Intra-Articular Injection of a Novel DVS Cross-Linked Hyaluronic Acid Manufactured by Biological Fermentation (YYD302) in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Multicenter, Noninferiority Study

Randomized Controlled Trials Studying Nonoperative Treatments of Osteoarthritis Often Use Misleading and Uninformative Control Groups: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Because there are no known treatments that alter the natural course of the pathophysiology of osteoarthritis, nonoperative treatment needs to be compared with known effective treatments that seek to mitigate symptoms or with similarly invasive inert (placebo) treatments to determine effectiveness. Comparing a treatment to an uninformative control group may inappropriately legitimize and support the use of potentially ineffective treatments. We therefore investigated the prevalence of inappropriate control groups in musculoskeletal research and asked whether these are associated with reporting a positive treatment effect.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We systematically reviewed randomized trials of nonoperative treatments of osteoarthritis and asked: (1) What proportion of randomized trials use uninformative control groups (defined as a treatment less invasive than the tested treatment, or a treatment that might possibly not outperform placebo but is not acknowledged as such)? (2) Is the use of uninformative control groups independently associated with reporting a positive treatment effect (defined as p < 0.05 in favor of the intervention, or as making a recommendation favoring the intervention over the control treatment)?

METHODS

In a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase up to September 2023 for randomized controlled trials published between 2020 to 2022 that compared one or more nonoperative treatments for the symptoms of osteoarthritis. We excluded studies that contained a surgical treatment group. We identified 103 trials that met eligibility criteria, with a total of 15,491 patients. The risk of bias was high in 60% (n = 62) of trials using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, version 2. Although the high risk of bias in the included studies is concerning, it does not invalidate our design; instead, it highlights that some studies may use flawed methods to recommend treatments with unproven effectiveness beyond nonspecific effects because the kinds of bias observed would tend to increase the apparent benefit of the treatment(s) being evaluated. We used logistic regression to test the association of uninformative control groups with a positive treatment effect, accounting for potential confounders such as conflict of interest and study bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias score.

RESULTS

The use of uninformative control groups (treatments less invasive than the tested treatment, or treatments that might not outperform placebo but are not acknowledged as such) was found in 46% (47 of 103) of included studies. After accounting for potential confounding, there was no association between reporting positive treatment effects and the use of an uninformative control group. Studies with a low risk of bias had a lower likelihood of reporting a positive treatment effect (OR 0.2 [95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.9]; p = 0.04, model pseudo R2 = 0.21).

CONCLUSION

The finding that recent studies that mimic high-level evidence often use uninformative control groups that do not adequately account for nonspecific effects (perceived treatment benefits unrelated to a treatment's direct physiological effects) points to a high risk of legitimizing ineffective treatments. This raises the ethical imperative for patients, clinicians, journal peer reviewers, and journal editors to hold researchers to the standard of an adequate, informative control group. Awareness and risk of bias checklists might help patients and clinicians forgo new treatments based on seemingly high-level evidence that may carry only iatrogenic, financial, and psychological harm (false hope, in particular).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Intra-articular injection of gold micro-particles with hyaluronic acid for painful knee osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Recently, in an open pilot study, we found up to two years, a potential pain-relieving effect of intra-articular gold micro-particles using the patient's synovial fluid for patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). During the study the excluded group of patients, due to multisite pain, co-morbidities, and other exclusion criteria., received intra-articular gold micro-particles using hyaluronic acid,. We aimed to identify if pre-treatment characteristics influence the global outcome two years after intra-articular treatment for painful KOA with gold microparticles using hyaluronic acid.

METHODS

Using hyaluronic acid as the carrier, 136 patients with KOA received intraarticular injections with 20 mg gold microparticles (72.000 particles, 20-40 μm in diameter). In the analysis, we included the Global Rating of Change Scale, Pain Detect Questionnaire (PDQ), Body Mass Index (BMI), and Kellgren & Lawrence score at the inclusion, Western Ontario, and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) sub-scores for pain, stiffness, and function at inclusion and two years.

RESULTS

On the Global Rating Change Scale, 69.1% of patients reported a positive effect, 28.7% no effect, and 2.2% worse. PDQ and the three WOMAC subscores all improved at two years of follow-up. PDQ ≥ 13 (P = 0.028), BMI (P = 0.022) and Kellgren & Lawrence grade 4 (P = 0.028) at inclusion reduced the effect with a minor odds ratio compared to the baseline effect of treatment (P = 0.025). WOMAC subscores at inclusion did not influence the outcome (P > 0.5).

CONCLUSIONS

Severe osteoarthritis, obesity, and neuropathic pain, reduced the effect of intra-articular gold microparticles for knee OA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study followed the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the local ethics committee of the North Denmark Region by 27/07/2016 (N-20,160,045). The regional data protection agency approved the project by 06/07/2016 (2008-58-0028, ID 2016 - 116) and registered in ClinicalTrial.Gov by 04/01/2018 (NCT03389906).

An update on the effect of intra-articular intervention strategies using nanomaterials in osteoarthritis: Possible clinical application

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common progressive condition affecting joints. It mainly affects the knees and hips as predominant weight-bearing joints. Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) accounts for a large proportion of osteoarthritis and presents numerous symptoms that impair quality of life, such as stiffness, pain, dysfunction, and even deformity. For more than two decades, intra-articular (IA) treatment options for managing knee osteoarthritis have included analgesics, hyaluronic acid (HA), corticosteroids, and some unproven alternative therapies. Before effective disease-modifying treatments for knee osteoarthritis, treatments are primarily symptomatic, mainly including intra-articular corticosteroids and hyaluronic acid, so these agents represent the most frequently used class of drugs for managing knee osteoarthritis. But research suggests other factors, such as the placebo effect, have an essential role in the effectiveness of these drugs. Several novel intra-articular therapies are currently in the clinical trial processes, such as biological therapies, gene and cell therapies. Besides, it has been shown that the development of novel drug nanocarriers and delivery systems could improve the effectiveness of therapeutic agents in osteoarthritis. This review discusses the various treatment methods and delivery systems for knee osteoarthritis and the new agents that have been introduced or are in development.

Designing functional hyaluronic acid-based hydrogels for cartilage tissue engineering

Damage to cartilage tissues is often difficult to repair owing to chronic inflammation and a lack of bioactive factors. Therefore, developing bioactive materials, such as hydrogels acting as extracellular matrix mimics, that can inhibit the inflammatory microenvironment and promote cartilage repair is crucial. Hyaluronic acid, which exists in cartilage and synovial fluid, has been extensively investigated for cartilage tissue engineering because of its promotion of cell adhesion and proliferation, regulation of inflammation, and enhancement of cartilage regeneration. However, hyaluronic acid-based hydrogels have poor degradation rates and unfavorable mechanical properties, limiting their application in cartilage tissue engineering. Recently, various multifunctional hyaluronic acid-based hydrogels, including alkenyl, aldehyde, thiolated, phenolized, hydrazide, and host–guest group-modified hydrogels, have been extensively studied for use in cartilage tissue engineering. In this review, we summarize the recent progress in the multifunctional design of hyaluronic acid-based hydrogels and their application in cartilage tissue engineering. Moreover, we outline the future research prospects and directions in cartilage tissue regeneration. This would provide theoretical guidance for developing hyaluronic acid-based hydrogels with specific properties to satisfy the requirements of cartilage tissue repair.

A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Parallel-Group, Placebo-Controlled Phase I/IIa Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of a Single Intra-Articular Injection of YYD302 in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis

This study was a phase I/IIa, multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, parallel, placebo-controlled clinical trial that aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of a single intra-articular injection of YYD302, a novel high-molecular-weight hyaluronic acid with divinyl sulfone cross-linking. Thirty adults with knee osteoarthritis were randomized to receive a single 2 mL intra-articular injection of YYD302 (test group 1), 3 mL of YYD302 (test group 2), or 3 mL of the placebo (placebo group). We compared the changes from the baseline in the weight-bearing pain of 100 mm using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Rheumatology-Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OASRSI) responder rates, and the use of rescue analgesics to assess the safety of this novel drug. A total of 26 subjects (10 in test group 1, 10 in test group 2, and 6 in the placebo group) were included in the full analysis set. At 12 weeks, only test groups 1 and 2 showed significant changes in the weight-bearing pain VAS scores (p = 0.0015 and p = 0.0085), symptoms, and average daily KOOS values compared to the baseline (p < 0.001, p = 0.0124, and p = 0.0018, p = 0.0426, respectively). While the rate and frequency of consuming the rescue drug continued to increase in the placebo group until 12 weeks, there was no change in the test groups. Our findings showed that YYD302, especially 2 mL of YYD302, reduced pain and improved knee joint function compared to the placebo.

Regdanvimab: First Approval

Regdanvimab (Regkirona™) is a recombinant human monoclonal antibody targeted against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. It is being developed by Celltrion Inc. for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In September 2021, regdanvimab received full approval in South Korea for the treatment of COVID-19 in elderly patients aged > 50 years with at least one underlying medical condition (obesity, cardiovascular disease, chronic lung disease, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, chronic liver disease, and patients on immunosuppressive agents) and mild symptoms of COVID-19 and in adult patients with moderate symptoms of COVID-19. This article summarizes the milestones in the development of regdanvimab leading to this first approval for COVID-19.