OBJECTIVE: To investigate if standardised powder made from rose-hip (Rosa canina) can reduce the symptom score in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: In a double-blind placebo-controlled trial, patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) according to ARA/ACR criteria were randomised to treatment with capsulated rose-hip powder 5g daily or matching placebo for 6 months at two outpatient clinics in Berlin and Copenhagen. Primary outcome variable was Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) at 6 months, secondary outcome included DAS-28, physician's global evaluation of disease activity, RAQoL, SF-12 and concomitant pain medication. RESULTS: In a total of 89 patients (90% female, mean age 56.6+11.3 years, mean disease duration 12.8+9.6 years) HAQ-DI in the rose-hip group improved by 0.105+/-0.346, whereas in the placebo group it worsened by 0.039+/-0.253 (p adjusted=0.032). In the HAQ Patient Pain Scale no significant differences were observed between both groups. In the HAQ Patient Global Scale a trend was seen favouring rose-hip (p=0.078). The DAS-28 score yielded improvement in the rose-hip group of 0.89+/-1.32 and in the placebo group of 0.34+/-1.27 (p=0.056) indicating moderate clinical relevance. The Physicians Global Scale demonstrated more improvement in the rose-hip compared to the placebo group (p=0.012). RAQoL and SF-12 physical score improved significantly in the rose-hip group compared to placebo, whereas SF-12 mental score remained unchanged. Intake of pain medication was not different between the groups. Per-protocol analysis confirmed these results. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that patients with RA may benefit from additional treatment with rose hip powder.
Background: Extracts of the medicinal plant Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F (TwHF) have been used in China for centuries to treat a spectrum of inflammatory diseases. Objective: To compare the benefits and side effects of TwHF extract with those of sulfasalazine for the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis. Design: Randomized, controlled trial. A computer-generated code with random, permuted blocks was used to assign treatment. Setting: 2 U.S. academic centers (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, and University of Texas, Dallas, Texas) and 9 rheumatology subspecialty clinics (in Dallas and Austin, Texas; Tampa and Fort Lauderdale, Florida; Arlington, Virginia; Duncanville, Pennsylvania; Wheaton and Greenbelt, Maryland; and Lansing, Michigan). Patients: 121 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and 6 or more painful and swollen joints. Intervention: TwHF extract, 60 mg 3 times daily, or sulfasalazine, 1 g twice daily. Patients could continue stable doses of oral prednisone or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs but had to stop taking disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs at least 28 days before randomization. Measurements: The primary outcome was the rate of achievement of 20% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR 20) at 24 weeks. Secondary end points were safety; radiographic scores of joint damage; and serum levels of interleukin-6, cholesterol, cortisol, and adrenocorticotropic hormone. Results: Outcome data were available for only 62 patients at 24 weeks. In a mixed-model analysis that imputed data for patients who dropped out, 65.0% (95% CI, 51.6% to 76.9%) of the TwHF group and 32.8% (CI, 21.3% to 46.0%) of the sulfasalazine group met the ACR 20 response criteria (P = 0.001). Patients receiving TwHF also had significantly higher response rates for ACR 50 and ACR 70 in mixed-model analyses. Analyses of only completers showed similar significant differences between the treatment groups. Significant improvement was demonstrated in all individual components of the ACR response, including the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability score. Interleukin-6 levels rapidly and significantly decreased in the TwHF group. Although not statistically significant, radiographic progression was lower in the TwHF group. The frequency of adverse events was similar in both groups. Limitations: Only 62% and 41% of patients continued receiving TwHF extract and sulfasalazine, respectively, during the 24 weeks of the study. Long-term outcome data were not collected on participants who discontinued treatment. Conclusion: In patients who continued treatment for 24 weeks and could also use stable oral prednisone and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, attainment of the ACR 20 response criteria was significantly greater with TwHF extract than with sulfasalazine. Primary Funding Source: National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases.
INTRODUCTION: Chicken type II collagen (CCII) is a protein extracted from the cartilage of chicken breast and exhibits intriguing possibilities for the treatment of autoimmune diseases by inducing oral tolerance. A 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, methotrexate (MTX)-controlled study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CCII in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
METHODS: Five hundred three RA patients were included in the study. Patients received either 0.1 mg daily of CCII (n = 326) or 10 mg once a week of MTX (n = 177) for 24 weeks. Each patient was evaluated for pain, morning stiffness, tender joint count, swollen joint count, health assessment questionnaire (HAQ), assessments by investigator and patient, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) by using the standard tools at baseline (week 0) and at weeks 12 and 24. Additionally, rheumatoid factor (RF) was evaluated at weeks 0 and 24. Measurement of a battery of biochemical parameters in serum, hematological parameters, and urine analysis was performed to evaluate the safety of CCII.
RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-four patients (94.43%) completed the 24-week follow-up. In both groups, there were decreases in pain, morning stiffness, tender joint count, swollen joint count, HAQ, and assessments by investigator and patient, and all differences were statistically significant. In the MTX group, ESR and CRP decreased. RF did not change in either group. At 24 weeks, 41.55% of patients in the CCII group and 57.86% in the MTX group met the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR-20) and 16.89% and 30.82%, respectively, met the ACR 50% improvement criteria (ACR-50). Both response rates for ACR-20 and ACR-50 in the CCII group were lower than those of the MTX group, and this difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The DAS28 (disease activity score using 28 joint counts) values of the two treatment groups were calculated, and there was a statistically significant difference between the two treatment groups (P < 0.05). Gastrointestinal complaints were common in both groups, but there were fewer and milder side effects in the CCII group than in the MTX group. The incidence of adverse events between the two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: CCII is effective in the treatment of RA and is safe for human consumption. CCII exerts its beneficial effects by controlling inflammatory responses through inducing oral tolerance in RA patients.
TRIALS REGISTRATION:
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR-TRC-00000093.
This article examines the effects of elk velvet antler on joint pain and swelling, patient/physician global assessment of disease activity, functional ability, quality of life, blood levels of C-reactive protein, and adverse events in persons with stage 2 to 3 rheumatoid arthritis experiencing residual symptoms after standard treatment. Patients (N=168) were enrolled in a 6-month randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Instruments included the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale, the Health Assessment Questionnaire, tender and swollen joint counts, and 100 mm-length visual analogue scales, along with blood tests. There were no significant differences between groups on any measures. The pattern of change of the measures across time points was essentially the same for both groups. Although some patients reported clinical improvements in their symptoms, there were no statistically significant differences between groups. Overall, elk velvet antler does not effectively manage residual symptoms in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
BACKGROUND: SKI306X, which consists of biologically active ingredients from <i>Clematis mandsburica</i>, <i>Trichosanthes kirilowii</i>, and <i>Prunella vulgaris</i>, was developed and tested in preclinical trials in Korea. Those studies found that SKI306X was associated with an anti-inflammatory and analgesic effect, and that it can delay the destruction of cartilage in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the pain relief and tolerability of SKI306X and celecoxib in patients with RA. METHODS: This study was a 6-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, Phase III, noninferiority clinical trial. Eligible patients were aged 18 to 80 years, had a history of RA with a disease duration of ≥3 months, and were functional American College of Rheumatology (ACR) class I, II, or III before entry. After a washout period of 2 weeks, patients were randomized to SKI306X 200 mg TID or celecoxib 200 mg BID for 6 weeks. The primary end point was a change in patient assessment of pain intensity using a visual analog scale (VAS). The secondary end points were a 20% improvement in response rate as defined by the ACR (ACR20) and the frequency of rescue medication use. Results after 3 and 6 weeks of treatment were compared with baseline and between treatment groups, and all patients were assessed for adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory data, and vital signs. AEs were identified based on spontaneous reports by patients during interviews conducted by the investigators and the study coordinator. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-two Korean patients from 7 medical centers were assessed and 183 were enrolled and randomized to 1 of 2 treatment groups. Ninety-one patients (10 male, 81 female; mean [SD] age, 52.13 [12.64] years; mean [SD] duration of RA, 9.08 [10.23] years; no. [%] of ACR class I, II, and III, 13 [14.29], 44 [48.35] and 34 [37.36] patients, respectively) received SKI306X 200 mg TID and 92 patients (10 male, 82 female; mean [SD] age, 51.78 [10.94] years; mean [SD] duration of RA, 8.78 [7.78] years; no. [%] of ACR class I, II, and III, 14 [15.22], 44 [47.83], and 34 [36.96] patients, respectively) received celecoxib 200 mg BID. An analysis of the change in reported pain intensity as determined by VAS (mm) score between baseline and week 3 (mean [SD], 13.64 [16.62] vs 14.45 [15.89]), and between baseline and week 6 (18.4 [20.8] vs 17.9 [19.1], respectively) suggested that SKI306X was not inferior to celecoxib. The number of patients who achieved ACR20 response rate was not significantly different between the SKI306X group and the celecoxib group at week 3 (16/87 [18.4%] vs 24/87 [27.6%], respectively) and at week 6 (29/87 [33.3%] vs 29/87 [33.3%]). The frequency of rescue medication use was not significantly different between the SKI306X group and celecoxib group at week 3 (54/87 [62.1%] vs 47/87 [54.0%], respectively) or week 6 (57/87 [65.5%] vs 49/87 [56.3%]). Drug-related AEs were reported by 27 (29.7%) patients in the SKI306X group and 22 (23.9%) patients in the celecoxib group. The most frequent drug-related AEs were epigastric pain (9/91 [9.9%]) in the SKI306X group and glutamyltranferase elevation (4/92 [4.3%]) in the celecoxib group. No significant between-group differences were observed in the prevalence of drug-related clinical- or laboratory-determined AEs. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that SKI306X was generally well tolerated and not inferior to celecoxib in regard to pain relief in these Korean patients with RA. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of a standardized willow bark extract in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: We studied 127 outpatients with hip or knee OA and a WOMAC pain score of at least 30 mm and 26 outpatients with active RA in 2 randomized, controlled, double-blind trials with followup for 6 weeks. OA trial: Patients were randomized to receive willow bark extract, corresponding to 240 mg of salicin/day, diclofenac 100 mg/day, or placebo (n = 43, 43, and 41, respectively). Main outcome measure was the pain subscore of the WOMAC OA Index. RA trial: Patients were randomized to receive willow bark extract, corresponding to 240 mg salicin/day (n = 13) or placebo (n = 13). Main outcome measure was the patient's assessment of pain rated on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: OA trial: WOMAC pain scores decreased by 8 mm (17%) in the willow bark group and by 23 mm (47%) in the diclofenac group, compared with 5 mm (10%) in the placebo group. The difference between willow bark extract and placebo was not statistically significant (-2.8 mm; 95% CI -12.1 to 6.4 mm; p = 0.55, ANCOVA), but the difference between diclofenac and placebo was highly significant (-18.0 mm; 95% CI -27.2 to -8.8 mm; p = 0.0002, ANCOVA). RA trial: The mean reduction of pain on the VAS was -8 mm (15%) in the willow bark group compared with -2 mm (4%) in the placebo group. The difference was not statistically significant (estimated difference -0.8 mm; 95% CI -20.9 to 19.3 mm; p = 0.93, ANCOVA). CONCLUSION: The OA study suggested that the willow bark extract showed no relevant efficacy in patients with OA. Similarly, the RA trial did not indicate efficacy of this extract in patients with RA.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of topical Tripterygium wilfordii (TW), a Chinese herbal therapy, in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A 6 week randomized double blind placebo controlled study of 61 patients with RA meeting American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria was conducted in China. The primary outcome was a modified ACR-20 response rate, analyzed by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The modified ACR-20 response rate differed significantly (topical TW 58% vs placebo 20%; p = 0.002). There was an 8.1-fold (95% CI 1.9-35.4) increase in the modified ACR-20 response for the TW compared to the placebo group, adjusted for age and erythrocyte sedimentation rate. CONCLUSION: Topical TW appears efficacious for the treatment of RA, but larger studies are needed.
