Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37343145›Full record

Trial reportThe oncologist2023

A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial of the Anti-Nerve Growth Factor Antibody Tanezumab in Subjects With Cancer Pain Due to Bone Metastasis.

Marie Fallon, Maciej Sopata, Erika Dragon, Mark T Brown, Lars Viktrup, Christine R West, Weihang Bao, Alex Agyemang

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialClinical Trial, Phase III
In one paragraph

Trial report in The oncologist, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02609828 (A PHASE 3 RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, MULTICENTER STUDY OF THE ANALGESIC EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF THE SUBCUTANEOUS ADMINISTRATION OF TANEZUMAB), which is not on this map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02609828 phase3completednot on this map

A phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study of the analgesic efficacy and safety of the subcutaneous administration of tanezumab (pf-04383119) in subjects with cancer pain predominantly due to bone metastasis receiving background opioid therapy

TypeinterventionalSponsorPfizerRan2015 to 2021Enrolled156ConditionsBone Metastasis, Cancer PainArmsTanezumab
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Cancer pain.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Not Just Neurons: Pain Is Orchestrated in Partnership with Many Non-neuronal Cells.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Marie FallonEdinburgh Cancer Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9214-0091
Maciej SopataDepartment of Palliative Medicine, Hospice Palium, University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland.
Erika DragonPfizer Ltd, Budapest, Hungary.
Mark T BrownPfizer Inc., Groton, CT, USA.
Lars ViktrupEli Lilly & Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Christine R WestPfizer Inc., Groton, CT, USA.
Weihang BaoPfizer Inc., Edison, NJ, USA.
Alex AgyemangPfizer Ltd, Surrey, UK.

Funding

Eli LillyPfizer
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study assessed the efficacy and safety of tanezumab in subjects with cancer pain predominantly due to bone metastasis receiving background opioid therapy.

methodsSubjects were randomized (stratified by (1) tumor aggressiveness and (2) presence/absence of concomitant anticancer treatment) to placebo or tanezumab 20 mg. Treatment was administered by subcutaneous injection every 8 weeks for 24 weeks (3 doses) followed by a 24-week safety follow-up period. The primary outcome was change in daily average pain in the index bone metastasis cancer pain site (from 0 = no pain to 10 = worst possible pain) from baseline to week 8.

resultsLS mean (SE) change in pain at week 8 was -1.25 (0.35) for placebo (n = 73) and -2.03 (0.35) for tanezumab 20 mg (n = 72). LS mean (SE) [95% CI] difference from placebo was -0.78 (0.37) [-1.52, -0.04]; P = .0381 with α = 0.0478. The number of subjects with a treatment-emergent adverse event during the treatment period was 50 (68.5%) for placebo and 53 (73.6%) for tanezumab 20 mg. The number of subjects with a prespecified joint safety event was 0 for placebo and 2 (2.8%) for tanezumab 20 mg (pathologic fracture; n = 2).

conclusionTanezumab 20 mg met the primary efficacy endpoint at week 8. Conclusions on longer-term efficacy are limited since the study was not designed to evaluate the durability of the effect beyond 8 weeks. Safety findings were consistent with adverse events expected in subjects with cancer pain due to bone metastasis and the known safety profile of tanezumab. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02609828.

Indexed as

Bone NeoplasmsCancer PainAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedDouble-Blind MethodHumansPainTreatment OutcomeAntibodies, Monoclonal, Humanizedtanezumabcancer painnerve growth factorrandomized controlled trialtanezumab

Identifiers

PMID37343145
PMCPMC10712717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.