CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03981419Updated Mar 13, 2024Results posted

A Study to Evaluate the Effect of GRF6021 on Postoperative Recovery Following Primary Hip or Knee Arthroplasty

A Phase 2 interventional study of GRF6021 and Placebo in Postoperative Recovery, sponsored by Alkahest, Inc.. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 50 Years to 85 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-03-13.

Sponsored by Alkahest, Inc. · Phase 2, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
38
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
50 Years to 85 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study will evaluate the safety, tolerability and effect of GRF6021 on clinical recovery parameters in participants undergoing primary hip or knee arthroplasty.

Read the detailed description

This is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind pilot study to investigate the effects of GRF6021, a 5% human plasma protein fraction administered by intravenous (IV) infusion, on intracellular signaling cascades in blood leukocytes in participants undergoing primary hip or knee arthroplasty.

02

Conditions studied

  • Postoperative Recovery

Keywords

  • Total hip replacement
  • Total knee replacement
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Alkahest, Inc. is the lead sponsor of 12 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

Of its 11 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 11 (100%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
50 Years to 85 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Men and women 50-85 years of age scheduled to undergo primary total hip or knee replacement surgery.
  • Estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥ 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 .

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Blood coagulation disorders.
  • Participants who started chronic anticoagulant therapy (warfarin, heparin, low-molecular weight heparin, or Factor Xa inhibitors) in the last 6 months
  • Hypercoagulable state.
  • Prior hypersensitivity to any human blood product including plasma.
  • Treatment with any human blood product, including transfusions and IV immunoglobulin, during the 6 months prior to screening.
  • History of immunoglobulin A or haptoglobin deficiency.
  • Major surgery, trauma or injury in the last 3 months or minor surgery in the last 1 month.
  • Heart disease or congestive heart failure in the 6 months prior to dosing.
  • Poorly controlled hypertension.
  • Severe anemia.
  • Functional impairment of major joint or lower extremity other than joint undergoing surgery.
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
38 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    GRF6021

    Participants received 4 doses of GRF6021, 250 milliliters (mL), intravenous (IV) infusion. The first dose was administered on day before surgery, the next two doses on the day of surgery i.e., within 4 hours before start of surgery (first incision), and then upon arrival in the postoperative care unit (within 5 hours after the first incision) and the last dose was administered on the day after the surgery.

    Biological: GRF6021

  • Placebo comparator
    Placebo

    Participants received 4 doses of GRF6021 matching placebo, 250 mL, IV infusion. The first dose was administered on day before surgery, the next two doses on the day of surgery i.e., within 4 hours before start of surgery (first incision), and then upon arrival in the postoperative care unit (within 5 hours after the first incision) and the last dose was administered on the day after the surgery.

    Other: Placebo

Interventions

  • BiologicalGRF6021

    for IV infusion

  • OtherPlacebo

    for IV infusion

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Effect of GRF6021 on Immune Responses to Surgery as Determined by Cytometry by Time of Flight (CyTOF) on Day 2

    CyTOF=multiplexed, high-content immune profiling technology, providing high-resolution surveillance of circulating immune cells \& response to GRF6021 infusions on surgical recovery. Blood samples were collected for CyTOF analysis \& were stimulated with a series of extracellular ligands to analyze evoked intracellular signaling responses. High-dimensional data results were obtained from CytOF, and analyzed using the immunological elastic net (iEN) algorithm, a penalized regression method particularly adapted for the analysis of highly correlated data, as it eliminates redundant parameters while retaining interrelated parameters. Raw data obtained from each sample was entered into the classification model (iEN algorithm) that generated prediction values (presented below) showing the effect of study treatment on immune response post-surgery. A prediction value of 0 \& 1 indicated perfect results (i.e., positive response to treatment) for the placebo \& GRF6021 arms, respectively.

    Time frame: Day 2 (before start of surgery and post surgery)

  2. Effect of GRF6021 on Immune Responses to Surgery as Determined by Cytometry by Time of Flight (CyTOF) on Day 3

    CyTOF=multiplexed, high-content immune profiling technology, providing high-resolution surveillance of circulating immune cells \& response to GRF6021 infusions on surgical recovery. Blood samples were collected for CyTOF analysis \& were stimulated with a series of extracellular ligands to analyze evoked intracellular signaling responses. High-dimensional data results were obtained from CytOF, and analyzed using the immunological elastic net (iEN) algorithm, a penalized regression method particularly adapted for the analysis of highly correlated data, as it eliminates redundant parameters while retaining interrelated parameters. Raw data obtained from each sample was entered into the classification model (iEN algorithm) that generated prediction values (presented below) showing the effect of study treatment on immune response post-surgery. A prediction value of 0 \& 1 indicated perfect results (i.e., positive response to treatment) for the placebo \& GRF6021 arms, respectively.

    Time frame: Day 3

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in Functional Status Using the ActiGraph Wearable Device Providing Measurements for Physical Activity/Function and Sleep

    At screening, participants were provided with an ActiGraph wearable device \& approximately -7 to -3 days before surgery, they were instructed to wear the device. ActiGraph wearable device was used to monitor participants' physical activity, mobility \& sleep. Functional status including heart rate \& sleep time were collected during the study period except perioperative times when it was removed for surgery. ActiGraph high-dimensional data was analyzed using a standard EN algorithm which utilizes a penalized regression method particularly adapted to the analysis of highly correlated data, as it eliminates redundant parameters while retaining interrelated parameters. Raw data obtained over the entire observation period was entered into a classification model (iEN algorithm) that generated prediction values (presented below) for functional status changes. A prediction value of 1 \&2 indicated perfect results (i.e., positive response to treatment) for GRF6021 \& placebo groups, respectively.

    Time frame: Baseline; Day 1, Day 3 up to approximately Day 46

  2. Effects of GRF6021 on Plasma Proteomics

    Blood samples collected were analyzed using the Somalogic SomaScan platform which provides a broad overview of proteomics changes by measuring approximately 7,000 proteins. It uses a highly multiplexed and high throughput aptamer-based proteomic technology and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)-microarray-based detection. It provides concentration domain values as relative fluorescence units (RFUs). Proteomics high-dimensional data was analyzed using a standard EN algorithm which utilizes a penalized regression method particularly adapted to the analysis of highly correlated data, as it eliminates redundant parameters while retaining interrelated parameters. Raw data obtained from each sample was entered into a classification model (iEN algorithm) that generated prediction values for proteomics which are presented in the data table. A prediction value of 1 and 2 indicated perfect results (i.e., positive response to treatment) for the GRF6021 and the placebo group, respectively.

    Time frame: Pre-infusion on Day 1 (baseline), 2 (before start of surgery and post surgery), and Day 3

  3. Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Delirium as Assessed Using 3-Minute Diagnostic Interview for Confusion Assessment Method (3-Minute Diagnostic Interview for Confusion [3D-CAM])

    The 3D-CAM is a brief verbal assessment tool used to test participants for delirium. Each item in the instrument directly informs one of the 4 CAM features including acute onset of mental status change or fluctuating course of cognition, inattention, disorganized thinking, and altered level of consciousness. For all items on the assessment, the participants answered as "incorrect," "correct," "no," or "yes". The CAM algorithm is considered positive if the following features are present: Feature 1) Acute onset or fluctuating course and Feature 2) Inattention and either Feature 3) Disorganized thinking or Feature 4) Altered level of consciousness. Number of participants at baseline and postbaseline with delirium "present" or "not present" are reported here. The baseline was defined as Day 1 pre-infusion measurement.

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1 pre-infusion); Days 2 (post-infusion), and 3 (pre-infusion)

  4. Time to 50% Recovery of Baseline Value on the Surgery Recovery Scale (SRS)

    SRS is sensitive \& simple tool for assessment of functional recovery following major surgery \& consist of 13 items. Impacts on daily activities are scored from 1 (not at all) to 5/6 (all the time). First 8 items were scored from 1 to 6. Rest were scored from 1 to 5. SRS scores were obtained by reversing responses (e.g., 1=6, 2=5, 3=4, 4=3, 5=2 and 6=1) to 5 negatively stated items (items 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7) \& then summing across all scale items for an individual at baseline \& each scheduled post-baseline time point. SRS total score range=13-63 where higher score indicated better recovery. For postoperative visits 'not applicable' responses were coded into same category as affirmations of 'not at all'. For all other time points 'not applicable' responses were coded as missing data. KM estimate of survival was to be used to summarize time (in Days) from date of randomization to 50% recovery of baseline value in SRS by treatment group. Baseline = Day -7 to -3 pre-infusion measurement.

    Time frame: Baseline; Days 1 and 3 (pre-infusion) and thereafter up to the end of the study (approximately Day 46)

  5. End of Study (EOS) Treatment Comparison of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)

    WOMAC is a widely utilized self-report measure of lower extremity symptoms and function. The WOMAC Likert Scale version used an 11-point scale anchored by the wording "no pain" and "extreme pain" for pain, and "no difficulty" and "extreme difficulty" for physical function. There were 5 questions for pain and 17 questions for physical function (total 22 questions). Scores (maximum 10) for each question of WOMAC were summed for an individual at the End of Study. The calculated scores were used to summarize the WOMAC score by treatment group. For this outcome measure, a full WOMAC score 0-220 point scale was used for data analysis. Higher scores on the WOMAC indicate worse pain and physical functional limitations.

    Time frame: At end of study (approximately Day 46)

  6. Time to a Score of < 12/40 on a Subset of Questions From the WOMAC, Pain Subscale

    WOMAC is a widely utilized self-report measure of lower extremity symptoms and function. The WOMAC Likert Scale version uses an 11-point scale anchored by the wording "no pain" (score=0) and "extreme pain" (score=10) for the pain subscale. The pain subscale consists of 4 items. The total score ranges from 0 (best) to 40 (worse). Higher scores on the WOMAC indicate worse pain. Kaplan Meier (KM) estimate of survival was used to summarize the time (in Days) from the date of randomization to the day when the participant had a non-missing score of \< 12. Right-censoring was used to produce Kaplan-Meier time-to-event estimates.

    Time frame: Days 1 and 3 (pre-infusion) and thereafter up to Day 39

  7. Time to a Score of < 18/60 on a Subset of Questions From the WOMAC, Physical Function Subscale

    WOMAC is a widely utilized self-report measures of lower extremity symptoms and function. WOMAC Likert Scale version uses an 11-point scale anchored by the wording "no difficulty" (score=0) and "extreme difficulty" (score=10) for physical function subscale. The physical function subscale consists of 6 items. The total score ranges from 0 (best) to 60 (worse). Higher scores on the WOMAC indicate more functional limitations. Kaplan Meier (KM) estimate of survival was used to summarize the time (in Days) from the date of randomization to the day when participant had a non-missing score of \< 18. Right-censoring was used to produce Kaplan-Meier time-to-event estimates.

    Time frame: Days 1 and 3 (pre-infusion) and thereafter up to Day 39

  8. Change From Baseline in Mental Health Score in the Short Form-36 (SF-36)

    The SF-36 determines participants' overall quality of life by assessing 1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual role because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems; 7) limitations in usual role due to emotional problems; and 8) general mental health. Items 5-8 primarily contribute to the mental component summary (MCS) score of the SF-36. The MCS ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), and higher score indicates better mental health status. Positive change from baseline indicates improvement. The baseline was defined as Day -7 to -3 prior to surgery.

    Time frame: At Baseline and end of study (approximately Day 46)

  9. Change From Baseline in Physical Health Score in the SF-36

    The SF-36 determines participants' overall quality of life by assessing 1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual role because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems; 7) limitations in usual role due to emotional problems; and 8) general mental health. Items 1-4 primarily contribute to the Physical Component Summary (PCS) score of the SF-36. The PCS ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), and a higher score indicates better physical condition. Positive change from baseline indicates improvement. The baseline was defined as Day -7 to -3 prior to surgery.

    Time frame: At Baseline and end of study (approximately Day 46)

  10. Change From Baseline in the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II)

    The BDI-II is a 21-item questionnaire used to assess depression. Most items are rated on a 4-point scale from 0 to 3, and a few items are rated on a 7-point scale. Individual item scores are added to get a total BDI-II score from 0 to 63. The higher the total score, the more severe the depression, and the lower the total score, the less severe the depression. A negative change from baseline indicated an improvement. The baseline was defined as Day -7 to -3 prior to surgery.

    Time frame: At Baseline and end of study (approximately Day 46)

  11. Number of Participants With Opioid Analgesic Consumption During Hospital Stay and After Discharge to End of Study

    Time frame: From Day 2 (post-surgery) up to end of study (approximately Day 46)

  12. Time to Discharge

    The Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimate of survival was used to summarize the time (in Days) from the date of randomization to discharge from the hospital by treatment group using median and inter quartile ranges: Q1 (25th percentile) and Q3 (75th percentile).

    Time frame: Day 1 up to end of study (approximately Day 46)

  13. Perioperative Outcome: Surgery Duration

    The duration (in hours) for which a participant underwent surgery i.e., primary hip or knee arthroplasty is reported here.

    Time frame: Day 2

  14. Perioperative Outcome: Duration for Which Participants Were Under Anesthesia

    The duration (in hours) for which a participant was under anesthesia is reported here.

    Time frame: Day 2

  15. Perioperative Outcome: Duration of Stay in the Post-Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU)

    The duration (in hours) for which the participants stayed at the PACU is reported here.

    Time frame: Day 2

  16. Perioperative Outcome: Number of Participants in Each 5 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Class

    ASA class ranges from ASA I - ASA VI. Higher ASA class with other factors (surgery type, frailty, and deconditioning) help predict greater perioperative risk. Normal healthy participants are categorized under ASA I, whereas participants with mild systematic disease and severe systematic disease are graded as ASA II and ASA III, respectively. If participants have severe systematic disease that is a constant threat to their life, they are graded as ASA IV. A moribund participant who is not expected to survive without the operation is classified as ASA V. ASA VI includes participants that are declared brain-dead and whose organs are being removed for donor purposes.

    Time frame: Day 2

  17. Perioperative Outcome: Estimated Blood Loss

    Time frame: Day 2

  18. Number of Participants in Whom Intraoperative Fluids Were Administered

    Intraoperative fluids administered were summarized by WHO Drug Dictionary (WHO-DD) Version 2018 Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) level 3 terms and standardized medication names.

    Time frame: Day 2

  19. Number of Participants in Whom Intraoperative Blood Products Were Administered

    Intraoperative blood products administered were summarized by WHO-DD Version 2018 ATC level 3 terms and standardized medication names.

    Time frame: Day 2

  20. Number of Participants Who Received Intraoperative Anesthesia

    Intraoperative anesthesia administered were summarized using WHO-DD Version 2018 ATC level 3 terms and standardized medication names.

    Time frame: Day 2

  21. Number of Participants Who Received Intraoperative Opioids

    The number of participants with intraoperative opioids administered were summarized by WHO-DD Version 2018 ATC level 3 terms and standardized medication names.

    Time frame: Day 2

  22. Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Blood Chemistry Values

    Participants with abnormal chemistry values as assessed by the investigator are reported here. The marked reference range are as follows: calcium \<1.12 or \> 1.47 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) and sodium \< 130 or \> 150 mmol/L.

    Time frame: At Screening and Day 3

  23. Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Hematology Values

    Participants with abnormal hematology values as assessed by the investigator are reported here. Hematology abnormalities were only observed on Day 3. The marked reference range are as follows: hematocrit \< 30 or \> 58%, hemoglobin \< 10 or \> 20 grams per deciliter (g/dL) and Lymphocytes/Leukocytes \< 10 or \> 60%.

    Time frame: Day 3

  24. Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Coagulation Values

    Participants with abnormal coagulation values as assessed by the investigator are reported here. The marked reference range are as follows: prothrombin international normalized ratio \> 1.3, prothrombin time \> 20 seconds, and activated partial thromboplastin time \> 45 seconds.

    Time frame: At Screening and Day 3

  25. Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Urinalysis Values

    Participants with abnormal urinalysis values as assessed by the investigator are reported here. The normalized estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) values were (mL/min/surface area (SA)) \< 55.

    Time frame: At Screening and Day 3

  26. Number of Participants With Abnormal Vital Signs: Blood Pressure Measurements

    Participants with abnormal blood pressure measurements as assessed by the investigator are reported here. The following parameters were considered in the assessment of abnormal blood pressure measurements: systolic blood pressure \>180 millimeters of mercury (mmHg); systolic blood pressure \> 200 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure \< 50 mmHg.

    Time frame: Pre-infusion at Days 1, 2 (Pre and Postoperative) and 3; At Post infusion on Day 1 (15, 30, 45, 60 mins); Day 2 Preoperative (15, 30, 45 mins); Postoperative (30 mins); Day 3 (15 and 30 mins); and 30 mins after end of each infusion

  27. Change From Baseline in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameter: Heart Rate

    A 12-lead ECG was to be performed to obtain heart rate. The baseline was defined as Day 1 pre-infusion measurement.

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1 pre-infusion); Day 3 pre and post-infusion

  28. Change From Baseline in ECG Parameters: QT Interval and QT Interval Corrected by the Fridericia Formula (QTcF)

    A 12-lead ECG was performed after the participant had rested quietly for at least 5 minutes in a supine or sitting position. The parameters evaluated from the participant ECG trace included QT interval and QTc (corrected). Corrected QTc intervals were calculated using Fridericia's correction formula. The baseline was defined as Day 1 pre-infusion measurement.

    Time frame: Baseline (Day 1 pre-infusion); Day 3 pre and post-infusion

07

Results

Posted Mar 13, 2024

Participant flow

Participants took part in this study at one investigative site in the United States from 12 July 2019 to 04 March 2021.

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneGRF6021Placebo
Started1820
Intent-to-treat (itt) population1820
Safety population1820
Evaluable population1819
Completed1819
Not completed01
Withdrew: Due to coronavirus disease-2019 (covid-19)01

Outcome measures

PrimaryEffect of GRF6021 on Immune Responses to Surgery as Determined by Cytometry by Time of Flight (CyTOF) on Day 2

CyTOF=multiplexed, high-content immune profiling technology, providing high-resolution surveillance of circulating immune cells \& response to GRF6021 infusions on surgical recovery. Blood samples were collected for CyTOF analysis \& were stimulated with a series of extracellular ligands to analyze evoked intracellular signaling responses. High-dimensional data results were obtained from CytOF, and analyzed using the immunological elastic net (iEN) algorithm, a penalized regression method particularly adapted for the analysis of highly correlated data, as it eliminates redundant parameters while retaining interrelated parameters. Raw data obtained from each sample was entered into the classification model (iEN algorithm) that generated prediction values (presented below) showing the effect of study treatment on immune response post-surgery. A prediction value of 0 \& 1 indicated perfect results (i.e., positive response to treatment) for the placebo \& GRF6021 arms, respectively.

Time frame:
Day 2 (before start of surgery and post surgery)
Reported as:
Median · predicted value
Effect of GRF6021 on Immune Responses to Surgery as Determined by Cytometry by Time of Flight (CyTOF) on Day 2
predicted valueGRF6021Placebo
Day 2 (Before Surgery Start)0.5692 (0.4559 to 0.6269)0.4521 (0.3935 to 0.5975)
Day 2 (Post Surgery)0.5326 (0.5180 to 0.5510)0.4471 (0.4310 to 0.4853)
SecondaryChange in Functional Status Using the ActiGraph Wearable Device Providing Measurements for Physical Activity/Function and Sleep

At screening, participants were provided with an ActiGraph wearable device \& approximately -7 to -3 days before surgery, they were instructed to wear the device. ActiGraph wearable device was used to monitor participants' physical activity, mobility \& sleep. Functional status including heart rate \& sleep time were collected during the study period except perioperative times when it was removed for surgery. ActiGraph high-dimensional data was analyzed using a standard EN algorithm which utilizes a penalized regression method particularly adapted to the analysis of highly correlated data, as it eliminates redundant parameters while retaining interrelated parameters. Raw data obtained over the entire observation period was entered into a classification model (iEN algorithm) that generated prediction values (presented below) for functional status changes. A prediction value of 1 \&2 indicated perfect results (i.e., positive response to treatment) for GRF6021 \& placebo groups, respectively.

Time frame:
Baseline; Day 1, Day 3 up to approximately Day 46
Reported as:
Median · predicted value
Change in Functional Status Using the ActiGraph Wearable Device Providing Measurements for Physical Activity/Function and Sleep
predicted valueGRF6021Placebo
Change in Functional Status Using the ActiGraph Wearable Device Providing Measurements for Physical Activity/Function and Sleep1.7007 (1.6314 to 1.7200)1.3861 (1.3289 to 1.5009)
SecondaryEffects of GRF6021 on Plasma Proteomics

Blood samples collected were analyzed using the Somalogic SomaScan platform which provides a broad overview of proteomics changes by measuring approximately 7,000 proteins. It uses a highly multiplexed and high throughput aptamer-based proteomic technology and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)-microarray-based detection. It provides concentration domain values as relative fluorescence units (RFUs). Proteomics high-dimensional data was analyzed using a standard EN algorithm which utilizes a penalized regression method particularly adapted to the analysis of highly correlated data, as it eliminates redundant parameters while retaining interrelated parameters. Raw data obtained from each sample was entered into a classification model (iEN algorithm) that generated prediction values for proteomics which are presented in the data table. A prediction value of 1 and 2 indicated perfect results (i.e., positive response to treatment) for the GRF6021 and the placebo group, respectively.

Time frame:
Pre-infusion on Day 1 (baseline), 2 (before start of surgery and post surgery), and Day 3
Reported as:
Mean · predicted value
Effects of GRF6021 on Plasma Proteomics
predicted valueGRF6021Placebo
Day 1 (Baseline)1.4320 (1.2641 to 1.6601)1.3716 (1.2417 to 1.7486)
Day 2 (Before Surgery Start)1.4189 (1.2135 to 1.7029)1.5245 (1.3442 to 1.6457)
Day 2 (Post Surgery)1.1563 (1.0322 to 1.4885)1.7264 (1.4567 to 1.9209)
Day 31.3971 (1.1933 to 1.5818)1.6284 (1.4737 to 1.9543)
SecondaryNumber of Participants With Change From Baseline in Delirium as Assessed Using 3-Minute Diagnostic Interview for Confusion Assessment Method (3-Minute Diagnostic Interview for Confusion [3D-CAM])

The 3D-CAM is a brief verbal assessment tool used to test participants for delirium. Each item in the instrument directly informs one of the 4 CAM features including acute onset of mental status change or fluctuating course of cognition, inattention, disorganized thinking, and altered level of consciousness. For all items on the assessment, the participants answered as "incorrect," "correct," "no," or "yes". The CAM algorithm is considered positive if the following features are present: Feature 1) Acute onset or fluctuating course and Feature 2) Inattention and either Feature 3) Disorganized thinking or Feature 4) Altered level of consciousness. Number of participants at baseline and postbaseline with delirium "present" or "not present" are reported here. The baseline was defined as Day 1 pre-infusion measurement.

Time frame:
Baseline (Day 1 pre-infusion); Days 2 (post-infusion), and 3 (pre-infusion)
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Delirium as Assessed Using 3-Minute Diagnostic Interview for Confusion Assessment Method (3-Minute Diagnostic Interview for Confusion [3D-CAM])
ParticipantsGRF6021Placebo
Baseline: Delirium Present00
Baseline: Delirium Not Present1819
Change from Baseline at Day 2: Delirium Present20
Change from Baseline at Day 2: Delirium Not Present1619
Change from Baseline at Day 3: Delirium Present00
Change from Baseline at Day 3: Delirium Not Present1819
SecondaryTime to 50% Recovery of Baseline Value on the Surgery Recovery Scale (SRS)

SRS is sensitive \& simple tool for assessment of functional recovery following major surgery \& consist of 13 items. Impacts on daily activities are scored from 1 (not at all) to 5/6 (all the time). First 8 items were scored from 1 to 6. Rest were scored from 1 to 5. SRS scores were obtained by reversing responses (e.g., 1=6, 2=5, 3=4, 4=3, 5=2 and 6=1) to 5 negatively stated items (items 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7) \& then summing across all scale items for an individual at baseline \& each scheduled post-baseline time point. SRS total score range=13-63 where higher score indicated better recovery. For postoperative visits 'not applicable' responses were coded into same category as affirmations of 'not at all'. For all other time points 'not applicable' responses were coded as missing data. KM estimate of survival was to be used to summarize time (in Days) from date of randomization to 50% recovery of baseline value in SRS by treatment group. Baseline = Day -7 to -3 pre-infusion measurement.

Time frame:
Baseline; Days 1 and 3 (pre-infusion) and thereafter up to the end of the study (approximately Day 46)
Reported as:
Median · days
Time to 50% Recovery of Baseline Value on the Surgery Recovery Scale (SRS)
daysGRF6021Placebo
Time to 50% Recovery of Baseline Value on the Surgery Recovery Scale (SRS)11.5 (8.0 to 15.0)15.0 (8.0 to 24.0)
SecondaryEnd of Study (EOS) Treatment Comparison of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)

WOMAC is a widely utilized self-report measure of lower extremity symptoms and function. The WOMAC Likert Scale version used an 11-point scale anchored by the wording "no pain" and "extreme pain" for pain, and "no difficulty" and "extreme difficulty" for physical function. There were 5 questions for pain and 17 questions for physical function (total 22 questions). Scores (maximum 10) for each question of WOMAC were summed for an individual at the End of Study. The calculated scores were used to summarize the WOMAC score by treatment group. For this outcome measure, a full WOMAC score 0-220 point scale was used for data analysis. Higher scores on the WOMAC indicate worse pain and physical functional limitations.

Time frame:
At end of study (approximately Day 46)
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
End of Study (EOS) Treatment Comparison of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)
score on a scaleGRF6021Placebo
End of Study (EOS) Treatment Comparison of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)28.50 ± 27.3937.30 ± 38.80
SecondaryTime to a Score of < 12/40 on a Subset of Questions From the WOMAC, Pain Subscale

WOMAC is a widely utilized self-report measure of lower extremity symptoms and function. The WOMAC Likert Scale version uses an 11-point scale anchored by the wording "no pain" (score=0) and "extreme pain" (score=10) for the pain subscale. The pain subscale consists of 4 items. The total score ranges from 0 (best) to 40 (worse). Higher scores on the WOMAC indicate worse pain. Kaplan Meier (KM) estimate of survival was used to summarize the time (in Days) from the date of randomization to the day when the participant had a non-missing score of \< 12. Right-censoring was used to produce Kaplan-Meier time-to-event estimates.

Time frame:
Days 1 and 3 (pre-infusion) and thereafter up to Day 39
Reported as:
Median · days
Time to a Score of < 12/40 on a Subset of Questions From the WOMAC, Pain Subscale
daysGRF6021Placebo
Time to a Score of < 12/40 on a Subset of Questions From the WOMAC, Pain Subscale13.5 (8.0 to 22.0)16.0 (5.0 to 29.0)
SecondaryTime to a Score of < 18/60 on a Subset of Questions From the WOMAC, Physical Function Subscale

WOMAC is a widely utilized self-report measures of lower extremity symptoms and function. WOMAC Likert Scale version uses an 11-point scale anchored by the wording "no difficulty" (score=0) and "extreme difficulty" (score=10) for physical function subscale. The physical function subscale consists of 6 items. The total score ranges from 0 (best) to 60 (worse). Higher scores on the WOMAC indicate more functional limitations. Kaplan Meier (KM) estimate of survival was used to summarize the time (in Days) from the date of randomization to the day when participant had a non-missing score of \< 18. Right-censoring was used to produce Kaplan-Meier time-to-event estimates.

Time frame:
Days 1 and 3 (pre-infusion) and thereafter up to Day 39
Reported as:
Median · days
Time to a Score of < 18/60 on a Subset of Questions From the WOMAC, Physical Function Subscale
daysGRF6021Placebo
Time to a Score of < 18/60 on a Subset of Questions From the WOMAC, Physical Function Subscale18.0 (11.0 to 22.0)18.0 (11.0 to 36.0)
SecondaryChange From Baseline in Mental Health Score in the Short Form-36 (SF-36)

The SF-36 determines participants' overall quality of life by assessing 1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual role because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems; 7) limitations in usual role due to emotional problems; and 8) general mental health. Items 5-8 primarily contribute to the mental component summary (MCS) score of the SF-36. The MCS ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), and higher score indicates better mental health status. Positive change from baseline indicates improvement. The baseline was defined as Day -7 to -3 prior to surgery.

Time frame:
At Baseline and end of study (approximately Day 46)
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Change From Baseline in Mental Health Score in the Short Form-36 (SF-36)
score on a scaleGRF6021Placebo
Baseline56.7 ± 10.1657.6 ± 8.50
Change From Baseline at End of Study2.1 ± 7.130.8 ± 8.62
SecondaryChange From Baseline in Physical Health Score in the SF-36

The SF-36 determines participants' overall quality of life by assessing 1) limitations in physical functioning due to health problems; 2) limitations in usual role because of physical health problems; 3) bodily pain; 4) general health perceptions; 5) vitality; 6) limitations in social functioning because of physical or emotional problems; 7) limitations in usual role due to emotional problems; and 8) general mental health. Items 1-4 primarily contribute to the Physical Component Summary (PCS) score of the SF-36. The PCS ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), and a higher score indicates better physical condition. Positive change from baseline indicates improvement. The baseline was defined as Day -7 to -3 prior to surgery.

Time frame:
At Baseline and end of study (approximately Day 46)
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Change From Baseline in Physical Health Score in the SF-36
score on a scaleGRF6021Placebo
Baseline32.7 ± 6.8734.9 ± 9.68
Change From Baseline at End of Study4.0 ± 7.923.3 ± 9.90
SecondaryChange From Baseline in the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II)

The BDI-II is a 21-item questionnaire used to assess depression. Most items are rated on a 4-point scale from 0 to 3, and a few items are rated on a 7-point scale. Individual item scores are added to get a total BDI-II score from 0 to 63. The higher the total score, the more severe the depression, and the lower the total score, the less severe the depression. A negative change from baseline indicated an improvement. The baseline was defined as Day -7 to -3 prior to surgery.

Time frame:
At Baseline and end of study (approximately Day 46)
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Change From Baseline in the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II)
score on a scaleGRF6021Placebo
Baseline7.3 ± 9.475.1 ± 5.47
Change From Baseline at End of Study-3.2 ± 9.28-2.7 ± 5.65
SecondaryNumber of Participants With Opioid Analgesic Consumption During Hospital Stay and After Discharge to End of Study
Time frame:
From Day 2 (post-surgery) up to end of study (approximately Day 46)
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants With Opioid Analgesic Consumption During Hospital Stay and After Discharge to End of Study
ParticipantsGRF6021Placebo
Number of Participants With Opioid Analgesic Consumption During Hospital Stay and After Discharge to End of Study1819
SecondaryTime to Discharge

The Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimate of survival was used to summarize the time (in Days) from the date of randomization to discharge from the hospital by treatment group using median and inter quartile ranges: Q1 (25th percentile) and Q3 (75th percentile).

Time frame:
Day 1 up to end of study (approximately Day 46)
Reported as:
Median · days
Time to Discharge
daysGRF6021Placebo
Time to Discharge2.0 (2.0 to 2.0)2.0 (2.0 to 2.0)
SecondaryPerioperative Outcome: Surgery Duration

The duration (in hours) for which a participant underwent surgery i.e., primary hip or knee arthroplasty is reported here.

Time frame:
Day 2
Reported as:
Median · hours
Perioperative Outcome: Surgery Duration
hoursGRF6021Placebo
Perioperative Outcome: Surgery Duration1.8 (1.1 to 2.4)1.6 (1.3 to 2.1)
SecondaryPerioperative Outcome: Duration for Which Participants Were Under Anesthesia

The duration (in hours) for which a participant was under anesthesia is reported here.

Time frame:
Day 2
Reported as:
Median · hours
Perioperative Outcome: Duration for Which Participants Were Under Anesthesia
hoursGRF6021Placebo
Perioperative Outcome: Duration for Which Participants Were Under Anesthesia3.0 (2.3 to 4.6)2.7 (2.3 to 4.6)
SecondaryPerioperative Outcome: Duration of Stay in the Post-Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU)

The duration (in hours) for which the participants stayed at the PACU is reported here.

Time frame:
Day 2
Reported as:
Median · hours
Perioperative Outcome: Duration of Stay in the Post-Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU)
hoursGRF6021Placebo
Perioperative Outcome: Duration of Stay in the Post-Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU)2.6 (1.6 to 5.3)2.9 (1.5 to 8)
SecondaryPerioperative Outcome: Number of Participants in Each 5 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Class

ASA class ranges from ASA I - ASA VI. Higher ASA class with other factors (surgery type, frailty, and deconditioning) help predict greater perioperative risk. Normal healthy participants are categorized under ASA I, whereas participants with mild systematic disease and severe systematic disease are graded as ASA II and ASA III, respectively. If participants have severe systematic disease that is a constant threat to their life, they are graded as ASA IV. A moribund participant who is not expected to survive without the operation is classified as ASA V. ASA VI includes participants that are declared brain-dead and whose organs are being removed for donor purposes.

Time frame:
Day 2
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Perioperative Outcome: Number of Participants in Each 5 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Class
ParticipantsGRF6021Placebo
ASA I00
ASA Il812
ASA III107
ASA IV00
ASA V00
SecondaryPerioperative Outcome: Estimated Blood Loss
Time frame:
Day 2
Reported as:
Mean · mL
Perioperative Outcome: Estimated Blood Loss
mLGRF6021Placebo
Perioperative Outcome: Estimated Blood Loss113.6 ± 60.00135.8 ± 96.63
SecondaryNumber of Participants in Whom Intraoperative Fluids Were Administered

Intraoperative fluids administered were summarized by WHO Drug Dictionary (WHO-DD) Version 2018 Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) level 3 terms and standardized medication names.

Time frame:
Day 2
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants in Whom Intraoperative Fluids Were Administered
ParticipantsGRF6021Placebo
Number of Participants in Whom Intraoperative Fluids Were Administered00
SecondaryNumber of Participants in Whom Intraoperative Blood Products Were Administered

Intraoperative blood products administered were summarized by WHO-DD Version 2018 ATC level 3 terms and standardized medication names.

Time frame:
Day 2
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants in Whom Intraoperative Blood Products Were Administered
ParticipantsGRF6021Placebo
Number of Participants in Whom Intraoperative Blood Products Were Administered00
SecondaryNumber of Participants Who Received Intraoperative Anesthesia

Intraoperative anesthesia administered were summarized using WHO-DD Version 2018 ATC level 3 terms and standardized medication names.

Time frame:
Day 2
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants Who Received Intraoperative Anesthesia
ParticipantsGRF6021Placebo
General Anesthesia1819
Local Anesthesia1519
SecondaryNumber of Participants Who Received Intraoperative Opioids

The number of participants with intraoperative opioids administered were summarized by WHO-DD Version 2018 ATC level 3 terms and standardized medication names.

Time frame:
Day 2
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants Who Received Intraoperative Opioids
ParticipantsGRF6021Placebo
Oxycodone1719
Hydromorphone96
Hydrocodone23
Tramadol23
Oxycodone hydrochloride12
Codeine10
Hydromorphone hydrochloride01
Tramadol hydrochloride01
SecondaryNumber of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Blood Chemistry Values

Participants with abnormal chemistry values as assessed by the investigator are reported here. The marked reference range are as follows: calcium \<1.12 or \> 1.47 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) and sodium \< 130 or \> 150 mmol/L.

Time frame:
At Screening and Day 3
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Blood Chemistry Values
ParticipantsGRF6021Placebo
Screening: Calcium, Ionized (mmol/L): High > 1.4710
Day 3: Calcium, Ionized (mmol/L): Low < 1.1201
Day 3: Sodium (mmol/L): Low < 13001
SecondaryNumber of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Hematology Values

Participants with abnormal hematology values as assessed by the investigator are reported here. Hematology abnormalities were only observed on Day 3. The marked reference range are as follows: hematocrit \< 30 or \> 58%, hemoglobin \< 10 or \> 20 grams per deciliter (g/dL) and Lymphocytes/Leukocytes \< 10 or \> 60%.

Time frame:
Day 3
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Hematology Values
ParticipantsGRF6021Placebo
Day 3: Hematocrit (%): Low < 3061
Day 3: Hemoglobin (g/dL): Low < 1084
Day 3: Lymphocytes/Leukocytes (%): Low < 1033
SecondaryNumber of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Coagulation Values

Participants with abnormal coagulation values as assessed by the investigator are reported here. The marked reference range are as follows: prothrombin international normalized ratio \> 1.3, prothrombin time \> 20 seconds, and activated partial thromboplastin time \> 45 seconds.

Time frame:
At Screening and Day 3
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Coagulation Values
ParticipantsGRF6021Placebo
At Screening: Prothrombin International Normalized Ratio: High > 1.311
At Screening: Prothrombin Time (seconds): High > 2010
Day 3: Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (seconds): High > 4502
Day 3: Prothrombin International Normalized Ratio: High > 1.343
Day 3: Prothrombin Time (seconds): High > 2023
SecondaryNumber of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Urinalysis Values

Participants with abnormal urinalysis values as assessed by the investigator are reported here. The normalized estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) values were (mL/min/surface area (SA)) \< 55.

Time frame:
At Screening and Day 3
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Urinalysis Values
ParticipantsGRF6021Placebo
Number of Participants With Abnormal Laboratory Urinalysis Values00
SecondaryNumber of Participants With Abnormal Vital Signs: Blood Pressure Measurements

Participants with abnormal blood pressure measurements as assessed by the investigator are reported here. The following parameters were considered in the assessment of abnormal blood pressure measurements: systolic blood pressure \>180 millimeters of mercury (mmHg); systolic blood pressure \> 200 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure \< 50 mmHg.

Time frame:
Pre-infusion at Days 1, 2 (Pre and Postoperative) and 3; At Post infusion on Day 1 (15, 30, 45, 60 mins); Day 2 Preoperative (15, 30, 45 mins); Postoperative (30 mins); Day 3 (15 and 30 mins); and 30 mins after end of each infusion
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants With Abnormal Vital Signs: Blood Pressure Measurements
ParticipantsGRF6021Placebo
Systolic Blood Pressure > 180 mmHg: On Day 1 (Prior to Infusion)11
Systolic Blood Pressure > 180 mmHg: On Day 1 (30 Minutes After End of Infusion)10
Systolic Blood Pressure > 180 mmHg: On Day 2 Preoperative (Prior to Infusion)11
Systolic Blood Pressure > 180 mmHg: On Day 2 Preoperative (15 Minutes Post Infusion)11
Systolic Blood Pressure > 180 mmHg: On Day 2 Preoperative (30 Minutes Post Infusion)12
Systolic Blood Pressure > 180 mmHg: On Day 2 Preoperative (45 Minutes Post Infusion)21
Systolic Blood Pressure > 180 mmHg: On Day 2 Postoperative (Prior to Infusion)10
Systolic Blood Pressure > 200 mmHg: On Day 2 Preoperative (15 Minutes Post Infusion)01
Systolic Blood Pressure > 200 mmHg: On Day 2 Preoperative (30 Minutes Post Infusion)01
Diastolic Blood Pressure < 50 mmHg: On Day 1 (Prior to Infusion)01
Diastolic Blood Pressure < 50 mmHg: On Day 1 (15 Minutes Post Infusion)01
Diastolic Blood Pressure < 50 mmHg: On Day 1 (30 Minutes Post Infusion)01
Diastolic Blood Pressure < 50 mmHg: On Day 1 (45 Minutes Post Infusion)10
Diastolic Blood Pressure < 50 mmHg: On Day 1 (60 Minutes Post Infusion)10
Diastolic Blood Pressure < 50 mmHg: On Day 1 (30 Minutes After End of Infusion)01
Diastolic Blood Pressure < 50 mmHg: On Day 2 Preoperative (30 Minutes After End of Infusion)12
Diastolic Blood Pressure < 50 mmHg: On Day 2 Postoperative (30 Minutes Post Infusion)01
Diastolic Blood Pressure < 50 mmHg: On Day 3 (Prior to Infusion)10
Diastolic Blood Pressure < 50 mmHg: On Day 3 (15 Minutes Post Infusion)01
Diastolic Blood Pressure < 50 mmHg: On Day 3 (30 Minutes Post Infusion)10
Diastolic Blood Pressure < 50 mmHg: On Day 3 (30 Minutes After End of Infusion)10
SecondaryChange From Baseline in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameter: Heart Rate

A 12-lead ECG was to be performed to obtain heart rate. The baseline was defined as Day 1 pre-infusion measurement.

Time frame:
Baseline (Day 1 pre-infusion); Day 3 pre and post-infusion
Reported as:
Mean · beats/minute
Change From Baseline in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameter: Heart Rate
beats/minuteGRF6021Placebo
At Baseline63.7 ± 7.0564.5 ± 11.24
Change From Baseline on Day 3 (Prior to Infusion)1.2 ± 9.165.1 ± 11.08
Change From Baseline on Day 3 (Post Infusion)8.4 ± 7.735.7 ± 11.96
SecondaryChange From Baseline in ECG Parameters: QT Interval and QT Interval Corrected by the Fridericia Formula (QTcF)

A 12-lead ECG was performed after the participant had rested quietly for at least 5 minutes in a supine or sitting position. The parameters evaluated from the participant ECG trace included QT interval and QTc (corrected). Corrected QTc intervals were calculated using Fridericia's correction formula. The baseline was defined as Day 1 pre-infusion measurement.

Time frame:
Baseline (Day 1 pre-infusion); Day 3 pre and post-infusion
Reported as:
Mean · msec
Change From Baseline in ECG Parameters: QT Interval and QT Interval Corrected by the Fridericia Formula (QTcF)
msecGRF6021Placebo
QT Interval: At Baseline422.1 ± 31.13408.9 ± 26.02
QT Interval: Change From Baseline on Day 3 (Prior to Infusion)2.6 ± 36.64-9.3 ± 37.04
QT Interval: Change From Baseline on Day 3 (Post Infusion)-24.3 ± 22.52-15.6 ± 31.01
QTcF: At Baseline429.1 ± 22.38416.4 ± 16.68
QTcF: Change From Baseline on Day 3 (Prior to Infusion)6.4 ± 22.48-1.3 ± 23.71
QTcF: Change From Baseline on Day 3 (Post Infusion)-7.3 ± 15.08-4.1 ± 14.91
PrimaryEffect of GRF6021 on Immune Responses to Surgery as Determined by Cytometry by Time of Flight (CyTOF) on Day 3

CyTOF=multiplexed, high-content immune profiling technology, providing high-resolution surveillance of circulating immune cells \& response to GRF6021 infusions on surgical recovery. Blood samples were collected for CyTOF analysis \& were stimulated with a series of extracellular ligands to analyze evoked intracellular signaling responses. High-dimensional data results were obtained from CytOF, and analyzed using the immunological elastic net (iEN) algorithm, a penalized regression method particularly adapted for the analysis of highly correlated data, as it eliminates redundant parameters while retaining interrelated parameters. Raw data obtained from each sample was entered into the classification model (iEN algorithm) that generated prediction values (presented below) showing the effect of study treatment on immune response post-surgery. A prediction value of 0 \& 1 indicated perfect results (i.e., positive response to treatment) for the placebo \& GRF6021 arms, respectively.

Time frame:
Day 3
Reported as:
Median · predicted value
Effect of GRF6021 on Immune Responses to Surgery as Determined by Cytometry by Time of Flight (CyTOF) on Day 3
predicted valueGRF6021Placebo
Effect of GRF6021 on Immune Responses to Surgery as Determined by Cytometry by Time of Flight (CyTOF) on Day 30.7829 (0.5941 to 0.8824)0.2871 (0.1201 to 0.7090)

Adverse events

Collected over From Baseline (Day -7 to -3 prior to surgery) up to end of study (approximately Day 46). Non-serious events are listed at a 5% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
GRF60210/18 (0%)0/18 (0%)14/18 (77.8%)
Placebo0/20 (0%)0/20 (0%)14/20 (70%)
Most frequent other events
Showing 10 of 30
Most frequent other events
EventGRF6021Placebo
NauseaGastrointestinal disorders7/185/20
ConstipationGastrointestinal disorders3/182/20
VomitingGastrointestinal disorders3/183/20
Procedural vomitingInjury, poisoning and procedural complications3/180/20
Haemorrhagic anaemiaBlood and lymphatic system disorders1/180/20
TachycardiaCardiac disorders1/180/20
Eye irritationEye disorders1/180/20
DyspepsiaGastrointestinal disorders1/180/20
Chest painGeneral disorders1/180/20
PyrexiaGeneral disorders1/181/20

Baseline characteristics

ITT population included all participants who met the inclusion criteria and did not meet the exclusion criteria and were randomized in the study.

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)GRF6021PlaceboTotal
Mean70.70 ± 5.8665.40 ± 8.3967.89 ± 7.70
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)GRF6021PlaceboTotal
Female91019
Male91019
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants)GRF6021PlaceboTotal
Hispanic or Latino101
Not Hispanic or Latino172037
Unknown or Not Reported000
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Race/Ethnicity, Customized(Participants)GRF6021PlaceboTotal
Asian101
Black or African American112
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander112
White81624
Not Reported314
Other415
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Stanford University Medical Center
    Palo Alto, California 94305, United States
09

References and documents

Study documents

  • Study protocol · Nov 14, 2019
  • Statistical analysis plan · Oct 8, 2020
  • Statistical analysis plan · Jun 10, 2021

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 13, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03981419
Lead sponsor
Alkahest, Inc.
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jun 10, 2019
Start date
Jul 12, 2019
Primary completion
Jan 23, 2021
Completion
Mar 4, 2021
Results posted
Mar 13, 2024
Last update
Mar 13, 2024

Study contacts

Alkahest Medical Monitor
study director · Alkahest, Inc.

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion