Trial · NCT02196324
Registered outcomes17
Each outcome the trial registered, primary first, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.
1 to 17 of 17
Download this page as JSON| List | Outcome | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Average Visual Analog Scale at Baseline | At Baseline | At study visits, participants recorded a mark for pruritus severity on a 10-cm horizontal line. This thermometer-type scale was marked with ratings of "no itch" (0 cm) and worst imaginable itch" (10 cm). Average Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (average itch over the past 24 hours) was recorded. Higher scores indicated worse outcome. |
| Primary | Average Visual Analog Scale at Week 2 | At Week 2 | At study visits, participants recorded a mark for pruritus severity on a 10-cm horizontal line. This thermometer-type scale was marked with ratings of "no itch" (0 cm) and worst imaginable itch" (10 cm). Average VAS (average itch over the past 24 hours) was recorded. Higher scores indicated worse outcome. |
| Primary | Average Visual Analog Scale at Week 4 | At Week 4 | At study visits, participants recorded a mark for pruritus severity on a 10-cm horizontal line. This thermometer-type scale was marked with ratings of "no itch" (0 cm) and worst imaginable itch" (10 cm). Average VAS (average itch over the past 24 hours) was recorded. Higher scores indicated worse outcome. |
| Primary | Average Visual Analog Scale at Week 8 | At Week 8 | At study visits, participants recorded a mark for pruritus severity on a 10-cm horizontal line. This thermometer-type scale was marked with ratings of "no itch" (0 cm) and worst imaginable itch" (10 cm). Average VAS (average itch over the past 24 hours) was recorded. Higher scores indicated worse outcome. |
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Improvement in Pruritus as Reported on Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) - Pruritus | At Baseline and Week 8 | At study visits, participants used the VRS to rate their skin sensations (pruritus, burning, and stinging) using a 5-point scale (0 = not present; 1 = mild present; 2 = moderately present; 3 = severely present; and 4 = very severely present). Higher scores indicated worse outcome. |
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Improvement in Burning as Reported on Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) - Burning | At Baseline and Week 8 | At study visits, participants used the VRS to rate their skin sensations (pruritus, burning, and stinging) using a 5-point scale (0 = not present; 1 = mild present; 2 = moderately present; 3 = severely present; and 4 = very severely present). Higher scores indicated worse outcome. |
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Improvement in Stinging as Reported on Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) - Stinging | At Baseline and Week 8 | At study visits, participants used the VRS to rate their skin sensations (pruritus, burning, and stinging) using a 5-point scale (0 = not present; 1 = mild present; 2 = moderately present; 3 = severely present; and 4 = very severely present). Higher scores indicated worse outcome. |
| Secondary | Worst Visual Analog Scale (VAS) | At Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8 | At study visits, participants recorded a mark for pruritus severity on a 10-cm horizontal line. This thermometer-type scale was marked with ratings of "no itch" (0 cm) and worst imaginable itch" (10 cm). Worst VAS (worst itch over the past 24 hours) was recorded. Higher scores indicated worse outcome. |
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Improvement in Pruritus as Reported on Patient Global Assessment (PGA) | At Weeks 2, 4, and 8 | The PGA included a question: Did the pruritus improve during the treatment period (yes/no). |
| Secondary | Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) | At Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8 | Numeric Rating Scale: Using the patient diary, participants rated the following using an 11-point NRS (0 = no itching; to 10 = worst itch imaginable): average itching over the past 24 hours (Average NRS). Higher scores indicated worse outcome. |
| Secondary | Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) | At Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8 | At each visit, participants completed a DLQI questionnaire. The DLQI is a validated questionnaire consisting of 10 questions relating to the degree to which the participant's skin condition affected his/her daily activities. The DLQI questionnaire is designed for use in adults, i.e. participants over the age of 16. The scoring of each question is as follows: Very much: scored 3, A lot: scored 2, A little: scored 1, Not at all: scored 0, Not relevant: scored 0, Question 7, 'prevented work or studying': scored 3. The DLQI is calculated by summing the score of each question resulting in a maximum of 30 and a minimum of 0. The higher the score, the more quality of life is impaired. Interpreting the DLQI Scores: 0 - 1: no effect at all on participant's life, 2 - 5: small effect on participant's life, 6 - 10: moderate effect on participant's life, 11 - 20: very large effect on participant's life, 21 - 30: extremely large effect on participant's life. |
| Secondary | Pruritus-specific Quality of Life (ItchyQoL) | At Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8 | At each visit, participants completed an ItchyQoL questionnaire. The ItchyQoL is a validated questionnaire consisting of 22 questions based on the concerns and issues pertinent to participants with pruritus. Items should be scored for the following answers: Never: 1, Rarely: 2, Sometimes: 3, Often: 4, All the time:5. Higher scores indicated worse outcome. Total Score is obtained by calculating the unweighted mean of all ItchyQoL questions. |
| Secondary | Patient Benefit Index, Version for Patients With Pruritus (PBI-P) | At Week 8 / End of Treatment | At Visits 2 and 5 (or Early termination) only, participants completed the standardized and validated PBI-P questionnaire. Prior to treatment, the first page of the questionnaire, the Patient Needs Questionnaire (PNQ), was administered to determine how different benefits of therapy were relevant for the individual participant. After treatment, using the Patient Benefit Questionnaire (PBQ), participants were asked to evaluate the extent to which the benefits they indicated were important to them were, in fact, realized. From all the items taken together, a weighted total benefit value was calculated, which represented the patient relevant therapy benefits. The mean score greater than 1 is considered to represent a clinically relevant improvement. The items are rated on a 5-point scale with values from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very), allowing for "does/did not apply to me" = 5; and missing value = -9. Higher scores indicated better outcome. |
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Improvement in PN Lesions as Reported on Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) | At Week 8 | Using the IGA, physicians rated change in PN lesions (if any) from +5 ("markedly improved") to -5 ("markedly worse"). Higher scores indicated better outcome. |
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Improvement on Prurigo Activity Score (PAS) | At Day 1 and Week 8 | Using the PAS, physicians described, localized, counted, and measured PN lesions. One of the 7 items was: Activity Stage (Stage 0-4: 0 = 0%, 1 = 1-25%, 2 = 26-50%, 3 = 51-75%, 4 = \> 75%) a. Prurigo lesions with excoriations/crusts Participants with PAS activity stage (prurigo lesions with excoriations/crusts) is presented in the below table. |
| Secondary | Participants With Rescue Medication Usage | Pre-treatment, upto 8 Weeks | Rescue medications included cetirizine hydrochloride, desloratadine, levocetirizine, and loratadine. |
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) | From the time of informed consent (Screening) until the last study visit (follow-up phone call, Week 10) | An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence associated with the use of a drug in humans, whether or not considered drug related. An AE (also referred to as an adverse experience) could be any unfavorable and unintended sign (eg, an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease temporally associated with the use of a study drug, without any judgment about causality. |
Source ClinicalTrials.govtrials-2026-11-12-0.5.0
Sources 3
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTFreely available. Acknowledgement requested
- ClinicalTrials.govNo license stated
- NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain
Each source's terms
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTClinicalTrials.gov data via Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT), CTTI. CTTI makes its materials freely available and requests acknowledgement. https://aact.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/documentation/299
- ClinicalTrials.govnone stated
- NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain (NIH RePORTER)
ClinicalTrials.gov's data carry an international copyright outside the United States: https://clinicaltrials.gov/about-site/terms-conditions.
For software
Read this list from software.
Twenty rows a page, as JSON. No key.
GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT02196324/registered