CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT05137041IRPATCHUpdated Sep 9, 2025Results posted

Efficacy and Safety of FIRTECH in Patients With Mild to Moderate Acute Low Back Pain

A Phase 3 interventional study of ITP FIRTECH in Low Back Pain, sponsored by Sanofi. Completed at 7 sites in 2 countries. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 65 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-09-09.

Sponsored by Sanofi · Phase 3, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
221
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 65 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Primary Objective:

To assess the efficacy of the infrared therapy patch (ITP) FIRTECH for treating participants suffering from mild to moderate acute low back pain.

Secondary Objectives:

  • To assess the efficacy of ITP FIRTECH on participant disability
  • To assess the efficacy of ITP FIRTECH on the degree of participant mobility
  • To assess the safety of ITP FIRTECH
Read the detailed description

Duration of study participation is up to 6 days per participant.

02

Conditions studied

  • Low Back Pain

Browse trials for

03

In context

Low Back Pain

2,818 studies on the registry are indexed under Low Back Pain; 482 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 221 is above the median of 60 across 2,268 interventional studies indexed under Low Back Pain.

Browse Low Back Pain studies →

Lead sponsor

Sanofi is the lead sponsor of 1,508 studies on the registry; 90 are open to participants now.

Of its 198 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 118 (60%) have results posted.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 65 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Participants suffering from mild to moderate acute low back pain
  • Low back pain (lumbar back pain) is defined as pain in the back from the level of the lowest rib down to the gluteal fold
  • Acute episode is defined as acute pain with less than 1 month duration
  • With intensity less than or equal to 6 on 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Participants suffering from any neurological pathology which could be responsible of the pain
  • Participants suffering from leg pain irradiation
  • Participants suffering from chronic lumbar pain of any etiology
  • Participants with chronic arthrosis and neurological symptoms
  • Participants experiencing recent significant trauma (i.e., injury related to a fall from a height or motor vehicle crash, or from a minor fall or heavy lifting in a participants with osteoporosis or possible osteoporosis)
  • Participants with major or progressive motor or sensory deficit, new-onset bowel or bladder incontinence or urinary retention, loss of anal sphincter tone, saddle anesthesia, history of cancer metastatic to bone, and suspected spinal infection
  • Participants clinically diagnosed with anxiety and/or depression
  • Participants using any medication for their pain within the last 48 hours within enrollment into the study
  • Participants taking any systemic medication for their pain within the last 24 hours (48 hours for diclofenac or corticosteroids)
  • Participants currently using recreational or illicit drugs or with a recent history of drug or alcohol abuse or dependence
  • Participants with any other medical condition that would interfere with efficacy and safety assessments based on investigator's judgment
  • Participants having received non-pharmaceutical lower back pain treatment (physiotherapy, heat treatment or massage) within 12 hours prior to enrollment
  • Participants having received spinal injection back pain treatment within 6 months prior to enrollment
  • Participants having received surgery due to back pain or rehabilitation due to back pain in the last 12 months
  • Participants with a known sensitivity to paracetamol
  • Participants with known cutaneous hypersensitivity to plaster
  • Participants participating in another clinical study within the past 30 days
  • Participants who are pregnant or breastfeeding; contraception is mandatory
  • Participants having damaged, non-intact, or scarred skin in or near the point of patch application
  • Participants having a known skin sensitivity
  • Participants having impaired blood circulation

The above information is not intended to contain all considerations relevant to a potential participation in a clinical trial.

05

Study design

Phase
Phase 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
221 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    ITP FIRTECH

    The ITP FIRTECH patch was applied on the lower back region of the body on Day 1 and intended to be worn for 5 Days (Day 5).

    Device: ITP FIRTECH

  • No intervention
    No Patch Control Arm

    No patch application.

Interventions

  • DeviceITP FIRTECH

    Infrared Therapy Patch

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Percentage of Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Responders at Day 5

    NRS is used to assess pain intensity, it is a 11-point scale (0-10) where '0' representing 'no pain' and '10' representing 'worst pain imaginable'. Responder is defined as participant with ≥30% decrease from baseline in pain NRS and who did not take rescue medication (defined as receiving paracetamol (authorized), any other analgesics and anti-inflammatory drugs as well as any non-pharmaceutical therapy (prohibited) for treating pain starting from randomization to Day 5 or starting before the study and still ongoing at randomization).

    Time frame: Day 5

Secondary outcomes

  1. Number of Participants Reported With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)

    An adverse event (AE) is any symptom, sign, illness or experience that develops or worsens in severity during the course of the study. A treatment emergent adverse event (TEAE) is an event that emerges during treatment, having been absent pretreatment, or worsens relative to the pretreatment state.

    Time frame: Day 1 to Day 6

  2. Normalized Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (PID) Over 5 Days (SPID0-5)

    NRS is used to assess pain intensity, it is a 11-point scale (0-10) where '0' representing 'no pain' and '10' representing 'worst pain imaginable'. PID equals the NRS change from baseline. A negative difference indicates improvement. Time-weighted summed pain intensity difference (SPID) was calculated by multiplying the PID score at each postdose time point by the duration since the preceding time point and then summing these values. The Normalized Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID0- 5) is to be calculated as the SPID0- 5 divided by the total duration time. The score range for ITP FIRTECH arm is -5.0 to 2.1 and for no patch control arm is -5.8 to 3.1.

    Time frame: Baseline, Day 5

  3. Percentage Change in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Score

    The RMDQ is a self-administered, widely used health status measure for lower back pain (LBP). It measures pain and function, using 24 items describing limitations to everyday life that can be caused by LBP. The score of the RMDQ is the total number of items checked - that is from a minimum of 0 (no disability) to a maximum of 24 (maximum disability), where lower scores indicative of better function.

    Time frame: From Baseline to Day 5

  4. Mobility Evaluation Using Schober's Test

    Change in mobility from baseline to Day 5 using Schober's test score.Schober test consists of extending a tape measure on the spinal column, between two posterior superior iliac spines and up to 10 cm above this, with the individual in a neutral position. Then, participant is asked to do anterior flexion of the trunk, then therapist will measure the distance of the marked points, in participants without changes of mobility should increase at least 5 cm. Increases smaller than 5 cm indicate that the test is positive, decreased mobility of the lumbar spine. These data were collected at baseline and at Day 5 and then the change from baseline to Day 5 was calculated for each treatment group.This change from baseline is analyzed by Analysis of covariance(ANCOVA) model with the treatment group as fixed effect and baseline instantaneous pain NRS as continuous covariate.Score range for ITP FIRTECH arm is -2.0 to 6.0 and for no patch control arm is -4.2 to 2.0.

    Time frame: Baseline and Day 5

  5. Mobility Evaluation Using Fingertip-to-Floor (FTF) Test

    Change in mobility from baseline to Day 5 using FTF test score.Procedure for FTF test follow recommendation of American Psychological Association:participant stood erect on a platform 20-cm high with shoes removed and feet together.Participant was asked to bend forward as far as possible,while maintaining knees,arms,and fingers fully extended.Vertical distance between tip of middle finger and platform is measured with supple tape measure and is expressed in cm.Vertical distance between platform and tip of middle finger is positive when participant did not reach platform and negative when he could go further.These data were collected at baseline and at Day 5 and then change from baseline to Day 5 was calculated for each treatment group.This change from baseline is analyzed by ANCOVA model with treatment group as fixed effect and baseline instantaneous pain NRS as continuous covariate.Score range:ITP FIRTECH arm=-22.0-17.0;no patch control arm=-30.0-13.0.

    Time frame: Baseline and Day 5

  6. Time to Reach Acceptable Pain

    Time to reach acceptable pain is defined as the time in hours from baseline subject symptom self-assessment date and time (Day 1 Visit 1, Pain perception) to the first report of post-baseline acceptable pain.

    Time frame: Up to Day 5

  7. Time to Reach no Pain

    Time to reach no pain was defined as the time (hours) from baseline subject symptom self-assessment date and time (Day 1 Visit 1, Pain Perception) to the first report of instantaneous pain NRS=0.

    Time frame: Up to Day 5

  8. Time Course of PID

    NRS is used to assess pain intensity, it is a 11-point scale (0-10) where '0' representing 'no pain' and '10' representing 'worst pain imaginable'. PID was defined as instantaneous pain NRS change from baseline. Instantaneous pain NRS was analyzed from baseline up to Day 5. A negative difference indicates improvement.

    Time frame: Baseline up to Day 5

  9. Time Course of Pain Relief

    Pain relief is assessed using a verbal rating scale (VRS), where 0 = none and 4 = complete in response to a pain relief question.

    Time frame: Baseline up to Day 5

  10. Normalized Sum of Pain Relief

    Total pain relief (TOTPAR) is calculated by multiplying the pain relief score at each post-dose time point by the duration (in hours) since the preceding time point. The Normalized Sum of Pain Relief (TOTPAR0- 5) is to be calculated as the Total Pain Relief divided by the total duration time. Higher scores indicate more pain relief. The score range is from 0.0 to 3.5 for both the arms.

    Time frame: Baseline up to Day 5

07

Results

Posted Sep 19, 2024

Participant flow

A total of 221 participants took part in the study at 7 investigative sites in Germany and Italy from 04 November 2021 to 22 November 2022.

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Started113108
Intent-to-treat population113108
Safety population114107
Modified intent-to-treat population9189
Full analysis set9784
Completed112104
Not completed14
Withdrew: Lost to follow-up11
Withdrew: Withdrawal by subject02
Withdrew: Reason not specified01

Outcome measures

PrimaryPercentage of Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Responders at Day 5

NRS is used to assess pain intensity, it is a 11-point scale (0-10) where '0' representing 'no pain' and '10' representing 'worst pain imaginable'. Responder is defined as participant with ≥30% decrease from baseline in pain NRS and who did not take rescue medication (defined as receiving paracetamol (authorized), any other analgesics and anti-inflammatory drugs as well as any non-pharmaceutical therapy (prohibited) for treating pain starting from randomization to Day 5 or starting before the study and still ongoing at randomization).

Time frame:
Day 5
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Responders at Day 5
percentage of participantsITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Percentage of Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Responders at Day 572.5 (62.17 to 81.37)49.4 (38.67 to 60.25)
Statistical analysis
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Fisher Exact · p = 0.002
SecondaryNumber of Participants Reported With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)

An adverse event (AE) is any symptom, sign, illness or experience that develops or worsens in severity during the course of the study. A treatment emergent adverse event (TEAE) is an event that emerges during treatment, having been absent pretreatment, or worsens relative to the pretreatment state.

Time frame:
Day 1 to Day 6
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants Reported With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)
ParticipantsITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Number of Participants Reported With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)187
SecondaryNormalized Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (PID) Over 5 Days (SPID0-5)

NRS is used to assess pain intensity, it is a 11-point scale (0-10) where '0' representing 'no pain' and '10' representing 'worst pain imaginable'. PID equals the NRS change from baseline. A negative difference indicates improvement. Time-weighted summed pain intensity difference (SPID) was calculated by multiplying the PID score at each postdose time point by the duration since the preceding time point and then summing these values. The Normalized Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID0- 5) is to be calculated as the SPID0- 5 divided by the total duration time. The score range for ITP FIRTECH arm is -5.0 to 2.1 and for no patch control arm is -5.8 to 3.1.

Time frame:
Baseline, Day 5
Reported as:
Mean · units on a scale
Normalized Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (PID) Over 5 Days (SPID0-5)
units on a scaleITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Normalized Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (PID) Over 5 Days (SPID0-5)-1.52 ± 1.356-0.91 ± 1.484
Statistical analysis
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · ANCOVA · p = 0.015 · Least square mean difference: -0.5 · 95% CI -0.817 to -0.137The p-value was adjusted using a False Discovery Rate approach (Benjamini-Hochberg).
SecondaryPercentage Change in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Score

The RMDQ is a self-administered, widely used health status measure for lower back pain (LBP). It measures pain and function, using 24 items describing limitations to everyday life that can be caused by LBP. The score of the RMDQ is the total number of items checked - that is from a minimum of 0 (no disability) to a maximum of 24 (maximum disability), where lower scores indicative of better function.

Time frame:
From Baseline to Day 5
Reported as:
Mean · percentage change in RMDQ score
Percentage Change in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Score
percentage change in RMDQ scoreITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Percentage Change in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) Score-32.2 ± 61.81-16.4 ± 41.64
Statistical analysis
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · ANCOVA · p = 0.103 (The p-value was adjusted using a False Discovery Rate approach (Benjamini-Hochberg).) · Least square mean difference: -15.9 · 95% CI -32.661 to 0.828
SecondaryMobility Evaluation Using Schober's Test

Change in mobility from baseline to Day 5 using Schober's test score.Schober test consists of extending a tape measure on the spinal column, between two posterior superior iliac spines and up to 10 cm above this, with the individual in a neutral position. Then, participant is asked to do anterior flexion of the trunk, then therapist will measure the distance of the marked points, in participants without changes of mobility should increase at least 5 cm. Increases smaller than 5 cm indicate that the test is positive, decreased mobility of the lumbar spine. These data were collected at baseline and at Day 5 and then the change from baseline to Day 5 was calculated for each treatment group.This change from baseline is analyzed by Analysis of covariance(ANCOVA) model with the treatment group as fixed effect and baseline instantaneous pain NRS as continuous covariate.Score range for ITP FIRTECH arm is -2.0 to 6.0 and for no patch control arm is -4.2 to 2.0.

Time frame:
Baseline and Day 5
Reported as:
Mean · cm
Mobility Evaluation Using Schober's Test
cmITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Baseline7.9 ± 4.528.1 ± 4.89
Day 58.7 ± 5.488.1 ± 5.23
Change from Baseline0.9 ± 1.44-0.1 ± 1.27
Statistical analysis
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · ANCOVA · p = <0.001 (The p-value was adjusted using a False Discovery Rate approach (Benjamini-Hochberg).) · Least square mean difference: 1.0 · 95% CI 0.511 to 1.581
SecondaryMobility Evaluation Using Fingertip-to-Floor (FTF) Test

Change in mobility from baseline to Day 5 using FTF test score.Procedure for FTF test follow recommendation of American Psychological Association:participant stood erect on a platform 20-cm high with shoes removed and feet together.Participant was asked to bend forward as far as possible,while maintaining knees,arms,and fingers fully extended.Vertical distance between tip of middle finger and platform is measured with supple tape measure and is expressed in cm.Vertical distance between platform and tip of middle finger is positive when participant did not reach platform and negative when he could go further.These data were collected at baseline and at Day 5 and then change from baseline to Day 5 was calculated for each treatment group.This change from baseline is analyzed by ANCOVA model with treatment group as fixed effect and baseline instantaneous pain NRS as continuous covariate.Score range:ITP FIRTECH arm=-22.0-17.0;no patch control arm=-30.0-13.0.

Time frame:
Baseline and Day 5
Reported as:
Mean · cm
Mobility Evaluation Using Fingertip-to-Floor (FTF) Test
cmITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Baseline21.0 ± 17.4818.6 ± 18.27
Day 517.4 ± 14.8817.5 ± 16.41
Change from Baseline-3.5 ± 6.6-1.7 ± 5.31
Statistical analysis
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · ANCOVA · p = 0.121 (The p-value was adjusted using a False Discovery Rate approach (Benjamini-Hochberg).) · Least square mean difference: -1.4 · 95% CI -2.976 to 0.250
SecondaryTime to Reach Acceptable Pain

Time to reach acceptable pain is defined as the time in hours from baseline subject symptom self-assessment date and time (Day 1 Visit 1, Pain perception) to the first report of post-baseline acceptable pain.

Time frame:
Up to Day 5
Reported as:
Median · hours
Time to Reach Acceptable Pain
hoursITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Time to Reach Acceptable Pain9.62 (8.017 to 10.317)8.65 (7.250 to 10.533)
Statistical analysis
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Log Rank · p = 0.564 (The p-value is adjusted using a False Discovery Rate approach (Benjamini-Hochberg).)
SecondaryTime to Reach no Pain

Time to reach no pain was defined as the time (hours) from baseline subject symptom self-assessment date and time (Day 1 Visit 1, Pain Perception) to the first report of instantaneous pain NRS=0.

Time frame:
Up to Day 5
Reported as:
Median · hours
Time to Reach no Pain
hoursITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Time to Reach no PainNA (NA to NA)NA (NA to NA)
Statistical analysis
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Log Rank · p = 0.289
SecondaryTime Course of PID

NRS is used to assess pain intensity, it is a 11-point scale (0-10) where '0' representing 'no pain' and '10' representing 'worst pain imaginable'. PID was defined as instantaneous pain NRS change from baseline. Instantaneous pain NRS was analyzed from baseline up to Day 5. A negative difference indicates improvement.

Time frame:
Baseline up to Day 5
Reported as:
Mean · units on a scale
Time Course of PID
units on a scaleITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Change from Baseline at Day 1 Evening-0.8 ± 1.24-0.1 ± 1.26
Change from Baseline at Day 2 Morning-1.1 ± 1.55-0.6 ± 1.60
Change from Baseline at Day 2 Evening-1.3 ± 1.60-0.5 ± 1.76
Change from Baseline at Day 3 Morning-1.6 ± 1.55-0.8 ± 1.85
Change from Baseline at Day 3 Evening-1.6 ± 1.53-0.9 ± 1.74
Change from Baseline at Day 4 Morning-1.8 ± 1.44-0.9 ± 1.91
Change from Baseline at Day 4 Evening-1.8 ± 1.56-1.0 ± 1.99
Change from Baseline at Day 5 Morning-1.6 ± 1.58-1.0 ± 2.20
Change from Baseline at Day 5-2.1 ± 1.64-1.4 ± 1.85
Statistical analysis
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = 0.001
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = 0.035
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = 0.004
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = 0.007
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = 0.005
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = 0.001
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = 0.007
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = 0.096
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = 0.015
SecondaryTime Course of Pain Relief

Pain relief is assessed using a verbal rating scale (VRS), where 0 = none and 4 = complete in response to a pain relief question.

Time frame:
Baseline up to Day 5
Reported as:
Mean · units on a scale
Time Course of Pain Relief
units on a scaleITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Day 1 Evening0.8 ± 0.860.3 ± 0.61
Day 2 Morning1.2 ± 0.970.7 ± 1.01
Day 2 Evening1.2 ± 0.920.7 ± 0.97
Day 3 Morning1.4 ± 1.030.7 ± 0.91
Day 3 Evening1.4 ± 0.980.7 ± 1.02
Day 4 Morning1.6 ± 1.110.8 ± 1.07
Day 4 Evening1.6 ± 1.160.9 ± 1.17
Day 5 Morning1.6 ± 1.221.1 ± 1.37
Day 51.9 ± 1.210.9 ± 1.32
Statistical analysis
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = <0.001
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = 0.001
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = <0.001
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = <0.001
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = <0.001
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = <0.001
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = <0.001
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = 0.024
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · Satterthwaite t-test · p = <0.001
SecondaryNormalized Sum of Pain Relief

Total pain relief (TOTPAR) is calculated by multiplying the pain relief score at each post-dose time point by the duration (in hours) since the preceding time point. The Normalized Sum of Pain Relief (TOTPAR0- 5) is to be calculated as the Total Pain Relief divided by the total duration time. Higher scores indicate more pain relief. The score range is from 0.0 to 3.5 for both the arms.

Time frame:
Baseline up to Day 5
Reported as:
Mean · units on a scale
Normalized Sum of Pain Relief
units on a scaleITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Normalized Sum of Pain Relief1.46 ± 0.8340.78 ± 0.842
Statistical analysis
  • ITP FIRTECH vs No Patch Control Arm · ANCOVA · p = <0.001 · Least square mean difference: 0.7 · 95% CI 0.415 to 0.903

Adverse events

Collected over Day 1 to Day 6. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
ITP FIRTECH0/114 (0%)0/114 (0%)18/114 (15.8%)
No Patch Control Arm0/107 (0%)0/107 (0%)7/107 (6.5%)
Most frequent other events
Showing 10 of 16
Most frequent other events
EventITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control Arm
Application Site PruritusGeneral disorders7/1140/107
NasopharyngitisInfections and infestations3/1142/107
Back PainMusculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders1/1142/107
Application Site ErythemaGeneral disorders2/1140/107
Application Site PainGeneral disorders2/1140/107
HeadacheNervous system disorders2/1140/107
DiarrhoeaGastrointestinal disorders0/1141/107
ContusionInjury, poisoning and procedural complications0/1141/107
Sleep DisorderPsychiatric disorders0/1141/107
Application Site IrritationGeneral disorders1/1140/107

Baseline characteristics

Intent-to-Treat population was defined as all participants randomized.

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)ITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control ArmTotal
Mean45.7 ± 13.1044.7 ± 12.8745.2 ± 12.97
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)ITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control ArmTotal
Female5962121
Male5446100
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected(Participants)ITP FIRTECHNo Patch Control ArmTotal
Count of participants——0
08

Study locations

7 sites
  • Investigational Site Number :06
    Bad Homburg, 61348, Germany
  • Investigational Site Number :02
    Leipzig, 04103, Germany
  • Investigational Site Number :01
    Munich, 80809, Germany
  • Investigational Site Number :03
    Weinheim, 69469, Germany
  • Investigational Site Number :7
    Taormina, Messina 98039, Italy
  • Investigational Site Number :5
    Alessandria, 15100, Italy
  • Investigational Site Number :4
    Chieti, 66100, Italy
09

References and documents

Study documents

  • Study protocol · Jul 22, 2022
  • Statistical analysis plan · Dec 12, 2022

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

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — Qualified researchers may request access to patient level data and related study documents including the clinical study report, study protocol with any amendments, blank case report form, statistical analysis plan, and dataset specifications. Patient level data will be anonymized and study documents will be redacted to protect the privacy of trial participants. Further details on Sanofi's data sharing criteria, eligible studies, and process for requesting access can be found at: https://vivli.org

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 9, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05137041
Lead sponsor
Sanofi
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Nov 30, 2021
Start date
Nov 4, 2021
Primary completion
Nov 22, 2022
Completion
Nov 22, 2022
Results posted
Sep 19, 2024
Last update
Sep 9, 2025

Study contacts

Clinical Sciences & Operations
study director · Sanofi

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2025. 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