Chronic Plantar FasciitisPhase 2/3NCT00447876
Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Dysport® in the Treatment of Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
A Phase 2/3 study testing Botulinum toxin type A in people with Chronic Plantar Fasciitis, run by Ipsen at 6 sites in Germany.
Trial summary
This study will investigate the hypothesis that the analgesic effect of a single injection of Dysport (200 MU) induces a significant reduction of symptoms in chronic cases of plantar fasciitis. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
- What is being tested?
- Botulinum toxin type A
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 40 participants
- Where
- 6 sitesGermany
- Study dates
- Jul 2005to Apr 2009
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Chronic plantar fasciitis (duration of disorder at least 4 months)
- At least 4 points on the visual analogue scale (0-10) for the most severe pain within the last 48 hours
- At least 2 previous unsuccessful conservative therapies
- Age 18 and older
Who cannot join
- Rheumatoid diseases (M. Bechterew, chronic polyarthritis, psoriasis-arthritis, para /post-infectious arthritis etc.)
- Previous surgery in the affected area of the foot
- Pre-treatment with Botulinum toxin A (only de novo patients)
- Prohibited concomitant treatment: local injections during the study and 2 weeks prior to start of study
Trial locations and contacts
6 sites in 1 country.
6 sites in 1 country
Germany6 sites
University Hospital Charite, Campus Virchow, Musculoskeletal Centre, Orthopedic Clinic
Berlin, 13353
Orthopedic Practice Biberburg
Berlin, 14089
Orthopedic Practice
Karlsruhe, 76133
Klinik für Orthopädie und Rheumatologie, Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg GmbH
Marburg
Orthocentre Munich
Munich, 81547
Orthopedic Practice
Weiden, 92637
About this study
Official title: Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Randomised, Multicentre Study on the Efficacy and Safety of a Single Injection of Botulinum Toxin A (200 Units Dysport®) in the Treatment of Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
This study will investigate the hypothesis that the analgesic effect of a single injection of Dysport (200 MU) induces a significant reduction of symptoms in chronic cases of plantar fasciitis.
- Conditions
- Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
- Being tested
- Botulinum toxin type A, Placebo
- Medical subject headings
- Fasciitis, Plantar
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Botulinum toxin type ABiological
Also called AbobotulinumtoxinA (Dysport®)
Botulinum type A toxin (Dysport®): 200 Units injected at the root of the plantar fascia
PlaceboDrug
0.9% sodium chloride: 2 ml injected at the root of the plantar fascia
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Botulinum type A toxin (Dysport®) | Experimental | Not described Receives: Biological: Botulinum toxin type A |
| Placebo | Placebo comparator | Not described Receives: Drug: Placebo |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Responders Rate at Week 6 (Pain While Moving)
The responder rate was defined as the percentage of patients whose pain score while moving during the last 48 hours, measured by means of a 10 cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS, 0 = no pain, 10 = maximum pain) decreased by at least 50% at Week 6 as compared to baseline. Pain at movement is the cardinal symptom of plantar fasciitis and the 10 cm VAS is a reference method for the assessment of pain intensity.
Measured: Baseline and Week 6
Secondary outcomes (12)
Changes From Baseline in Gerbershagen's Score at Week 18
The Gerbershagen scale gives a global score ranging between I and III, with lower scores reflecting less impact of pain in terms of temporal, spatial aspects, drug taking behaviour and utilization of the health care system. The changes in Gerbershagen's global scores from baseline to Week 18 are reported as percentage of patients for each of the specified categories.
Measured: Baseline and Week 18
Changes From Baseline in Maximum Pain (Pain While Moving) at Each Visit
Assessments of the pain intensity while moving (maximum pain during the previous 48 hours) were performed by means of a 10 cm VAS (0 = no pain, 10 = maximum pain) at each visit. The changes from baseline, expressed as Pain Intensity Difference (PID) values at each indicated timepoint are reported.
Measured: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Assessment of Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) for Maximum Pain for Overall Study
Assessments of the pain intensity while moving (maximum pain during the previous 48 hours) were performed by means of a 10 cm VAS (0 = no pain, 10 = maximum pain) at each visit. The PID values at each timepoint were determined by comparison to baseline, followed by calculation of the area under the curve (AUC) of PID as a function of time (i.e. SPID). The least square (LS) means of SPID, adjusted for the baseline value of pain while moving are reported.
Measured: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Changes From Baseline in Continuous Pain (Pain At Rest) at Each Visit
Assessments of the pain intensity while at rest (continuous pain during the previous 48 hours) were performed by means of a 10 cm VAS (0 = no pain, 10 = maximum pain) at each visit. The changes from baseline, expressed as PID values at each indicated timepoint are reported.
Measured: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Assessment of SPID for Continuous Pain for Overall Study
Assessments of the pain intensity while at rest (continuous pain during the previous 48 hours) were performed by means of a 10 cm VAS (0 = no pain, 10 = maximum pain) at each visit. The PID values at each timepoint were determined by comparison to baseline, followed by calculation of the AUC of PID as a function of time (i.e. SPID). The LS means for SPID, adjusted for the baseline value of pain at rest are reported.
Measured: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Changes From Baseline in Pain Threshold at Each Visit
The maximum pain felt in the medial back foot was measured using an algometer. The pain threshold corresponded to the maximum pressure at which pain was still tolerated. Changes from baseline, expressed as pain threshold differences at each indicated timepoint are reported.
Measured: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Assessment of Sum of Pain Threshold Differences (by Measurement of AUC) for Overall Study
Assessments of the pain threshold using an algometer (which was the pressure corresponding to the maximum tolerated pain) were performed at each visit. Pain threshold differences at each timepoint were determined by comparison to baseline, followed by calculation of the AUC of the pain threshold difference as a function of time. The LS means of AUC, adjusted for the baseline value of pain threshold are reported.
Measured: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Changes From Baseline in Pressure Threshold (With Algometer) at Each Visit
Pressure pain in the medial back foot was measured using an algometer. Pressure threshold corresponded to the minimum pressure causing pain. The changes from baseline, expressed as pressure threshold differences at each indicated timepoint are reported.
Measured: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Assessment of Sum of Pressure Threshold Differences (by Measurement of AUC) for Overall Study
Assessments of the pressure threshold using an algometer (which corresponded to the minimum pressure causing pain) were performed at each visit. Pressure threshold differences at each timepoint were determined by comparison to baseline, followed by calculation of the AUC of the pressure threshold difference as a function of time. The LS means of AUC, adjusted for the baseline value of pressure threshold are reported.
Measured: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Assessment of Dorsal Extension / Plantar Flexion Range of Motion (ROM) of the Affected Foot At Week 18
Dorsal extension and plantar flexion of the affected foot were assessed at baseline and at Week 18. A ROM of approximately 70 degrees is considered to be normal. The LS means, adjusted for the baseline value are reported.
Measured: Baseline and Week 18
Number of Patients Without Pain and/or With a Pain Reduction Based on Global Assessment of Pain by Investigator at Each Visit
A global assessment of the patient's current condition relative to baseline was performed by the Investigator at each visit using 5 level scale: significantly better, slightly better, unchanged, slightly worse, significantly worse. The number of patients for each variable at each indicated timepoint are reported.
Measured: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Number of Patients Without Pain and/or With a Pain Reduction Based on Global Assessment of Pain by Patient at Each Visit
A global assessment of the patient's current condition relative to baseline was performed by the patient at each visit using a 5 level scale: significantly better, slightly better, unchanged, slightly worse, significantly worse. The number of patients for each variable at each indicated timepoint are reported.
Measured: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 Mar 2007 (estimated)
- Study startJul 2005
- Primary completionJan 2009
- Study completionApr 2009
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Chronic Plantar FasciitisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by IpsenThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Ipsen
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Ipsen Medical Director, Study director, Ipsen
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00447876
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- A-94-52120-100
- Other IDs
- 2004-002533-39, 2004
- Status last verified
- Nov 2019
- First submitted
- 13 Mar 2007
- Last updated
- 22 Nov 2019
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Peterlein CD, Funk JF, Holscher A, Schuh A, Placzek R. Is botulinum toxin A effective for the treatment of plantar fasciitis? Clin J Pain. 2012 Jul;28(6):527-33. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e31823ae65a.
PubMed 22673486
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 22 Nov 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Randomised, Multicentre Study on the Efficacy and Safety of a Single Injection of Botulinum Toxin A (200 Units Dysport®) in the Treatment of Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00447876
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- A-94-52120-100
- Conditions
- Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- IpsenIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- Jul 2005
- Primary completion
- Jan 2009 (actual)
- Study completion
- Apr 2009 (actual)
- First posted
- 15 Mar 2007 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 23 Jun 2017
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study will investigate the hypothesis that the analgesic effect of a single injection of Dysport (200 MU) induces a significant reduction of symptoms in chronic cases of plantar fasciitis.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Botulinum type A toxin (Dysport®) | Experimental | Biological: Botulinum toxin type A |
| Placebo | Placebo comparator | Drug: Placebo |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Chronic plantar fasciitis (duration of disorder at least 4 months)
- At least 4 points on the visual analogue scale (0-10) for the most severe pain within the last 48 hours
- At least 2 previous unsuccessful conservative therapies
- Age 18 and older
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Rheumatoid diseases (M. Bechterew, chronic polyarthritis, psoriasis-arthritis, para /post-infectious arthritis etc.)
- Previous surgery in the affected area of the foot
- Pre-treatment with Botulinum toxin A (only de novo patients)
- Prohibited concomitant treatment: local injections during the study and 2 weeks prior to start of study
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Botulinum toxin type AAlso: AbobotulinumtoxinA (Dysport®)Botulinum type A toxin (Dysport®): 200 Units injected at the root of the plantar fascia | Biological | Botulinum type A toxin (Dysport®) |
| Placebo0.9% sodium chloride: 2 ml injected at the root of the plantar fascia | Drug | Placebo |
Primary outcome
Responders Rate at Week 6 (Pain While Moving)
Time frame: Baseline and Week 6
The responder rate was defined as the percentage of patients whose pain score while moving during the last 48 hours, measured by means of a 10 cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS, 0 = no pain, 10 = maximum pain) decreased by at least 50% at Week 6 as compared to baseline. Pain at movement is the cardinal symptom of plantar fasciitis and the 10 cm VAS is a reference method for the assessment of pain intensity.
12 secondary outcomes
Changes From Baseline in Gerbershagen's Score at Week 18
Time frame: Baseline and Week 18
Changes From Baseline in Maximum Pain (Pain While Moving) at Each Visit
Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Assessment of Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) for Maximum Pain for Overall Study
Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Changes From Baseline in Continuous Pain (Pain At Rest) at Each Visit
Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Assessment of SPID for Continuous Pain for Overall Study
Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Changes From Baseline in Pain Threshold at Each Visit
Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Assessment of Sum of Pain Threshold Differences (by Measurement of AUC) for Overall Study
Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Changes From Baseline in Pressure Threshold (With Algometer) at Each Visit
Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Assessment of Sum of Pressure Threshold Differences (by Measurement of AUC) for Overall Study
Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Assessment of Dorsal Extension / Plantar Flexion Range of Motion (ROM) of the Affected Foot At Week 18
Time frame: Baseline and Week 18
Number of Patients Without Pain and/or With a Pain Reduction Based on Global Assessment of Pain by Investigator at Each Visit
Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Number of Patients Without Pain and/or With a Pain Reduction Based on Global Assessment of Pain by Patient at Each Visit
Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 22 Nov 2019.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Results publication: PubMed 22673486Peterlein CD, Funk JF, Holscher A, Schuh A, Placzek R. Is botulinum toxin A effective for the treatment of plantar fasciitis? Clin J Pain. 2012 Jul;28(6):527-33. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e31823ae65a.
Related trials for Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
Not yet recruiting
Hip Muscle Strengthening and Calf Myofascial Release in Females With Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
Chronic Planter Fascitis
Recruiting
F-18 Sodium Fluoride PET/CT-Guided Pain Palliation in Chronic Plantar Fasciitis: A Comparative Study of ¹⁷⁷Lutetium-Corticosteroid-Local Anaesthetic Injection vs Corticosteroid-Local Anaesthetic Injection
Plantar Fascitis, Chronic Heel Pain
Not yet recruiting
Radial vs Focused Shockwave Therapy for Plantar Fasciitis
Plantar Fasciitis, Chronic
RecruitingObservational study
Tibial Nerve Size and Clinical Features in Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
Plantar Fasciitis, Chronic, Tibial Nerve
Recruiting
Acupuncture of Different Treatment Frequency in Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
Plantar Fasciitis, Chronic
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Ipsen Medical Director study director
Ipsen
6 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2/3 study testing Botulinum toxin type A in people with Chronic Plantar Fasciitis, run by Ipsen at 6 sites in Germany.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 22 Nov 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 6 sites in Germany. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this combined phase mean?
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 23 Jun 2017). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Responders Rate at Week 6 (Pain While Moving) (time frame: Baseline and Week 6). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00447876, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 22 Nov 2019.