ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04076462ACROINNOVA 1Updated Aug 20, 2026Results posted

A Trial to Assess Efficacy and Safety of Octreotide Subcutaneous Depot in Patients With Acromegaly

A Phase 3 interventional study of CAM2029 (octreotide subcutaneous depot) and Matching placebo in Acromegaly, sponsored by Camurus AB. Completed at 63 sites in 10 countries. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-20.

Sponsored by Camurus AB · Phase 3, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
72
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of this trial is to assess the efficacy and safety of CAM2029 in patients with acromegaly. Patients will be randomized to either CAM2029 or placebo administered subcutaneously once monthly during 6 months.

02

Conditions studied

  • Acromegaly

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Acromegaly
  • octreotide
  • CAM2029
  • phase 3
03

In context

Acromegaly

202 studies on the registry are indexed under Acromegaly; 19 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 72 is above the median of 43 across 115 interventional studies indexed under Acromegaly.

Browse Acromegaly studies →

Lead sponsor

Camurus AB is the lead sponsor of 9 studies on the registry; 1 is open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Male or female patients, ≥18 years at screening
  • Able to provide written to participate in the trial prior to any trial related procedures are performed
  • Diagnosis of acromegaly by historical evidence of (persistent or recurrent) acromegaly
  • Treatment with a stable dose of octreotide long-acting repeatable (LAR) or lanreotide autogel (ATG) for at least 3 months as monotherapy prior to screening
  • Insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) levels ≤1x (ULN) at screening
  • Adequate liver, pancreatic, renal and bone marrow functions
  • Normal

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Growth hormone (GH) ≥2.5 μg/L at screening (cycle)
  • Have received medical treatment for acromegaly with pasireotide (within 6 months prior to screening), pegvisomant (within 3 months prior to screening), dopamine agonists (within 3 months prior to screening) or other agents (within 30 days or 5 half-lives prior to screening [whichever is longer]
  • Patients who usually take octreotide LAR or lanreotide ATG less frequently than every 4 weeks (e.g. every 6 weeks or 8 weeks)
  • Patients with compression of the optic chiasm causing any visual field defect for whom surgical intervention is indicated
  • Patients who have undergone major surgery/surgical therapy for any cause within 1 month from screening
  • Patients who have undergone pituitary surgery within 6 months prior to screening
  • Patients who have received prior pituitary irradiation
  • Patients with poorly controlled diabetes mellitus ( >8.0%)
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(5)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

ULN (upper limit of normal)

The top of the normal range for a blood test, as set by the laboratory that runs it. Each lab prints its own range next to your result.

“≤ 2.5 × ULN” means the result can be up to two and a half times that top value.

ECG (electrocardiogram)

A recording of the heart’s electrical activity, taken with stickers on the chest, arms and legs. It takes a few minutes and does not hurt.

Investigational drug or device

A drug or device being studied in a clinical trial.

It may be new, or already approved and being studied for another use, dose or form. Criteria often leave out people who took part in another study of one within a recent period, commonly 30 days or five half-lives.

HbA1c

A blood test of average blood sugar over the past two to three months, given as a percentage or in mmol/mol. 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) or more is the usual threshold for diabetes, normally confirmed by a second test.

05

Study design

Phase
Phase 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator)
Enrollment
72 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    CAM2029 (octreotide subcutaneous depot)

    CAM2029 (octreotide subcutaneous depot) 20mg/1.0 mL for 20 mg dose, subcutaneous injection once monthly, six months treatment. If down-titration is required, 10mg/0.5 mL for 10 mg dose is available.

    Drug: CAM2029 (octreotide subcutaneous depot)

  • Placebo comparator
    Matching placebo

    Placebo (subcutaneous depot) 1.0 mL, subcutaneous injection once monthly, six months treatment. If down-titration is required, 0.5 mL dose is available.

    Drug: Matching placebo

Interventions

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Proportion of Participants With Mean Insulin-like Growth Factor -1 (IGF-1) Levels ≤1 x Upper Limit of Normal (ULN) at Week 22/24

    If one of the IGF-1 values at Week 22 or Week 24 was missing, the other value was used to define a responder/non-responder in the analysis. The variable of interest was considered missing only if no IGF-1 value could be obtained from either the Week 22 or the Week 24 sample. A composite strategy was assumed for intercurrent events, and a participant was considered as a non-responder if they discontinued IMP, or had the dose reduced prior to Week 22 (regardless of IGF-1 values), and/or was switched to rescue medication. ULN was derived from the participant's sex and age at screening. In order to account for all participants in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis set, multiple imputation was applied. The mean proportion of responders was calculated as an average of responders across the imputed datasets. The resulting proportion was multiplied by 100 to present "Percentage of participants".

    Time frame: Week 22 and 24

Secondary outcomes

  1. Proportion of Participants With Mean IGF-1 Levels ≤1x Upper Limit or Normal (ULN) at Week 22/24, Including Participants With Dose Reduction

    First key secondary endpoint. If one of the IGF-1 values at Week 22 or Week 24 was missing, the other value was used to define a responder/non-responder in the analysis. The variable of interest was considered missing only if no IGF-1 value could be obtained from either the Week 22 or the Week 24 sample. A composite strategy was assumed for intercurrent events, and a participant was considered as a non-responder if they discontinued IMP and/or was switched to rescue medication. For this endpoint, a patient who had their dose reduced was not directly classified as a non-responder. No participant had their dose reduced during the trial. ULN was derived from the participant's sex and age at screening. In order to account for all participants in the ITT analysis set, multiple imputation was applied. The mean proportion of responders was calculated as an average of responders across the imputed datasets. The resulting proportion was multiplied by 100 to present "Percentage of participants"

    Time frame: Week 22 and 24

  2. Proportion of Participants With Mean IGF-1 Levels ≤1xULN at Week 22/Week 24 and Mean Growth Hormone (GH) Levels <2.5 µg/L at Week 24

    Second key secondary endpoint. If one of the IGF-1 values at Week 22 or Week 24 was missing, the other value was used to define a responder/non-responder in the analysis. The variable of interest was considered missing only if no IGF-1 value could be obtained from either the Week 22 or the Week 24 sample or no GH value at Week 24. A composite strategy was assumed for intercurrent events, and a patient was considered as a non-responder if they discontinued IMP or had the dose reduced prior to Week 22 (regardless of IGF-1 values), and/or was switched to rescue medication. ULN was based on the patient's sex and age at screening. In order to account for all participants in the ITT analysis set, multiple imputation was applied. The mean proportion of responders was calculated as an average of responders across the imputed datasets. The resulting proportion was multiplied by 100 to present "Percentage of participants".

    Time frame: Week 22 and 24

  3. Proportion of Participants With Mean GH Levels <2.5 µg/L at Week 24

    For the responder analysis of mean GH \<2.5 µg/L at Week 24, a composite strategy was assumed for intercurrent events. A participant was considered as a non-responder if they discontinued IMP, or had the dose reduced prior to Week 24 (regardless of mean GH values), and/or was switched to rescue medication. In order to account for all participants in the ITT analysis set, multiple imputation was applied. The mean proportion of participants was calculated as an average of responders across the imputed datasets. The resulting proportion was multiplied by 100 to present "Percentage of participants".

    Time frame: Week 24

  4. Proportion of Participants With Mean GH Levels <1.0 µg/L at Week 24

    For the responder analysis of mean GH \<1.0 µg/L at Week 24, a composite strategy was assumed for intercurrent events. A participant was considered as a non-responder if they discontinued IMP, or had the dose reduced prior to Week 24 (regardless of mean GH values), and/or was switched to rescue medication. In order to account for all participants in the ITT analysis set, multiple imputation was applied. The mean proportion of participants was calculated as an average of responders across the imputed datasets. The resulting proportion was multiplied by 100 to present "Percentage of participants".

    Time frame: Week 24

  5. Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events

    A treatment emergent adverse event was defined as an adverse event that occurred during or after the first administration of the IMP to the end of trial visit or the next dose of any acromegaly treatment, whichever came first.

    Time frame: Week 0 to 24

  6. Proportion of Participants/Partners Declared Competent by a Healthcare Professional to Administer Intervention

    During participants'/partners' first three attempts during the trial period of 24 weeks whenever these visits took place. Percentages were based on those who opted for self-/partner-administration.

    Time frame: Week 0 to 20 and Week 24

  7. Octreotide Plasma Concentrations Over Time

    Plasma samples were taken pre-dose on dosing days.

    Time frame: Week 0 to 24

07

Results

Posted Aug 20, 2026

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneCAM2029Placebo
Started4824
Treated4724
Completed4624
Not completed20
Withdrew: Consent withdrawn20

Outcome measures

PrimaryProportion of Participants With Mean Insulin-like Growth Factor -1 (IGF-1) Levels ≤1 x Upper Limit of Normal (ULN) at Week 22/24

If one of the IGF-1 values at Week 22 or Week 24 was missing, the other value was used to define a responder/non-responder in the analysis. The variable of interest was considered missing only if no IGF-1 value could be obtained from either the Week 22 or the Week 24 sample. A composite strategy was assumed for intercurrent events, and a participant was considered as a non-responder if they discontinued IMP, or had the dose reduced prior to Week 22 (regardless of IGF-1 values), and/or was switched to rescue medication. ULN was derived from the participant's sex and age at screening. In order to account for all participants in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis set, multiple imputation was applied. The mean proportion of responders was calculated as an average of responders across the imputed datasets. The resulting proportion was multiplied by 100 to present "Percentage of participants".

Time frame:
Week 22 and 24
Reported as:
Number · Percentage of participants
Proportion of Participants With Mean Insulin-like Growth Factor -1 (IGF-1) Levels ≤1 x Upper Limit of Normal (ULN) at Week 22/24
Percentage of participantsCAM2029Placebo
Proportion of Participants With Mean Insulin-like Growth Factor -1 (IGF-1) Levels ≤1 x Upper Limit of Normal (ULN) at Week 22/2472.237.5
Statistical analysis
  • CAM2029 vs Placebo · Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel · p = 0.0018 (Significance level: 0.025, one-sided) · Risk difference (rd): 34.6 · 95% CI 11.3 to 57.9Weighted difference in proportions (%), CAM2029 - Placebo
SecondaryProportion of Participants With Mean IGF-1 Levels ≤1x Upper Limit or Normal (ULN) at Week 22/24, Including Participants With Dose Reduction

First key secondary endpoint. If one of the IGF-1 values at Week 22 or Week 24 was missing, the other value was used to define a responder/non-responder in the analysis. The variable of interest was considered missing only if no IGF-1 value could be obtained from either the Week 22 or the Week 24 sample. A composite strategy was assumed for intercurrent events, and a participant was considered as a non-responder if they discontinued IMP and/or was switched to rescue medication. For this endpoint, a patient who had their dose reduced was not directly classified as a non-responder. No participant had their dose reduced during the trial. ULN was derived from the participant's sex and age at screening. In order to account for all participants in the ITT analysis set, multiple imputation was applied. The mean proportion of responders was calculated as an average of responders across the imputed datasets. The resulting proportion was multiplied by 100 to present "Percentage of participants"

Time frame:
Week 22 and 24
Reported as:
Number · Percentage of participants
Proportion of Participants With Mean IGF-1 Levels ≤1x Upper Limit or Normal (ULN) at Week 22/24, Including Participants With Dose Reduction
Percentage of participantsCAM2029Placebo
Proportion of Participants With Mean IGF-1 Levels ≤1x Upper Limit or Normal (ULN) at Week 22/24, Including Participants With Dose Reduction72.237.5
Statistical analysis
  • CAM2029 vs Placebo · Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel · p = 0.0018 (Conditional on having met the primary endpoint in the testing procedure. Significance level: 0.025, one-sided.) · Risk difference (rd): 34.6 · 95% CI 11.3 to 57.9Weighted difference in proportions (%), CAM2029 - Placebo
SecondaryProportion of Participants With Mean IGF-1 Levels ≤1xULN at Week 22/Week 24 and Mean Growth Hormone (GH) Levels <2.5 µg/L at Week 24

Second key secondary endpoint. If one of the IGF-1 values at Week 22 or Week 24 was missing, the other value was used to define a responder/non-responder in the analysis. The variable of interest was considered missing only if no IGF-1 value could be obtained from either the Week 22 or the Week 24 sample or no GH value at Week 24. A composite strategy was assumed for intercurrent events, and a patient was considered as a non-responder if they discontinued IMP or had the dose reduced prior to Week 22 (regardless of IGF-1 values), and/or was switched to rescue medication. ULN was based on the patient's sex and age at screening. In order to account for all participants in the ITT analysis set, multiple imputation was applied. The mean proportion of responders was calculated as an average of responders across the imputed datasets. The resulting proportion was multiplied by 100 to present "Percentage of participants".

Time frame:
Week 22 and 24
Reported as:
Number · Percentage of participants
Proportion of Participants With Mean IGF-1 Levels ≤1xULN at Week 22/Week 24 and Mean Growth Hormone (GH) Levels <2.5 µg/L at Week 24
Percentage of participantsCAM2029Placebo
Proportion of Participants With Mean IGF-1 Levels ≤1xULN at Week 22/Week 24 and Mean Growth Hormone (GH) Levels <2.5 µg/L at Week 2470.037.5
Statistical analysis
  • CAM2029 vs Placebo · Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel · p = 0.0035 (Conditional on having met the primary and first key secondary endpoints in the testing procedure. Significance level: 0.025, one-sided.) · Risk difference (rd): 32.3 · 95% CI 8.8 to 55.7Weighted difference in proportions (%), CAM2029 - Placebo
SecondaryProportion of Participants With Mean GH Levels <2.5 µg/L at Week 24

For the responder analysis of mean GH \<2.5 µg/L at Week 24, a composite strategy was assumed for intercurrent events. A participant was considered as a non-responder if they discontinued IMP, or had the dose reduced prior to Week 24 (regardless of mean GH values), and/or was switched to rescue medication. In order to account for all participants in the ITT analysis set, multiple imputation was applied. The mean proportion of participants was calculated as an average of responders across the imputed datasets. The resulting proportion was multiplied by 100 to present "Percentage of participants".

Time frame:
Week 24
Reported as:
Number · Percentage of participants
Proportion of Participants With Mean GH Levels <2.5 µg/L at Week 24
Percentage of participantsCAM2029Placebo
Proportion of Participants With Mean GH Levels <2.5 µg/L at Week 2487.583.3
SecondaryProportion of Participants With Mean GH Levels <1.0 µg/L at Week 24

For the responder analysis of mean GH \<1.0 µg/L at Week 24, a composite strategy was assumed for intercurrent events. A participant was considered as a non-responder if they discontinued IMP, or had the dose reduced prior to Week 24 (regardless of mean GH values), and/or was switched to rescue medication. In order to account for all participants in the ITT analysis set, multiple imputation was applied. The mean proportion of participants was calculated as an average of responders across the imputed datasets. The resulting proportion was multiplied by 100 to present "Percentage of participants".

Time frame:
Week 24
Reported as:
Number · Percentage of participants
Proportion of Participants With Mean GH Levels <1.0 µg/L at Week 24
Percentage of participantsCAM2029Placebo
Proportion of Participants With Mean GH Levels <1.0 µg/L at Week 2459.937.5
SecondaryNumber of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events

A treatment emergent adverse event was defined as an adverse event that occurred during or after the first administration of the IMP to the end of trial visit or the next dose of any acromegaly treatment, whichever came first.

Time frame:
Week 0 to 24
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events
ParticipantsCAM2029Placebo
Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events3719
SecondaryProportion of Participants/Partners Declared Competent by a Healthcare Professional to Administer Intervention

During participants'/partners' first three attempts during the trial period of 24 weeks whenever these visits took place. Percentages were based on those who opted for self-/partner-administration.

Time frame:
Week 0 to 20 and Week 24
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Proportion of Participants/Partners Declared Competent by a Healthcare Professional to Administer Intervention
ParticipantsCAM2029Placebo
Proportion of Participants/Partners Declared Competent by a Healthcare Professional to Administer Intervention3220
SecondaryOctreotide Plasma Concentrations Over Time

Plasma samples were taken pre-dose on dosing days.

Time frame:
Week 0 to 24
Reported as:
Mean · ng/mL
Octreotide Plasma Concentrations Over Time
ng/mLCAM2029
Day 10.370 ± 0.465
Week 40.852 ± 0.495
Week 80.975 ± 0.547
Week 121.178 ± 0.822
Week 161.005 ± 0.635
Week 201.104 ± 0.877
Week 222.226 ± 1.241
Week 241.049 ± 0.970

Adverse events

Collected over 24 weeks. Non-serious events are listed at a 5% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
CAM20290/47 (0%)4/47 (8.5%)36/47 (76.6%)
Placebo0/24 (0%)2/24 (8.3%)19/24 (79.2%)
Most frequent serious events
Most frequent serious events
EventCAM2029Placebo
Covid-19Infections and infestations2/470/24
Gastritis erosiveGastrointestinal disorders0/471/24
CholecystitisHepatobiliary disorders0/471/24
Covid-19 pneumoniaInfections and infestations1/470/24
InfluenzaInfections and infestations1/470/24
Most frequent other events
Showing 10 of 16
Most frequent other events
EventCAM2029Placebo
Injection site erythemaGeneral disorders12/475/24
Injection site massGeneral disorders3/475/24
ArthralgiaMusculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders8/472/24
Injection site swellingGeneral disorders7/472/24
Injection site pruritusGeneral disorders7/471/24
AnaemiaBlood and lymphatic system disorders1/473/24
Injection site indurationGeneral disorders4/473/24
Injection site painGeneral disorders4/473/24
Covid-19Infections and infestations2/473/24
Injection site noduleGeneral disorders4/471/24

Baseline characteristics

Intention-to-treat analysis set (all participants who were randomized to a treatment arm)

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)CAM2029PlaceboTotal
Mean57.0 ± 11.252.0 ± 15.155.3 ± 12.8
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)CAM2029PlaceboTotal
Female281240
Male201232
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants)CAM2029PlaceboTotal
American Indian or Alaska Native000
Asian202
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander000
Black or African American101
White452469
More than one race000
Unknown or Not Reported000
08

Study locations

63 sites
  • UCLA Department of Medicine Division of Endocrinology
    Los Angeles, California 90095, United States
  • Stanford University Medical Center
    Palo Alto, California 94305, United States
  • Prufen Clinical Research LLC
    Miami, Florida 33130, United States
  • University of Michigan
    Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106, United States
  • Mayo Clinic
    Rochester, Minnesota 55905, United States
  • Washington University in St. Louis, School of Medicine
    St Louis, Missouri 63110, United States
  • Palm Research Center
    Las Vegas, Nevada 89148, United States
  • Columbia University Medical Center
    New York, New York 10018, United States
  • University of Cincinnati
    Cincinnati, Ohio 45267, United States
  • Thomas Jefferson University
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107, United States
  • Allegheny Endocrinology Associates
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15212, United States
  • Research Institute of Dallas
    Dallas, Texas 75231, United States
  • Universitätsklinikum Essen
    Essen, 45147, Germany
  • Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Medizinische Klinik 1, Schwerpunkt Endokrinologie, Diabetologie, Ernährungsmedizin
    Frankfurt, 60590, Germany
  • Universitätsklinikum Freiburg
    Freiburg im Breisgau, 79601, Germany
  • LMU Clinic of University of Munich, Medical Clinic and Polyclinic IV
    Munich, 80336, Germany
  • Medicover Neuroendokrinologie
    Munich, 81667, Germany
  • Medicover Oldenburg MVZ
    Oldenburg, 26122, Germany
  • General Hospital of Athens "Laiko", Endocrinology University Clinic
    Athens, 115 27, Greece
  • Aretaeio University Hospital Endocrinology Department, Faculty of Diabetes and Metabolism
    Athens, 115 28, Greece
  • General Hospital of Thessaloniki "Ippokratio"
    Thessaloniki, 546 42, Greece
  • Military Healt Center, 2nd Department of Internal Medicine
    Budapest, 1062, Hungary
  • SZTE ÁOK I.sz. Belgyógyászati Klinika
    Szeged, 6720, Hungary
  • IRCCS Policlinico San Martino
    Genova, 16132, Italy
  • Azienda Universitaria "Federico II"
    Naples, 80131, Italy
  • Azienda Ospedaliera Padova, Department of Internal medicine
    Padova, 35128, Italy
  • Policlinic Gemelli University Hospital IRCCS, Department of Endocrinology
    Roma, Italy
  • AOUI Verona, Policlinic of GB Rossi
    Verona, 37134, Italy
  • Samodzielny Publiczny Zaklad Opieki Zdrowotnej Szpital Uniwersytecki w Krakowie
    Krakow, 30-688, Poland
  • Centrum Nowoczesnych Terapii "Dobry Lekarz"
    Krakow, 31-011, Poland
  • Amicare Sp. z o.o. Sp. K.
    Lodz, 90-644, Poland
  • Piekarskie Centrum Medyczne, Szpital Miejski
    Piekary Śląskie, 41-940, Poland
  • Interregional Clinical Diagnostic Center
    Kazan', 420087, Russia
  • "Atlas" Medical Center
    Moscow, Russia
  • Sechenov Moscow First State Medical University
    Moscow, Russia
  • Vladimirsky Moscow Regional Research Clinical Institute
    Moscow, Russia
  • Novosibirsk State Regional Clinical Hospital
    Novosibirsk, 630087, Russia
  • Interregional Clinical Diagnostic Center
    Ryazan, 420087, Russia
  • Saratov Regional Clinic Hospital
    Saratov, 410053, Russia
  • University Hospital Complex A Coruña
    A Coruña, 15006 A, Spain
  • University Hospital of Alicante
    Alicante, 03010, Spain
  • Hospital Universitario Vall d'Hebron
    Barcelona, 08035, Spain
  • Hospital Universitario La Princesa
    Madrid, 28006, Spain
  • Hospital Universitario Gregorio Marañón
    Madrid, 28009, Spain
  • Complejo Hospitalario Universitario Santiago de Compostela
    Santiago de Compostela, 15706, Spain
  • University Hospital Virgen del Rocio
    Seville, 41013, Spain
  • Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe
    Valencia, 46026, Spain
  • Hospital Universitario de la Ribera
    Valencia, 46600, Spain
  • Akdeniz University Faculty of Medicine Department of Endocrinology
    Antalya, 07985, Turkey (Türkiye)
  • Aydın Adnan Menderes University Research and Application Hospital
    Aydin, 09010, Turkey (Türkiye)
  • Pamukkale University Faculty of Medicine Department of Endocrinology
    Denizli, 20070, Turkey (Türkiye)
  • Eskisehir Osmangazi University Medical Faculty
    Eskişehir, 26480, Turkey (Türkiye)
  • Istanbul University Medical Faculty
    Fatih, 34098, Turkey (Türkiye)
  • Kocaeli University Faculty of Medicine Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism
    Kocaeli, 41000, Turkey (Türkiye)
  • Inonu University Medical Faculty Endocrinology Department
    Malatya, 44000, Turkey (Türkiye)
  • Erciyes University Medical Faculty, Dept. of Endocrinology
    Melikgazi, 38039, Turkey (Türkiye)
  • Karadeniz Technical University Farabi Hospital
    Trabzon, 61080, Turkey (Türkiye)
  • Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit University Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism Ibni Sina Campus
    Zonguldak, 67600, Turkey (Türkiye)
  • College of Medical and Dental Sciences
    Birmingham, B15 2TT, United Kingdom
  • University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust
    Coventry, CV2 2DX, United Kingdom
  • Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
    Leeds, LS97TF, United Kingdom
  • The Christie NHS Foundation Trust
    Manchester, M20 4BX, United Kingdom
  • Salford Royal Foundation Trust
    Salford, M6 8HD, United Kingdom
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Glatard A, Friberg-Hietala S, Keutzer L, Hansson A, Johnsson M, Tiberg F. Population Pharmacokinetic Analysis of an Octreotide Depot (CAM2029) in the Treatment of Acromegaly. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2025 Jul;64(7):1079-1092. doi: 10.1007/s40262-025-01522-3. Epub 2025 May 26. PubMed 40418492 ↗
  • Ferone D, Freda P, Katznelson L, Gatto F, Kadioglu P, Maffei P, Seufert J, Silverstein JM, Spencer-Segal JL, Isaeva E, Dreval A, Harrie M, Svedberg A, Tiberg F. Octreotide Subcutaneous Depot for Acromegaly: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Phase 3 Trial, ACROINNOVA 1. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2025 May 19;110(6):1729-1739. doi: 10.1210/clinem/dgae707. PubMed 39378125 ↗

Study documents

PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 20, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04076462
Lead sponsor
Camurus AB
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Sep 3, 2019
Start date
Aug 19, 2019
Primary completion
May 2, 2023
Completion
May 2, 2023
Results posted
Aug 20, 2026
Last update
Aug 20, 2026

Study contacts

Pamela Freda, M.D
principal investigator · Columbia University

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 Jul 2026. 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.

Studies of the drugs tested here: Octreotide hydrochloride · Octreotide Depot Formulation CAM2029

Start the discussion