A novel diclofenac gel (AMZ001) applied once or twice daily in subjects with painful knee osteoarthritis: A randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial

A phase 2b double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial of SB-061, an aggrecan mimetic, in patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intra-articular injections of a novel aggrecan mimetic, SB-061, in subjects with knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase II study comparing intra-articular injections of SB-061 with placebo (isotonic saline) for 52 weeks, administered at baseline, Wk 16, and Wk 32. Eligible subjects had a KL grade of 2 or 3 on X-ray of the target knee and a Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score ≥20 out of 50 at screening and baseline visits. Subjects having any other knee condition were excluded. Use of analgesics was prohibited, except for rescue medication. The primary endpoint was change from baseline (CFB) in WOMAC pain at Week 8. Secondary endpoints were CFB in WOMAC function and total, ICOAP, Patient Global Assessment, and 20-meter walk test. Exploratory endpoints included structural CFB in magnetic resonance imaging entities.

RESULTS

A total of 288 subjects were randomized to SB-061 (n = 145) or placebo (n = 143), and 252 (87.5%) completed injections. The groups were comparable at baseline. The primary endpoint was not met, as no significant difference in the CFB of the WOMAC pain score at Week 8 between groups was observed, nor at any other time point during the study. Similarly, neither of the secondary or exploratory endpoints indicated any significant difference between groups. The frequency and type of adverse events were similar between groups. SB-061 was well-tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Intra-articular injections of SB-061 administered at baseline, Week 16, and Week 32, over one year in subjects with knee OA, were safe but did not show any statistically significant effect on knee pain nor on other symptomatic or structural entities compared to placebo.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER EUDRACT NO

2019-004515-31.

Multidisciplinary Guidelines for the Rational Use of Topical Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs for Musculoskeletal Pain (2022)

(1) Background: Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are one of the primary drugs for treating musculoskeletal pain. However, there are currently no evidence-based recommendations about drug selection, drug administration, drug interactions, and use in special populations or other pharmacology-related content of such medications. To this end, the Chinese Pharmaceutical Association Hospital Pharmacy Professional Committee developed multidisciplinary guidelines on using topical NSAIDs to treat musculoskeletal pain. (2) Methods: The guidelines development process followed the World Health Organization guideline development handbook, the GRADE methodology, and the statement of Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare. The guideline panel used the Delphi method to identify six clinical questions to be addressed in the guidelines. An independent systematic review team conducted a systematic search and integration of evidence. (3) Results: Based on the balance between the benefits and harms of an intervention, the quality of the evidence, patient preferences and values, and resource utilization, the guideline panel developed 11 recommendations and nine expert consensuses on using topical NSAIDs to treat acute and chronic musculoskeletal pain. (4) Conclusions: Based on the effectiveness and overall safety of topical NSAIDs, we recommend patients with musculoskeletal pain use topical NSAIDs and suggest high-risk patients use topical NSAIDs, such as those with other diseases or receiving other concurrent treatments. The evidenced-based guidelines on topical NSAIDs for musculoskeletal pain incorporated a pharmacist perspective. The guidelines have the potential to facilitate the rational use of topical NSAIDs. The guideline panel will monitor the relevant evidence and update the recommendations accordingly.

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.

Osteoarthritis year in review 2021: epidemiology & therapy

This "Year in review" presents a selection of research themes and individual studies from the clinical osteoarthritis (OA) field (epidemiology and therapy) and includes noteworthy descriptive, analytical-observational, and intervention studies. The electronic database search for the review was conducted in Medline, Embase and medRxiv (15th April 2020 to 1st April 2021). Following study screening, the following OA-related themes emerged: COVID-19; disease burden; occupational risk; prediction models; cartilage loss and pain; stem cell treatments; novel pharmacotherapy trials; therapy for less well researched OA phenotypes; benefits and challenges of Individual Participant Data (IPD) meta-analyses; patient choice-balancing benefits and harms; OA and comorbidity; and inequalities in OA. Headline study findings included: a longitudinal cohort study demonstrating no evidence for a harmful effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in terms of COVID-19 related deaths; a Global Burden of Disease study reporting a 102% increase in crude incidence rate of OA in 2017 compared to 1990; a longitudinal study reporting cartilage thickness loss was associated with only a very small degree of worsening in pain over 2 years; an exploratory analysis of a non-OA randomised controlled trial (RCT) finding reduced risk of total joint replacement with an Interleukin -1β inhibitor (canakinumab); a significant relationship between cumulative disadvantage and clinical outcomes of pain and depression mediated by perceived discrimination in a secondary analysis from a RCT; worsening socioeconomic circumstances were associated with future arthritis diagnosis in an innovative natural experiment (with implications for unique research possibilities arising from the COVID-19 pandemic context).

New developments in osteoarthritis pharmacological therapies

OA is an increasingly common, painful condition with complex aetiology and limited therapies. Approaches to expanding our therapeutic armamentarium have included repurposing existing therapies used for other rheumatological conditions, modifying existing OA preparations to enhance their benefits, and identifying new therapeutics. HCQ and low-dose MTX have been unsuccessful in improving hand OA pain or reducing structural progression. Anti-IL-6 and anti-GM-CSF also did not improve symptoms in hand OA trials, but IL-1 remains an intriguing target for large-joint OA, based on reduced joint replacements in a post hoc analysis from a large cardiovascular disease trial. The peripheral nociceptive pathway appears an attractive target, with mAbs to nerve growth factor and IA capsaicin demonstrating efficacy; tropomyosin receptor kinase A inhibitors are at an earlier stage of development. Limited evidence suggests pharmacological therapies can modify cartilage and bone structural progression, though evidence of synchronous symptom benefits are lacking.

Efficacy of platelet-rich plasma and plasma for symptomatic treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a double-blinded placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial

Background

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has a still conflicting efficacy for knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and might be a minimally invasive and safe treatment alternative. The potential benefit of only plasma (non-enriched) has never been investigated. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and plasma to improve pain and function in participants with KOA over 24 weeks.

Methods

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with 3 groups (n = 62): PRP (n = 20), plasma (n = 21) and saline (n = 21). Two ultrasound-guided knee injections were performed with a 2-week interval. The primary outcome was visual analog scale 0-10 cm (VAS) for overall pain at week 24, with intermediate assessments at weeks 6 and 12. Main secondary outcomes were: KOOS, OMERACT-OARSI criteria and TUGT.

Results

At baseline, 92% of participants were female, with a mean age of 65 years, mean BMI of 28.0 Kg/m²and mean VAS pain of 6.2 cm. Change in pain from baseline at week 24 were -2.9 (SD 2.5), -2.4 (SD 2.5) and -3.5 cm (SD 3.3) for PRP, plasma and saline, respectively (p intergroup = 0.499). There were no differences between the three groups at weeks 6 and 12. Similarly, there were no differences between groups regarding secondary outcomes. The PRP group showed higher frequency of adverse events (65% versus 24% and 33% for plasma and saline, respectively, p = 0.02), mostly mild transitory increase in pain.

Conclusions

PRP and plasma were not superior to placebo for pain and function improvement in KOA over 24 weeks. The PRP group had a higher frequency of mild transitory increase in pain.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03138317, 03/05/2017.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04706-7.