using the Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity 5-point scale ((1=very good, 2=good, 3=fair, 4=poor, and 5=very poor). Subjects were classified as "Improved" if their assessment reduced at least 2 grades from baseline or if their assessment changed to Grade 1 (Very Good). Subjects were classified as "Worsened" if their assessment increased at least 2 grades from baseline or if their assessment changed to Grade 5 (Very Poor). Subjects were classified as "No Change" otherwise.
Time frame: Week 6/ET
Change From Baseline in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Total Score
Each subject assessed his/her own disability due to low back pain using the RMDQ worksheet, which consisted of 24 statements of disability. The RMDQ total score was calculated as the total number of statements that were checked; the RMDQ total scores could have ranged from 0 to 24, with higher scores indicating greater disability. RMDQ: Change = mean score at Week 6/ET minus mean score at Baseline.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET
Change From Baseline in Modified Brief Pain Inventory (m-BPI-sf)
m-BPI-sf scale assessed pain severity (0 = no pain to 10 = worst possible pain), and pain interference of functional activities (0 = does not interfere to 10 = completely interferes) during the 24 hour follow-up period. Subjects indicated: how much pain now; worst pain; average level of pain; how much pain interfered with general activity, mood, walking ability, relations with other people, sleep, normal work (including housework), and enjoyment of life. m-BPI-sf: Change = mean score at Week 6/ET minus mean score at Baseline.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET
Change From Baseline in Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Scale
MOS sleep scale included the following attributes: sleep disturbance, snoring, awaken shortness of breath or headache, quantity of sleep, sleep adequacy, somnolence, Sleep Problem Index I, and Sleep Problem Index II. Score ranged from 0-100, with a higher score indicating more of the scale attribute (e.g., more sleep disturbance, etc.). A negative change indicated subject improvement. MOS sleep scale: Change = mean score at Week 6/ET minus mean score at Baseline.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET
Number of Subjects With Change From Baseline in MOS Optimal Sleep Scale Scores
The Optimal Scale is scaled from 0 or 1 with 1 indicating 7 or 8 hours of sleep per night and 0 otherwise. Number of subjects with change of improvement (0 to 1), no change (1 to 1 or 0 to 0), or worsening (1 to 0) from baseline as indicated by the MOS Optimal sleep scale.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET
Change From Baseline in Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ)
The WLQ included the following: Time Scale, Physical Scale, Output Scale, Mental-Interpersonal Scale, and Index Scale. The scales ranged from 0 (Limited none of the time) to 100 (Limited all of the time). A negative change indicated subject improvement.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 6/ET
Patient's Global Evaluation of Study Medication
Number of subjects with an overall response to study medication of poor, fair, good, very good, and excellent.
Time frame: Weeks 1, 3, and 6/ET
Patient's Satisfaction Questionnaire (With Pain Relief Scale)
Number of subjects at varying levels of pain relief (1 = very dissatisfied to 10 = very satisfied).
Time frame: Week 6/ET
Patient's Satisfaction Questionnaire (With Walking and Bending Ability Scale)
Number of subjects at varying levels of pain relief (1 = very dissatisfied to 10 = very satisfied).
Time frame: Week 6/ET
Chronic Low Back Pain Responders Based on VAS, Patient's Global, and RMDQ
Subjects were successful responders if they had: \> = 30% improvement from baseline to final visit in VAS assessment (as identified by 100 millimeter scale); \> = 30% improvement from baseline to final visit in Patient's Global assessment (classified as improved if assessment reduced at least 2 grades from baseline or if assessment changed to Grade 1, worsened if assessment increased at least 2 grades from baseline or if assessment changed to Grade 5, or no change; and \< 20% worsening from baseline to final visit in RMDQ assessment (lower scores indicated greater disability).
Time frame: Week 6/ET