A randomized, double-blind, crossover clinical trial of diclofenac plus misoprostol versus acetaminophen in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee

Model-Based Assessment of the Liver Safety Profile of Acetaminophen to Support its Combination Use with Topical Diclofenac in Mild-to-Moderate Osteoarthritis Pain

INTRODUCTION

The use of combination therapy of oral acetaminophen and topical diclofenac, having complementary mechanisms of action, is an attractive strategy to enhance the analgesic response in osteoarthritis (OA) pain. While topical diclofenac is considered as well tolerated due to its low systemic exposure, concerns of liver toxicity with acetaminophen at standard analgesic doses remain. Thus, this study aimed to assess the liver safety profile of acetaminophen, particularly in OA management, using a model-based meta-analysis (MBMA).

METHODS

A literature review was conducted using the MEDLINE database to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting liver toxicity on acetaminophen use. An MBMA was implemented to assess the deviation from the upper limit of normal (ULN) of alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase, namely > 0-1 × ULN, > 1.5-2 × ULN, and > 3 × ULN representing mild, moderate, and severe risk of liver abnormality, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 15 RCTs were included in the MBMA, encompassing over 4800 subjects and exposure to acetaminophen ranging from 2 to 26 weeks. Of the 15 included studies, eight involved patients with OA pain, four involved healthy subjects and three were in patients with conditions such as asthma, glaucoma, chronic pain, and cardiovascular disease. Acetaminophen 1500-4000 mg/day was found to exhibit 23% (95% confidence interval (CI): 17.74-29.20), 1.35% (95% CI: 0.17-2.51) and 0.01% (95% CI: 0.00-0.32) increased risk for mild, moderate, and severe liver injury, respectively, versus placebo. Moreover, at therapeutic doses, no correlation was identified between acetaminophen intake and liver abnormality risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, our analysis shows that short-term (~ 8-16 weeks) acetaminophen use at therapeutically recommended doses is associated with a low risk of clinically relevant changes in liver enzymes. Given the good tolerability of topical diclofenac, the findings support the safety of the combination of acetaminophen and topical diclofenac, at least over the short term, as treatment for mild-to-moderate OA pain.

Potential of rosmarinic acid from Orthosiphon aristatus extract for inflammatory induced diseases and its mechanisms of action

Orthosiphon aristatus has been traditionally used as a medicinal herb for various illnesses in Southeast Asia and Europe. The most dominant bioactive compound of the herb is rosmarinic acid (RosA) which has been demonstrated for its remarkable anti-inflammatory properties. This review describes the recent progress of studies on multi-target molecular pathways of RosA in relation to targeted inflammatory-associated diseases. An inclusive literature search was conducted using electronic databases such as Google Scholar, Scopus, Springer Link, PubMed, Medline, Wiley and Science Direct for studies reporting on the anti-inflammatory actions of RosA from 2008 until 2023. The keywords of the search were RosA and anti-inflammatory in relation to hepatoprotective, chondroprotective, cardioprotective, neuroprotective and toxicity. Only publications that are written in English are included in this review. The inhibition and deactivation of pro-inflammatory biomolecules by RosA were explained based on the initial inflammation stimuli and their location in the body. The activation of Nrf2/HO-1 expression to inhibit NF-κB pathway is the key mechanism for hepatoprotection. Besides NF-κB inhibition, RosA activates PPARγ to alleviate ischemia/reperfusion (I/R)-induced myocardial injury for cardioprotection. The regulation of MAPK and T-cell activation is important for chondroprotection, whereas the anti-oxidant property of RosA is the main contributor of neuroprotection. Even though less studies on the anti-inflammation of RosA extracts from O. aristatus, but the effective pharmacological properties of RosA has promoted it as a natural potent lead for further investigation.

Pilot Study of Low-Dose Naltrexone for the Treatment of Chronic Pain Due to Arthritis: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled, Crossover Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

Low-dose naltrexone (LDN) is commonly used to control pain and other symptoms, especially in patients with autoimmune diseases, but with limited evidence. This study tests the efficacy of LDN in reducing chronic pain in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and inflammatory arthritis (IA), where existing approaches often fail to adequately control pain.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover clinical trial, each patient received 4.5 mg LDN for 8 weeks and placebo for 8 weeks. Outcome measures were patient reported, using validated questionnaires. The primary outcome was differences in pain interference during the LDN and placebo periods, using the Brief Pain Inventory (scale, 0-70). Secondary outcomes included changes in mean pain severity, fatigue, depression, and multiple domains of health-related quality of life. The painDETECT questionnaire classified pain as nociceptive, neuropathic, or mixed. Data were analyzed using mixed-effects models.

FINDINGS

Seventeen patients with OA and 6 with IA completed the pilot study. Most patients described their pain as nociceptive (n = 9) or mixed (n = 8) rather than neuropathic (n = 3). There was no difference in change in pain interference after treatment with LDN (mean [SD], -23 [19.4]) versus placebo (mean [SD], -22 [19.2]; P = 0.90). No significant differences were seen in pain severity, fatigue, depression, or health-related quality of life.

IMPLICATIONS

In this small pilot study, findings do not support LDN being efficacious in reducing nociceptive pain due to arthritis. Too few patients were enrolled to rule out modest benefit or to assess inflammatory or neuropathic pain.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov identifier: NCT03008590.

Paracetamol: A Review of Guideline Recommendations

Musculoskeletal pain conditions are age-related, leading contributors to chronic pain and pain-related disability, which are expected to rise with the rapid global population aging. Current medical treatments provide only partial relief. Furthermore, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids are effective in young and otherwise healthy individuals but are often contraindicated in elderly and frail patients. As a result of its favorable safety and tolerability record, paracetamol has long been the most common drug for treating pain. Strikingly, recent reports questioned its therapeutic value and safety. This review aims to present guideline recommendations. Paracetamol has been assessed in different conditions and demonstrated therapeutic efficacy on both acute and chronic pain. It is active as a single agent and is additive or synergistic with NSAIDs and opioids, improving their efficacy and safety. However, a lack of significant efficacy and hepatic toxicity have also been reported. Fast dissolving formulations of paracetamol provide superior and more extended pain relief that is similar to intravenous paracetamol. A dose reduction is recommended in patients with liver disease or malnourished. Genotyping may improve efficacy and safety. Within the current trend toward the minimization of opioid analgesia, it is consistently included in multimodal, non-opioid, or opioid-sparing therapies. Paracetamol is being recommended by guidelines as a first or second-line drug for acute pain and chronic pain, especially for patients with limited therapeutic options and for the elderly.

Efficacy and safety of thunder-fire moxibustion for patients with knee osteoarthritis: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a major public health issue because it causes pain and functional limitation in patients. Many studies have reported that moxibustion, a treatment in traditional Chinese medicine, is effective in treating KOA. The aim of this protocol is to develop a standard in advance for synthesize and assess the efficacy and safety of thunder-fire moxibustion for KOA from these randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

The 2 commentators will screen 7 databases (PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese VIP Information, Wanfang Database, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database) for randomized controlled trials that can be included from the time the database is built up until publication in December 2020. The original study that randomized control trials of thunder-fire moxibustion for patients with KOA will be selected and is not limited by country or language. In addition, researches in progress, the reference lists, and the citation lists of identified publications will be retrieved similarly. Study selection, data extraction, and assessment of the quality will be performed independently by 2 reviewers who have been trained before data extraction. A meta-analysis will be conduct if the quantity and quality of the original studies included are satisfactory; otherwise, a descriptive analysis will be conducted. Review Manager 5.4 software (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark) will be using for data synthesis and assessment the risk of bias according to Cochrane Handbook.

RESULT

This study will provide a comprehensive review of current evidence for the treatment of thunder-fire moxibustion on KOA.

CONCLUSION

The conclusion of this study will provide a judging basis that whether the treatment of KOA with thunder-fire moxibustion is effective.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

INPLASY2020100012.

Work-related outcomes in randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trials in osteoarthritis - are they adequately reported in journal publications? A systematic review

Background

Osteoarthritis (OA) has a high prevalence in Western societies and can affect an individual's life in a number of domains, including work. In our experience, treatment trials on OA, however, rarely report work-related outcomes. Here we conducted a systematic review to assess the reporting of work-related outcomes in randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trials in OA. Our systematic review also compared two search strategies for identifying eligible publications, one where work-related terms were included in the database search string (A) and one where this was not the case and work-related outcomes were identified by searches of full text Portable Document Formats (PDFs) (B). Search strategy A would conventionally be used and would only identify publications where work-related terms were mentioned in the title or abstract. Search strategy B presents the innovation of full text PDF searching and would identify publications were work-related terms were reported in the full text, regardless of whether they are mentioned in the title and abstract or not. We hypothesize that search strategy B identifies more relevant publications than search strategy A.

Methods

Electronic database searching was performed in Medline (Pubmed) from database inception to February 23, 2017 to identify peer-reviewed articles of randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled treatment trials in OA of the hand, hip, or knee, available as full-text PDFs. For search strategy A, search terms to identify work-related outcomes were included in the database search string, while search strategy B did not have these terms included in the database search string, but instead involved full text PDF searching. We included English language articles only and only those articles where searchable PDFs were available, to enable a comparison between search strategies A and B. Additionally, included studies also needed to report on pain intensity in relation to the work-related outcomes.

Results

Search strategy A yielded 50 hits combined for hand, hip or knee OA that mentioned some work-related concept in the title or abstract; 12 articles had to be excluded because they were not available as searchable PDFs. Screening of the remaining 38 articles resulted in only two articles that satisfied our inclusion criteria. Search strategy B yielded 986 hits, out of which 201 articles were excluded because searchable full text PDFs were not available. PDF full text searching and further screening resulted in 10 articles that were considered eligible for our review.

Conclusions

Work-related outcomes are rarely reported in journal publication on randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trials of hand, hip or knee OA. Searching full text PDFs yields more eligible articles than searching titles and abstracts only.

Somatosensation in OA: exploring the relationships of pain sensitization, vibratory perception and spontaneous pain

Background

Pain in osteoarthritis (OA) remains poorly understood. Different types of somatosensory alterations exist in OA including hyperesthesia and increased sensitivity to painful stimuli as well as those of decreased sensitivity to cutaneous stimuli including vibratory perception threshold. The relationship between these different somatosensory measures has not been previously evaluated in OA. In this observational study, we evaluated relationships between vibratory perception (VPT), pressure pain detection thresholds (PPT), allodynia and subjective pain in knee OA.

Methods

Forty-two persons with moderate to severe knee OA and 12 controls without OA were evaluated. VPT was measured using a biothesiometer. Allodynia was measured by application of a 60 g Von Frey monofilament repeatedly to predetermined sites. PPTs were measured using a pressure algometer.

Results

Increased vibratory acuity was associated with lower PPTs and presence of allodynia. Allodynia was more common in OA than controls (54.8% vs 16.6%, p = 0.024 in the ipsilateral knee, and 42.9% vs 0%, p = 0.005 in the contralateral knee). OA participants with allodynia had lower PPTs than those without allodynia. In those with OA, spontaneous knee pain was associated with lower PPTs and with allodynia.

Conclusion

This study confirms the presence of somatosensory alterations in OA. Sensory alterations (vibratory perception) were shown to be related to nociceptive alterations (sensitization) in OA, showing a general increased sensitivity to cutaneous mechanical stimulation. Understanding these relationships is an important step in delineating the complicated pathophysiology of pain processing in OA.

Lysophosphatidic acid provides a missing link between osteoarthritis and joint neuropathic pain

OBJECTIVE

Emerging evidence suggests that osteoarthritis (OA) has a neuropathic component; however, the identity of the molecules responsible for this peripheral neuropathy is unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the contribution of the bioactive lipid lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) to joint neuropathy and pain.

DESIGN

Male Lewis rats received an intra-articular injection of 50 μg of LPA into the knee and allowed to recover for up to 21 days. Saphenous nerve myelination was assessed by g-ratio calculation from electron micrographs and afferent nerve damage visualised by activation transcription factor-3 (ATF-3) expression. Nerve conduction velocity was measured electrophysiologically and joint pain was determined by hindlimb incapacitance. The effect of the LPA antagonist Ki-16425 was also evaluated. Experiments were repeated in the sodium monoiodoacetate (MIA) model of OA.

RESULTS

LPA caused joint nerve demyelination which resulted in a drop in nerve conduction velocity. Sensory neurones were ATF-3 positive and animals exhibited joint pain and knee joint damage. MIA-treated rats also showed signs of demyelination and joint neuropathy with concomitant pain. Nerve damage and pain could be ameliorated by Ki-16425 pre-treatment.

CONCLUSION

Intra-articular injection of LPA caused knee joint neuropathy, joint damage and pain. Pharmacological blockade of LPA receptors inhibited joint nerve damage and hindlimb incapacitance. Thus, LPA is a candidate molecule for the development of OA nerve damage and the origin of joint neuropathic pain.

Pain Management in Elderly Patients

In elderly patients, persistent pain negatively impacts quality of life. An interdisciplinary approach to pain management and emphasis on quality improvement will help to achieve better therapeutic outcomes. Managing pain in the geriatric population is challenging because of age-related changes in pain perception, cognition, pharmacokinetics, and drug effects. Improvement and maintenance of physical and emotional function is the goal. Pharmacotherapy should be initiated conservatively and titrated to effective doses with minimal adverse effects. Milder pain should be treated with non-opioid analgesics with a progression toward opioids and/or adjuvant medications as the pain intensifies. Acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, and adjuvant medications represent most of the analgesic agents used in pain management. Knowing the underlying mechanism of pain will help guide pharmacologic therapy. The patient should be monitored initially, with every dose change, and periodically to assess efficacy and severity of adverse effects.

The role of inflammation-related genes in osteoarthritis

In this review article we examine the role of inflammation-related genes in osteoarthritis (OA) from the perspective of genetics, epigenetics and gene expression. There have been great strides in such genomic analyses of OA in recent years thanks to the study of adequately powered patient cohorts, the detailed analysis of candidate genes, and the application of genome-wide approaches. These have led to some unexpected and therefore exciting discoveries, implicating pathways that would not necessarily have been predicted to have a role in this common arthritis. Inflammatory-related genes sit firmly in the candidate camp based on prior observations that the OA disease process can have an inflammatory component. What is clear from the genetic studies published to date is that there is no compelling evidence that DNA variation in inflammatory genes is an OA risk factor. This conclusion may of course change as ever more powerful association studies are conducted. There is, however, compelling evidence that epigenetic effects involving inflammatory genes are a component of OA and that alteration in the expression of these genes is also highly relevant to the disease process. We may in fact be close to demonstrating, at the genomic level, a clear separation of OA patients into those in whom inflammation is a key driver of the disease and those in whom it is not. This has obvious implications for the design of trials of novel OA interventions and may also guide the intelligent re-purposing of anti-inflammatory therapies.

Effectiveness and Implications of Alternative Placebo Treatments: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Osteoarthritis Trials

BACKGROUND

Placebo controls are essential in evaluating the effectiveness of medical treatments. Although it is unclear whether different placebo interventions for osteoarthritis vary in efficacy, systematic differences would substantially affect interpretation of the results of placebo-controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of alternative placebo types on pain outcomes in knee osteoarthritis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Database from inception through 1 June 2015 and unpublished data.

STUDY SELECTION

149 randomized trials of adults with knee osteoarthritis that reported pain outcomes and compared widely used pharmaceuticals against oral, intra-articular, topical, and oral plus topical placebos.

DATA EXTRACTION

Study data were independently double-extracted; study quality was assessed by using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Placebo effects that were evaluated by using a network meta-analysis with 4 separate placebo nodes (differential model) showed that intra-articular placebo (effect size, 0.29 [95% credible interval, 0.09 to 0.49]) and topical placebo (effect size, 0.20 [credible interval, 0.02 to 0.38]) had significantly greater effect sizes than did oral placebo. This differential model showed marked differences in the relative efficacies and hierarchy of the active treatments compared with a network model that considered all placebos equivalent. In the model accounting for differential effects, intra-articular and topical therapies were superior to oral treatments in reducing pain. When these differential effects were ignored, oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were superior.

LIMITATIONS

Few studies compared different placebos directly. The study could not decisively conclude whether disease severity and co-interventions systematically differed between trials evaluating different placebos.

CONCLUSION

All placebos are not equal, and some can trigger clinically relevant responses. Differential placebo effects can substantially alter estimates of the relative efficacies of active treatments, an important consideration for the design of clinical trials and interpretation of their results.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Managing osteoarthritis

Management of osteoarthritis should be based on a combination of non-drug and drug treatments targeted towards prevention, modifying risk and disease progression. Obesity is the most important modifiable risk factor, so losing weight in addition to land- and water-based exercise and strength training is important. While paracetamol can be tried, guidelines recommend non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs as first-line treatment for osteoarthritis. If there are concerns about the adverse effects of oral treatment, particularly in older patients or those with comorbidities, topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs can be used. Glucosamine does not appear to be any better than placebo for pain. Its effect on the structural progression of disease when taken alone or in combination with chondroitin is uncertain. Fish oil has not been found to reduce the structural progression of knee arthritis. Surgical interventions should be avoided in the first instance, with arthroscopic procedures not showing benefit over sham procedures or optimised physical and medical therapy. Joint replacement surgery should be considered for severe osteoarthritis.

Anti-arthritic agents: progress and potential

Osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis are the two most common types of arthritis. Cartilage breakdown is a key feature of both diseases which contributes to the pain and joint deformity experienced by patients. Therefore, anti-arthritis drugs are of great importance. The aim of this review is to present recent progress in studies of various agents against osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. The structures and activities of anti-arthritic agents, which used in medical practice or are in development, are presented and discussed. The effects and mechanisms of action of opioids, glucocorticoids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, natural products derived from plants, nutraceuticals, and a number of new and perspective agents are considered. Various perspective targets for the treatment of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis are also discussed. Trials of good quality are needed to draw solid conclusions regarding efficacy of many of the studied agents. Unfortunately, to date, there is no pharmacologic agent proven to prevent the progression of both diseases, and there is an urgent need for further development of better anti-arthritic agents.

High-rosmarinic acid spearmint tea in the management of knee osteoarthritis symptoms

Individuals with medically diagnosed knee osteoarthritis (OA) participated in a randomized, double-blind study to investigate the effects of a high-rosmarinic acid (rosA) spearmint tea. Sixty-two participants were randomized by sex and screening pain score to consume tea brewed from a high-rosA spearmint variety or a commercially available spearmint twice daily for 16 weeks. Pain, quality of life (QoL), and physical function at baseline and week 16 were assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Short-Form 36-item Health Survey (SF-36), 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and stair climb test (SCT). Data from 46 participants (mean age=60.7; BMI=32.9 kg/m(2)) were analyzed. Pain score significantly decreased from week 0 to 16 for the high-rosA group but not for the control group and scores for stiffness and physical disability significantly decreased from week 0 to 16 for both groups. Increased QoL score on the bodily pain index in the SF-36 was observed at week 16 within the high-rosA group only, although no significant differences were observed between the groups. A nonsignificant improvement was observed in the 6MWT at week 16 in the high-rosA group only. There were no changes in the SCT for either group. Therefore, 16-week daily consumption of the high-rosA and commercial spearmint teas significantly improved stiffness and physical disability scores in adults with knee OA, but only the high-rosA tea significantly decreased pain. Consumption of high-rosA tea warrants further consideration as a potential complementary therapy to reduce pain in OA.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01380015.

Thai massage, and Thai herbal compress versus oral ibuprofen in symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized controlled trial

The aim of this study was to verify the clinical responses to Thai massage (TM) and Thai herbal compression (THC) for treating osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee in comparison to oral ibuprofen. This study was a randomized, evaluator-blind, controlled trial. Sixty patients with OA of the knee were randomly assigned to receive either a one-hour session of TM or THC (three times weekly) or oral ibuprofen (three times daily). The duration of treatment was three weeks. The clinical assessments included visual analog scale assessing pain and stiffness, Lequesne's functional index, time for climbing up ten steps, and physician's and patient's overall opinions on improvement. In a within-group comparison, each treatment modality caused a significant improvement of all variables determined for outcome assessments. In an among group comparison, all modalities provided nearly comparable clinical efficacy after a three-week symptomatic treatment of OA of the knee, in which a trend toward greatest improvement was likely to be found in THC group. In conclusion, TM and THC generally provided comparable clinical efficacy to oral ibuprofen after three weeks of treatment and could be considered as complementary and alternative treatments for OA of the knee.

A randomized, placebo-controlled trial to determine the course of aminotransferase elevation during prolonged acetaminophen administration

Background

Acetaminophen administration for more than 4 days causes aminotransferase elevation in some subjects. The objective of this randomized, placebo-controlled trial is to describe the course of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevation in subjects administered 4 g/day of acetaminophen for at least 16 days.

Methods

A randomized, placebo controlled trial of acetaminophen (4 g/day) vs placebo. Subjects were healthy volunteers with normal liver enzymes. The primary outcome was the course of ALT during acetaminophen administration. All subjects were treated for a minimum of 16 days. Subjects with ALT elevation at day 16 were continued on treatment until these elevations resolved up to a maximum of 40 days. Subjects were also evaluated for elevation of INR or serum bilirubin as evidence of hepatic dysfunction.

Results

157/205 (77%) completed acetaminophen subjects had no ALT elevation or transient elevations that resolved by day 16. Of the 48 subjects who had ALT elevations at study day 16, 47 continued on acetaminophen and had resolution by study day 40. One acetaminophen subject did not have resolution by study day 40, and the course of aminotransferase elevation suggests an alternative cause. One placebo subject had an ALT elevation at day 16 that resolved by day 22. The highest observed ALT among all acetaminophen subjects was 191 IU/L. The mean ALT at day 16 was 4.4 IU/L higher for the acetaminophen than for the placebo group. No subject developed liver dysfunction.

Conclusions

A minority of subjects treated with 4 g/day of acetaminophen for 16 days will have low-grade aminotransferase elevations that are not accompanied by liver dysfunction and resolve if administration is continued.

Trials registration

Clintrials.gov NCT00743093 registered August 26, 2008

Cost-effectiveness analyses of osteoarthritis oral therapies: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) have been performed for oral non-disease-altering osteoarthritis (OA) treatments for well over a decade. During that period the methods for performing these analyses have evolved as pharmacoeconomic methods have advanced, new treatments have been introduced, and the knowledge of associated adverse events (AEs) has improved.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review was to trace the development of CEAs for oral non-disease-altering treatments in OA.

METHODS

A systematic search for CEAs of OA oral treatments was performed of the English-language medical literature using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE In-Process, EconLit, and Cochrane. Key requirements for inclusion were that the population described patients with OA or arthritis and that the analysis reported at least one incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Each identified publication was assessed for inclusion. Thirteen characteristics and all AEs appearing in each included CEA were extracted and organized. Reference lists from these CEAs were also searched. A chronology of key CEAs in the field was compiled, noting the characteristics that advanced the state of the art in modeling oral OA treatments.

RESULTS

Thirty publications of 28 CEAs were identified and evaluated. Developments in CEAs included an expanded set of comparators that broadened from non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) only to NSAIDs plus gastroprotective agents, cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, and opioids. In turn, AEs expanded from gastrointestinal (GI) events to also include cardiovascular (CV) and neurological events. Efficacy, which initially was presumed to be equivalent for all treatments, evolved to treatment-specific efficacies. Decision-tree analyses were generally replaced by Markov models or, occasionally, stochastic or discrete event simulation. Finally, outcomes have progressed from GI-centric measures to also include quality-adjusted life-years.

CONCLUSION

Methods used by CEAs of oral non-disease-altering OA treatments have evolved in response to changing treatments with different safety profiles and efficacies as well as technical advances in the application of decision science to health care.

MDHAQ/RAPID3 to recognize improvement over 2 months in usual care of patients with osteoarthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, spondyloarthropathy, and gout, as well as rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To analyze whether MDHAQ (Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire) scores for physical function (FN), pain, Patient Global Estimate (PATGL), and RAPID3 (Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data, a composite of these 3 measures) document improvement in patients with osteoarthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, spondyloarthropathy, and gout, similarly to rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

In a solo rheumatology practice, every patient completes an MDHAQ/RAPID3 and is assigned a Physician Global Estimate (DOCGL) at every visit. Mean and median FN (0-10 scale), pain (0-10), PATGL (0-10), RAPID3 (0-30), and DOCGL (0-10) were computed at first visit and 2 months later in 141 new patients with 5 diagnoses. Proportions with RAPID3 high (>12), moderate (6.1-12), and low (3.1-6) severity and remission (≤3) were computed. Differences between baseline and 2-month follow-up for each diagnosis were analyzed using paired t tests. Mean changes over 2 months across 5 diagnoses were compared using analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Mean baseline scores for all measures were in narrow ranges for all 5 diagnoses: FN 1.5 to 2.5, pain 4.2 to 5.9, PATGL 4.3 to 5.6, RAPID3 10.1 to 13.7, and DOCGL 2.4 to 4.0. Improvement for FN was 9.4% to 26.8% in all diagnoses but osteoarthritis, for pain 20.2% to 35.3% in all diagnoses, PATGL 11.3% to 30.4%, RAPID3 16.8% to 27.5%, and for DOCGL 23.8% to 36.4%, similar in 5 diagnostic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

MDHAQ, RAPID3, and DOCGL document similar baseline and improvement scores in patients with 5 diagnoses. These quantitative data may supplement traditional narrative, "gestalt" descriptions in usual care of patients with any rheumatic disease.

Undenatured type II collagen (UC-II®) for joint support: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in healthy volunteers

BACKGROUND

UC-II contains a patented form of undenatured type II collagen derived from chicken sternum. Previous preclinical and clinical studies support the safety and efficacy of UC-II in modulating joint discomfort in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of UC-II in moderating joint function and joint pain due to strenuous exercise in healthy subjects.

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted in healthy subjects who had no prior history of arthritic disease or joint pain at rest but experienced joint discomfort with physical activity. Fifty-five subjects who reported knee pain after participating in a standardized stepmill performance test were randomized to receive placebo (n = 28) or the UC-II (40 mg daily, n = 27) product for 120 days. Joint function was assessed by changes in degree of knee flexion and knee extension as well as measuring the time to experiencing and recovering from joint pain following strenuous stepmill exertion.

RESULTS

After 120 days of supplementation, subjects in the UC-II group exhibited a statistically significant improvement in average knee extension compared to placebo (81.0 ± 1.3º vs 74.0 ± 2.2º; p = 0.011) and to baseline (81.0 ± 1.3º vs 73.2 ± 1.9º; p = 0.002). The UC-II cohort also demonstrated a statistically significant change in average knee extension at day 90 (78.8 ± 1.9º vs 73.2 ± 1.9º; p = 0.045) versus baseline. No significant change in knee extension was observed in the placebo group at any time. It was also noted that the UC-II group exercised longer before experiencing any initial joint discomfort at day 120 (2.8 ± 0.5 min, p = 0.019), compared to baseline (1.4 ± 0.2 min). By contrast, no significant changes were seen in the placebo group. No product related adverse events were observed during the study. At study conclusion, five individuals in the UC-II cohort reported no pain during or after the stepmill protocol (p = 0.031, within visit) as compared to one subject in the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily supplementation with 40 mg of UC-II was well tolerated and led to improved knee joint extension in healthy subjects. UC-II also demonstrated the potential to lengthen the period of pain free strenuous exertion and alleviate the joint pain that occasionally arises from such activities.

Clinical evaluation of a formulation containing Curcuma longa and Boswellia serrata extracts in the management of knee osteoarthritis

A formulation containing Curcuma longa and Boswellia serrata extracts (CB formulation) was evaluated for safety and efficacy in osteoarthritic patients and directly compared with the selective COX-2 inhibitor, celecoxib. In total, 54 subjects were screened, 30 subjects were enrolled and 28 completed the study. The treatment was well tolerated and did not produce any adverse effect in patients, as judged by the vital signs, hemogram, liver and renal function tests. The CB formulation at 500 mg administered twice a day, was more successful than administering celecoxib 100 mg twice a day for symptom scoring and clinical examination. The formulation was found to be safe and no dose-related toxicity was found.

Use of NSAIDs in treating patients with arthritis

Patients with rheumatic diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis, almost universally describe pain and stiffness as important contributors to reduced health-related quality of life. Of the treatment options available, NSAIDs are the most widely used agents for symptomatic treatment. NSAIDs are effective anti-inflammatory and analgesic drugs by virtue of their ability to inhibit biosynthesis of prostaglandins at the level of the cyclooxygenase enzyme. However, many of the adverse effects of NSAIDs are also related to inhibition of prostaglandin production, making their use problematic in some patient populations. For the clinician, understanding the biology of prostaglandin as it relates to gastrointestinal, renal, and cardiovascular physiology and the pharmacologic properties of specific NSAIDs is key to using these drugs safely. Of particular importance is the recognition of co-morbid conditions and concomitant drugs that may increase the risk of NSAIDs in particular patients. In patients with risk factors for NSAID toxicity, using the lowest dose of a drug with a short half-life only when it is needed is likely to be the safest treatment option. For those patients whose symptoms cannot be managed with intermittent treatment, using protective strategies is essential.

Pharmacologic treatment of hand-, knee- and hip-osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a joint disease of high prevalence and affects > 90 % of the population, depending on several risk factors. Symptomatic OA is less frequent, but requires an individually tailored therapeutic regimen consisting of non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment modalities. Pharmacologic therapy, however, is mainly limited to analgetic and anti-inflammatory agents; structure modifying remedies do not exist. The therapeutic approach to hand-, knee- and hip-OA is basically similar and differs only at some minor points. Generally, topical agents or paracetamol are recommended as first-line agents. If unsuccessful oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or COX-2-selctive inhibitors should be introduced. Tramadol is an option in the case patients will not respond satisfactorily to NSAIDs. Glucosamine and chondroitine sulphate are no longer recommended in knee and hip OA, but chondroitine might be efficient in treating hand OA. Oral NSAIDs should be prescribed with caution due to potential side effects. Opioids are not recommended as their benefits are outweighed by an increased risk for serious adverse events.

Transplantation of Nonexpanded Adipose Stromal Vascular Fraction and Platelet-Rich Plasma for Articular Cartilage Injury Treatment in Mice Model

Stromal vascular fraction (SVF) combined with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is commonly used in preclinical and clinical osteoarthritis as well as articular cartilage injury treatment. However, this therapy has not carefully evaluated the safety and the efficacy. This research aims to assess the safety and the efficacy of SVF combined with PRP transplantation. Ten samples of SVFs and PRPs from donors were used in this research. About safety, we evaluate the expression of some genes related to tumor formation such as Oct-4, Nanog, SSEA3, and SSEA4 by RT-PCR, flow cytometry, and tumor formation when injected in NOD/SCID mice. About efficacy, SVF was injected with PRP into murine joint that caused joint failure. The results showed that SVFs are negative with Oct-4, Nanog, SSEA-3, and SSEA-4, as well as they cannot cause tumors in mice. SVFs combined with PRP can improve the joint regeneration in mice. These results proved that SVFs combined with PRP transplantation is a promising therapy for articular cartilage injury treatment.

Pharmaceutical therapy for osteoarthritis

There are a variety of oral and topical pharmaceutical agents for the treatment of osteoarthritis. To date there is no pharmacologic agent proved to prevent disease progression. This article focuses primarily on the medications used for symptomatic relief and palliation of pain. The article reviews the medications' mechanisms of action and the available efficacy literature, as well as indications, contraindications, and common adverse effects.

Treatment satisfaction after switching to another therapy in Spanish orthopaedic clinic outpatients with knee or hip osteoarthritis previously refractory to paracetamol

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Hip and knee osteoarthritis is highly prevalent in the elderly, and the incidence is estimated to increase in the coming decades. Prior to surgery, symptomatic treatment, starting with non-pharmacological therapies, should be prescribed. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is the recommended first pharmacological treatment for osteoarthritis. If paracetamol is ineffective, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) treatment is indicated. The superiority of NSAIDs over paracetamol has been demonstrated in several studies. Furthermore, the assessment of patient satisfaction could be an adequate indicator of the quality of care given and is likely related to the evolution of the condition and the therapeutic regimen. The objective of this study was to assess the satisfaction of patients diagnosed with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis who had been previously treated with paracetamol and switched to NSAID treatment due to a lack of effectiveness by paracetamol.

METHODS

An observational, prospective, multicentre and comparative study was conducted in 2009 among patients diagnosed with hip and knee OA who visited outpatient orthopaedic clinics. The evaluation of treatment effectiveness was carried out using a patient-based visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). The satisfaction regarding change of treatment due to a lack of effectiveness and/or the presence of adverse effects was evaluated using the osteoARthritis Treatment Satisfaction (ARTS) questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 2437 patients were evaluated (knee OA: 1438 [59%]; hip OA: 621 [25.5%]; knee and hip OA: 124 [5.1%]; and without OA location registered: 254 [10.4%]). The study findings showed an increase in patient satisfaction after abandoning the use of paracetamol to treat OA. Statistically significant increases in both overall satisfaction mean (from 57.7 [SD 13.5] to 71.3 [SD 12.0]) and in each of the four domains of the ARTS questionnaire were observed (p < 0.0001 in all cases). According to the WOMAC and a VAS, treatment effectiveness increased significantly after 3 months (p < 0.0001) and significant correlations with satisfaction were observed (r = -0.32 and r = -0.29, respectively; p < 0.0001). The mean (SD) change in global satisfaction in patients treated with NSAIDs was 14.9 (15.5) versus 7.2 (14.4) for patients treated with non-NSAIDs (p < 0.0001). Patients taking NSAID treatment showed substantially more improvement over those taking non-NSAID treatment.

CONCLUSION

NSAIDs relieve pain due to OA in paracetamol-resistant patients and improve treatment effectiveness and patient satisfaction with treatment. Furthermore, paracetamol-refractory subjects under conventional medical treatment with NSAIDs experienced the drug as more effective and also tended to be more satisfied with treatment than those treated with non-NSAIDs.

Treatment satisfaction after switching to another therapy in Spanish orthopaedic clinic outpatients with knee or hip osteoarthritis previously refractory to paracetamol

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Hip and knee osteoarthritis is highly prevalent in the elderly, and the incidence is estimated to increase in the coming decades. Prior to surgery, symptomatic treatment, starting with non-pharmacological therapies, should be prescribed. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is the recommended first pharmacological treatment for osteoarthritis. If paracetamol is ineffective, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) treatment is indicated. The superiority of NSAIDs over paracetamol has been demonstrated in several studies. Furthermore, the assessment of patient satisfaction could be an adequate indicator of the quality of care given and is likely related to the evolution of the condition and the therapeutic regimen. The objective of this study was to assess the satisfaction of patients diagnosed with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis who had been previously treated with paracetamol and switched to NSAID treatment due to a lack of effectiveness by paracetamol.

METHODS

An observational, prospective, multicentre and comparative study was conducted in 2009 among patients diagnosed with hip and knee OA who visited outpatient orthopaedic clinics. The evaluation of treatment effectiveness was carried out using a patient-based visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). The satisfaction regarding change of treatment due to a lack of effectiveness and/or the presence of adverse effects was evaluated using the osteoARthritis Treatment Satisfaction (ARTS) questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 2437 patients were evaluated (knee OA: 1438 [59%]; hip OA: 621 [25.5%]; knee and hip OA: 124 [5.1%]; and without OA location registered: 254 [10.4%]). The study findings showed an increase in patient satisfaction after abandoning the use of paracetamol to treat OA. Statistically significant increases in both overall satisfaction mean (from 57.7 [SD 13.5] to 71.3 [SD 12.0]) and in each of the four domains of the ARTS questionnaire were observed (p < 0.0001 in all cases). According to the WOMAC and a VAS, treatment effectiveness increased significantly after 3 months (p < 0.0001) and significant correlations with satisfaction were observed (r = -0.32 and r = -0.29, respectively; p < 0.0001). The mean (SD) change in global satisfaction in patients treated with NSAIDs was 14.9 (15.5) versus 7.2 (14.4) for patients treated with non-NSAIDs (p < 0.0001). Patients taking NSAID treatment showed substantially more improvement over those taking non-NSAID treatment.

CONCLUSION

NSAIDs relieve pain due to OA in paracetamol-resistant patients and improve treatment effectiveness and patient satisfaction with treatment. Furthermore, paracetamol-refractory subjects under conventional medical treatment with NSAIDs experienced the drug as more effective and also tended to be more satisfied with treatment than those treated with non-NSAIDs.

Efficacy of etoricoxib, celecoxib, lumiracoxib, non-selective NSAIDs, and acetaminophen in osteoarthritis: a mixed treatment comparison

Objective:

To compare the efficacy of etoricoxib, lumiracoxib, celecoxib, non-selective (ns) NSAIDs and acetaminophen in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA)

Methods:

Randomized placebo controlled trials investigating the effects of acetaminophen 4000mg, diclofenac 150mg, naproxen 1000mg, ibuprofen 2400mg, celecoxib 100-400mg, lumiracoxib 100-400mg, and etoricoxib 30-60mg with treatment duration of at least two weeks were identified with a systematic literature search. The endpoints of interest were pain, physical function and patient global assessment of disease status (PGADS). Pain and physical function reported on different scales (VAS or LIKERT) were translated into effect sizes (ES). An ES 0.2 - 0.5 was defined as a “small” treatment effect, whereas ES of 0.5 – 0.8 and > 0.8 were defined as “moderate” and “large”, respectively. A negative effect indicated superior effects of the treatment group compared to the control group. Results of all trials were analyzed simultaneously with a Bayesian mixed treatment comparison.

Results:

There is a >95% probability that etoricoxib (30 or 60mg) shows the greatest improvement in pain and physical function of all interventions compared. ESs of etoricoxib 30mg relative to placebo, celecoxib 200mg, ibuprofen 2400mg, and diclofenac 150mg were -0.66 (95% Credible Interval -0.83; -0.49), -0.32 (-0.50; -0.14), -0.25 (-0.53; 0.03), and -0.17 (-0.41; 0.08), respectively. Regarding physical functioning, ESs of etoricoxib 30mg relative to placebo, celecoxib 200mg, ibuprofen 2400mg, and diclofenac 150mg were -0.61 (-0.76; -0.46), -0.27 (-0.43; -0.10), -0.20 (-0.47; 0.07), and -0.09 (- 0.33; 0.14) respectively. The greatest improvements in PGADS were expected with either etoricoxib or diclofenac.

Conclusion:

The current study estimated the efficacy of acetaminophen, nsNSAIDs, and COX-2 selective NSAIDs in OA and found that etoricoxib 30 mg is likely to result in the greatest improvements in pain and physical function. Differences in PGADS between interventions were smaller.

Asymmetric loading and bone mineral density at the asymptomatic knees of patients with unilateral hip osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

In patients with unilateral end-stage hip osteoarthritis (OA), the contralateral knee is known to be at greater risk for end-stage knee OA compared to the ipsilateral (i.e., same-side) knee. The contralateral knee is known to have increased dynamic joint loads compared to the ipsilateral knee. The present study was undertaken to examine patients who had unilateral hip OA but who did not have symptoms of knee OA, in order to detect early asymmetries in knee loading.

METHODS

Data on 62 patients with unilateral hip OA were evaluated. Patients underwent gait analyses of dynamic knee loads as well as dual x-ray absorptiometry for determination of bone mineral density (BMD) in both knees. Differences between knees were compared.

RESULTS

Peak dynamic knee loads were significantly higher at the contralateral knee compared to the ipsilateral knee (mean ± SD 2.46 ± 0.71 percent of body weight × height versus 2.23 ± 0.81 percent of body weight × height; P = 0.029). Similarly, medial compartment tibial BMD was significantly higher in the contralateral knee compared to the ipsilateral knee (mean ± SD 0.897 ± 0.208 gm/cm(2) versus 0.854 ± 0.206 gm/cm(2); P = 0.033). Interestingly, there was a direct correlation between the contralateral:ipsilateral dynamic knee load and contralateral:ipsilateral medial compartment tibial BMD (ρ = 0.287, P = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

The risk of developing progressive symptomatic OA in contralateral knees is higher compared to the risk in ipsilateral knees in patients with unilateral hip OA. The present study demonstrates that loading and structural asymmetries appear early in the disease course, while the knees are still asymptomatic. These early biomechanical asymmetries may have corresponding long-term consequences, providing further evidence for the potential role of loading in OA onset and progression.

NSAIDs vs acetaminophen in knee and hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review regarding heterogeneity influencing the outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To identify sources of heterogeneity (statistical, methodological, and clinical) in studies evaluating non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) vs acetaminophen in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) to elucidate variations in outcomes.

METHOD

A database search (1966 to January 2010) was made for (randomized) controlled trials ((R)CTs) comparing NSAIDs vs acetaminophen in knee and hip OA. Extracted data included baseline demographic/clinical characteristics, outcomes at follow-up, and characteristics of study design. Heterogeneity was examined with subgroup analyses by exploring changes in effect size and with I(2) of Higgins. Pain measures were expressed as standardized mean differences.

RESULTS

15 RCTs, including 21 comparisons of NSAIDs and acetaminophen were included. Statistical heterogeneity was absent (Cochran's Q-test=14.11; I(2)=0; P=0.78). Moderate clinical heterogeneity was found for comparisons which included both hip and knee OA vs knee OA only (I(2)=51; P=0.09). NSAIDs seemed slightly more effective than acetaminophen if more patients with hip OA were included. However, the pooled effect sizes of comparisons with knee OA vs both knee and hip OA are equal. Low clinical heterogeneity was found for comparisons with low dosage of acetaminophen, normal dosage of NSAIDs, and moderate pain intensity at baseline. Low methodological heterogeneity was found for comparisons with a short duration.

CONCLUSION

Future trials should present the results of hip and knee OA separately, as moderate clinical heterogeneity was found. There might be differences in effectiveness of NSAIDs vs acetaminophen in patients with hip vs knee OA. No significant methodological and statistical heterogeneity was found in studies evaluating NSAIDs vs acetaminophen.

Nonoperative modalities to treat symptomatic cervical spondylosis

Cervical spondylosis is a common and disabling condition. It is generally felt that the initial management should be nonoperative, and these modalities include physiotherapy, analgesia and selective nerve root injections. Surgery should be reserved for moderate to severe myelopathy patients who have failed a period of conservative treatment and patients whose symptoms are not adequately controlled by nonoperative means. A review of the literature supporting various modalities of conservative management is presented, and it is concluded that although effective, nonoperative treatment is labour intensive, requiring regular review and careful selection of medications and physical therapy on a case by case basis.

A randomized trial of patellofemoral bracing for treatment of patellofemoral osteoarthritis

PURPOSE

The number of effective knee osteoarthritis (OA) interventions, especially those tailored to specific compartmental involvement, are small. The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of a realigning patellofemoral (PF) brace in improving pain and function among persons with symptomatic lateral PF OA.

METHOD

We conducted a double blind, randomized crossover trial of a realigning PF brace for persons with lateral PF OA. Participants had lateral PF OA with anterior knee symptoms on most days of the month, lateral PF joint space narrowing, and radiographic evidence of a definite osteophyte in the PF joint. We compared two treatments: (1) Control treatment consisting of a BioSkin Q Brace with patellar realigning strap removed; and (2) Active treatment consisting of a realigning BioSkin Q Brace with the strap applied. For each participant, the trial lasted 18 weeks, including 6 weeks each of active and control treatment period separated by a 6-week washout period. The order of treatments was randomized. The primary outcome was change in knee pain on the visual analog scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes included WOMAC pain, function, and stiffness. An unstructured correlation matrix for observations within participants was used in generalized estimating equation fitting to derive a linear regression model that expressed the relation between the intervention and change in VAS pain.

RESULTS

80 participants (63 F) with a mean age and body mass index of 61 years and 28 kg/m(2), respectively, were randomized by order of treatment. A model examining the main effects for change in VAS knee pain (0-100) demonstrated no significant treatment effect (-0.68 VAS units, 95% CI: -6.2, 4.8 units, P=0.81) and no differential carryover effect. There was also no significant difference between active and control treatments for WOMAC pain, function, or stiffness outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The effects of a specific realigning PF brace are not of clinical or statistical significance.

Asymptomatic alanine aminotransferase elevations with therapeutic doses of acetaminophen

While acetaminophen overdose has been recognized as a cause of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevations for over 40 years, recent studies have reported asymptomatic ALT elevations in research subjects who are administered with therapeutic doses (4 g/d or less) of acetaminophen for more than 4 days. While the clinical course of these elevations is not completely defined, available evidence suggests that even in high risk groups the elevations are not accompanied by evidence of hepatic dysfunction and that resolve if treatment is continued. Toxicologists should consider therapeutic acetaminophen use as a cause of ALT elevation. Further study of the mechanism of ALT elevations may provide new insight into other causes of drug-induced liver injury and hepatic adaptation.

Osteoarthritis subpopulations and implications for clinical trial design

Treatment guidelines for osteoarthritis have stressed the need for research on clinical predictors of response to different treatments. However, identifying such clinical predictors of response is less easy than it seems, and there is not a given classification of osteoarthritis subpopulations. This review article highlights the key methodical issues when analyzing and designing clinical studies to detect important subgroups with respect to treatment effect. In addition, we discuss the main osteoarthritis subpopulations and give examples of how specific treatment effects in these subpopulations have been assessed.

[Economic evaluation of tramadol/paracetamol in the management of pain in patients with osteoarthritis in Spain]

OBJECTIVE

To compare the costs of treating osteoarthritis (OA) pain using combination tramadol/paracetamol tablets, Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Agents (NSAID) alone or NSAID plus proton pump inhibitors (PPI) from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System.

METHODS

A decision-analytical model was constructed to analyze the cost associated with three treatment strategies over 6 months. A cost-minimization approach was used, which considered data related to resource use, medication costs and costs for the treatment of adverse events.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis, costs for 6 months of treatment of OA pain using tramadol/paracetamol were €232.86, compared with €274.60 for NSAID + PPI and €133.75 for NSAID alone. This provided a savings of €41.74 per patient over 6 months for tramadol/paracetamol compared with NSAID + PPI and a cost increase of €99.11 compared with NSAID alone. When renal adverse events associated with NSAID were considered, tramadol/paracetamol was cost saving compared with all NSAID-based regimens (saving €140.02 vs NSAID alone, €280.86 vs NSAID + PPI).

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of a theoretical decision-analytic model, the data obtained may suggest that tramadol/paracetamol is cost saving compared with NSAID + PPI for the treatment of OA pain over a period of 6 months. Tramadol/paracetamol is also cost saving compared with treatment with NSAID alone if considering renal adverse events.

Phase 1, placebo-controlled, dose escalation trial of chicory root extract in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee

BACKGROUND

Extracts of chicory root have anti-inflammatory properties in vitro and in animal models of arthritis. The primary objective of this investigator-initiated, Phase 1, placebo-controlled, double blind, dose-escalating trial was to determine the safety and tolerability of a proprietary bioactive extract of chicory root in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). Secondary objectives were to assess effects on the signs and symptoms of this disorder.

METHODS

Individuals greater than 50 years of age with OA of the hip or knee were eligible for trial entry. A total of 40 patients were enrolled in 3 cohorts and were treated with escalating chicory doses of 600 mg/day, 1200 mg/day and 1800 mg/day for 1 month. The ratio of active treatment to placebo was 5:3 in cohorts 1 and 2 (8 patients) each and 16:8 in cohort 3 (24 patients). Safety evaluations included measurement of vital signs and routine lab tests at baseline and the end of the treatment period. Efficacy evaluations at baseline and final visits included self-assessment questionnaires and measurement of the 25-foot walking time.

RESULTS

In the highest dose cohort, 18 patients who completed treatment per protocol were analyzed for efficacy. In this group, 13 patients showed at least 20% improvement in the defined response domains of pain, stiffness and global assessment: 9 of 10 (90%) patients randomized to active treatment with chicory and 4 of 8 (50%) patients randomized to placebo (P = 0.06). In general, the treatment was well-tolerated. Only one patient who was treated with the highest dose of chicory had to discontinue treatment due to an adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this pilot study suggest that a proprietary bioactive extract of chicory root has a potential role in the management of OA and merits further investigation. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT 01010919.

Patient preference for sustained-release versus standard paracetamol (acetaminophen): a multicentre, randomized, open-label, two-way crossover study in subjects with knee osteoarthritis

Guidelines for osteoarthritis (OA) management recommend paracetamol (acetaminophen) as the most appropriate first-line analgesic for mild to moderate pain. Standard paracetamol requires four times daily dosing. Drug compliance and convenience are inversely related to daily dose frequency. Compliance is a pivotal component of the successful management of OA pain and is influenced by patient preferences or beliefs. The added convenience of three times daily dosing may enhance compliance and, therefore, pain relief. This multicentre, randomized, open-label, two-way crossover, phase IV study is the first to evaluate patient preference with a sustained-release paracetamol tablet formulation designed for three times daily dosing. Compared with standard paracetamol tablets dosed four times daily, the sustained-release formulation was preferred in a 2:1 ratio, provided better overall joint pain relief, resulted in higher levels of satisfaction in subjects with OA of the knee and has the potential to improve patient compliance and, therefore, pain control.

A multi-dimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ) and routine assessment of patient index data (RAPID3) scores are informative in patients with all rheumatic diseases

Although indices have been developed for many rheumatic diseases in usual care, they are rarely used in usual care. In most visits to rheumatologists, the only quantitative data collected are laboratory tests. Patient history data often are more important in management of patients with rheumatic diseases than other diseases. A two-page multidimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ) can be completed by the patient in 5 to 10 minutes and reviewed by the physician in 10 seconds, with RAPID3 scored in 5 to 10 seconds. The MDHAQ is useful in rheumatic diseases, to improve management documentation and outcomes. MDHAQ data for physical function, pain, global status, and RAPID3 scores appear preferable to no quantitative data.

Effectiveness of diclofenac versus acetaminophen in primary care patients with knee osteoarthritis: [NTR1485], DIPA-trial: design of a randomized clinical trial

Background

Osteoarthritis is the most frequent chronic joint disease which causes pain and disability of especially hip and knee. According to international guidelines and the Dutch general practitioners guidelines for non-traumatic knee symptoms, acetaminophen should be the pain medication of first choice for osteoarthritis. However, of all prescribed pain medication in general practice, 90% consists of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs compared to 10% of acetaminophen. Because general practitioners may lack evidence showing a similar efficacy of acetaminophen and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, we present the design of a randomized open-label trial to investigate the efficacy of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (diclofenac) compared with acetaminophen in new consulters with knee osteoarthritis in general practice.

Methods/Design

Patients aged 45 years or older consulting their general practitioner with non-traumatic knee pain, meeting the clinical American College of Rheumatology criteria, and with a pain severity score of 2 or higher (on a 0-10 scale), will be randomly allocated to either diclofenac (maximum daily dose of 150 mg) or acetaminophen (maximum daily dose of 3000 mg) for 2 weeks and, if required, an additional 1-2 weeks, with a total follow-up period of 12 weeks. The primary outcomes are knee pain measured with a daily diary, and pain and function measured with the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at baseline, and at 3, 6, 9, and 12-weeks follow-up. Secondary outcomes are patients' perceived recovery, quality of life, medical, patient, and productivity costs, compliance to therapy, co-interventions, and adverse reactions.

Discussion

The successful completion of this trial would lead to a better understanding of which medication should be used in the treatment of primary care patients with mild knee osteoarthritis.

Trial registration

Dutch trial registry NTR1485.