PT009 vs PT005 treatment of Moderate to Very Severe COPD (SOPHOS)

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    A Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel Group, Multi-Center Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of PT009 compared to PT005 on COPD Exacerbations over a 52-Week Treatment Period in Subjects With Moderate to Very Severe COPD

  • IRAS ID

    212039

  • Contact name

    Paul Dorinsky

  • Sponsor organisation

    Pearl Therapeutics, Inc. (Pearl)

  • Eudract number

    2016-000155-28

  • Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier

    NCT02727660

  • Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier

    122166, IND number

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    2 years, 3 months, 2 days

  • Research summary

    Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a common problem that often results in sudden episodes of worsening symptoms beyond normal day-to-day variations which are called exacerbations, which leads to a change in medication. Metered dose inhalers (MDIs) are the most common type of device to deliver inhaled drugs to patients with COPD. Yet, many COPD treatments, particularly dual and triple combinations of well-known inhaled medicines, have proven to be difficult to develop in an MDI for many reasons. The Sponsor, Pearl Therapeutics Inc., has overcome these challenges and has developed a new MDI formulation for the treatment of COPD.

    The purpose of the study is to assess the effects of PT009 (Budesonide + Formoterol Fumarate MDI combination) versus PT005 (Formoterol Fumarate MDI alone) on COPD exacerbation rate and lung function in symptomatic patients with moderate to very severe COPD.

    The study will examine COPD patients currently being treated with at least one or more approved COPD standard of care inhaled therapy and within the previous 12 months are classified as having either i) severe COPD with a documented history of ≥1 moderate or severe COPD exacerbation or ii) moderate COPD with a documented history of ≥ 2 moderate exacerbations or ≥1 severe COPD exacerbation.

  • REC name

    Yorkshire & The Humber - Sheffield Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    16/YH/0506

  • Date of REC Opinion

    25 Jan 2017

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion