Effectiveness of chondroitin sulphate in patients with concomitant knee osteoarthritis and psoriasis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Evaluation of efficacy and safety of glucosamine sulfate, chondroitin sulfate, and their combination regimen in the management of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

This study was aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two oral Symptomatic Slow Acting Drugs for Osteoarthritis (SYSADOAs)-Glucosamine Sulfate, Chondroitin Sulfate, and their combination regimen in the management of knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. A detailed literature search was performed from 03/1994 to 31/12/2022 using various electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, using the search terms-Glucosamine sulfate (GS), Chondroitin sulfate (CS), Knee osteoarthritis, Joint pain, Joint disease, and Joint structure, for literature concerning glucosamine, chondroitin, and their combination in knee osteoarthritis treatment. Cochrane Collaboration's Risk assessment tool (version 5.4.1) was used for assessing the risk of bias and the quality of the literature. The data was extracted from the included studies and subjected to statistical analysis to determine the beneficial effect of Glucosamine Sulfate, Chondroitin Sulfate, and their combination.

RESULTS

Twenty-five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this systematic review. In short, exclusively 9 RCTs for GS, 13 RCTs for CS, and 3 RCTs for the combination of GS and CS. All these studies had their treatment groups compared with placebo. In the meta-analysis, CS showed a significant reduction in pain intensity, and improved physical function compared to the placebo; GS showed a significant reduction in tibiofemoral joint space narrowing. While the combination of GS and CS showed neither a reduction in pain intensity, nor any improvement in the physical function. However, the combination exhibited a non-significant reduction in joint space narrowing. In the safety evaluation, both CS and GS have shown good safety profile and were well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis revealed that the CS (with decreased pain intensity and improvement in the physical function), and GS (with significant reduction in the joint space narrowing) have significant therapeutic benefits. However, their combination did not significantly improve the symptoms or modify the disease. This may be due to the limited trials that are available on the combination of the sulfate forms of the intervention. Hence, there is a scope for conducting multicentric randomised controlled trials to evaluate and conclude the therapeutic role of CS and GS combination in the management of KOA.

A systematic review of 454 randomized controlled trials using the Dermatology Life Quality Index: experience in 69 diseases and 43 countries

BACKGROUND

Over 29 years of clinical application, the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) has remained the most used patient-reported outcome (PRO) in dermatology due to its robustness, simplicity and ease of use.

OBJECTIVES

To generate further evidence of the DLQI's utility in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to cover all diseases and interventions.

METHODS

The methodology followed PRISMA guidelines and included seven bibliographical databases, searching articles published from 1 January 1994 until 16 November 2021. Articles were reviewed independently by two assessors, and an adjudicator resolved any opinion differences.

RESULTS

Of 3220 screened publications, 454 articles meeting the eligibility criteria for inclusion, describing research on 198 190 patients, were analysed. DLQI scores were primary endpoints in 24 (5.3%) of studies. Most studies were of psoriasis (54.1%), although 69 different diseases were studied. Most study drugs were systemic (85.1%), with biologics comprising 55.9% of all pharmacological interventions. Topical treatments comprised 17.0% of total pharmacological interventions. Nonpharmacological interventions, mainly laser therapy and ultraviolet radiation treatment, comprised 12.2% of the total number of interventions. The majority of studies (63.7%) were multicentric, with trials conducted in at least 42 different countries; 40.2% were conducted in multiple countries. The minimal clinically importance difference (MCID) was reported in the analysis of 15.0% of studies, but only 1.3% considered full score meaning banding of the DLQI. Forty-seven (10.4%) of the studies investigated statistical correlation of the DLQI with clinical severity assessment or other PRO/quality of life tools; and 61-86% of studies had within-group scores differences greater than the MCID in 'active treatment arms'. The Jadad risk-of-bias scale showed that bias was generally low, as 91.8% of the studies had Jadad scores of ≥ 3; only 0.4% of studies showed a high risk of bias from randomization. Thirteen per cent had a high risk of bias from blinding and 10.1% had a high risk of bias from unknown outcomes of all participants in the studies. In 18.5% of the studies the authors declared that they followed an intention-to-treat protocol; imputation for missing DLQI data was used in 34.4% of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides a wealth of evidence of the use of the DLQI in clinical trials to inform researchers' and -clinicians' decisions for its further use. Recommendations are also made for improving the reporting of data from future RCTs using the DLQI.

Chondroitin Sulfate Supplements for Osteoarthritis: A Critical Review

Over the years, chondroitin sulfate (CS) has been used as a slow-acting drug for the treatment of osteoarthritis, for the reduction of pain and improvement of function, and for its disease-modifying properties by limiting cartilage volume loss and joint space narrowing progression. However, there have been inconsistencies in published trials regarding clinical efficacy, with reports of a lack of significant effects compared to placebo. The therapeutic effects of chondroitin sulfate may depend on many variables, such as the source of origin, purity, and contamination with by-products. Another source of confusion may be related to the fact that CS is commonly combined with glucosamine, which makes it challenging to isolate the specific contribution of chondroitin to the therapeutic outcome. This is aggravated by the fact that CS supplements, used in many countries, are not regulated, and labels wrongly claim high levels of purity. Many of these inferior CS products may have been used in clinical trials, which may have had limited but significant results. This has led to recent recommendations to opt for higher-purity pharmacologic-grade CS for the treatment of OA. This article aims to provide an up-to-date view of the current literature regarding the biological effects and efficacy of CS and discusses the quality of available chondroitin sulfate supplements and the current direction in CS investigation. This review concludes that pharmacologic-grade CS supplements may have clinically significant benefits when properly standardized; however, high-quality evidence from properly designed clinical trials is still needed to draw definitive conclusions about clinical efficacy in osteoarthritis.

Heterologous production of chondroitin

•

Chondroitin sulfate (CS) is a glycosaminoglycan with a growing variety of applications.

•

CS can be produced from microbial fermentation of native or engineered strains.

•

Synthetic biology tools are being used to improve CS yields in different hosts.

•

Integrated polymerization and sulfation can generate cost-effective CS.

Chondroitin sulfate (CS) is a glycosaminoglycan with a broad range of applications being a popular dietary supplement for osteoarthritis. Usually, CS is extracted from animal sources. However, the known risks of animal products use have been driving the search for alternative methods and sources to obtain this compound. Several pathogenic bacteria naturally produce chondroitin-like polysaccharides through well-known pathways and, therefore, have been the basis for numerous studies that aim to produce chondroitin using non-pathogenic hosts. However, the yields obtained are not enough to meet the high demand for this glycosaminoglycan. Metabolic engineering strategies have been used to construct improved heterologous hosts. The identification of metabolic bottlenecks and regulation points, and the screening for efficient enzymes are key points for constructing microbial cell factories with improved chondroitin yields to achieve industrial CS production. The recent advances on enzymatic and microbial strategies to produce non-animal chondroitin are herein reviewed. Challenges and prospects for future research are also discussed.

Differentiating Psoriatic Arthritis from Osteoarthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Narrative Review and Guide for Advanced Practice Providers

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects multiple organ systems and is characterized by skin and joint manifestations. PsA is frequently undiagnosed and/or misdiagnosed, especially because of the similarities in clinical presentation shared with other arthritic diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA). An accurate and timely diagnosis of PsA is crucial to prevent delays in optimal treatment, which can lead to irreversible joint damage and increased functional disability. Patients are usually seen by a number of different healthcare providers on their path to a diagnosis of PsA, including advanced practice providers (APPs). This review provides a comprehensive overview of the characteristic features that can be used to facilitate the differentiation of PsA from RA and OA. Detailed information on clinical manifestations, biomarkers, radiologic features, and therapeutic recommendations for PsA included here can be applied in routine clinical settings to provide APPs with the confidence and knowledge to recognize and refer patients more accurately to rheumatologists for management of patients with PsA.

Functions of, and replenishment strategies for, chondroitin sulfate in the human body

Chondroitin sulfate (CS) belongs to a class of molecules called glycosaminoglycans (GAGs). These are long, linear chains of polysaccharides comprising alternating amino sugars and hexuronic acid. Similar to other GAGs, CS is important in a multitude of biological activities. Alteration of CS levels has been implicated in several pathological conditions, including osteoarthritis (OA) and other inflammatory diseases, as well as physiological conditions, such as aging. Therefore, devising replenishment strategies for this molecule is an important area of research. In this review, we discuss the nature of CS, its function in different organs, and its implications in health and disease. We also describe different methods for the exogenous administration of CS.

Highly purified chondroitin sulfate: a literature review on clinical efficacy and pharmacoeconomic aspects in osteoarthritis treatment

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent musculoskeletal disease and a major cause of negative relevant outcomes, associated with an ever-increasing societal burden. Pharmaceutical-grade chondroitin sulfate (CS) was repeatedly reported to reduce pain and improve function in patients with OA. This article aims to review the evidence for the role of highly purified (hp) CS (Condrosulf^®, IBSA) in the treatment of OA. We collected and reported evidence concerning (1) efficacy of hpCS 800 mg/day in the treatment of OA affecting the knee, hand and hip; (2) efficacy and safety of hpCS 1200 mg/day also in the oral gel formulation; (3) the safety profile of hpCS; (4) the difference of hpCS and pharmaceutical-grade formulations versus food supplements; (5) pharmacoeconomic added value of hpCS. The data support that hpCS is an effective and safe treatment of OA, with its effect already evident at 30 days; in addition, its beneficial action is prolonged, being maintained for at least 3 months after the drug is discontinued. Full safety reports’ analyses confirm that CS is safe to use and has almost no side effects, in particular, it showed better gastrointestinal tolerance if compared with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Moreover, the therapeutic strategy has proved to be cost-effective: treatment with CS reduced the use of NSAIDs and their side effects.

Efficacy of Chondroitin Sulfate in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Exploring Inconsistencies in Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

There are some controversies about treatment modalities in osteoarthritis (OA), including chondroitin sulfate (CS). The objective of this study was to determine whether CS is effective at alleviating pain and improving function in patients with knee OA and to identify the factors that explain inconsistencies in clinical trial results.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of randomized, placebo-controlled trials, searching the databases Medline, Cochrane central register for controlled trials and Scopus. Random effects meta-analysis was then performed, using tau2 and I2 statistics to assess heterogeneity. The pain and Lequesne index (LI) scores were expressed as standardized mean differences (SMDs), with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was explored by stratifying the analyses according to pre-specified study-level characteristics and assessing the sources of funnel plot asymmetry.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria yielded 18 trials. Overall, CS significantly but inconsistently reduced pain (SMD: - 0.63; 95% CI: - 0.91, - 0.35; I2 = 94%) and improved function (SMD: - 0.82; 95% CI: - 1.31, - 0.33; I2 = 95%). When limiting the analysis to studies with a low risk of bias, the pharmaceutical grade CS of IBSA origin showed a greater reduction in pain (SMD: - 0.25; 95% CI: - 0.34, - 0.16; I2 = 75%) and function (SMD: - 0.33; 95% CI: - 0.47, - 0.20; I2 = 53%, p = 0.07) compared with the other preparations (SMDPain: - 0.08; 95% CI: - 0.19, + 0.02; I2 = 20%; SMDFunction: - 0.18; 95% CI: - 0.36, +0.01; I2 = 0%). Assessing funnel plot asymmetry in the studies with a low risk of bias, we found strong correlations between the treatment effects and study size (pain: rS = 0.93; LI: rS = 0.86; p < 0.05). Ultimately, there was no residual heterogeneity in the CS effects when the smallest studies were removed from the analyses.

CONCLUSION

This new meta-analysis suggests that CS provides a moderate benefit for pain and has a large effect on function in knee OA, however with large inconsistency. The risks of bias, brand and study size were the factors explaining heterogeneity among the clinical trial results.

Safety of Symptomatic Slow-Acting Drugs for Osteoarthritis: Outcomes of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic slow-acting drugs for osteoarthritis (SYSADOAs) are an important drug class in the treatment armamentarium for osteoarthritis (OA).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to re-assess the safety of various SYSADOAs in a comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials, using, as much as possible, data from full safety reports.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and random-effects meta-analyses of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that assessed adverse events (AEs) with various SYSADOAs in patients with OA. The databases MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Ovid CENTRAL) and Scopus were searched. The primary outcomes were overall severe and serious AEs, as well as AEs involving the following Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) system organ classes (SOCs): gastrointestinal, cardiac, vascular, nervous system, skin and subcutaneous tissue, musculoskeletal and connective tissue, renal and urinary system.

RESULTS

Database searches initially identified 3815 records. After exclusions according to the selection criteria, 25 studies on various SYSADOAs were included in the qualitative synthesis, and 13 studies with adequate data were included in the meta-analyses. Next, from the studies previously excluded according to the protocol, 37 with mainly oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) permitted as concomitant medication were included in a parallel qualitative synthesis, from which 18 studies on various SYSADOAs were included in parallel meta-analyses. This post hoc parallel inclusion was conducted because of the high number of studies allowing concomitant anti-OA medications. Indeed, primarily excluding studies with concomitant anti-OA medications was crucial for a meta-analysis on safety. The decision for parallel inclusion was made for the purpose of comparative analyses. Glucosamine sulfate (GS), chondroitin sulfate (CS) and avocado soybean unsaponifiables (ASU; Piascledine®) were not associated with increased odds for any type of AEs compared with placebo. Overall, with/without concomitant OA medication, diacerein was associated with significantly increased odds of total AEs (odds ratio [OR] 2.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58-3.13; I2 = 52.8%), gastrointestinal disorders (OR 2.85; 95% CI 2.02-4.04; I2 = 62.8%) and renal and urinary disorders (OR 3.42; 95% CI 2.36-4.96; I2 = 17.0%) compared with placebo. In studies that allowed concomitant OA medications, diacerein was associated with significantly more dermatological disorders (OR 2.47; 95% CI 1.42-4.31; I2 = 0%) and more dropouts due to AEs (OR 3.18; 95% CI 1.85-5.47; I2 = 13.4%) than was placebo. No significant increase in serious or severe AEs was found with diacerein versus placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

GS and CS can be considered safe treatments for patients with OA. All eligible studies on ASU included in our analysis used the proprietary product Piascledine® and allowed other anti-OA medications; thus, the safety of ASU must be confirmed in future studies without concomitant anti-OA medications. Given the safety concerns with diacerein, its usefulness in patients with OA should be assessed, taking into account individual patient characteristics.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Progen, a Nutritional Supplement Based on Innovative Plasma Proteins, in ACL Reconstruction: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Background:

New biologic strategies are arising to enhance healing and improve the clinical outcome of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

Purpose:

To evaluate the efficacy of a new oral nutritional supplement (Progen) that contains hydrolyzed collagen peptides and plasma proteins, a hyaluronic acid–chondroitin sulfate complex, and vitamin C.

Study Design:

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods:

The study included patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with hamstring autografts using the same fixation method. All patients received the same analgesia and physical therapy (PT) protocol and were randomized to receive either the nutritional supplement (supplemented group) or no additional therapy (control group). Patients were followed up at days 7, 30, 60, and 90. Pain was assessed by use of a visual analog scale (VAS) and by analgesic consumption. Clinical outcome was assessed via International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score and the number of PT sessions. Perceived efficacy and tolerability were rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Graft maturation was assessed by a blinded musculoskeletal radiologist using magnetic resonance imaging. The number of adverse events (AEs) was recorded.

Results:

The intention-to-treat analysis included 72 patients, 36 allocated to the supplemented group and 36 to the control group, with no significant differences regarding demographic and preoperative characteristics. Both groups showed significant improvement in pain and function (measured by VAS and IKDC scores) during the 90-day follow-up period (P < .001 for both), without significant differences between groups. The supplemented group had fewer patients that needed analgesics (8.5% vs 50.0%; P < .05) and attended fewer PT sessions (38.0 vs 48.4 sessions; P < .001) at 90 days and had a higher IKDC score at 60 days (62.5 vs 55.5; P = .029) compared with the control group. Patient- and physician-perceived efficacy was considered significantly higher in the supplemented group at 60 and 90 days (P < .05). Perceived tolerability of the overall intervention was better in the supplemented group at 30, 60, and 90 days (P < .05). Graft maturation showed more advanced degrees (grades 3 and 4) in the supplemented group at 90 days (61.8% vs 38.2%; P < .01). No intolerance or AEs associated with the nutritional supplement treatment were reported.

Conclusion:

The combination of the nutritional supplement and PT after ACL reconstruction improved pain, clinical outcome, and graft maturation. Nutritional supplementation showed higher efficacy during the second month of recovery, without causing AEs.

Registration:

NCT03355651 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Preparation, characterisation and in vitro and in vivo evaluation of CD44-targeted chondroitin sulphate-conjugated doxorubicin PLGA nanoparticles

The purpose of this study was to ascertain the effect of chondroitin sulphate-modified doxorubicin (Dox) nanoparticles on enhancing the tumour-targeting effect and tumour growth inhibition effect of doxorubicin both in vitro and in vivo. The chondroitin sulphate-doxorubicin conjugate and its poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) nanoparticles (CS-Dox-PLGA) were successfully synthesised, and then characterized by Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), proton magnetic resonance (¹HNMR), thermogravimetric analysis/differential scanning calorimetry (TGA/DSC), transmission electron microscope (TEM), zeta potential and laser light scattering. Taking advantage of the enhanced permeability and CD44-mediated endocytosis, CS-Dox-PLGA showed excellent capacity for penetrating the peripheral tumour barrier and into the nucleus of tumour cells. The CS-Dox-PLGA cellular uptake was improved and exhibited a significantly higher level of cytotoxicity in U251 cells. After intravenous administration, the CS-Dox-PLGA showed good pharmacokinetic properties and excellent U251-induced tumour inhibition with low cardiac toxicity. Therefore, CS-Dox-PLGA with low cardiac toxicity and good anti-tumour ability might be a better choice for Dox in clinical practice.

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.

Effect of glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials

Although glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate have showed beneficial effects on joint tissues in osteoarthritis (OA), their therapeutic use in the clinical setting is still debatable. Hence, a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials was conducted to investigate the efficacy of glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate on knee OA symptoms. Medline, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were searched for randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating the effect of orally administered glucosamine and/or chondroitin sulfate on OA symptoms using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) and/or the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model and generic inverse-variance method. Heterogeneity was tested using the I2 statistic index. Treatments with glucosamine and chondroitin were found to significantly reduce pain in VAS [weighted mean difference (WMD) - 7.41 mm, 95% CI - 14.31, - 0.51, p = 0.04 and WMD - 8.35 mm, 95% CI - 11.84, - 4.85, p < 0.00001, respectively]. Their combination did not show this behavior (WMD - 0.28 mm, 95% CI - 8.87, 8.32, p = 0.95). None of the glucosamine, chondroitin or their combination had a significant positive effect on the total WOMAC index and its subscores. Oral supplementation with glucosamine or chondroitin sulfate reduces pain in knee OA. However, there is no additional effect using both therapeutic agents in combination for the management of symptomatic knee OA.

PANLAR Consensus Recommendations for the Management in Osteoarthritis of Hand, Hip, and Knee

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this consensus is to update the recommendations for the treatment of hand, hip, and knee osteoarthritis (OA) by agreeing on key propositions relating to the management of hand, hip, and knee OA, by identifying and critically appraising research evidence for the effectiveness of the treatments and by generating recommendations based on a combination of the available evidence and expert opinion of 18 countries of America.

METHODS

Recommendations were developed by a group of 48 specialists of rheumatologists, members of other medical disciplines (orthopedics and physiatrists), and three patients, one for each location of OA. A systematic review of existing articles, meta-analyses, and guidelines for the management of hand, hip, and knee OA published between 2008 and January 2014 was undertaken. The scores for Level of Evidence and Grade of Recommendation were proposed and fully consented within the committee based on The American Heart Association Evidence-Based Scoring System. The level of agreement was established through a variation of Delphi technique.

RESULTS

Both "strong" and "conditional" recommendations are given for management of hand, hip, and knee OA and nonpharmacological, pharmacological, and surgical modalities of treatment are presented according to the different levels of agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations are based on the consensus of clinical experts from a wide range of disciplines taking available evidence into account while balancing the benefits and risks of nonpharmacological, pharmacological, and surgical treatment modalities, and incorporating their preferences and values. Different backgrounds in terms of patient education or drug availability in different countries were not evaluated but will be important.

Is chondroitin sulfate effective for osteoarthritis?

Osteoarthritis is the most prevalent chronic articular disease, in which pain is one of the main symptoms and the major determinant of functional loss. Several therapeutic options have been proposed, including chondroitin sulfate, but its actual usefulness has not yet been established. To answer this question we searched in Epistemonikos database, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources. We identified 13 systematic reviews including 50 randomized trials overall. We extracted data, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach. We concluded it is not clear whether the use of chondroitin sulfate leads to an improvement in pain or functionality in osteoarthritis because the certainty of the evidence is very low.

Chondroitin sulfate efficacy versus celecoxib on knee osteoarthritis structural changes using magnetic resonance imaging: a 2-year multicentre exploratory study

Background

In osteoarthritis (OA) treatment, although chondroitin sulfate (CS) was found in a number of studies using radiography to have a structure-modifying effect, to date CS use is still under debate. A clinical study using quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (qMRI) is therefore of the utmost importance. Here we report data from a 24-month, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled, comparative exploratory study of knee OA. The primary endpoint was to determine the effect of CS 1200 mg/day versus celecoxib 200 mg/day on cartilage volume loss (CVL) in the lateral compartment over time as measured by qMRI. Secondary endpoints included assessment of the OA structural changes and signs and symptoms of OA.

Methods

qMRI was performed at baseline and at 12 and 24 months. CVL, bone marrow lesion size, and synovial thickness were evaluated using qMRI. The primary statistical analysis was carried out on the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population (n = 138) using chi-squared, Fisher’s exact, Wilcoxon Mann–Whitney, and Student’s t tests and analysis of covariance. Analyses were also conducted on the according-to-protocol (ATP; n = 120) population.

Results

In the adjusted mITT analysis, compared with celecoxib treatment, patients treated with CS had a significant reduced CVL at 24 months in the medial compartment (celecoxib –8.1 % ± 4.2, CS –6.3 % ± 3.2; p = 0.018) and medial condyle (–7.7 % ± 4.7, –5.5 % ± 3.9; p = 0.008); no significant effect was seen in the lateral compartment. In the ATP population, CS reduced CVL in the medial compartment at 12 months (celecoxib –5.6 % ± 3.0, CS –4.5 % ± 2.6; p = 0.049) and 24 months (celecoxib –8.4 % ± 4.2, CS –6.6 % ± 3.3; p = 0.021), and in the medial condyle at 24 months (celocoxib –8.1 % ± 4.7, CS –5.7 % ± 4.0; p = 0.010). A trend towards a statistically reduced synovial thickness (celecoxib +17.96 ± 33.73 mm, CS –0.66 ± 22.72 mm; p = 0.076) in the medial suprapatellar bursa was observed in CS patients. Both groups experienced a marked reduction in the incidence of patients with joint swelling/effusion and in symptoms over time. Data showed similar good safety profiles including cardiovascular adverse events for both drugs.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated, for the first time in a 2-year randomised controlled trial using qMRI, the superiority of CS over celecoxib at reducing CVL in knee OA patients.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01354145. Registered 13 May 2011.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13075-016-1149-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Chondroitin for osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis, a common joint disorder, is one of the leading causes of disability. Chondroitin has emerged as a new treatment. Previous meta-analyses have shown contradictory results on the efficacy of chondroitin. This, in addition to the publication of more trials, necessitates a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefit and harm of oral chondroitin for treating osteoarthritis compared with placebo or a comparator oral medication including, but not limited to, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), analgesics, opioids, and glucosamine or other "herbal" medications.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched seven databases up to November 2013, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Science Citation Index (Web of Science) and Current Controlled Trials. We searched the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMEA) websites for adverse effects. Trial registers were not searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized or quasi-randomized clinical trials lasting longer than two weeks, studying adults with osteoarthritis in any joint, and comparing chondroitin with placebo, an active control such as NSAIDs, or other "herbal" supplements such as glucosamine.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed all title assessments, data extractions, and risk of bias assessments.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-three randomized controlled trials including 4,962 participants treated with chondroitin and 4,148 participants given placebo or another control were included. The majority of trials were in knee OA, with few in hip and hand OA. Trial duration varied from 1 month to 3 years. Participants treated with chondroitin achieved statistically significantly and clinically meaningful better pain scores (0-100) in studies less than 6 months than those given placebo with an absolute risk difference of 10% lower (95% confidence interval (CI), 15% to 6% lower; number needed to treat (NNT) = 5 (95% CI, 3 to 8; n = 8 trials) (level of evidence, low; risk of bias, high); but there was high heterogeneity between the trials (T(2) = 0.07; I(2) = 70%, which was not easily explained by differences in risk of bias or study sample size). In studies longer than 6 months, the absolute risk difference for pain was 9% lower (95% CI 18% lower to 0%); n = 6 trials; T(2) = 0.18; I(2) = 83% ), again with low level of evidence.For the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index Minimal Clinically Important Improvement (WOMAC MCII Pain subscale) outcome, a reduction in knee pain by 20% was achieved by 53/100 in the chondroitin group versus 47/100 in the placebo group, an absolute risk difference of 6% (95% CI 1% to 11%), (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.24; T(2) = 0.00; I(2) = 0%) (n = 2 trials, 1253 participants; level of evidence, high; risk of bias, low).Differences in Lequesne's index (composite of pain,function and disability) statistically significantly favoured chondroitin as compared with placebo in studies under six months, with an absolute risk difference of 8% lower (95% CI 12% to 5% lower; T(2)= 0.78; n = 7 trials) (level of evidence, moderate; risk of bias, unclear), also clinically meaningful. Loss of minimum joint space width in the chondroitin group was statistically significantly less than in the placebo group, with a relative risk difference of 4.7% less (95% CI 1.6% to 7.8% less; n = 2 trials) (level of evidence, high; risk of bias, low). Chondroitin was associated with statistically significantly lower odds of serious adverse events compared with placebo with Peto odds ratio of 0.40 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.82; n = 6 trials) (level of evidence, moderate). Chondroitin did not result in statistically significant numbers of adverse events or withdrawals due to adverse events compared with placebo or another drug. Adverse events were reported in a limited fashion, with some studies providing data and others not.Comparisons of chondroitin taken alone or in combination with glucosamine or another supplement showed a statistically significant reduction in pain (0-100) when compared with placebo or an active control, with an absolute risk difference of 10% lower (95% CI 14% to 5% lower); NNT = 4 (95% CI 3 to 6); T(2) = 0.33; I(2) = 91%; n = 17 trials) (level of evidence, low). For physical function, chondroitin in combination with glucosamine or another supplement showed no statistically significant difference from placebo or an active control, with an absolute risk difference of 1% lower (95% CI 6% lower to 3% higher with T(2) = 0.04; n = 5 trials) (level of evidence, moderate). Differences in Lequesne's index statistically significantly favoured chondroitin as compared with placebo, with an absolute risk difference of 8% lower (95% CI, 12% to 4% lower; T(2) = 0.12; n = 10 trials) (level of evidence, moderate). Chondroitin in combination with glucosamine did not result in statistically significant differences in the numbers of adverse events, withdrawals due to adverse events, or in the numbers of serious adverse events compared with placebo or with an active control.The beneficial effects of chondroitin in pain and Lequesne's index persisted when evidence was limited to studies with adequate blinding or studies that used appropriate intention to treat (ITT) analyses. These beneficial effects were uncertain when we limited data to studies with appropriate allocation concealment or a large study sample (> 200) or to studies without pharmaceutical funding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A review of randomized trials of mostly low quality reveals that chondroitin (alone or in combination with glucosamine) was better than placebo in improving pain in participants with osteoarthritis in short-term studies. The benefit was small to moderate with an 8 point greater improvement in pain (range 0 to 100) and a 2 point greater improvement in Lequesne's index (range 0 to 24), both seeming clinically meaningful. These differences persisted in some sensitivity analyses and not others. Chondroitin had a lower risk of serious adverse events compared with control. More high-quality studies are needed to explore the role of chondroitin in the treatment of osteoarthritis. The combination of some efficacy and low risk associated with chondroitin may explain its popularity among patients as an over-the-counter supplement.

Enhancing the intestinal absorption of low molecular weight chondroitin sulfate by conjugation with α-linolenic acid and the transport mechanism of the conjugates

The purpose of this report was to demonstrate the effect of amphiphilic polysaccharides-based self-assembling micelles on enhancing the oral absorption of low molecular weight chondroitin sulfate (LMCS) in vitro and in vivo, and identify the transepithelial transport mechanism of LMCS micelles across the intestinal barrier. α-Linolenic acid-low molecular weight chondroitin sulfate polymers(α-LNA-LMCS) were successfully synthesized, and characterized by FTIR, (1)HNMR, TGA/DSC, TEM, laser light scattering and zeta potential. The significant oral absorption enhancement and elimination half-life (t₁/₂) extension of LNA-LMCS2 in rats were evidenced by intragastric administration in comparison with CS and LMCS. Caco-2 transport studies demonstrated that the apparent permeability coefficient (Papp) of LNA-LMCS2 was significantly higher than that of CS and LMCS (p<0.001), and no significant effects on the overall integrity of the monolayer were observed during the transport process. In addition, α-LNA-LMCS micelles accumulated around the cell membrane and intercellular space observed by confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM). Furthermore, evident alterations in the F-actin cytoskeleton were detected by CLSM observation following the treatment of the cell monolayers with α-LNA-LMCS micelles, which further certified the capacity of α-LNA-LMCS micelles to open the intercellular tight junctions rather than disrupt the overall integrity of the monolayer. Therefore, LNA-LMCS2 with low cytotoxicity and high bioavailability might be a promising substitute for CS in clinical use, such as treating osteoarthritis, atherosclerosis, etc.

Use of glucosamine and chondroitin supplements and risk of colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Glucosamine and chondroitin are non-vitamin, non-mineral supplements which have anti-inflammatory properties. These supplements are typically used for joint pain and osteoarthritis and are commonly taken as either glucosamine alone or glucosamine plus chondroitin. An exploratory analysis conducted within the VITamins And Lifestyle (VITAL) study observed any use of glucosamine and chondroitin to be associated with reduced risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) after 5 years of follow-up.

METHODS

With two additional years of follow-up, we have studied these associations in greater depth, including associations by frequency/duration of use and by formulation, and have evaluated whether observed associations are modified by factors associated with inflammation. Participants include 75,137 western Washington residents aged 50-76 who completed the mailed VITAL questionnaire between 2000 and 2002. Use of glucosamine and chondroitin was ascertained by questions about supplement use during the 10-year period prior to baseline, and participants were followed for CRC through 2008 (n = 557). Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Persons reporting use of glucosamine + chondroitin on 4+ days/week for 3+ years had a non-statistically significant 45 % lower CRC risk than non-users (HR: 0.55; 95 % CI 0.30-1.01; p-trend: 0.16). This association varied by body mass index (p-interaction: 0.006), with inverse association observed among the overweight/obese (p-trend: 0.02), but not among the underweight/normal weight. Use of glucosamine alone was not significantly associated with CRC risk.

CONCLUSIONS

There is great need to identify safe and effective cancer preventive strategies, suggesting that glucosamine and chondroitin may merit further attention as a potential chemopreventive agent.

Symptom and structure modification in osteoarthritis with pharmaceutical-grade chondroitin sulfate: what's the evidence?

OBJECTIVES

Osteoarthritis is a chronic disease characterized by irreversible damage to joint structures, including loss of articular cartilage, osteophyte formation, alterations in the subchondral bone and synovial inflammation. It has been shown that chondroitin sulfate interferes with the progression of structural changes in joint tissues and is used in the management of patients with osteoarthritis.

METHODS

This review summarizes data from relevant reports describing the mechanisms of action of chondroitin sulfate that may explain the beneficial effects of the drug and examines the evidence for clinical efficacy of oral chondroitin sulfate in osteoarthritis. Data included in the review were derived from a literature search in PubMed. Literature searches were performed in PubMed using the search terms 'chondroitin sulfate', 'pharmaceutical-grade', 'osteoarthritis', 'randomized clinical trials', 'humans'. The MEDLINE database was searched from January 1996 through August 2012 for all randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and review articles of chondroitin sulfate in osteoarthritis.

RESULTS

Chondroitin sulfate exerts in vitro a beneficial effect on the metabolism of different cell lines: chondrocytes, synoviocytes and cells from subchondral bone, all involved in osteoarthritis. It increases type II collagen and proteoglycan synthesis in human articular chondrocytes and is able to reduce the production of some pro-inflammatory factors and proteases, to reduce the cellular death process, and improve the anabolic/catabolic balance of the extracellular cartilage matrix (ECM). Clinical trials have reported a beneficial effect of chondroitin sulfate on pain and function. The structure-modifying effects of chondroitin sulfate have been reported and analyzed in recent meta-analyses. The results in knee osteoarthritis demonstrate a small but significant reduction in the rate of decline in joint space width. Because chondroitin sulfate quality of several nutraceuticals has been found to be poor, it is recommended that pharmaceutical-grade chondroitin sulfate is used rather than food supplements in the treatment of OA. Chondroitin sulfate is recommended by several guidelines from international societies in the management of knee and hip OA. Furthermore, its safety profile is favorable when compared with many other therapies used in OA.

CONCLUSION

Chondroitin sulfate is an effective and safe treatment option for patients with osteoarthritis.

Association between use of specialty dietary supplements and C-reactive protein concentrations

Laboratory evidence suggests that certain specialty dietary supplements have antiinflammatory properties, though evidence in humans remains limited. Data on a nationally representative sample of 9,947 adults from the 1999-2004 cycles of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were used to assess the associations between specialty supplement use and inflammation, as measured by serum high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) concentration. Using survey-weighted multivariate linear regression, significant reductions in hs-CRP concentrations were associated with regular use of glucosamine (17%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 7, 26), chondroitin (22%, 95% CI: 8, 33), and fish oil (16%, 95% CI: 0.3, 29). No associations were observed between hs-CRP concentration and regular use of supplements containing methylsulfonylmethane, garlic, ginkgo biloba, saw palmetto, or pycnogenol. These results suggest that glucosamine and chondroitin supplements are associated with reduced inflammation in humans and provide further evidence to support an inverse association between use of fish oil supplements and inflammation. It is important to further investigate the potential antiinflammatory role of these supplements, as there is a need to identify safe and effective ways to reduce inflammation and the burden of inflammation-related diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular disease.

Chondroitin sulfate in the treatment of osteoarthritis: from in vitro studies to clinical recommendations

Chondroitin sulfate (CS) is recommended as a therapeutic intervention in the multimodal approach of osteoarthritis (OA) management. CS has been studied extensively to describe its pharmacology (pharmacokinetic, in vitro and in vivo effects) and its clinical efficacy. Various results have been reported depending on the system of evaluation (model, dosage and duration) and the source of CS (origin and quality). The purpose of this review was to gather most of the available information about CS and to discuss its potency in OA management.

Extracellular matrix proteoglycan plays a pivotal role in sensitization by low pH of mechanosensitive currents in nociceptive sensory neurones

Ischaemia, inflammation, and exercise lead to tissue acidosis, which induces pain and mechanical hyperalgesia. Corresponding to this, enhanced thin-fibre afferent responses to mechanical stimulation have been recorded in vitro at low pH. However, knowledge about how this sensitization by low pH occurs is lacking. In this study, we found that all three types (rapidly adapting (RA), intermediately adapting and slowly adapting) of mechanically activated currents recorded with the whole cell patch-clamp method were sensitized by low pH in rat cultured dorsal root ganglion neurones. This sensitization was mainly observed in neurones positively labelled with isolectin B4 (IB4), which binds to versican, a chondroitin sulfate proteoglycan. Inhibitors of acid-sensitive channels (amiloride and capsazepine) did not block sensitization by low pH except in RA neurones, and extracellular calcium was not involved even in the sensitization of this type of neurone. A broad spectrum kinase inhibitor and a phospholipase C inhibitor (staurosporine and U73122) failed to block pH-induced sensitization in IB4-positive neurones, suggesting that these intracellular signalling pathways are not involved. Notably, both excess chondroitin sulfate in the extracellular solution and pretreatment of the neurone culture with chondroitinase ABC attenuated this low pH-induced sensitization in IB4-positive neurones. These findings suggest that a change in interaction between mechanosensitive channels and/or their auxiliary molecules and the side chain of versican on the cell surface causes this sensitization, at least in IB4-positive neurones. This report proposes a novel mechanism for sensitization that involves extracellular proteoglycans (versican).

Effect of chondroitin sulfate on turpentine-induced down-regulation of CYP1A2 and CYP3A6

This study aimed to assess whether chronic administration of chondroitin sulfate (CS) affects baseline expression of cytochrome P450 isoforms and impedes the decrease in expression and activity of CYP1A2 and CYP3A6 in rabbits with a turpentine-induced inflammatory reaction (TIIR). Seven groups of 5 rabbits, 3 control groups and 4 receiving 20 mg/kg/day of CS for 20 and 30 days, were used. The rabbits of 1 control group and 2 groups receiving CS had a TIIR; finally, the rabbits of one of the control groups remained in the animal facilities for 30 days to assess the effect of time and environment on cytochrome P450. In control rabbits, intake of CS for 20 and 30 days did not affect CYP3A6, CYP1A2 and NADPH cytochrome P450 reductase (CPR) mRNA, protein expression and activity. Compared with control rabbits, the TIIR not only reduced mRNA, protein expression and activity of CYP3A6 and CYP1A2 but also that of CPR. In rabbits with TIIR, CS prevented the decrease of CYP3A6 expression but not the reduction in activity. CS did not impede TIIR-induced down-regulation of CYP1A2. Hepatic NO() concentrations and NF-κB nuclear translocation were increased by the TIIR, effect reversed by CS. In vitro, in hepatocytes, CS did not alter the expression and activity of CYP3A6, CYP1A2, and CPR. In conclusion, oral CS elicits a systemic effect but does not affect CYP1A2, CYP3A6, and CPR in control rabbits, although in rabbits with TIIR, CS prevents CYP3A6 protein down-regulation but not that of CYP1A2.

Emerging drugs for osteoarthritis

INTRODUCTION

Osteoarthritis (OA), the most prevalent form of joint disease, affects as much as 13% of the world's population. In the USA, it is the leading cause of disability in people over age 65 and is characterized by progressive cartilage loss, bone remodeling, osteophyte formation and synovial inflammation with resultant joint pain and disability. There are no treatments marketed for structural disease modification; current treatments mainly target symptoms, with > 75% of patients reporting need for additional symptomatic treatment.

AREAS COVERED

Drugs in later development (Phase II - III) for OA pain and joint structural degeneration are reviewed. Topics that are not covered in this article are procedural-based (e.g., arthrocentesis, physical therapy), behavioral-based (e.g., weight loss, pain coping techniques) or device-based (e.g., knee braces, surgical implants) treatments.

EXPERT OPINION

More in-depth understanding of the pathophysiology of the disease, as well as elucidation of the link between clinical symptomatology and structural changes in the joint will likely lead to the development of novel target classes with promising efficacy in the future. Efficacy notwithstanding, there remain significant hurdles to overcome in clinical development of these therapeutics, inherent in the progression pattern of the disease as well as challenges with readouts for both pain and structure modification trials.

What about supplements for osteoarthritis? A critical and evidenced-based review

Dietary supplements have inundated the commercial market in recent times. These so called "health" supplements are being marketed as beneficial in the prevention and regression of several common medical conditions that include osteoarthritis. This review provides an overview of osteoarthritis as a common disease and elucidates the disease process in relation to conventional therapeutic approaches. We also attempt to present perspectives about the dietary industry, focusing on the widely available dietary supplements for osteoarthritis; then we discuss the current available evidence regarding these common dietary supplements which are finally consolidated and enumerated as major key points.

Development of chondroitin sulfate encapsulated PLGA microsphere delivery systems with controllable multiple burst releases for treating osteoarthritis

The purpose of the study was to design and develop unique drug delivery systems with controllable multiple burst releases of drugs for treating osteoarthritis. Chondroitin sulfate (CS) was encapsulated into four types of PLGA materials, that is, PLGA 50:50, PLGA 65:35, PLGA 75:25, and PLGA 85:15. The effects of microsphere size and various combinations of blend PLGA microspheres on CS release were investigated. The cytotoxicity of the CS-encapsulated microspheres was investigated according to the ISO 10993 guideline. Our study showed that the encapsulation efficiency of CS into PLGA 50:50 microspheres varied with the size of microspheres; however, the encapsulation efficiencies of CS into PLGA microspheres were independent of the types of PLGA materials. The size of PLGA microspheres was shown to affect the rate of CS release. With the increase of microsphere size from 75-150 μm to 300-355 μm, the initial CS release decreased. Further increase in microsphere size led to an increase in the initial CS release. In addition, combination of different types of PLGA microspheres was shown to be capable of achieving multiple burst CS releases. Moreover, the CS encapsulated PLGA microspheres were shown to be non-cytotoxic. This study proved the concept of multiple burst drug releases that were achieved by encapsulating CS into different types of PLGA microspheres and delivering CS from systems consisting of mixed types of PLGA microspheres, which may be applied to treat osteoarthritis by mimicking multiple intra-joint injection of therapeutic agents.

Chondroitin sulphate reduces both cartilage volume loss and bone marrow lesions in knee osteoarthritis patients starting as early as 6 months after initiation of therapy: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study using MRI

Objective

To determine the effect of chondroitin sulphate (CS) treatment on cartilage volume loss, subchondral bone marrow lesions (BML), synovitis and disease symptoms in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

In this pilot multicentre, randomised, double-blind, controlled trial in primary knee OA, 69 patients with clinical signs of synovitis were randomised to receive CS 800 mg or placebo once daily for 6 months followed by an open-label phase of 6 months in which patients in both groups received CS 800 mg once daily. Cartilage volume and BML were assessed by MRI at baseline and at 6 and 12 months; synovial membrane thickness was assessed at baseline and at 6 months.

Results

The CS group showed significantly less cartilage volume loss than the placebo group as early as 6 months for the global knee (p=0.030), lateral compartment (p=0.015) and tibial plateaus (p=0.002), with significance persisting at 12 months. Significantly lower BML scores were found for the CS group at 12 months in the lateral compartment (p=0.035) and the lateral femoral condyle (p=0.044). Disease symptoms were similar between the two groups.

Conclusion

CS treatment significantly reduced the cartilage volume loss in knee OA starting at 6 months of treatment, and BML at 12 months. These findings suggest a joint structure protective effect of CS and provide new in vivo information on its mode of action in knee OA.