Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of chondroitin sulfate plus glucosamine hydrochloride (CS+GH) versus celecoxib in patients with knee osteoarthritis and severe pain. Methods Double-blind Multicentre Osteoarthritis interVEntion trial with SYSADOA (MOVES) conducted in France, Germany, Poland and Spain evaluating treatment with CS+GH versus celecoxib in 606 patients with Kellgren and Lawrence grades 2-3 knee osteoarthritis and moderate-To-severe pain (Western Ontario and McMaster osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) score ≥301; 0-500 scale). Patients were randomised to receive 400 mg CS plus 500 mg GH three times a day or 200 mg celecoxib every day for 6 months. The primary outcome was the mean decrease in WOMAC pain from baseline to 6 months. Secondary outcomes included WOMAC function and stiffness, visual analogue scale for pain, presence of joint swelling/effusion, rescue medication consumption, Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials and Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) criteria and EuroQoL-5D. Results The adjusted mean change (95% CI) in WOMAC pain was -185.7 (-200.3 to -171.1) (50.1% decrease) with CS+GH and -186.8 (-201.7 to -171.9) (50.2% decrease) with celecoxib, meeting the non-inferiority margin of -40: -1.11 (-22.0 to 19.8; p=0.92). All sensitivity analyses were consistent with that result. At 6 months, 79.7% of patients in the combination group and 79.2% in the celecoxib group fulfilled OMERACT-OARSI criteria. Both groups elicited a reduction >50% in the presence of joint swelling; a similar reduction was seen for effusion. No differences were observed for the other secondary outcomes. Adverse events were low and similarly distributed between groups. Conclusions CS+GH has comparable efficacy to celecoxib in reducing pain, stiffness, functional limitation and joint swelling/effusion after 6 months in patients with painful knee osteoarthritis, with a good safety profile.
AIM: To compare the efficacy, tolerability and safety of celecoxib, naproxen and placebo in Asian patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.
METHOD: Patients of Asian descent with knee OA, aged ≥ 45 years, in a flare state with a functional capacity classification of I-III, received celecoxib 200 mg once daily, naproxen 500 mg twice daily or placebo, for 6 weeks. The change in Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain (week 6 vs. baseline) was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints, including Patient's and Physician's Global Assessments of Arthritis, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index (WOMAC), use of complementary and alternative medicines, incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and measurements of upper gastrointestinal tolerability, were also assessed.
RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty-seven patients were randomized: 145 to celecoxib, 144 to naproxen and 78 to placebo. Celecoxib was as effective as naproxen in reducing OA pain (least squares mean change from baseline in visual analogue scale score [standard error] -37.1 [2.0] for celecoxib and -37.5 [2.0] for naproxen). Patient's and Physician's Global Assessment of Arthritis, WOMAC scores, Pain Satisfaction Scale and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 showed statistically significant improvement in active treatment groups versus placebo, with the exception of naproxen WOMAC scores. Treatment-related TEAEs occurred in 19 (13%), 34 (24%) and six (8%) patients in the celecoxib, naproxen and placebo groups, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Celecoxib and naproxen were comparable in their effects to reduce the signs and symptoms of knee OA in Asian patients. Celecoxib was shown to be safe and well tolerated in this patient population.
<b>OBJECTIVE: </b>To determine if the dietary supplements, glucosamine and/or chondroitin, result in reduced joint space narrowing (JSN) and pain among people with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. <b>METHODS: </b>A double-blind randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial with 2-year follow-up. 605 participants, aged 45-75 years, reporting chronic knee pain and with evidence of medial tibio-femoral compartment narrowing (but retaining >2 mm medial joint space width) were randomised to once daily: glucosamine sulfate 1500 mg (n=152), chondroitin sulfate 800 mg (n=151), both dietary supplements (n=151) or matching placebo capsules (n=151). JSN (mm) over 2 years was measured from digitised knee radiographs. Maximum knee pain (0-10) was self-reported in a participant diary for 7 days every 2 months over 1 year. <b>RESULTS: </b>After adjusting for factors associated with structural disease progression (gender, body mass index (BMI), baseline structural disease severity and Heberden's nodes), allocation to the dietary supplement combination (glucosamine-chondroitin) resulted in a statistically significant (p=0.046) reduction of 2-year JSN compared to placebo: mean difference 0.10 mm (95% CI 0.002 mm to 0.20 mm); no significant structural effect for the single treatment allocations was detected. All four allocation groups demonstrated reduced knee pain over the first year, but no significant between-group differences (p=0.93) were detected. 34 (6%) participants reported possibly-related adverse medical events over the 2-year follow-up period. <b>CONCLUSIONS: </b>Allocation to the glucosamine-chondroitin combination resulted in a statistically significant reduction in JSN at 2 years. While all allocation groups demonstrated reduced knee pain over the study period, none of the treatment allocation groups demonstrated significant symptomatic benefit above placebo. <b>Trial Registration Clinicaltrialsgov Identifier: </b>NCT00513422; http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.
OBJECTIVE: To further characterize time-to-first pain relief, effect size, correlations between various outcome measures and durability of relief for single-tablet naproxen 500 mg/esomeprazole 20 mg (NAP/ESO) given twice daily and celecoxib (CEL) (200 mg) given once daily versus placebo in knee osteoarthritis (OA).
METHODS: Unpublished data from two double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled trials in which patients aged ≥ 50 years with knee OA were randomized to NAP/ESO (n = 487), CEL (n = 486) or placebo (n = 246) were pooled (NCT00664560 and NCT00665431). Acute response endpoints: 1) Time to first significant pain response, 2) Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscale and 3) American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire (APS-POQ) scores. Sustainability endpoints: 1) Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data (RAPID3) and 2) WOMAC Stiffness, Pain and Total scores; and Patient Global Assessment (PGA) at 6 and 12 weeks. Effect sizes for all measures were calculated. Rescue pain medication use also was analyzed, as was the correlation of WOMAC to RAPID3.
RESULTS: NAP/ESO produced statistically significant decreases in WOMAC Pain on Days 2-7 and at Weeks 6 and 12 (all p < 0.05); most APS-POQ pain assessments with NAP/ESO were significantly improved on Days 2-7 compared with placebo (all p < 0.05). A good or excellent response occurred in a median of 6 days. RAPID3 and WOMAC total/stiffness/function/PGA scores decreased significantly at Weeks 6 and 12 (all p < 0.05). Placebo-adjusted WOMAC pain effect sizes were 0.44, 0.34 and 0.25 at Day 7, week 6 and week 12, respectively. RAPID3 to WOMAC total and WOMAC pain to RAPID3: Pain scores were highly correlated at 6 and 12 weeks (correlation coefficients >0.80). No significant differences in overall responses were found between CEL and NAP/ESO.
CONCLUSION: Naproxen/esomeprazole produced a significant absolute moderate early pain response, which was maintained for 12 weeks. RAPID3 was found to be highly correlated with the typical OA measure (WOMAC) and might be a useful clinical tool for measuring NSAID response. NCT00664560: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00664560, NCT00665431: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00665431.
BACKGROUND: Celecoxib is an effective treatment for osteoarthritis (OA). However, information on its efficacy and safety profile in different racial/ethnic groups is limited. Noticeable differences among racial groups are found in other disease states, but a thorough investigation of OA is lacking. The objective of this study was to determine if celecoxib 200 mg once daily is as effective as naproxen 500 mg twice daily in the treatment of OA of the knee in Hispanic patients.
METHODS: Hispanic patients aged ≥45 years with knee OA were randomized to receive celecoxib 200 mg once daily, naproxen 500 mg twice daily, or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the change in Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain at 6 weeks compared with baseline. Secondary variables were change in Patient's and Physician's Global Assessments of Arthritis from baseline to week 6/early termination, change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index (WOMAC) from baseline to week 6/early termination, change in American Pain Society pain score, Pain Satisfaction Scale, Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and measurements of upper gastrointestinal tolerability.
RESULTS: In total, 239 patients completed the trial (96 celecoxib, 96 naproxen, 47 placebo). Celecoxib was as effective as naproxen in reducing OA pain (least squares mean change from baseline [standard error] -39.7 [2.7] for celecoxib and -36.9 [2.6] for naproxen). Patient's and Physician's Global Assessments of Arthritis, WOMAC scores, upper gastrointestinal tolerability, Pain Satisfaction Scale, and PHQ-9 showed no statistically significant differences between the celecoxib and naproxen groups. The incidence of adverse events and treatment-related adverse events were similar among the treatment groups.
CONCLUSION: Celecoxib 200 mg once daily was as effective as naproxen 500 mg twice daily in the treatment of signs and symptoms of knee OA in Hispanic patients. Celecoxib was shown to be safe and well tolerated in this patient population.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the short-term efficacy of oral glucosamine supplementation by evaluating structural lesions in the knee joints, as assessed using 3T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
METHODS: This study was designed as a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Recruitment was performed via mass mailings and an arthritis registry in southwestern Pennsylvania. In total, 201 participants with mild-to-moderate pain in one or both knees, as defined by a Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score ≥25 and ≤100, were enrolled. Of these subjects, 69.2% had a Kellgren/Lawrence grade ≥2 in at least 1 knee. Participants received 24 weeks of treatment with 1,500 mg glucosamine hydrochloride in beverage form or a placebo beverage. The primary outcome was decreased worsening of cartilage damage on 3T MRI of both knees, assessed according to a validated scoring system, the Whole-Organ MRI Score (WORMS). Secondary outcomes included change in bone marrow lesion (BML) scores in all knees and change in excretion of urinary C-terminal crosslinking telopeptide of type II collagen (CTX-II).
RESULTS: The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for the likelihood of decreased cartilage damage over 24 weeks in any WORMS-scored subregion of the knee in the glucosamine treatment group compared to the control group was 0.938 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.528, 1.666). Compared to subjects treated with glucosamine, control subjects showed more improvement in BMLs (adjusted OR 0.537, 95% CI 0.291, 0.990) but no difference in worsening BMLs (adjusted OR 0.691, 95% CI 0.410, 1.166) over 24 weeks. There was no indication that treatment with glucosamine decreased the excretion of urinary CTX-II (β = -0.10, 95% CI -0.21, 0.002).
CONCLUSION: The results of this short-term study provide no evidence of structural benefits (i.e., improvements in MRI morphologic features or urinary CTX-II excretion) from glucosamine supplementation in individuals with chronic knee pain.
OBJECTIVE: Determine efficacy and safety of acetaminophen extended release (ER) 1300 mg given three times daily compared to placebo for relieving signs and symptoms of hip or knee osteoarthritis. Research design and methods: Sixty investigators at 58 private, ambulatory, primary care sites in the US enrolled 542 outpatient adults ≥40 years old with moderate to severe idiopathic osteoarthritis pain into a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind 12 week clinical trial. Patients were randomly assigned to treatment given three times daily of acetaminophen 1300 mg (<i>n</i> = 267) or placebo (<i>n</i> = 275). RESULTS: The three primary endpoints measured through week 12 favored acetaminophen ER as follows: least squares (LS) mean change from baseline for WOMAC physical function subscale score was significantly greater for acetaminophen ER than for placebo (<i>P</i> = 0.011); LS mean patient’s global assessment of response to therapy was significantly greater for acetaminophen ER than for placebo (<i>P</i> = 0.010); and LS mean change from baseline for WOMAC pain subscale score was marginally greater for acetaminophen ER than for placebo (<i>P</i> = 0.054). LS mean change from baseline for secondary endpoints through week 12 also favored acetaminophen ER compared with placebo: significantly for WOMAC stiffness subscale score (<i>P</i> = 0.004), significantly for WOMAC total index score (<i>P</i> = 0.013), and marginally for Nottingham Health Profile energy subscale score (<i>P</i> = 0.057). The percentage of patients with any adverse event was similar for both treatment groups. Hepatic transaminases exceeded 3 × ULN in seven acetaminophen ER patients and one placebo patient. Elevations were attributed to health conditions in three of seven acetaminophen ER patients; elevations in the remaining four patients returned to or toward normal. CONCLUSIONS: Acetaminophen ER 1300 mg, a nonprescription drug, given three times daily, can provide effective relief of signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis of the hip or knee and was well tolerated. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)
