A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of low-dose oral prednisolone for treating painful hand osteoarthritis

Inflammation as a therapeutic target for osteoarthritis: A literature review of clinical trials

The burden of osteoarthritis (OA) is rapidly increasing with population aging, but there are still no approved disease-modifying drugs available. Accumulating evidence has shown that OA is a heterogeneous disease with multiple phenotypes, and it is unlikely to respond to one-size-fits-all treatments. Inflammation is recognized as an important phenotype of OA and is associated with worse pain and joint deterioration. Therefore, it is believed that anti-inflammatory treatments may be more effective for OA with an inflammatory phenotype. In this review, we summarized clinical trials that evaluated anti-inflammatory treatments for OA and discussed whether these treatments are more effective in inflammatory OA phenotypes compared to general OA patients.

Hand osteoarthritis: A fresh look

Hand osteoarthritis (OA) has been the subject of numerous publications in recent years, particularly in the fields of imaging and therapeutics. The imaging studies revealed a good correlation between the presence of synovitis and/or subchondral edema and arthritic joint pain. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have assessed the efficacy of biologics and conventional DMARDs in patients with symptomatic hand OA. No less than six RCTs have evaluated the symptomatic and, in some cases, structural efficacy of anti-IL-1, anti-TNF or anti-IL-6 drugs. Overall, the results of these trials were disappointing - none of them demonstrated superiority over placebo. There were also two negative trials with hydroxychloroquine. In the end, the only trial that was positive evaluated 10mg oral prednisone versus placebo for 6 weeks in patients with flares of hand OA and synovitis visible on ultrasound. While that trial confirms the role of inflammation in hand OA, it should obviously not encourage the long-term use of corticosteroids as a symptomatic treatment.

Sustained increase of pinch strength after traction treatment for symptomatic distal interphalangeal joint osteoarthritis

Background

Symptomatic distal interphalangeal joint osteoarthritis is a common joint disease that causes hand disability and reduces quality of life. There are few conservative treatment options for this condition. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of traction treatment on symptomatic distal interphalangeal joint osteoarthritis.

Methods

This prospective, longitudinal study involved multiple time-series observations and within-subject controls. The most painful distal interphalangeal joints in patients with hand osteoarthritis were treated by daily, 15-min joint traction at home using a finger trap orthosis. The corresponding contralateral digits were used as within-subject controls. The primary outcome measure was two-point pinch strength, and the secondary outcome measures were radiographic findings and treatment adherence. Longitudinal and pairwise comparison analyses of the treated and control digits examined improvements in two-point pinch strength at months 1, 3, and 6 from baseline. The durability of treatment effects after treatment discontinuation was investigated at month 12.

Results

Eighteen treated digits and 18 corresponding control digits were eligible for analysis. There was a significant increase in two-point pinch strength after 1-month traction, and this increase was maintained until month 6 despite the absence of radiographic changes. Compared to controls, significant improvement in two-point pinch strength relative to baseline was seen at every observation time point, with a moderate to large effect size. There was no time-treatment interaction. Treatment adherence was high. At months 3 and 6, around 60-80 % of digits were voluntarily treated. Pinch strength was comparable between months 6 and 12, with greater improvement than in the control group.

Conclusion

Joint traction treatment can improve pinch strength in symptomatic distal interphalangeal joint osteoarthritis. Larger, randomized studies on traction treatment and the effect on hand function are warranted.

Report of similar placebo response in one internet versus onsite randomised controlled trials from the literature

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the magnitude and the predictors of the placebo response in an internet versus onsite randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people with hand osteoarthritis (HOA).

Method

This study is a post-hoc analysis based on one internet RCT (RADIANT) and previously published onsite RCTs for HOA identified through a rigorous searching and selection strategy. The magnitude of the placebo response in the two different types of RCTs were compared using heterogeneity statistics and forest plots visualisation. Classic placebo predictors as well as a combined model, defined with data from onsite RCTs, were tested to predict the placebo response.

Results

We analysed the dataset from RADIANT and fourteen previously published onsite RCTs. None of the analyses showed a significant difference between the placebo response for the internet versus onsite RCTs. The "classic" placebo predictors combined in a multivariate predictive model correlated significantly with the placebo response measured in RADIANT study.

Conclusion

Despite the absence of face-to-face interactions with the study personnel, there is no evidence that either the magnitude or the predictors of the placebo response of this internet RCT differ from those of onsite RCTs. This analysis is considered as a first step towards evaluating the difference between these designs and strengthens the argument that internet RCTs remain an acceptable alternative way to assess the efficacy of an active treatment in comparison to a placebo.

Osteoarthritis: Insights into Diagnosis, Pathophysiology, Therapeutic Avenues, and the Potential of Natural Extracts

Osteoarthritis (OA) stands as a prevalent and progressively debilitating clinical condition globally, impacting joint structures and leading to their gradual deterioration through inflammatory mechanisms. While both non-modifiable and modifiable factors contribute to its onset, numerous aspects of OA pathophysiology remain elusive despite considerable research strides. Presently, diagnosis heavily relies on clinician expertise and meticulous differential diagnosis to exclude other joint-affecting conditions. Therapeutic approaches for OA predominantly focus on patient education for self-management alongside tailored exercise regimens, often complemented by various pharmacological interventions primarily targeting pain alleviation. However, pharmacological treatments typically exhibit short-term efficacy and local and/or systemic side effects, with prosthetic surgery being the ultimate resolution in severe cases. Thus, exploring the potential integration or substitution of conventional drug therapies with natural compounds and extracts emerges as a promising frontier in enhancing OA management. These alternatives offer improved safety profiles and possess the potential to target specific dysregulated pathways implicated in OA pathogenesis, thereby presenting a holistic approach to address the condition's complexities.

Molecular pathogenesis of OA pain: Past, present, and future

OBJECTIVE

To provide a historical perspective and narrative review on research into the molecular pathogenesis of osteoarthritis pain.

DESIGN

PubMed databases were searched for combinations of "osteoarthritis", "pain" and "animal models" for papers that represented key phases in the history of osteoarthritis pain discovery research including epidemiology, pathology, imaging, preclinical modeling and clinical trials.

RESULTS

The possible anatomical sources of osteoarthritis pain were identified over 50 years ago, but relatively slow progress has been made in understanding the apparent disconnect between structural changes captured by radiography and symptom severity. Translationally relevant animal models of osteoarthritis have aided in our understanding of the structural and molecular drivers of osteoarthritis pain, including molecules such as nerve growth factor and C-C motif chemokine ligand 2. Events leading to persistent osteoarthritis pain appear to involve a two-step process involving changes in joint innervation, including neo-innervation of the articular cartilage, as well as sensitization at the level of the joint, dorsal root ganglion and central nervous system.

CONCLUSIONS

There remains a great need for the development of treatments to reduce osteoarthritis pain in patients. Harnessing all that we have learned over the past several decades is helping us to appreciate the important interaction between structural disease and pain, and this is likely to facilitate development of new disease modifying therapies in the future.

Diagnostic Value of Short Course Low-dose Prednisolone in Patients with Clinically Suspected Seronegative Inflammatory Arthritis - A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

We aim to establish the utility of a trial of low-dose systemic glucocorticoid therapy in the assessment of new clinically suspected inflammatory arthritis patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients from a private rheumatology practice in Melbourne, Australia between January 1st, 2019, and December 31st, 2021, who presented with clinically suspected inflammatory arthritis and subsequently underwent a trial of low-dose prednisolone (15 mg daily weaned over three weeks in 5 mg increments). We excluded patients with known autoimmune/ inflammatory disorders or concurrent immunosuppression at presentation. We collected basic participant demographic details and clinical details of their presentation, glucocorticoid response, investigations, and treatment.

RESULTS

We recruited 177 participants with a median age of 52, and 69.5% were female gender. The median symptom time to presentation was 12 months. Hands were the most affected joint in 63.3% and 85% had bilateral disease. Among the participants, 29.4% had synovitis on clinical review and 75.7% had imaging performed as part of the initial assessment. At presentation, the median CRP was 11 and the median ESR was 16. 79.7% of the cohort experienced significant improvement in their arthritis symptoms from low-dose glucocorticoids and 83.6% of the cohort required long-term immunosuppression for an underlying inflammatory condition. Of those who responded to glucocorticoids, 92.1% were diagnosed with an inflammatory condition. Rheumatoid arthritis was the most common overall diagnosis in 28%.

CONCLUSION

An initial trial of low-dose glucocorticoids in undifferentiated arthritis patients is useful in predicting the diagnosis of inflammatory arthritis. It is also a predictor of further long-term steroid-sparing therapy.

Comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for hand osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials

OBJECTIVE

To explore the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for hand osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

We systematically searched Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until 26 December 2021, for randomised trials of pharmacological interventions for people with hand OA. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and assessed the risk of bias. We calculated the effect sizes for pain (standardised mean differences) using Bayesian random effects models for network meta-analysis (NMA) and pairwise meta-analysis. Based on a pre-specified protocol, we prospectively registered the study at PROSPERO, CRD42021215393.

RESULTS

We included 72 trials with 7609 participants. 65 trials (n=5957) were eligible for the quantitative synthesis, investigating 29 pharmacological interventions. Oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and oral glucocorticoids' NMA effect sizes were -0.18 (95% credible interval -0.36 to 0.02) and -0.54 (-0.83 to -0.24), respectively, compared with placebo, and the result was consistent when limiting evidence to the pairwise meta-analysis of trials without high risk of bias. Intra-articular hyaluronate, intra-articular glucocorticoids, hydroxychloroquine, and topical NSAIDs' NMA effect sizes were 0.22 (-0.08 to 0.51), 0.25 (0.00 to 0.51), -0.01 (-0.19 to 0.18), and -0.14 (-0.33 to 0.08), respectively, compared with placebo. Oral NSAIDs were inferior to oral glucocorticoids with an NMA effect size of 0.36 (0.01 to 0.72). No intervention was superior to placebo when stratifying for thumb and finger OA.

CONCLUSION

Oral NSAIDs and glucocorticoids are apparently effective pharmacological interventions in hand OA. Intra-articular therapies and topical NSAIDs were not superior to placebo.

Efficacy of corticosteroids for hand osteoarthritis - a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

There is some evidence that corticosteroids may have a beneficial effect in hand osteoarthritis. We examined the efficacy of corticosteroids on symptoms and structural outcomes in hand osteoarthritis.

Methods

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to October 2021 for randomized controlled trials investigating the efficacy of corticosteroids in hand osteoarthritis. Two authors independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the RoB 2 tool. Standardized mean difference (SMD) or mean difference (MD) was calculated, and random-effects meta-analyses were performed.

Results

Of 13 included trials, 3 examined oral corticosteroids and clinical outcomes in any hand joints, 9 examined intra-articular injection of corticosteroids and clinical outcomes at the first carpometacarpal joint and one in the interphalangeal joints. In meta-analysis, oral corticosteroids reduced pain (SMD -0.53, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.28) and improved stiffness (MD -5.03, 95% CI -9.91 to -0.15; Australian Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index stiffness subscale) and function (SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.12) at 4-6 weeks. However, there was no significant persistent effect on pain and function at 3 months which was 6-8 weeks after study medication was stopped. There was no significant effect of intra-articular corticosteroids on pain or function at 4-6 weeks or over 3-12 months in first carpometacarpal osteoarthritis. Two trials evaluated joint structure at 4-6 weeks: one study showed oral corticosteroids reduced synovial thickening, neither showed an effect on synovitis.

Conclusions

There was low-certainty evidence for a medium effect of oral corticosteroids on pain relief and stiffness improvement and small-to-medium effect on functional improvement at 4-6 weeks, with no significant effect for intra-articular corticosteroids. Corticosteroids had no significant effect on any outcomes over longer term (3-12 months) off treatment. No trials examined the effect of corticosteroids on disease progression. The role of corticosteroids in hand osteoarthritis is limited.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05619-9.

The management of hand osteoarthritis: The rheumatologist's perspective

Hand osteoarthritis (OA) is treated by several medical professionals. In this review the rheumatologist's perspective will be conveyed. The rheumatologist tasks are to diagnose hand OA, exclude other causes of patient's complaints, and provide treatment. The rheumatologist therefore has a distinctive and important role in hand OA treatment. Although no disease modifying treatment exists, there are multiple options for managing hand OA in rheumatology practice, with the goal of achieving symptom relief and optimizing hand function. These treatments can be non-pharmacological or pharmacological. In this review we will provide a summary of evidence-based management options based on existing guidelines. Furthermore, we will describe common practice among rheumatologists for hand OA management. In order to do so, we performed a literature review of studies addressing treatment modality usage for hand OA. The review comprised 25 studies, which were heterogeneous in terms of treatment modality usage. In addition, a detailed description of care usage by patients in a Rheumatology outpatient clinic is given, based on data of our Hand OSTeoArthritis in Secondary care primary hand OA cohort. The large majority of these patients used any form of hand OA treatment (83%). Non-pharmacological treatment was less frequently used (47%) than pharmacological treatment (77%).

Topical corticosteroid for treatment of hand osteoarthritis: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Hand osteoarthritis is a common and disabling chronic joint disease with a lack of effective therapies. Emerging evidence suggests the role of local inflammation in causing pain in hand osteoarthritis. Corticosteroids are potent anti-inflammatory drugs used in many rheumatic diseases. The aim of this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial is to determine whether topical corticosteroid reduces pain over 6 weeks in patients with hand osteoarthritis.

Methods

One hundred participants with hand osteoarthritis will be recruited from the community in Melbourne, Australia, and randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive either topical Diprosone OV or placebo ointment administered 3 times daily on the painful hand joints for 6 weeks. The primary outcome is pain reduction (assessed by 100 mm visual analogue scale) at 6 weeks. The secondary outcomes include changes in pain and function assessed using Functional Index for Hand Osteoarthritis, Australian Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index, Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire, and tender and swollen joint count at 6 weeks. Adverse events will be recorded. The primary analysis will be by intention to treat, including all participants in their randomised groups.

Discussion

This study will provide high-quality evidence to determine whether topical corticosteroid reduces pain over 6 weeks in patients with hand osteoarthritis, with major clinical and public health importance by informing clinical practice guidelines for the management of hand osteoarthritis and reducing the burden of the disabling disease.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN12620000599976. Registered 22 May 2020.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04921-2.

Pharmaceutical therapeutics for articular regeneration and restoration: state-of-the-art technology for screening small molecular drugs

Articular cartilage damage caused by sports injury or osteoarthritis (OA) has gained increased attention as a worldwide health burden. Pharmaceutical treatments are considered cost-effective means of promoting cartilage regeneration, but are limited by their inability to generate sufficient functional chondrocytes and modify disease progression. Small molecular chemical compounds are an abundant source of new pharmaceutical therapeutics for cartilage regeneration, as they have advantages in design, fabrication, and application, and, when used in combination, act as powerful tools for manipulating cellular fate. In this review, we present current achievements in the development of small molecular drugs for cartilage regeneration, particularly in the fields of chondrocyte generation and reversion of chondrocyte degenerative phenotypes. Several clinically or preclinically available small molecules, which have been shown to facilitate chondrogenesis, chondrocyte dedifferentiation, and cellular reprogramming, and subsequently ameliorate cartilage degeneration by targeting inflammation, matrix degradation, metabolism, and epigenetics, are summarized. Notably, this review introduces essential parameters for high-throughput screening strategies, including models of different chondrogenic cell sources, phenotype readout methodologies, and transferable advanced systems from other fields. Overall, this review provides new insights into future pharmaceutical therapies for cartilage regeneration.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the pharmacological management of osteoarthritis in the very old: prescribe or proscribe?

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis worldwide, and ranges in the top 5–10 most disabling diseases. Contrary to common opinion, this disease is severe, often symptomatic, and may lead to loss of mobility and independence, as well as being responsible for increased frailty and excess mortality [standardized ratio: 1.55 (95% confidence interval, CI: 1.41–1.70)]. The incidence of OA increases dramatically with age in an increasingly ageing world. Therefore, practitioners involved in the management of OA often have to manage very old patients, aged 75–80 years and above, as part of their daily practice. Treatment options are limited. In addition to education and physical treatments, which are at the forefront of all treatment recommendations but require a low level of symptoms to be implemented, many pharmacological options are proposed. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can be used as a second-line treatment but with great caution. However, the precise incidence of cardiovascular, renal, and gastrointestinal adverse events in very elderly patients is unclear. All of these risks are increased in the elderly. The relative risks can be extrapolated from various studies. However, what is the absolute risk according to age categorization? The answer to this question is important because NSAIDs should be used in very elderly patients with OA only if full information has been provided and the decision to prescribe this treatment is shared between the patient and their doctor. This article reviews the risks and currently available recommendations, and proposes practical options and warnings to allow for a responsible and limited use of NSAIDs in the very old.

Hand Erosive Osteoarthritis and Distal Interphalangeal Involvement in Psoriatic Arthritis: The Place of Conservative Therapy

Hand erosive osteoarthritis (HEOA) and Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) with DIP involvement are common diseases affecting the hand. Both of them evolve with a progressive limitation in grip due to limited range of motion of the affected joints and stenosing tenosynovitis. Pharmacological options currently available (corticosteroids and clodronate or Idrossicloroquine) for the treatment of EHOA are mostly symptomatic and currently there are no effective drugs able to modify the course of the disease. In addition, data on drug effectiveness of PsA with DIP involvement are lacking. Conservative therapy should be considered in order to reduce pain and improve hand functionality. There are many studies debating a wide range of non-pharmacological intervention in the management of HEOA: joint protection program, range of motion and strengthening exercise, hand exercise with electromagnetic therapy, application of heat with paraffin wax or balneotherapy, occupational therapy and education. Concerning conservative treatment strategies to treat PsA, on the contrary, current evidence is still weak. Further research is needed to find the correct place of physical therapy to prevent stiffness and ankylosis due to the vicious circle of inflammation-pain-immobility-rigidity.

Choice of control group treatments in hand osteoarthritis trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess how patient characteristics and study design influence the effectiveness of control interventions in hand OA trials.

METHODS

The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020163473). Two authors independently searched four electronic databases from their inception to December 31, 2019. Randomized and non-randomized controlled hand OA trials were included if pain intensity was assessed using a validated scale. We allocated control groups into one of the following: placebo, add-on treatment, no treatment, or active treatment. The standardized mean differences (d) of pain, as well as subjective function and hand strength, were pooled with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and 90% prediction intervals using random-effects models. Meta-regression and post-hoc subgroup analyses were performed to investigate which factors potentially impacted placebo analgesia and between-study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Thirty-one placebo, 11 add-on, 12 no-treatment, and 10 active-treatment controls were included in meta-analyses. Effective pain relief was observed in placebo (d = -0.50, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.37), add-on (d = -0.35, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.12), and active-treatment (d = -0.92, 95% CI -1.35 to -0.48) groups. In subjective function, these treatments had smaller but beneficial effects; hand strength, contrastingly, was not improved. Placebo effects were larger when flare designs were used (d = -0.96) and more homogeneous when minimum pain thresholds were set (d = -0.46, 90% prediction intervals -0.79 to -0.14).

CONCLUSION

Placebo, add-on, and active control treatments were more effective than the no treatment control in relieving hand pain and improving subjective function. By choosing minimum pain thresholds and flare requirements at patient enrollment, moderate pain relief may be replicated among control participants in future randomized placebo-controlled trials.

Task shifting in the care for patients with hand osteoarthritis. Protocol for a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

Background

Current health policy states that patients with osteoarthritis (OA) should mainly be managed in primary health care. Still, research shows that patients with hand OA have poor access to recommended treatment in primary care, and in Norway, they are increasingly referred to rheumatologist consultations in specialist care. In this randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, we will test if a new model, where patients referred to consultation in specialist health care receive their first consultation by an occupational therapy (OT) specialist, is as safe and effective as the traditional model, where they receive their first consultation by a rheumatologist. More specifically, we will answer the following questions:

What are the characteristics of patients with hand OA referred to specialist health care with regards to joint affection, disease activity, symptoms and function?

Is OT-led hand OA care as effective and safe as rheumatologist-led care with respect to treatment response, disease activity, symptoms, function and patient satisfaction?

Is OT-led hand OA care equal to, or more cost effective than rheumatologist-led care?

Which factors, regardless of hand OA care, predict improvement 6 and 12 months after baseline?

Methods

Participants will be patients with hand OA diagnosed by a general practitioner and referred for consultation at one of two Norwegian departments of rheumatology. Those who agree will attend a clinical assessment and report their symptoms and function in validated outcome measures, before they are randomly selected to receive their first consultation by an OT specialist (n = 200) or by a rheumatologist (n = 200). OTs may refer patients to a rheumatologist consultation and vice versa. The primary outcome will be the number of patients classified as OMERACT/OARSI-responders after six months. Secondary outcomes are pain, function and satisfaction with care over the twelve-month trial period. The analysis of the primary outcome will be done by logistic regression. A two-sided 95% confidence interval for the difference in response probability will be formed, and non-inferiority of OT-led care will be claimed if the upper endpoint of this interval does not exceed 15%.

Discussion

The findings will improve access to evidence-based management of people with hand OA.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03102788. Registered April 6th, 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03102788?term=Kjeken&draw=2&rank=1

Date and version identifier:

December 17th, 2020. First version.

Emerging pharmaceutical therapies for osteoarthritis

The prevalence of osteoarthritis (OA) and the burden associated with the disease are steadily increasing worldwide, representing a major public health challenge for the coming decades. The lack of specific treatments for OA has led to it being recognized as a serious disease that has an unmet medical need. Advances in the understanding of OA pathophysiology have enabled the identification of a variety of potential therapeutic targets involved in the structural progression of OA, some of which are promising and under clinical investigation in randomized controlled trials. Emerging therapies include those targeting matrix-degrading proteases or senescent chondrocytes, promoting cartilage repair or limiting bone remodelling, local low-grade inflammation or Wnt signalling. In addition to these potentially disease-modifying OA drugs (DMOADs), several targets are being explored for the treatment of OA-related pain, such as nerve growth factor inhibitors. The results of these studies are expected to considerably reshape the landscape of OA management over the next few years. This Review describes the pathophysiological processes targeted by emerging therapies for OA, along with relevant clinical data and discussion of the main challenges for the further development of these therapies, to provide context for the latest advances in the field of pharmaceutical therapies for OA.

Efficacy of tocilizumab in patients with hand osteoarthritis: double blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of tocilizumab, an antibody against IL-6 receptor, in patients with hand osteoarthritis.

METHODS

This was a multicentre, 12-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study from November 2015 to October 2018. Patients with symptomatic hand osteoarthritis (pain ≥40 on a 0-100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) despite analgesics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; at least three painful joints, Kellgren-Lawrence grade ≥2) were randomised to receive two infusions 4 weeks apart (weeks 0 and 4) of tocilizumab (8 mg/kg intravenous) or placebo. The primary endpoint was changed in VAS pain at week 6. Secondary outcomes included the number of painful and swollen joints, duration of morning stiffness, patients' and physicians' global assessment and function scores.

RESULTS

Of 104 patients screened, 91 (45 to tocilizumab and 46 to placebo; 82% women; mean age 64.4 (SD 8.7) years) were randomly assigned and 79 completed the 12-week study visit. The mean change between baseline and week 6 on the VAS for pain (primary outcome) was -7.9 (SD 19.4) and -9.9 (SD 20.1) in the tocilizumab and placebo groups (p=0.7). The groups did not differ for any secondary outcomes at weeks 4, 6, 8 or 12. Overall, adverse events were slightly more frequent in the tocilizumab than placebo group.

CONCLUSION

Tocilizumab was no more effective than placebo for pain relief in patients with hand osteoarthritis.

Of mice and men: converging on a common molecular understanding of osteoarthritis

Despite an increasing burden of osteoarthritis in developed societies, target discovery has been slow and there are currently no approved disease-modifying osteoarthritis drugs. This lack of progress is due in part to a series of misconceptions over the years: that osteoarthritis is an inevitable consequence of ageing, that damaged articular cartilage cannot heal itself, and that osteoarthritis is driven by synovial inflammation similar to that seen in rheumatoid arthritis. Molecular interrogation of disease through ex-vivo tissue analysis, in-vitro studies, and preclinical models have radically reshaped the knowledge landscape. Inflammation in osteoarthritis appears to be distinct from that seen in rheumatoid arthritis. Recent randomised controlled trials, using treatments repurposed from rheumatoid arthritis, have largely been unsuccessful. Genome-wide studies point to defects in repair pathways, which accords well with recent promise using growth factor therapies or Wnt pathway antagonism. Nerve growth factor has emerged as a robust target in osteoarthritis pain in phase 2-3 trials. These studies, both positive and negative, align well with those in preclinical surgical models of osteoarthritis, indicating that pathogenic mechanisms identified in mice can lead researchers to valid human targets. Several novel candidate pathways are emerging from preclinical studies that offer hope of future translational impact. Enhancing trust between industry, basic, and clinical scientists will optimise our collective chance of success.

Therapeutic options for targeting inflammatory osteoarthritis pain

Pain is the major symptom of osteoarthritis (OA) and is an important factor in strategies to manage this disease. However, the current standard of care does not provide satisfactory pain relief for many patients. The pathophysiology of OA is complex, and its presentation as a clinical syndrome is associated with pathologies of multiple joint tissues. Inflammation is associated with both OA pain and disease outcome and is therefore a major treatment target for OA and OA pain. Unlike TNF inhibitors and IL-1 inhibitors, established drugs such as glucocorticoids and methotrexate can reduce OA pain. Although central nociceptive pathways contribute to OA pain, crosstalk between the immune system and nociceptive neurons is central to inflammatory pain; therefore, new therapies might target this crosstalk. Newly identified drug targets, including neurotrophins and the granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF)-CC-chemokine ligand 17 (CCL17) chemokine axis, offer the hope of better results but require clinical validation.

KARAOKE: Krill oil versus placebo in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a common and important cause of pain and disability, but interventions aimed at modifying structures visible on imaging have been disappointing. While OA affects the whole joint, synovitis and effusion have been recognised as having a role in the pathogenesis of OA. Krill oil reduces knee pain and systemic inflammation and could be used for targeting inflammatory mechanisms of OA.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will recruit 260 patients with clinical knee OA, significant knee pain and effusion-synovitis present on MRI in five Australian cities (Hobart, Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide and Perth). These patients will be randomly allocated to the two arms of the study, receiving 2 g/day krill oil or inert placebo daily for 6 months. MRI of the study knee will be performed at screening and after 6 months. Knee symptoms, function and MRI structural abnormalities will be assessed using validated methods. Safety data will be recorded. Primary outcomes are absolute change in knee pain (assessed by visual analog score) and change in size of knee effusion-synovitis over 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes include improvement in knee pain over 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 weeks. The primary analyses will be intention-to-treat analyses of primary and secondary outcomes. Per protocol analyses adjusting for missing data and for treatment compliance will be performed as the secondary analyses.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide high-quality evidence to assess whether krill oil 2 g/day reduces pain and effusion-synovitis size in older adults with clinical knee OA and knee effusion-synovitis. If krill oil is effective and confirmed to be safe, we will provide compelling evidence that krill oil improves pain and function, changes disease trajectory and slows disease progression in OA. Given the lack of approved therapies for slowing disease progression in OA, and moderate cost of krill oil, these findings will be readily translated into clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12616000726459. Registered on 02 June 2016. Universal Trial Number (UTN) U1111-1181-7087.

Results of a 6-week treatment with 10 mg prednisolone in patients with hand osteoarthritis (HOPE): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Hand osteoarthritis is a prevalent joint condition that has a high burden of disease and an unmet medical need for effective therapeutic options. Since local inflammation is recognised as contributing to osteoarthritic complaints, the Hand Osteoarthritis Prednisolone Efficacy (HOPE) study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of short-term prednisolone in patients with painful hand osteoarthritis and synovial inflammation.

METHODS

The HOPE study is a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. We recruited eligible adults from rheumatology outpatient clinics at two sites in the Netherlands. Patients were considered eligible if they had symptomatic hand osteoarthritis and signs of inflammation in their distal and proximal interphalangeal (DIP/PIP) joints. For inclusion, patients were required to have four or more DIP/PIP joints with osteoarthritic nodes; at least one DIP/PIP joint with soft swelling or erythema; at least one DIP/PIP joint with a positive power Doppler signal or synovial thickening of at least grade 2 on ultrasound; and finger pain of at least 30 mm on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) that flared up during a 48-h non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) washout (defined as worsening of finger pain by at least 20 mm on the VAS). Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 10 mg prednisolone or placebo orally once daily for 6 weeks, followed by a 2-week tapering scheme, and a 6-week follow-up without study medication. The patients and study team were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was finger pain, assessed on a VAS, at 6 weeks in participants who had been randomly assigned to groups and attended the baseline visit. This study is registered with the Netherlands Trial Registry, number NTR5263.

FINDINGS

We screened patients for enrolment between Dec 3, 2015, and May 31, 2018. Patients completed baseline visits and started treatment between Dec 14, 2015, and July 2, 2018, and the last study visit of the last patient was Oct 4, 2018. Of 149 patients assessed for eligibility, 57 (38%) patients were excluded (predominantly because they did not meet one or several inclusion criteria, most often because of an absence of synovial inflammation or of flare-ups after NSAID washout) and 92 (62%) patients were eligible for inclusion. We randomly assigned 46 (50%) patients to receive prednisolone and 46 (50%) patients to receive placebo, all of whom were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis of the primary endpoint. 42 (91%) patients in the prednisolone group and 42 (91%) in the placebo group completed the 14-week study. The mean change between baseline and week 6 on VAS-reported finger pain was -21·5 (SD 21·7) in the prednisolone group and -5·2 (24·3) in the placebo group, with a mean between-group difference (of prednisolone vs placebo) of -16·5 (95% CI -26·1 to -6·9; p=0·0007). The number of non-serious adverse events was similar between the groups. Five serious adverse events were reported during our study: one serious adverse event in the prednisolone group (a myocardial infarction) and four serious adverse events in the placebo group (an infected traumatic leg haematoma that required surgery, bowel surgery, atrial fibrillation that required a pacemaker implantation, and symptomatic uterine myomas that required a hysterectomy). Four (4%) patients discontinued the study because of an adverse event: one (2%) patient receiving prednisolone (for a myocardial infarction) and three (7%) patients receiving placebo (for surgery of the bowel and for an infected leg haematoma and for Lyme disease arthritis of the knee).

INTERPRETATION

Treatment with 10 mg prednisolone for 6 weeks is efficacious and safe for the treatment of patients with painful hand osteoarthritis and signs of inflammation. The results of our study provide clinicians with a new short-term treatment option for patients with hand osteoarthritis who report a flare-up of their disease.

FUNDING

Dutch Arthritis Society.

Glucocorticoid signaling and osteoarthritis

Glucocorticoids are steroid hormones synthesized and released by the adrenal cortex. Their main function is to maintain cell homeostasis through a variety of signaling pathways, responding to changes in an organism's environment or developmental status. Mimicking the actions of natural glucocorticoids, synthetic glucocorticoids have been recruited to treat many diseases that implicate glucocorticoid receptor signaling such as osteoarthritis. In osteoarthritis, synthetic glucocorticoids aim to alleviate inflammation and pain. The variation of patients' response and the possibility of complications associated with their long-term use have led to a need for a better understanding of glucocorticoid receptor signaling in osteoarthritis. In this review, we performed a literature search in the molecular pathways that link the osteoarthritic joint to the glucocorticoid receptor signaling. We hope that this information will advance research in the field and propose new molecular targets for the development of more optimized therapies for osteoarthritis.

2018 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of hand osteoarthritis

Since publication of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for management of hand osteoarthritis (OA) in 2007 new evidence has emerged. The aim was to update these recommendations. EULAR standardised operating procedures were followed. A systematic literature review was performed, collecting the evidence regarding all non-pharmacological, pharmacological and surgical treatment options for hand OA published to date. Based on the evidence and expert opinion from an international task force of 19 physicians, healthcare professionals and patients from 10 European countries formulated overarching principles and recommendations. Level of evidence, grade of recommendation and level of agreement were allocated to each statement. Five overarching principles and 10 recommendations were agreed on. The overarching principles cover treatment goals, information provision, individualisation of treatment, shared decision-making and the need to consider multidisciplinary and multimodal (non-pharmacological, pharmacological, surgical) treatment approaches. Recommendations 1-3 cover different non-pharmacological treatment options (education, assistive devices, exercises and orthoses). Recommendations 4-8 describe the role of different pharmacological treatments, including topical treatments (preferred over systemic treatments, topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) being first-line choice), oral analgesics (particularly NSAIDs to be considered for symptom relief for a limited duration), chondroitin sulfate (for symptom relief), intra-articular glucocorticoids (generally not recommended, consider for painful interphalangeal OA) and conventional/biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (discouraged). Considerations for surgery are described in recommendation 9. The last recommendation relates to follow-up. The presented EULAR recommendations provide up-to-date guidance on the management of hand OA, based on expert opinion and research evidence.

Efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological, pharmacological and surgical treatment for hand osteoarthritis: a systematic literature review informing the 2018 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of hand osteoarthritis

To update the evidence on efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological, pharmacological and surgical interventions for hand osteoarthritis (OA), a systematic literature review was performed up to June 2017, including (randomised) controlled trials or Cochrane systematic reviews. Main efficacy outcomes were pain, function and hand strength. Risk of bias was assessed. Meta-analysis was performed when advisable. Of 7036 records, 127 references were included, of which 50 studies concerned non-pharmacological, 64 pharmacological and 12 surgical interventions. Many studies had high risk of bias, mainly due to inadequate randomisation or blinding. Beneficial non-pharmacological treatments included hand exercise and prolonged thumb base splinting, while single trials showed positive results for joint protection and using assistive devices. Topical and oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) proved equally effective, while topical NSAIDs led to less adverse events. Single trials demonstrated positive results for chondroitin sulfate and intra-articular glucocorticoid injections in interphalangeal joints. Pharmacological treatments for which no clear beneficial effect was shown include paracetamol, intra-articular thumb base injections of glucocorticoids or hyaluronic acid, low-dose oral glucocorticoids, hydroxychloroquine and anti-tumour necrosis factor. No trials compared surgery to sham or non-operative treatment. No surgical intervention for thumb base OA appeared more effective than another, although in general more complex procedures led to more complications. No interventions slowed radiographic progression. In conclusion, an overview of the evidence on efficacy and safety of treatment options for hand OA was presented and informed the task force for the updated European League Against Rheumatism management recommendations for hand OA.

Etanercept in patients with inflammatory hand osteoarthritis (EHOA): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Objective

Hand osteoarthritis is a prevalent disease with limited treatment options. Since joint inflammation is often present, we investigated tumour necrosis factor (TNF) as treatment target in patients with proven joint inflammation in a proof-of-concept study.

Methods

This 1-year, double-blind, randomised, multicentre trial (NTR1192) enrolled patients with symptomatic erosive inflammatory hand osteoarthritis. Patients flaring after non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug washout were randomised to etanercept (24 weeks 50 mg/week, thereafter 25  mg/week) or placebo. The primary outcome was Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain at 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes included clinical and imaging outcomes (radiographs scored using Ghent University Scoring System (GUSS, n=54) and MRIs (n=20)).

Results

Of 90 patients randomised to etanercept (n=45) or placebo (n=45), respectively, 12 and 10 discontinued prematurely. More patients on placebo discontinued due to inefficacy (6 vs 3), but fewer due to adverse effects (1 vs 6). The mean between-group difference (MD) in VAS pain was not statistically significantly different (−5.7 (95% CI −15.9 to 4.5), p=0.27 at 24 weeks; − 8.5 (95% CI −18.6 to 1.6), p=0.10 at 1  year; favouring etanercept). In prespecified per-protocol analyses of completers with pain and inflammation at baseline (n=61), MD was −11.8 (95% CI −23.0 to −0.5) (p=0.04) at 1  year. Etanercept-treated joints showed more radiographic remodelling (delta GUSS: MD 2.9 (95% CI 0.5 to 5.4), p=0.02) and less MRI bone marrow lesions (MD −0.22 (95% CI −0.35 to −0.09), p = 0.001); this was more pronounced in joints with baseline inflammation.

Conclusion

Anti-TNF did not relieve pain effectively after 24 weeks in erosive osteoarthritis. Small subgroup analyses showed a signal for effects on subchondral bone in actively inflamed joints, but future studies to confirm this are warranted.

Nuclear receptors as potential drug targets in osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis is amongst the major causes of disability worldwide, but no medications that can slow or stop progression of this disorder have been identified. Recent evidence suggests roles for a variety of members of the nuclear receptor family of ligand-activated transcription factors in various forms of osteoarthritis. Since nuclear receptors are amongst the major classes of drug targets, these studies suggest that modulators of nuclear receptor activity might provide novel strategies to treat osteoarthritis. This review focuses on recent advances in our understanding of the role of nuclear receptors in osteoarthritis onset and progression, as well as their therapeutic implications. Future studies should continue to examine the possible roles of additional nuclear receptors in the pathophysiology of different types of osteoarthritis.

Optimal management of glenohumeral osteoarthritis

Glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA) is defined as progressive loss of articular cartilage, resulting in bony erosion, pain, and decreased function. This article provides a gross overview of this disease, along with peer-reviewed research by experts in the field. The pathology, diagnosis, and classification of this condition have been well described. Treatment begins with non-operative measures, including oral and topical anti-inflammatory agents, physical therapy, and intra- articular injections of either a corticosteroid or a viscosupplementation agent. Operative treatment is based on the age and function of the affected patient, and treatment of young individuals with glenohumeral OA remains controversial. Various methods of surgical treatment, ranging from arthroscopy to resurfacing, are being evaluated. The roles of hemiarthroplasty, total shoulder arthroplasty, and reverse shoulder arthroplasty are similarly reviewed with supporting data.

The importance of synovial inflammation in osteoarthritis: current evidence from imaging assessments and clinical trials

Synovial abnormalities have been observed at multiple stages of osteoarthritis (OA). Increasing evidence suggests that it may play an important role in the OA pathological process. Many assessment systems using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound have been established to detect synovial inflammation in OA. These have been used to inform the current investigation of OA disease phenotypes and progression and can be utilised in the future for clinical trials developing potential treatments. This narrative review aims to illustrate the importance of synovial tissue in OA and provide an overview of imaging assessments and possible therapies targeting synovial abnormalities.

Synovial membrane receptors as therapeutic targets: A review of receptor localization, structure, and function

Joint pathology and degeneration is a significant cause of pain. The synovial membrane plays an important role in maintenance of the joint, contributes to the pathology of many arthropathies and may be adversely affected in joint disease. Improving knowledge of the receptors present within the synovium will aid in a better understanding of joint pathology and the development of new treatments for diseases such as osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Knowledge of the location and function of synovial membrane receptors (both in healthy and diseased synovium) may provide important targets in the treatment of various arthropathies. Classic pain receptors such as opioid receptors in the synovium are a mainstay in local and systemic management of chronic pain in many species. In addition to these, many other receptors such as bradykinin, neurokinin, transient receptor potential vanilloid, and inflammatory receptors, such as prostanoid and interleukin receptors have been discovered within the synovial membrane. These receptors are important in pain, inflammation, and in maintenance of normal joint function and may serve as targets for pharmacologic intervention in pathologic states. The goal of this review is to outline synovial membrane receptor localization and local therapeutic modulation of these receptors, in order to stimulate further research into pharmacological management of arthropathies at the local level. © 2017 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 35:1589-1605, 2017.

New Therapeutic Targets for Osteoarthritis Pain

Osteoarthritis (OA), the most common form of arthritis, causes pain and disability, as well as emotional distress. While total joint replacement is one of the most effective treatments available for improving the quality of life in people with severe OA, it is not suitable for all patients and all joints. Current pharmacological analgesics have limited efficacy, and their use is often restricted by adverse events. Medications that might reduce pain by slowing or preventing structural disease remain elusive. Our increasing understanding of the complex mechanisms that underlie OA pain offers a wide range of potential new treatment targets. New drugs for OA pain might come from repurposing those developed for other conditions, as well as novel compounds targeting pain mechanisms specific to the joint. Here we discuss the mechanisms of OA pain and its therapeutic implications. We explore evolving treatment modalities, including combination treatment. We review recent research and patents pointing to future OA therapies. We discuss the potential for biomarkers to facilitate drug development and targeting.

Diagnostic value of a 3-day course of prednisolone in patients with possible rheumatoid arthritis - the TryCort study

Background

In patients with tender and swollen finger joints, the differential diagnosis between rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA) of the hands can be initially difficult. This prospective study (the TryCort study) was performed to study the diagnostic value of prednisolone in differentiating between RA and hand OA. We present the results of this potentially diagnostic test in patients with possible RA in daily clinical practice by demonstrating the results of a pilot and a validation part of this ‘prednisolone test’ (pred-test).

Methods

We investigated the response to a 3-day course of 20 mg of prednisolone in patients with suspicion of RA. All patients received 1 g of paracetamol per day for 5 days for pain relief. On days 3–5, a morning dose of 20 mg of prednisolone was added. Hand pain was quantified on a 0–10 Numerical Rating Scale, and the subjective percentage of improvement (0–100%) was recorded. Thresholds for response to prednisolone were investigated in a pilot phase with differentiation in response between patients with RA and patients with OA of the hands, both with pain in the hands ≥4. In a validation phase, the best differentiating cut-off of the pilot phase was applied to discriminate responders from non-responders in consecutive patients with hand pain ≥4 referred because of suspected RA. Final diagnoses were made by the expert upon re-examination at week 12. Primary outcomes were the sensitivity and specificity of a positive test in relation to the diagnosis.

Results

A percentage of 40% subjective improvement of pain in the hands on day 3 discriminated best between RA and OA in the pilot phase. Among 95 patients with complete data in the validation phase, RA was diagnosed in about 50%. Patients with RA had more swollen joints, higher C-reactive protein levels and slightly higher Health Assessment Questionnaire scores. The pred-test was positive in 42.1% of all patients (40 of 95). The median percentage of improvement on day 5 was higher in RA than in non-RA: 50% (IQR 30–60%) vs. 20% (IQR 10–30%) (p < 0.001). The sensitivity and specificity of the pred-test were 0.6 (95% CI 0.5–0.8) and 0.8 (95% CI 0.7–0.9), respectively, and the positive and negative predictive values were 0.77 and 0.70, respectively.

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first evaluation of the widely used pred-test that has ever been performed. The pred-test had a moderate sensitivity and a good specificity. We conclude that rheumatologists may use this test in unclear clinical situations to better differentiate between inflammatory and other conditions.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01395251. Registered on 14 Jul 2011.

EudraCT number: 2011-002633-19. Registered on 21 Dec 2011.

EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging in the clinical management of peripheral joint osteoarthritis

The increased information provided by modern imaging has led to its more extensive use. Our aim was to develop evidence-based recommendations for the use of imaging in the clinical management of the most common arthropathy, osteoarthritis (OA). A task force (including rheumatologists, radiologists, methodologists, primary care doctors and patients) from nine countries defined 10 questions on the role of imaging in OA to support a systematic literature review (SLR). Joints of interest were the knee, hip, hand and foot; imaging modalities included conventional radiography (CR), MRI, ultrasonography, CT and nuclear medicine. PubMed and EMBASE were searched. The evidence was presented to the task force who subsequently developed the recommendations. The strength of agreement for each recommendation was assessed. 17 011 references were identified from which 390 studies were included in the SLR. Seven recommendations were produced, covering the lack of need for diagnostic imaging in patients with typical symptoms; the role of imaging in differential diagnosis; the lack of benefit in monitoring when no therapeutic modification is related, though consideration is required when unexpected clinical deterioration occurs; CR as the first-choice imaging modality; consideration of how to correctly acquire images and the role of imaging in guiding local injections. Recommendations for future research were also developed based on gaps in evidence, such as the use of imaging in identifying therapeutic targets, and demonstrating the added value of imaging. These evidence-based recommendations and related research agenda provide the basis for sensible use of imaging in routine clinical assessment of people with OA.

Synovitis in osteoarthritis: current understanding with therapeutic implications

Modern concepts of osteoarthritis (OA) have been forever changed by modern imaging phenotypes demonstrating complex and multi-tissue pathologies involving cartilage, subchondral bone and (increasingly recognized) inflammation of the synovium. The synovium may show significant changes, even before visible cartilage degeneration has occurred, with infiltration of mononuclear cells, thickening of the synovial lining layer and production of inflammatory cytokines. The combination of sensitive imaging modalities and tissue examination has confirmed a high prevalence of synovial inflammation in all stages of OA, with a number of studies demonstrating that synovitis is related to pain, poor function and may even be an independent driver of radiographic OA onset and structural progression. Treating key aspects of synovial inflammation therefore holds great promise for analgesia and also for structure modification. This article will review current knowledge on the prevalence of synovitis in OA and its role in symptoms and structural progression, and explore lessons learnt from targeting synovitis therapeutically.

Inflammation (or synovitis)-driven osteoarthritis: an opportunity for personalizing prognosis and treatment?

The disabling and painful disease osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis. Strong evidence suggests that a subpopulation of OA patients has a form of OA driven by inflammation. Consequently, understanding when inflammation is the driver of disease progression and which OA patients might benefit from anti-inflammatory treatment is a topic of intense research in the OA field. We have reviewed the current literature on OA, with an emphasis on inflammation in OA, biochemical markers of structural damage, and anti-inflammatory treatments for OA. The literature suggests that the OA patient population is diverse, consisting of several subpopulations, including one associated with inflammation. This inflammatory subpopulation may be identified by a combination of novel serological inflammatory biomarkers. Preliminary evidence from small clinical studies suggests that this subpopulation may benefit from anti-inflammatory treatment currently reserved for other inflammatory arthritides.

Instruments Measuring Pain, Physical Function, or Patient’s Global Assessment in Hand Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Literature Search

Objective.

Description of use and metric properties of instruments measuring pain, physical function, or patient’s global assessment (PtGA) in hand osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods.

Medical literature databases up to January 2014 were systematically reviewed for studies reporting on instruments measuring pain, physical function, or PtGA in hand OA. The frequency of the use of these instruments were described, as well as their metric properties, including discrimination (reliability, sensitivity to change), feasibility, and validity.

Results.

In 66 included studies, various questionnaires and performance- or assessor-based instruments were applied for evaluation of pain, physical function, or PtGA. No major differences regarding metric properties were observed between the instruments, although the amount of supporting evidence varied. The most frequently evaluated questionnaires were the Australian/Canadian Hand OA Index (AUSCAN) pain subscale and visual analog scale (VAS) pain for pain assessment, and the AUSCAN function subscale and Functional Index for Hand OA (FIHOA) for physical function assessment. Excellent reliability was shown for the AUSCAN and FIHOA, and good sensitivity to change for all mentioned instruments; additionally, the FIHOA had good feasibility. Good construct validity was suggested for all mentioned questionnaires. The most commonly applied performance- or assessor-based instruments were the grip and pinch strength for the assessment of physical function, and the assessment of pain by palpation. For these measures, good sensitivity to change and construct validity were established.

Conclusion.

The AUSCAN, FIHOA, VAS pain, grip and pinch strength, and pain on palpation were most frequently used and provided most supporting evidence for good metric properties. More research has to be performed to compare the different instruments with each other.

[Osteoarthritis: what internists should know]

Osteoarthritis is the most frequent joint disorder and substantially affects patient quality of life. As an age-related disease it leads to an increasing financial burden for the healthcare system due to the current demographic changes. Osteoarthritis affects every single tissue in the joint. The identification of the source of disease symptoms is the key to a successful management. Therapeutic approaches include non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment. Surgery is the therapeutic end stage (e.g. total joint replacement, high tibial osteotomy and arthrodesis). This overview focuses on the pharmacological treatment whereas the clinical manifestations and non-pharmacological approaches are only briefly dealt with.

Imaging of non-osteochondral tissues in osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review is to describe imaging techniques for evaluation of non-osteochondral structures such as the synovium, menisci in the knee, labrum in the hip, ligaments and muscles and to review the literature from recent clinical and epidemiological studies of OA.

METHODS

This is a non-systematic narrative review of published literature on imaging of non-osteochondral tissues in OA. PubMed and MEDLINE search for articles published up to 2014, using the keywords osteoarthritis, synovitis, meniscus, labrum, ligaments, plica, muscles, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), scintigraphy, and positron emission tomography (PET).

RESULTS

Published literature showed imaging of non-osteochondral tissues in OA relies primarily on MRI and ultrasound. The use of semiquantitative and quantitative imaging biomarkers of non-osteochondral tissues in clinical and epidemiological OA studies is reported. We highlight studies that have compared both imaging methodologies directly, and those that have established a relationship between imaging biomarkers and clinical outcomes. We provide recommendations as to which imaging protocols should be used to assess disease-specific changes regarding synovium, meniscus in the knee, labrum in the hip, and ligaments, and highlight potential pitfalls in their usage.

CONCLUSION

MRI and ultrasound are currently the most useful imaging modalities for evaluation of non-osteochondral tissues in OA. MRI evaluation of any tissue needs to be performed using appropriate MR pulse sequences. Ultrasound may be particularly useful for evaluation of small joints of the hand. Nuclear medicine and CT play a limited role in imaging of non-osteochondral tissues in OA.

Future directions for the management of pain in osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the predominant form of arthritis worldwide, resulting in a high degree of functional impairment and reduced quality of life owing to chronic pain. To date, there are no treatments that are known to modify disease progression of OA in the long term. Current treatments are largely based on the modulation of pain, including NSAIDs, opiates and, more recently, centrally acting pharmacotherapies to avert pain. This review will focus on the rationale for new avenues in pain modulation, including inhibition with anti-NGF antibodies and centrally acting analgesics. The authors also consider the potential for structure modification in cartilage/bone using growth factors and stem cell therapies. The possible mismatch between structural change and pain perception will also be discussed, introducing recent techniques that may assist in improved patient phenotyping of pain subsets in OA. Such developments could help further stratify subgroups and treatments for people with OA in future.

[Pharmacological therapy of arthrosis]

The pharmacological management of osteoarthritis includes pure analgesia, anti-inflammatory drugs and substances supporting tissue maintenance in osteoarthritic joints. The decision for the treatment modality is made depending on the affected joint, the stage of the disease, the extent and frequency of inflammatory flares and the patient risk profile. This article gives an overview of the current treatment modalities including the advantages and disadvantages.