Osteoarthritis: a progressive disease with changing phenotypes

Clinical settings in knee osteoarthritis: Pathophysiology guides treatment

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common chronic joint disorder and its prevalence increases rapidly during midlife. Complex interactions of genetic alterations, sex hormone deficit, and aging with mechanical factors and systemic inflammation-associated metabolic syndrome lead to joint damage. Thus, the expression of a clinical phenotype in the early stages of OA relies on the main underlying pathway and predominant joint tissue involved at a given time. Moreover, OA often coexists with other morbidities in the same patient, which in turn condition the OA process. In this scenario, an appropriate identification of clinical phenotypes, especially in the early stages of the disease, may optimize the design of individualized treatments in OA. An ESCEO-EUGMS (European Union Geriatric Medicine Society) working group has recently suggested possible patient profiles in OA. Hereby, we propose the existence of 4 clinical phenotypes - biomechanical, osteoporotic, metabolic and inflammatory - whose characterization would help to properly stratify patients with OA in clinical trials or studies. Further research in this field is warranted.

Intra-articular therapies for osteoarthritis

INTRODUCTION

Conventional medical therapies for osteoarthritis are mainly palliative in nature, aiming to control pain and symptoms. Traditional intra-articular therapies are not recommended in guidelines as first line therapy, but are potential alternatives, when conventional therapies have failed.

AREAS COVERED

Current and future intra-articular drug therapies for osteoarthritis are highlighted, including corticosteroids, hyaluronate, and more controversial treatments marketed commercially, namely platelet rich plasma and mesenchymal cell therapy. Intraarticular disease modifying osteoarthritis drugs are the future of osteoarthritis treatments, aiming at structural modification and altering the disease progression. Interleukin-1β inhibitor, bone morphogenic protein-7, fibroblast growth factor 18, bradykinin B2 receptor antagonist, human serum albumin, and gene therapy are discussed in this review. The evolution of drug development in osteoarthritis is limited by the ability to demonstrate effect. High quality trials are required to justify the use of existing intra-articular therapies and to advocate for newer, promising therapies.

EXPERT OPINION

Challenges in osteoarthritis therapy research are fundamentally related to the complexity of the pathological mechanisms of osteoarthritis. Novel drugs offer hope in a disease with limited medical therapy options. Whether these future intra-articular therapies will provide clinically meaningful benefits, remains unknown.

Differences Regarding Branded HA in Italy, Part 2: Data from Clinical Studies on Knee, Hip, Shoulder, Ankle, Temporomandibular Joint, Vertebral Facets, and Carpometacarpal Joint

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the current study is to collect scientific data on all branded hyaluronic acid (HA) products in Italy that are in use for intra-articular (IA) injection in osteoarthritis (OA) compared with that reported in the leaflet.

METHODS

An extensive literature research was performed for all articles reporting data on the IA use of HA in OA. Selected studies were taken into consideration only if they are related to products based on HAs that are currently marketed in Italy with the specific joint indication for IA use in patients affected by OA.

RESULTS

Sixty-two HA products are marketed in Italy: 30 products are indicated for the knee but only 8 were proved with some efficacy; 9 products were effective for the hip but only 6 had hip indication; 7 products proved to be effective for the shoulder but only 3 had the indication; 5 products proved effective for the ankle but only one had the indication; 6 products were effective for the temporomandibular joint but only 2 had the indication; only 2 proved effective for vertebral facet joints but only 1 had the indication; and 5 products proved effective for the carpometacarpal joint but only 2 had the indication.

CONCLUSIONS

There are only a few products with some evidences, while the majority of products remain without proof. Clinicians and regulators should request postmarketing studies from pharmaceuticals to corroborate with that reported in the leaflet and to gather more data, allowing the clinicians to choose the adequate product for the patient.

Can we identify patients with high risk of osteoarthritis progression who will respond to treatment? A focus on epidemiology and phenotype of osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis is a syndrome affecting a variety of patient profiles. A European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis and the European Union Geriatric Medicine Society working meeting explored the possibility of identifying different patient profiles in osteoarthritis. The risk factors for the development of osteoarthritis include systemic factors (e.g., age, sex, obesity, genetics, race, and bone density) and local biomechanical factors (e.g., obesity, sport, joint injury, and muscle weakness); most also predict disease progression, particularly joint injury, malalignment, and synovitis/effusion. The characterization of patient profiles should help to better orientate research, facilitate trial design, and define which patients are the most likely to benefit from treatment. There are a number of profile candidates. Generalized, polyarticular osteoarthritis and local, monoarticular osteoarthritis appear to be two different profiles; the former is a feature of osteoarthritis co-morbid with inflammation or the metabolic syndrome, while the latter is more typical of post-trauma osteoarthritis, especially in cases with severe malalignment. Other biomechanical factors may also define profiles, such as joint malalignment, loss of meniscal function, and ligament injury. Early- and late-stage osteoarthritis appear as separate profiles, notably in terms of treatment response. Finally, there is evidence that there are two separate profiles related to lesions in the subchondral bone, which may determine benefit from bone-active treatments. Decisions on appropriate therapy should be made considering clinical presentation, underlying pathophysiology, and stage of disease. Identification of patient profiles may lead to more personalized healthcare, with more targeted treatment for osteoarthritis.

Call for standardized definitions of osteoarthritis and risk stratification for clinical trials and clinical use

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a heterogeneous disorder. The goals of this review are (1) To stimulate use of standardized nomenclature for OA that could serve as building blocks for describing OA and defining OA phenotypes, in short to provide unifying disease concepts for a heterogeneous disorder; and (2) To stimulate establishment of ROAD (Risk of OA Development) and ROAP (Risk of OA Progression) tools analogous to the FRAX™ instrument for predicting risk of fracture in osteoporosis; and (3) To stimulate formulation of tools for identifying disease in its early preradiographic and/or molecular stages - REDI (Reliable Early Disease Identification). Consensus around more sensitive and specific diagnostic criteria for OA could spur development of disease modifying therapies for this entity that has proved so recalcitrant to date. We fully acknowledge that as we move forward, we expect to develop more sophisticated definitions, terminology and tools.

Gait Characteristics, Symptoms, and Function in Persons With Hip Osteoarthritis: A Longitudinal Study With 6 to 7 Years of Follow-up

STUDY DESIGN

Longitudinal laboratory study.

OBJECTIVES

(1) To compare gait characteristics between individuals with early-stage hip osteoarthritis who underwent total hip replacement (THR) and those who did not undergo THR, and (2) to evaluate whether gait characteristics, function, and symptoms declined among individuals who did not undergo THR during a 6- to 7-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND

The natural history of symptoms, function, and gait changes secondary to hip osteoarthritis, including potential differences at an early stage of disease, is unknown.

METHODS

Forty-three individuals (mean age, 58.9 years) with radiographic and symptomatic hip osteoarthritis participated. Outcome measures included 3-D gait analysis; self-reported pain, stiffness, and function; hip range of motion; and the six-minute walk test. Baseline comparisons between individuals who later underwent THR and those who did not undergo THR were made using independent t tests or Mann-Whitney U tests. Comparisons of baseline measures and 6- to 7-year follow-up for the nonoperated individuals were conducted with paired-samples t tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests (P<.05).

RESULTS

Twelve (27.9%) of the 43 individuals initially evaluated had not undergone THR at the 6- to 7-year follow-up. At baseline, these individuals had larger sagittal plane hip and knee joint excursions, larger joint space width, lower body mass index, and superior self-reported function compared with the individuals who later underwent THR. At the 6- to 7-year follow-up, the individuals who did not undergo THR exhibited no decline in gait characteristics, minimum joint space, or overall function. Furthermore, their self-reported pain had significantly decreased (P = .024).

CONCLUSION

Individuals who did not undergo THR during a 6- to 7-year follow-up period did not exhibit a decline in gait, function, or symptoms compared to those who underwent THR. These findings are suggestive of a phenotype of hip osteoarthritis with a very slow disease progression, particularly in regard to pain.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognosis, level 1b.

Classification of osteoarthritis phenotypes by metabolomics analysis

OBJECTIVES

To identify metabolic markers that can classify patients with osteoarthritis (OA) into subgroups.

DESIGN

A case-only study design was utilised.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients were recruited from those who underwent total knee or hip replacement surgery due to primary OA between November 2011 and December 2013 in St. Clare's Mercy Hospital and Health Science Centre General Hospital in St. John's, capital of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), Canada. 38 men and 42 women were included in the study. The mean age was 65.2±8.7 years.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Synovial fluid samples were collected at the time of their joint surgeries. Metabolic profiling was performed on the synovial fluid samples by the targeted metabolomics approach, and various analytic methods were utilised to identify metabolic markers for classifying subgroups of patients with OA. Potential confounders such as age, sex, body mass index (BMI) and comorbidities were considered in the analysis.

RESULTS

Two distinct patient groups, A and B, were clearly identified in the 80 patients with OA. Patients in group A had a significantly higher concentration on 37 of 39 acylcarnitines, but the free carnitine was significantly lower in their synovial fluids than in those of patients in group B. The latter group was further subdivided into two subgroups, that is, B1 and B2. The corresponding metabolites that contributed to the grouping were 86 metabolites including 75 glycerophospholipids (6 lysophosphatidylcholines, 69 phosphatidylcholines), 9 sphingolipids, 1 biogenic amine and 1 acylcarnitine. The grouping was not associated with any known confounders including age, sex, BMI and comorbidities. The possible biological processes involved in these clusters are carnitine, lipid and collagen metabolism, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrated that OA consists of metabolically distinct subgroups. Identification of these distinct subgroups will help to unravel the pathogenesis and develop targeted therapies for OA.