Trial · NCT07371572
The Efficacy and Safety of Intramuscular Methylprednisolone in Patients With Hand OsteoArthritis
NCT07371572, Phase 3, Recruiting, Sint Maartenskliniek
3 sourcestrials-2026-11-12-0.5.0
Cite this record
ConductScience Library. The Efficacy and Safety of Intramuscular Methylprednisolone in Patients With Hand OsteoArthritis. Trials, record NCT07371572. Release trials-2026-11-12-0.5.0, 12 Nov 2026. https://conductscience.org/library/trials/NCT07371572
On this page
Trial
As registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, in the graph's capture of the registry.
- Title
- The Efficacy and Safety of Intramuscular Methylprednisolone in Patients With Hand OsteoArthritis
- NCT number
- NCT07371572
- Status
- Recruiting
- Phases
- Phase 3
- Enrollment
- 212 participants, estimated
- Lead sponsor
- Sint Maartenskliniek
- Conditions
- Hand Osteoarthritis
- Interventions
- 120mg methylprednisolone acetate, 40mg methylprednisolone acetate, Placebo
- First posted
- 2026-01-28
- Last updated
- 2026-01-28
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Registered outcomes26
Each outcome the trial registered, primary first, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.
| List | Outcome | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Efficacy of intramuscular methylprednisolone acetate in reducing hand pain between baseline and week 4, compared to placebo measured on a 0-100 mm Visual Analogue Scale | From baseline to week 4 | The primary objective of this study is to assess the efficacy of intramuscular methylprednisolone acetate (120mg or 40mg) in reducing hand pain between baseline and week 4, compared to placebo measured on a digital Visual Analogue Scale ranging from 1-100 mm. The higher the score, the worse the outcome. |
| Secondary | Non-inferiority of 40mg compared to 120mg MP of the efficacy of intramuscular methylprednisolone acetate in reducing hand pain assessed by the digital 0-100 mm Visual Analogue Scale | From baseline to week 4 | Investigate non-inferiority of 40mg MP compared to 120mg MP (in case superiority to placebo of both interventions is proven in the primary analysis) of the efficacy of intramuscular methylprednisolone acetate in reducing hand pain measured on a digital Visual Analogue Scale ranging from 1-100 mm. The higher the score, the worse the outcome. |
| Secondary | Change in hand pain at week 4, and thereafter every 4 weeks | From week 8 to week 48 | Compare the three treatment arms based on change in hand pain at week 8, and therafter every 4 weeks until week 48 measured on a digital Visual Analogue Scale ranging from 1-100 mm. The higher the score, the worse the outcome. |
| Secondary | Percentage of participants with a reduction in hand pain larger than the MCID | From baseline to week 4 | Compare the three treatment arms based on percentage of participants with a reduction in hand pain larger than the minimal clinically important difference in pain (MCID) = 10 mm |
| Secondary | Hand function, change in functional index | From baseline to week 48 | Compare the three treatment arms based on hand function. Change in functional index for hand OA at week 4, 16, 32 and 48, compared to baseline measured with Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaire ranging from 0-100. The higher the score, the better the hand function. |
| Secondary | OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria based on pain measured with Visual Analogue Scale | From baseline to week 48 | Compare the three treatment arms based on OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria based on pain measured on a digital Visual Analogue Scale ranging from 1-100 mm. The higher the score, the worse the outcome. Proportion participants fulfilling responder criteria every 4 weeks compared to baseline. |
| Secondary | OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria based on Visual Analogue Scale hand function | From baseline to week 48 | Compare the three treatment arms based on OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria based on hand function measured on a digital Visual Analogue Scale ranging from 1-100 mm. The higher the score, the worse the outcome. Proportion participants fulfilling responder criteria every 4 weeks compared to baseline. |
| Secondary | OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria based on patient global assessment measured with Visual Analogue Scale | From baseline to week 48 | Compare the three treatment arms based on OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria based on patient global assessment measured on a digital Visual Analogue Scale ranging from 1-100 mm. The higher the score, the worse the outcome. Proportion participants fulfilling responder criteria every 4 weeks compared to baseline. |
| Secondary | Quality of life, measured with EuroQuol-5D-5L | From baseline to week 48 | Compare the three treatment arms based on Quality of Life, measured with EuroQuol-5D-5L questionnaire at week 16, 32 and 48. The EuroQol EQ-5D-5L has two measurement systems: the health state index score and the EQ Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS). The health state index score ranges from below zero to 1, with 1 being full health and values below zero indicating a state worse than death, depending on the specific country's value set. The EQ VAS, which measures current overall health, ranges from 0 to 100, where 100 is the best imaginable health |
| Secondary | Patient experience of steroid use with the Steroid PRO | From baseline to week 48 | Compare the three treatment arms based on patient experience of steroid use with the Steroid PRO questionnaire every 4 weeks. Answers can be ranged from 1 to 5. Where the higher the score, the worse the outcome. |
1 to 10 of 26Source ClinicalTrials.gov
See all 26 registered outcomesOutcomes0
Each outcome the trial posted results for, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.
None in this release.
Results by group0
Each measurement the trial posted, group by group, in the words and numbers it posted.
None in this release.
Participant flow0
How many started, completed or left each group, period by period.
None in this release.
Adverse events0
Each adverse event the trial posted, group by group: the participants affected out of those at risk.
None in this release.
Adverse event totals0
The totals the trial posted for each group.
None in this release.
Papers0
The papers the trial lists on ClinicalTrials.gov.
None in this release.
Grants0
The grants NIH RePORTER links to the trial, newest funded first: NIH's, and some of AHRQ's, CDC's, FDA's and VA's. Each shows its title, principal investigators, organization and funder in its newest year.
None in this release.
Trial comparisons0
Comparisons of the trial's two groups, calculated by ConductScience from the counts it posted.
None in this release.
Tests0
The ConductCognition tests this trial's registered outcomes name, as ScienceGraph matched them in trial-tests-2026-11-12-0.2.1.
None in this release.
Data dates
The day each source was copied for this release.
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 trial from software.
The record and each of its lists are JSON, twenty rows a page. No key.
GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT07371572
GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT07371572/registered?page=2