Try the modernized ClinicalTrials.gov beta website. Learn more about the modernization effort.
Working…
ClinicalTrials.gov
ClinicalTrials.gov Menu

Placebo-controlled Study to Evaluate Rexlemestrocel-L Alone or Combined With Hyaluronic Acid in Participants With Chronic Low Back Pain (MSB-DR003)

The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.
 
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02412735
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : April 9, 2015
Results First Posted : January 18, 2022
Last Update Posted : January 20, 2022
Sponsor:
Collaborator:
Quintiles, Inc.
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Mesoblast, Ltd.

Brief Summary:
This is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3 study designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Mesoblast's rexlemestrocel-L alone or combined with hyaluronic acid (HA) in participants with chronic low back pain (> 6 months) associated with moderate radiographic degenerative changes of a disc.

Condition or disease Intervention/treatment Phase
Degenerative Disc Disease Drug: Rexlemestrocel-L Drug: Rexlemestrocel-L + HA Mixture Drug: Placebo Phase 3

Layout table for study information
Study Type : Interventional  (Clinical Trial)
Actual Enrollment : 404 participants
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Quadruple (Participant, Care Provider, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Primary Purpose: Treatment
Official Title: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of a Single Injection of Rexlemestrocel-L Alone or Combined With Hyaluronic Acid (HA) in Subjects With Chronic Low Back Pain
Actual Study Start Date : March 6, 2015
Actual Primary Completion Date : May 15, 2020
Actual Study Completion Date : June 15, 2021

Resource links provided by the National Library of Medicine

MedlinePlus related topics: Back Pain

Arm Intervention/treatment
Experimental: Rexlemestrocel-L
Participants received rexlemestrocel-L 2.0 mL injection of approximately 6 million rexlemestrocel-L cells in freeze media mixed in a 1:1 by-volume ratio with saline on Day 0 (Visit 2).
Drug: Rexlemestrocel-L
Rexlemestrocel-L injection

Experimental: Rexlemestrocel-L + HA
Participants received rexlemestrocel-L 2.0 mL injection of approximately 6 million rexlemestrocel-L cells in freeze media mixed in a 1:1 by-volume ratio with hyaluronic acid (HA) solution on Day 0 (Visit 2).
Drug: Rexlemestrocel-L + HA Mixture
Rexlemestrocel-L was combined in 1:1 by-volume ratio with HA solution and the resulting mixture was injected

Placebo Comparator: Placebo
Participants received saline solution as matching-placebo on Day 0 (Visit 2).
Drug: Placebo
Saline control solution




Primary Outcome Measures :
  1. Overall Treatment Success: Bayesian Estimated Response Rate [ Time Frame: Up to 24 months ]
    Overall treatment success was determined based on number of responders who had composite response at both months 12 and 24 evaluated per specified criteria. A treatment responder with treatment success was defined as a participant who met the 3 criteria of a composite responder analysis as: 50% or greater reduction in the lower-back pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score; 15-point or greater reduction in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score; and lack of post-treatment interventions at the treated level as of the study visit (Visits 6 [12 months post-treatment] and 8 [24 months post-treatment]). The average response rate was based upon the average of multiple Bayesian simulations.


Secondary Outcome Measures :
  1. Effectiveness Based on Number of Pain Responders [ Time Frame: Up to 24 months ]
    A participant was defined as a pain responder for a given study visit if they achieved at least a 50% reduction from Baseline in the lower-back pain VAS score (average pain over 24 hours), as reported during in-clinic assessment. The participant should be qualified as a pain responder at both 12 and 24 months post-treatment, and must not have received a post-treatment intervention through 24 months' follow-up. Any participant that did not have a minimum of a visit at 3 months (Study Visit 4) was considered a non-responder for this outcome measure.

  2. Effectiveness Based on Number of Functional Responders [ Time Frame: Up to 24 months ]
    A participant was defined as a functional responder for a given study visit if they achieved at least a 15-point reduction from Baseline in ODI score, as reported during in-clinic assessment. The participant should be qualified as a functional responder at both 12 and 24 months post-treatment, and must not have received a post-treatment intervention through 24 months' follow-up; any participant that did not have a minimum of a visit at 3 months (Study Visit 4) was considered a non-responder for this outcome measure.

  3. Effectiveness Based on Treatment Success at 24 Months Reported as Number of Responders [ Time Frame: Month 24 ]
    A treatment responder with treatment success was defined as a participant who met the 3 conditions of a composite responder analysis as: 50% or greater reduction in the lower-back pain VAS score; 15-point or greater reduction in ODI score; and lack of post-treatment interventions at the treated level as of the study visit. The participants qualified as responders if they satisfied the above conditions at the 24-month follow-up visit alone. Any participant that did not have a minimum of a visit at 3 months (Study Visit 4) was considered a non-responder for this outcome measure.

  4. Effectiveness Based on Number of Minimal Pain Responders at 24 Months [ Time Frame: Month 24 ]
    A minimal pain responder was defined as a participant who achieved a lower-back pain VAS score (average pain over 24 hours) of 20 mm or less at the given study visit. The participants qualified as responders if they satisfied the above condition at 24 months post-treatment, and did not receive a post-treatment intervention through 24 months' follow-up. Any participant that did not have a minimum of a visit at 3 months (Study Visit 4) was considered a non-responder for this outcome measure.

  5. Effectiveness Based on Time to First Intervention Over 24 Months [ Time Frame: Month 24 ]
    The effectiveness of the study drug was evaluated based on its ability in increasing the time to additional interventions at the treated level over 24 months post-treatment.

  6. Effectiveness Based on Number of Minimal Disability Responders at 24 Months [ Time Frame: Month 24 ]
    A minimal pain responder was defined as a participant who achieved an ODI score of 20% or less at the given study visit. The participants qualified as responders if they satisfied the above condition at 24 months post-treatment, and did not receive a post-treatment intervention through 24 months' follow-up. Any participant that did not have a minimum of a visit at 3 months (Study Visit 4) was considered a non-responder for this outcome measure.



Information from the National Library of Medicine

Choosing to participate in a study is an important personal decision. Talk with your doctor and family members or friends about deciding to join a study. To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contacts provided below. For general information, Learn About Clinical Studies.


Layout table for eligibility information
Ages Eligible for Study:   18 Years and older   (Adult, Older Adult)
Sexes Eligible for Study:   All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:   No
Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Male and female participants 18 years of age and older
  • If female of childbearing potential, participant is non-pregnant, non-nursing, and agrees to use highly effective methods of contraception for a minimum of 24 months post-treatment
  • Signed informed consent and country-appropriate privacy forms indicating participant is willing to undergo treatment and willing to be available for each examination scheduled over the study duration
  • Have documented diagnosis of moderate radiographic degeneration of an intervertebral disc from L1 to S1, with a disc suspected of causing chronic low back pain (CLBP) associated with moderate radiographic degeneration at a lumbar disc is defined as the following (participant must meet all of the listed conditions):

    1. Chronic low back pain for at least 6 months
    2. Have failed 6 months of conservative back pain care. (Conservative treatment regimens may include any or all of the following: initial rest, medications [e.g., anti-inflammatory, analgesics, narcotics/opioids, muscle relaxants], massage, acupuncture, chiropractic manipulations, activity modification, home-directed lumbar exercise program, and non-invasive pain control treatments or procedures)
    3. Have at a minimum undergone supervised physical therapy, such as daily walking routines, therapeutic exercises, and back education programs specifically for the treatment of low back pain and taken a pain medication for back pain (e.g. non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) and/or opioid medication).
    4. Change from normal disc morphology of the index disc as defined by radiographic evaluation by the core imaging evaluation provider. Radiographs must show all of the following:
  • A modified Pfirrmann score of 3, 4, 5 or 6 on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at the index disc
  • Modic Grade II changes or less on MRI at the index disc
  • With or without contained disc protrusion at the index disc on MRI

    e. Low back pain of at least 40mm and not more than 90mm of 100mm on low back pain visual analogue scale (VAS) (average pain over 24 hours)

    f. Leg pain ≤20mm in both legs on a 100mm VAS scale

    g. Oswestry disability index (ODI) score of at least 30 and no more than 90 on a 100 point scale.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Female participants who are pregnant or nursing, or women planning to become pregnant in the first 24 months post-treatment
  • Extreme obesity, as defined by National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical Guidelines Body Mass Index (BMI > 40)
  • Have undergone a surgical procedure (e.g. discectomy, intradiscal electrothermal therapy, intradiscal radiofrequency, artificial disc replacement, interbody fusion) on the disc at the index or adjacent level
  • Osteoporosis, as defined by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan. A DEXA T-score of ≤ -2.5 will exclude the participant.
  • Any lumbar intradiscal injection, including steroids, into the index or adjacent discs prior to treatment injection, with the exception of the following injections performed at least 2 weeks prior to study treatment:

    1. Contrast medium (discography or other diagnostic injection)
    2. NSAIDs
    3. Nerve-blocking anesthetics (e.g., lidocaine, bupivacaine)
    4. Antibiotics
    5. Saline
  • Have undergone a procedure affecting the structure/biomechanics of the index disc level (e.g., posterolateral fusion)
  • Active malignancy or tumor as source of symptoms or history of malignancy within the 5 years prior to enrolment on study
  • Have been a recipient of prior allogeneic stem cell/progenitor cell therapy for any indication or autologous stem cell/progenitor cell therapy or other biological intervention to repair the index intervertebral disc
  • An average baseline morphine equivalent dose (MED) of >75mg/day as determined by e-diary entries during the screening period
  • Taking systemic immunosuppressants
  • A medical condition, serious intercurrent illness, or extenuating circumstance that would preclude participation in the study or potentially decrease survival or interfere with ambulation or rehabilitation.
  • Participants involved in spinal litigation, including workman's compensation, unless litigation is complete
  • Are transient or has a severe alcohol or substance abuse problem
  • Clinically significant nerve pain (e.g., chronic radiculopathy or neuropathy)
  • Clinically significant sacroiliac joint pain
  • Compressive pathology due to stenosis or disc protrusion on MRI with associated clinical symptoms defined as leg pain VAS>20mm out of 100mm or neurologic deficit on neurologic exam
  • Disc extrusion with a maximum dimension greater or equal to twice the posterior height of the disc, or disc sequestration in the lumbar spine on MRI as determined by radiographic core lab
  • Modified Pfirrmann score of 7 or 8 at any lumbar level (L1-S1) on MRI evaluation as determined by radiographic core lab
  • Symptomatic involvement of more than one lumbar disc
  • Symptomatic central vertebral canal stenosis as defined by neurogenic claudication
  • Spondylolisthesis or retrolisthesis Grade 2 and above or Spondylolysis at the index or adjacent level(s)
  • Lumbar spondylitis or other undifferentiated spondyloarthropathy affecting the index disc
  • Spinal deformity defined as lumbar scoliosis with a Cobb angle of the lumbar spine greater than 15 degrees
  • Any fracture of the spine at the index or adjacent levels that has not healed, or clinically compromised vertebral bodies at the index level due to current or past trauma
  • Facet pain at the index level or adjacent segments as determined by a diagnostic medial branch block (a facet block injection is not acceptable for making this determination) to rule out facet joint involvement.
  • Full thickness annular tears in the index level as determined by free flowing contrast media through the annulus fibrosis.

Information from the National Library of Medicine

To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.

Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT02412735


Locations
Show Show 48 study locations
Sponsors and Collaborators
Mesoblast, Ltd.
Quintiles, Inc.
Investigators
Layout table for investigator information
Study Director: Roger Brown Mesoblast, Ltd.
  Study Documents (Full-Text)

Documents provided by Mesoblast, Ltd.:
Layout table for additonal information
Responsible Party: Mesoblast, Ltd.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02412735    
Other Study ID Numbers: MSB-DR003
First Posted: April 9, 2015    Key Record Dates
Results First Posted: January 18, 2022
Last Update Posted: January 20, 2022
Last Verified: January 2022
Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:
Plan to Share IPD: No

Layout table for additional information
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product: Yes
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product: No
Keywords provided by Mesoblast, Ltd.:
Chronic Lumbar Back Pain
Low back pain
Back pain
Degenerative Disc Disease
Injection of Degenerated Lumbar Disc
Intervertebral Disc Degeneration
Bone Diseases
Musculoskeletal Diseases
Nervous System Diseases
Neurologic Manifestations
Pain
Spinal Diseases
Stem Cells
Adult Stem Cells
Allogeneic Mesenchymal Precursor cells (MPCs)
Mesoblast
Hyaluronic Acid
Pharmaceutical Solutions
Adjuvants, Immunologic
Immunologic Factors
Pharmacologic Actions
Protective Agents
rexlemestrocel-L
Viscosupplements
Additional relevant MeSH terms:
Layout table for MeSH terms
Intervertebral Disc Degeneration
Back Pain
Low Back Pain
Pain
Neurologic Manifestations
Spinal Diseases
Bone Diseases
Musculoskeletal Diseases