Evaluation of Safety and Activity of Celaderm in Healing Venous Leg Ulcers
An Initial Evaluation Of The Safety And Activity Of Celaderm(TM) Treatment Regimens In Healing Venous Leg Ulcers
1 other identifier
interventional
40
1 country
9
Brief Summary
This pilot study was designed to test the safety of Celaderm(TM) in treating venous leg ulcers and to give preliminary information about the efficacy of two different Celaderm(TM) dosing regimens.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for phase_1
Started Jan 2007
9 active sites
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
November 10, 2006
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
November 14, 2006
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
January 31, 2007
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
April 30, 2008
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
April 30, 2008
CompletedResults Posted
Study results publicly available
May 16, 2013
CompletedJune 11, 2021
June 1, 2021
1.2 years
November 10, 2006
March 18, 2013
June 4, 2021
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Primary Efficacy: Cumulative Proportion of Patients Completely Healed by the End of the Treatment Period, as Judged by the Investigator's Direct Observation.
The primary efficacy observation was the proportion of wounds that achieved complete wound closure after 12 weeks of active treatment (i.e. of of Week 15 including screening/wash-in phase.)
12 weeks
Secondary Outcomes (3)
Secondary Efficacy: Proportion of Patients Achieving 90% Re-epithelialization After 12 Weeks of Active Treatment.
12 Weeks
Secondary Efficacy: Durability of Wound Closure Through 12 Weeks After the End of the Treatment Period.
Variable - minimum of 12 weeks of follow-up.
Secondary Efficacy: Cumulative Proportion of Patients Completely Healed by the End of the Follow-up Period (24 Weeks).
24 weeks
Study Arms (3)
Control
ACTIVE COMPARATORMulti-layer compression bandaging (Profore)
Celaderm, Bi-Weekly
EXPERIMENTALCeladerm, bi-weekly applications, up to a maximum of four applications
Celaderm, Weekly
EXPERIMENTALCeladerm, applied weekly, up to a maximum of four applications
Interventions
Four biweekly applications of Celaderm plus compression therapy
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- venous ulcer \> 1 month and \< 12 months in duration; 2 to 20 sq cm in surface area; not infected
- confirmatory venous ultrasound showing prior DVT and concurrent venous reflux
- ankle-brachial index 0.80 or greater
You may not qualify if:
- cutaneous malignancy
- recent treatment with corticosteroids or chemotherapeutic agents
- wound exposed bone, tendon or neurovascular structure
- wound infected and requiring antibiotics
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Shirelead
Study Sites (9)
Dr. Robert Snyder
Tamarac, Florida, 33321, United States
National Center for Limb Preservation
Niles, Illinois, 60714, United States
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Division of Podiatry
Boston, Massachusetts, 02215, United States
State University of New York Stony Brook
Stony Brook, New York, 11794, United States
Center for Curative & Palliative Wound Care, Calvary Hospital
The Bronx, New York, 10461, United States
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Division of Vascular Surgery
Durham, North Carolina, 27599, United States
Blair Medical Associates, Inc., Station Medical Center, Associates Wound Clinic
Altoona, Pennsylvania, 16602, United States
Peripheral Vascular Associates, P.A.
San Antonio, Texas, 78205, United States
Dixie Regional Medical Center, Wound Care
St. George, Utah, 84770, United States
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Limitations and Caveats
Limitations of the trial include the potential for outcome assessment bias as the study was not blinded.
Results Point of Contact
- Title
- Study Director
- Organization
- Shire
Study Officials
- STUDY DIRECTOR
Study Director
Takeda
Publication Agreements
- PI is Sponsor Employee
- No
- Restrictive Agreement
- No
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- phase 1
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- INDUSTRY
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
November 10, 2006
First Posted
November 14, 2006
Study Start
January 31, 2007
Primary Completion
April 30, 2008
Study Completion
April 30, 2008
Last Updated
June 11, 2021
Results First Posted
May 16, 2013
Record last verified: 2021-06