Sources of pain in osteoarthritis: implications for therapy

Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of diacerein versus placebo to treat knee osteoarthritis with effusion-synovitis (DICKENS)

Background

There is an unmet need for treatments for knee osteoarthritis (OA). Effusion-synovitis is a common inflammatory phenotype of knee OA and predicts knee pain and structural degradation. Anti-inflammatory therapies, such as diacerein, may be effective for this phenotype. While diacerein is recommended for alleviating pain in OA patients, evidence for its effectiveness is inconsistent, possibly because studies have not targeted patients with an inflammatory phenotype. Therefore, we will conduct a multi-centre, randomised, placebo-controlled double-blind trial to determine the effect of diacerein on changes in knee pain and effusion-synovitis over 24 weeks in patients with knee OA and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-defined effusion-synovitis.

Methods

We will recruit 260 patients with clinical knee OA, significant knee pain, and MRI-detected effusion-synovitis in Hobart, Melbourne, Adelaide, and Perth, Australia. They will be randomly allocated to receive either diacerein (50mg twice daily) or identical placebo for 24 weeks. MRI of the study knee will be performed at screening and after 24 weeks of intervention. The primary outcome is improvement in knee pain at 24 weeks as assessed by a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes include improvement in volumetric (ml) and semi-quantitative (Whole-Organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score, 0–3) measurements of effusion-synovitis using MRI over 24 weeks, and improvement in knee pain (VAS) at 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 weeks. Intention-to-treat analyses of primary and secondary outcomes will be performed as the primary analyses. Per protocol analyses will be performed as the secondary analyses.

Discussion

This study will provide high-quality evidence to determine whether diacerein improves pain, changes disease trajectory, and slows disease progression in OA patients with effusion-synovitis. If diacerein proves effective, this has the potential to significantly benefit the substantial proportion (up to 60%) of knee OA patients with an inflammatory phenotype.

Trial registration

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12618001656224. Registered on 08 October 2018.

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.

A protocol for a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to compare the effect of annual infusions of zoledronic acid to placebo on knee structural change and knee pain over 24 months in knee osteoarthritis patients - ZAP2

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates are a class of drugs that slow bone loss and are a promising candidate to treat knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients. In a pilot study, we demonstrated that zoledronic acid reduced knee pain and size of subchondral bone marrow lesions (BMLs) over 6 months in knee OA patients with significant knee pain and BMLs. A longer, larger study is required to assess whether decreases in BML size will translate to reductions in cartilage loss over time. We are currently conducting a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial over 24 months that aims to compare the effect of annual infusions of zoledronic acid to placebo on knee structural change (assessed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)) and knee pain in knee OA patients.

METHODS

Two hundred sixty-four patients with clinical knee OA, significant knee pain and subchondral BMLs present on MRI will be recruited in Hobart, Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide. They will be randomly allocated to the two arms of the study, receiving an annual identical intravenous infusion of either 100 mL of fluid containing zoledronic acid (5 mg/100 mL) or placebo (0.9% NaCl 100 mL), at baseline and 1 year later. MRI of the study knee will be performed at screening, month 6 and 24. Knee structure, symptoms and function will be assessed using validated methods. The primary outcome is absolute change in tibiofemoral cartilage volume (mm3) over 24 months. Secondary outcomes include improvement in knee pain over 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months and reductions in BML size over 6 and 24 months. The primary analyses will be intention-to-treat analyses of primary and secondary outcomes. Per protocol analyses will be performed as the secondary analyses.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide high-quality evidence to assess whether zoledronic acid has a novel disease modifying effect in OA by slowing cartilage loss and reducing pain. If zoledronic acid proves effective, it suggests great potential for cost savings through a delay or reduced need for joint replacement surgery, and potential for great improvements in quality of life for OA suffers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12613000039785 , registered on 14 January 2013.

Long-term evaluation of osteoarthritis sheep knee, treated with TGF-β3 and BMP-6 induced multipotent stem cells

BACKGROUND

Hyaline articular cartilage, which protects the bones of diarthrodial joints from forces associated with load bearing, frictions, and impacts has very limited capacities for self-repair. Over the years, the trend of treatments has shifted to regenerations and researchers have been on the quest for a lasting regeneration. We evaluated the treatment of osteoarthritis by chondrogenically induced ADSCs and BMSCs for a long time functional recovery.

METHODS

Osteoarthritis was induced at the right knee of sheep by complete resection of ACL and medial meniscus. Stem cells from sheep were induced to chondrogenic lineage. Test sheep received 5 mls single doses of 2 × 10⁷ autologous PKH26-labelled ADSCs or BMSCs, while controls received basal medium. Functional recovery of the knees was evaluated via electromyography.

RESULTS

Induced ADSCs had 625, 255, 393, 908, 409, 157 and 1062 folds increases of collagen I, collagen II, aggrecan, SOX9, cartilage oligomeric protein, chondroadherin and fibromodullin compare to uninduced cells, while BMSCs had 702, 657, 321, 276, 337, 233 and 1163 respectively; p = .001. Immunocytochemistry was positive for these chondrogenic markers. 12 months post-treatment, controls scored 4 in most regions using ICRS, while the treated had 8; P = .001. Regenerated cartilages were positive to PKH26 and demonstrated the presence of condensing cartilages on haematoxylin and eosin; and Safranin O. OA degenerations caused significant amplitude shift from right to left hind limb. After treatments, controls persisted with significant decreases; while treated samples regained balance.

CONCLUSIONS

Both ADSCs and BMSCs had increased chondrogenic gene expressions using TGF-β3 and BMP-6. The treated knees had improved cartilage scores; PKH26 can provide elongated tracking, while EMG results revealed improved joint recoveries. These could be suitable therapies for osteoarthritis.

Lifestyle modifications to improve musculoskeletal and bone health and reduce disability--a life-course approach

This review covers the evidence relating to lifestye modification in the big three musculoskeletal conditions: osteoarthritis, osteoporosis and rheumatoid arthritis. Lifestyle is of considerable importance in the first two and there is emerging evidence for rheumatoid arthritis despite it not traditionally being considered a lifestyle disease.

Neuropathic pain in osteoarthritis: a review of pathophysiological mechanisms and implications for treatment

OBJECTIVES

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the leading cause of musculoskeletal pain and functional disability worldwide, affecting a growing number of individuals in the western society. Despite various conservative and interventional treatment approaches, the overall management of the condition is problematic, and pain-the major clinical problem of the disease-remains sub-optimally controlled. The objectives of this review are to present the pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying the complexity of pain in OA and to discuss the challenges for new treatment strategies aiming to translate experimental findings into daily clinical practice.

METHODS

A narrative literature review of studies investigating the existence of a neuropathic component in OA pain was conducted. We searched PubMed, Embase and Scopus for English language publications. A hand-search of reference lists of relevant studies was also performed.

RESULTS

Recent advances have shed additional light on the pathophysiology of osteoarthritic pain, highlighting the contribution of central pain pathways together with the sensitisation of peripheral joint receptors and changes of the nociceptive process induced by local joint inflammation and structural bone tissue changes. Thus, a neuropathic pain component may be predominant in individuals with minor joint changes but with high levels of pain refractory to analgesic treatment, providing an alternative explanation for osteoarthritic pain perception.

CONCLUSION

A growing amount of evidence suggests that the pain in OA has a neuropathic component in some patients. The deeper understanding of multiple mechanisms of OA pain has led to the use of centrally acting medicines that may have a benefit on alleviating osteoarthritic pain. The ineffective pain management and the increasing rates of disability associated with OA mandate for change in our treatment paradigm.