Comparison of naproxen and acetaminophen in a two-year study of treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee

Single dose thermoresponsive dexamethasone prodrug completely mitigates joint pain for 15 weeks in a murine model of osteoarthritis

In this study, we aimed to assess the analgesic efficacy of a thermoresponsive polymeric dexamethasone (Dex) prodrug (ProGel-Dex) in a mouse model of osteoarthritis (OA). At 12 weeks post model establishment, the OA mice received a single intra-articular (IA) injection of ProGel-Dex, dose-equivalent Dex, or Saline. Comparing to Saline and Dex controls, ProGel-Dex provided complete and sustained pain relief for >15 weeks according to incapacitance tests. In vivo optical imaging confirmed the continuous presence of ProGel-Dex in joints for 15 weeks post-injection. According to micro-CT analysis, ProGel-Dex treated mice had significantly lower subchondral bone thickness and medial meniscus bone volume than Dex and Saline controls. Except for a transient delay of body weight increase and slightly lower endpoint liver and spleen weights, no other adverse effect was observed after ProGel-Dex treatment. These findings support ProGel-Dex's potential as a potent and safe analgesic candidate for management of OA pain.

Reduction of systemic exposure and side effects by intra-articular injection of anti-inflammatory agents for osteoarthritis: what is the safer strategy?

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic degenerative joint disease associated with pain, inflammation, and cartilage degradation. However, no current treatment can effectively halt the progression of the disease. Therefore, the use of NSAIDs and intra-articular corticosteroids is usually recommended as the primary treatment for OA-associated pain and inflammation. However, there is accumulating evidence that the long-term use of oral NSAIDs and intra-articular corticosteroids can lead to a myriad of negative side effects. Although numerous efforts have been made to develop intra-articular formulations for NSAIDs, the systemic exposure of intra-articular injection of NSAIDs and its potential side effects have not been explicitly investigated. To ascertain the evident and potential side effects of intra-articular injection of anti-inflammatory agents, we have summarised in this review the systemic exposure, local side effects, and systemic side effects of intra-articular injections of anti-inflammatory agents, including NSAIDs and corticosteroids. For developing a safer treatment to fulfil the unmet long-term use needs of patients, a new therapy, which combines the locally active drug and a sustained-release formulation, has been proposed in this review.

Naproxen treatment inhibits articular cartilage loss in a rat model of osteoarthritis

The effects of naproxen, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), on articular cartilage degeneration in female Sprague-Dawley rats was examined. Osteoarthritis (OA) was induced by destabilization of the medial meniscus (DMM) in each knee. Rats were treated with acetaminophen (60 mg/kg), naproxen (8 mg/kg), or 1% carboxymethylcellulose (placebo) by oral gavage twice daily for 3 weeks, beginning 2 weeks after surgery. OA severity was assessed by histological Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) scoring and by measuring proximal tibia cartilage depth using contrast enhanced µCT (n = 6 per group) in specimens collected at 2, 5, and 7 weeks after surgery as well as on pristine knees. Medial cartilage OARSI scores from the DMM knees of naproxen-treated rats were statistically lower (i.e., better) than the medial cartilage OARSI scores from the DMM knees of placebo-treated rats at 5-weeks (8.7 ± 3.6 vs. 13.2 ± 2.4, p = 0.025) and 7-weeks (9.5 ± 1.2 vs. 12.5 ± 2.5, p = 0.024) after surgery. At 5 weeks after DMM surgery, medial articular cartilage depth in the proximal tibia specimens was significantly greater in the naproxen (1.78 ± 0.26 mm, p = 0.005) and acetaminophen (1.94 ± 0.12 mm, p < 0.001) treated rats as compared with placebo-treated rats (1.34 ± 0.24 mm). However, at 7 weeks (2 weeks after drug withdrawal), medial articular cartilage depth for acetaminophen-treated rats (1.36 ± 0.29 mm) was significantly reduced compared with specimens from the naproxen-treated rats (1.88 ± 0.14 mm; p = 0.004). The results indicate that naproxen treatment reduced articular cartilage degradation in the rat DMM model during and after naproxen treatment.

Application of the DILIsym® Quantitative Systems Toxicology drug-induced liver injury model to evaluate the carcinogenic hazard potential of acetaminophen

In 2019, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) initiated a review of the carcinogenic hazard potential of acetaminophen. The objective of the analysis herein was to inform this review by assessing whether variability in patient baseline characteristics (e.g. baseline glutathione (GSH) levels, pharmacokinetics, and capacity of hepatic antioxidants) leads to potential differences in carcinogenic hazard potential at different dosing schemes: maximum labeled doses of 4 g/day, repeated doses above the maximum labeled dose (>4-12 g/day), and acute overdoses of acetaminophen (>15 g). This was achieved by performing simulations of acetaminophen exposure in thousands of diverse virtual patients scenarios using the DILIsym® Quantitative Systems Toxicology (QST) model. Simulations included assessments of the dose and exposure response for toxicity and mode of cell death based on evaluations of the kinetics of changes of: GSH, N-acetyl-p-benzoquinone-imine (NAPQI), protein adducts, mitochondrial dysfunction, and hepatic cell death. Results support that, at therapeutic doses, cellular GSH binds to NAPQI providing sufficient buffering capacity to limit protein adduct formation and subsequent oxidative stress. Simulations evaluating repeated high-level supratherapeutic exposures or acute overdoses indicate that cell death precedes DNA damage that could result in carcinogenicity and thus acetaminophen does not present a carcinogenicity hazard to humans at any dose.

A critical review of the acetaminophen preclinical carcinogenicity and tumor promotion data and their implications for its carcinogenic hazard potential

In 2019 the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) initiated a review of the carcinogenic hazard potential of acetaminophen, including an assessment of the long-term rodent carcinogenicity and tumor initiation/promotion studies. The objective of the analysis herein was to inform this review process with a weight-of-evidence assessment of these studies and an assessment of the relevance of these models to humans. In most of the 14 studies, there were no increases in the incidences of tumors in any organ system. In the few studies in which an increase in tumor incidence was observed, there were factors such as absence of a dose response and a rodent-specific tumor supporting that these findings are not relevant to human hazard identification. In addition, we performed qualitative analysis and quantitative simulations of the exposures to acetaminophen and its metabolites and its toxicity profile; the data support that the rodent models are toxicologically relevant to humans. The preclinical carcinogenicity results are consistent with the broader weight of evidence assessment and evaluations of multiple international health authorities supporting that acetaminophen is not a carcinogenic hazard.

What is the quality of clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of acute lateral ankle ligament sprains in adults? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Acute lateral ankle ligament sprains (LALS) are a common injury seen by many different clinicians. Knowledge translation advocates that clinicians use Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) to aid clinical decision making and apply evidence-based treatment. The quality and consistency of recommendations from these CPGs are currently unknown. The aims of this systematic review are to find and critically appraise CPGs for the acute treatment of LALS in adults.

METHODS

Several medical databases were searched. Two authors independently applied inclusion and exclusion criteria. The content of each CPG was critically appraised independently, by three authors, using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument online version called My AGREE PLUS. Data related to recommendations for the treatment of acute LALS were abstracted independently by two reviewers.

RESULTS

This study found CPGs for physicians and physical therapists (Netherlands), physical therapists, athletic trainers, physicians, and nurses (USA) and nurses (Canada and Australia). Seven CPGs underwent a full AGREE II critical appraisal. None of the CPGs scored highly in all domains. The lowest domain score was for domain 5, applicability (discussion of facilitators and barriers to application, provides advice for practical use, consideration of resource implications, and monitoring/auditing criteria) achieving an exceptionally low joint total score of 9% for all CPGs. The five most recent CPGs scored a zero for applicability. Other areas of weakness were in rigour of development and editorial independence.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall quality of the existing LALS CPGs is poor and majority are out of date. The interpretation of the evidence between the CPG development groups is clearly not consistent. Lack of consistent methodology of CPGs is a barrier to implementation.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Systematic review registered with PROSPERO ( CRD42015025478 ).

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of viscosupplementation with hylan G-F 20 for knee and hip osteoarthritis

Purpose

To estimate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of viscosupplementation with one intra-articular (IA) injection of 6 mL hylan G-F 20 (Synvisc-One^®) and with three injections of 2 mL hylan G-F 20 (Synvisc^®3×2) in knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients compared with conventional support therapy (CST - eg, NSAIDs and acetaminophen) and the cost-effectiveness of one IA injection of 2 mL hylan G-F 20 (Synvisc^®1×2) in hip OA patients compared with CST from an Italian Health System perspective.

Methods

The model used was a Markov model with states for stages II-IV on the Kellgren-Lawrence scale and runs on 6-month cycles over a 5-year time horizon. A 3.5% discount was applied to both costs and utilities. Direct costs were determined from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service. A one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted for both comparisons.

Results

Hylan G-F 20 1×6 mL and hylan G-F 20 3×2 mL for knee OA were very likely to be cost-effective when compared to acetaminophen (ICER = €3,160.61 and €3,845.81 per QALY, respectively) and NSAIDs as both ICERs are below €25,000. The hip OA treatment by hylan G-F 20 1×2 mL was dominant compared to NSAIDs and very likely compared to acetaminophen. The results of the cost-effectiveness analysis were confirmed by one-way sensitivity analysis. The budget impact analysis for knee and hip OA showed a small increase in expenditure during 5 years.

Conclusions

Hylan G-F 20 1×6 mL/hylan G-F 20 is a cost-effectiveness treatment compared to NSAIDs and acetaminophen in the treatment of knee/hip OA in Italy. The treatment of hip and knee OA resulted in cost-saving with hylan G-F 20 1×2 mL and economically sustainable with hylan G-F 20 1×6 mL. However, Real Word Evidence studies should be conducted in order to estimate costs associated with both prosthetics and to understand the reduction of physiotherapy and medication due to hylan G-F 20.

Safety of Paracetamol in Osteoarthritis: What Does the Literature Say?

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a major cause of pain and physical disability in adults, and an increasingly common disease given its associations with aging and a growing obese/overweight population. Paracetamol is widely recommended for analgesia at an early stage in the management of OA, and, although frequently prescribed, evidence suggests the efficacy of paracetamol for OA pain is low. Furthermore, there have been recent concerns over the safety profile of paracetamol, with reports of gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, hepatic and renal adverse events. This narrative review summarizes recent literature on the benefits and harms of paracetamol for OA pain. Data on long-term paracetamol safety are derived largely from observational evidence, and are difficult to interpret given the potential biases of such data. Nonetheless, a considerable degree of toxicity is associated with paracetamol use among the general population, especially at the upper end of standard analgesic doses. Paracetamol is linked to liver function abnormalities and there is evidence for liver failure associated with non-intentional paracetamol overdose. Safety data for paracetamol use in the older population (aged >65 years) are sparse; however, there is some evidence that frail elderly people may have impaired paracetamol clearance. Given that the analgesic benefit of paracetamol in OA joint pain is uncertain and potential safety issues have been raised, more careful consideration of its use is required.

Association of Pharmacological Treatments With Long-term Pain Control in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Even though osteoarthritis is a chronic and progressive disease, pharmacological agents are mainly studied over short-term periods, resulting in unclear recommendations for long-term disease management.

OBJECTIVE

To search, review, and analyze long-term (≥12 months) outcomes (symptoms, joint structure) from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of medications for knee osteoarthritis.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

The databases of MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched until June 30, 2018 (MEDLINE alerts through August 31, 2018) for RCTs of patients with knee osteoarthritis that had treatment and follow-up lasting 1 year or longer.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data at baseline and at the longest available treatment and follow-up of 12 months' duration or longer (or the change from baseline) were extracted. A Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis was performed.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the mean change from baseline in knee pain. Secondary outcomes were physical function and joint structure (the latter was measured radiologically as joint space narrowing). Standardized mean differences (SMDs) and mean differences with 95% credibility intervals (95% CrIs) were calculated. Findings were interpreted as associations when the 95% CrIs excluded the null value.

RESULTS

Forty-seven RCTs (22 037 patients; mean age range, mostly 55-70 years; and a higher mean proportion of women than men, around 70%) included the following medication categories: analgesics; antioxidants; bone-acting agents such as bisphosphonates and strontium ranelate; nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; intra-articular injection medications such as hyaluronic acid and corticosteroids; symptomatic slow-acting drugs in osteoarthritis such as glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate; and putative disease-modifying agents such as cindunistat and sprifermin. Thirty-one interventions were studied for pain, 13 for physical function, and 16 for joint structure. Trial duration ranged from 1 to 4 years. Associations with decreases in pain were found for the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug celecoxib (SMD, -0.18 [95% CrI, -0.35 to -0.01]) and the symptomatic slow-acting drug in osteoarthritis glucosamine sulfate (SMD, -0.29 [95% CrI, -0.49 to -0.09]), but there was large uncertainty for all estimates vs placebo. The association with pain improvement remained significant only for glucosamine sulfate when data were analyzed using the mean difference on a scale from 0 to 100 and when trials at high risk of bias were excluded. Associations with improvement in joint space narrowing were found for glucosamine sulfate (SMD, -0.42 [95% CrI, -0.65 to -0.19]), chondroitin sulfate (SMD, -0.20 [95% CrI, -0.31 to -0.07]), and strontium ranelate (SMD, -0.20 [95% CrI, -0.36 to -0.05]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this systematic review and network meta-analysis of studies of patients with knee osteoarthritis and at least 12 months of follow-up, there was uncertainty around the estimates of effect size for change in pain for all comparisons with placebo. Larger RCTs are needed to resolve the uncertainty around efficacy of medications for knee osteoarthritis.

Osteoarthritis of the Knee – An Introduction

Osteoarthritis of the knee is common, and a major cause of disability in older people that is likely to increase over time. Some patients progress rapidly to needing surgery, whereas others will have persistent pain for many years. The aims of conservative treatment are to reduce pain and disability.

There is evidence that several non-pharmacological therapies such as exercise, education and weight loss can have an effect in patients with knee pain, though the effect is usually only modest. Ultrasound and short wave diathermy are widely available, but not supported by evidence. Particular preparations of topical treatments are effective, as too is oral paracetamol (acetaminophen). Glucosamine is popular but not all trials have found it to have any effect.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are effective, though their effect is modest and their longterm value is not established. They are associated with significant adverse events, particularly gastrointestinal haemorrhage, which has a substantial mortality. They are particularly dangerous in the elderly. Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors cause fewer gastrointestinal problems but increase the risk of vascular events including myocardial infarction and stroke. Herbal therapies have only sparse evidence in support. Intra-articular injections of steroids may be effective, at least for a short period, but hyaluronan has a longer duration of action.

Patients prefer treatments that are safe, and are willing to forgo some effectiveness in favour of safety. In this context, acupuncture is a potentially valuable treatment for OA knee, and the evidence on effectiveness, safety and cost should be considered carefully.

Mixed Treatment Comparisons for Nonsurgical Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Network Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a significant health problem with lifetime risk of development estimated to be 45%. Effective nonsurgical treatments are needed for the management of symptoms.

METHODS

We designed a network meta-analysis to determine clinically relevant effectiveness of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, intra-articular (IA) corticosteroids, IA platelet-rich plasma, and IA hyaluronic acid compared with each other as well as with oral and IA placebos. We used PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to perform a systematic search of KOA treatments with no date limits and last search on October 7, 2015. Article inclusion criteria considered the following: target population, randomized controlled study design, English language, human subjects, treatments and outcomes of interest, ≥30 patients per group, and consistent follow-up. Using the best available evidence, two abstractors independently extracted pain and function data at or near the most common follow-up time.

RESULTS

For pain, all active treatments showed significance over oral placebo, with IA corticosteroids having the largest magnitude of effect and significant difference only over IA placebo. For function, no IA treatments showed significance compared with either placebo, and naproxen was the only treatment showing clinical significance compared with oral placebo. Cumulative probabilities showed naproxen to be the most effective individual treatment, and when combined with IA corticosteroids, it is the most probable to improve pain and function.

DISCUSSION

Naproxen ranked most effective among conservative treatments of KOA and should be considered when treating pain and function because of its relative safety and low cost. The best available evidence was analyzed, but there were instances of inconsistency in the design and duration among articles, potentially affecting uniform data inclusion.

The Role of Sirtuins in Cartilage Homeostasis and Osteoarthritis

The past decade has witnessed many advances in the understanding of sirtuin biology and related regulatory circuits supporting the capacity of these proteins to serve as energy-sensing molecules that contribute to healthspan in various tissues, including articular cartilage. Hence, there has been a significant increase in new investigations that aim to elucidate the mechanisms of sirtuin function and their roles in cartilage biology, skeletal development, and pathologies such as osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and intervertebral disc degeneration (IVD). The majority of the work carried out to date has focused on SIRT1, although SIRT6 has more recently become a focus of some investigations. In vivo work with transgenic mice has shown that Sirt1 and Sirt6 are essential for maintaining cartilage homeostasis and that the use of sirtuin-activating molecules such as resveratrol may have beneficial effects on cartilage anabolism. Current thinking is that SIRT1 exerts positive effects on cartilage by encouraging chondrocyte survival, especially under stress conditions, which may provide a mechanism supporting the use of sirtuin small-molecule activators (STACS) for future therapeutic interventions in OA and other degenerative pathologies of joints, especially those that involve articular cartilage.

Pain Management in Elderly Patients

In elderly patients, persistent pain negatively impacts quality of life. An interdisciplinary approach to pain management and emphasis on quality improvement will help to achieve better therapeutic outcomes. Managing pain in the geriatric population is challenging because of age-related changes in pain perception, cognition, pharmacokinetics, and drug effects. Improvement and maintenance of physical and emotional function is the goal. Pharmacotherapy should be initiated conservatively and titrated to effective doses with minimal adverse effects. Milder pain should be treated with non-opioid analgesics with a progression toward opioids and/or adjuvant medications as the pain intensifies. Acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, and adjuvant medications represent most of the analgesic agents used in pain management. Knowing the underlying mechanism of pain will help guide pharmacologic therapy. The patient should be monitored initially, with every dose change, and periodically to assess efficacy and severity of adverse effects.

Can paracetamol (acetaminophen) be administered to patients with liver impairment?

Although 60 years have passed since it became widely available on the therapeutic market, paracetamol dosage in patients with liver disease remains a controversial subject. Fulminant hepatic failure has been a well documented consequence of paracetamol overdose since its introduction, while short and long term use have both been associated with elevation of liver transaminases, a surrogate marker for acute liver injury. From these reports it has been assumed that paracetamol use should be restricted or the dosage reduced in patients with chronic liver disease. We review the factors that have been purported to increase risk of hepatocellular injury from paracetamol and the pharmacokinetic alterations in different pathologies of chronic liver disease which may affect this risk. We postulate that inadvertent under-dosing may result in concentrations too low to enable efficacy. Specific research to improve the evidence base for prescribing paracetamol in patients with different aetiologies of chronic liver disease is needed.

Effectiveness and Implications of Alternative Placebo Treatments: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Osteoarthritis Trials

BACKGROUND

Placebo controls are essential in evaluating the effectiveness of medical treatments. Although it is unclear whether different placebo interventions for osteoarthritis vary in efficacy, systematic differences would substantially affect interpretation of the results of placebo-controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of alternative placebo types on pain outcomes in knee osteoarthritis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Database from inception through 1 June 2015 and unpublished data.

STUDY SELECTION

149 randomized trials of adults with knee osteoarthritis that reported pain outcomes and compared widely used pharmaceuticals against oral, intra-articular, topical, and oral plus topical placebos.

DATA EXTRACTION

Study data were independently double-extracted; study quality was assessed by using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Placebo effects that were evaluated by using a network meta-analysis with 4 separate placebo nodes (differential model) showed that intra-articular placebo (effect size, 0.29 [95% credible interval, 0.09 to 0.49]) and topical placebo (effect size, 0.20 [credible interval, 0.02 to 0.38]) had significantly greater effect sizes than did oral placebo. This differential model showed marked differences in the relative efficacies and hierarchy of the active treatments compared with a network model that considered all placebos equivalent. In the model accounting for differential effects, intra-articular and topical therapies were superior to oral treatments in reducing pain. When these differential effects were ignored, oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were superior.

LIMITATIONS

Few studies compared different placebos directly. The study could not decisively conclude whether disease severity and co-interventions systematically differed between trials evaluating different placebos.

CONCLUSION

All placebos are not equal, and some can trigger clinically relevant responses. Differential placebo effects can substantially alter estimates of the relative efficacies of active treatments, an important consideration for the design of clinical trials and interpretation of their results.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Safety and efficacy of paracetamol and NSAIDs in osteoarthritis: which drug to recommend?

INTRODUCTION

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis and is a major cause of disability, especially in people ≥ 45 years old. Several international societies recommend the use of both acetaminophen and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to alleviate OA pain. However, patients with OA often have comorbidities, notably cardiovascular risk factors, which may hamper the use of these analgesics.

AREAS COVERED

This paper reviews the safety of both acetaminophen and NSAIDs in OA. Recent data have pointed to a gastrointestinal and cardiovascular toxicity of acetaminophen, which has been neglected for a long time. In addition, several meta-analyses revealed that acetaminophen is a poor analgesic in OA. Traditional NSAIDs and cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors (coxibs) have similar analgesic effects but vary greatly in their potential gastrointestinal and cardiovascular toxicity.

EXPERT OPINION

Given the putative gastrointestinal and cardiovascular toxicity and poor analgesic properties of acetaminophen in OA, its use in patients with risk factors is questionable. Acetaminophen should be used at the lowest effective dosage and for the shortest time in all OA patients. Given the different safety profiles, the choice of NSAIDs, traditional or coxibs, should be based on individual patient risk factors. A good knowledge of the different strategies to decrease the gastrointestinal and cardiovascular toxic effects of NSAIDs is key to the management of OA.

The effects of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of large-joint osteoarthritis: a systematic review

CONTEXT

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common and costly condition with both operative and nonoperative treatments available. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is emerging as a treatment option for a variety of musculoskeletal pathologies, including OA.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of intra-articular PRP injection in the treatment of large-joint OA.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database were searched. The references of all articles that met the inclusion criteria were manually searched for additional articles.

STUDY SELECTION

English studies that enrolled human participants were included, with level of evidence I to IV.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles met the inclusion criteria: 12 focused on knee OA, and 1 on hip OA. All studies showed statistically significant improvement in patient outcome scores with PRP. Platelet-rich plasma has a statistically significant benefit in knee OA when compared with hyaluronic acid. The benefit from PRP appears to last between 6 and 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Platelet-rich plasma may be an effective treatment for knee OA. However, because of the low level of evidence, small sample sizes, and wide variability in treatment, no definitive recommendations can be made at this time.

Cost-effectiveness analyses of osteoarthritis oral therapies: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) have been performed for oral non-disease-altering osteoarthritis (OA) treatments for well over a decade. During that period the methods for performing these analyses have evolved as pharmacoeconomic methods have advanced, new treatments have been introduced, and the knowledge of associated adverse events (AEs) has improved.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review was to trace the development of CEAs for oral non-disease-altering treatments in OA.

METHODS

A systematic search for CEAs of OA oral treatments was performed of the English-language medical literature using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE In-Process, EconLit, and Cochrane. Key requirements for inclusion were that the population described patients with OA or arthritis and that the analysis reported at least one incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Each identified publication was assessed for inclusion. Thirteen characteristics and all AEs appearing in each included CEA were extracted and organized. Reference lists from these CEAs were also searched. A chronology of key CEAs in the field was compiled, noting the characteristics that advanced the state of the art in modeling oral OA treatments.

RESULTS

Thirty publications of 28 CEAs were identified and evaluated. Developments in CEAs included an expanded set of comparators that broadened from non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) only to NSAIDs plus gastroprotective agents, cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, and opioids. In turn, AEs expanded from gastrointestinal (GI) events to also include cardiovascular (CV) and neurological events. Efficacy, which initially was presumed to be equivalent for all treatments, evolved to treatment-specific efficacies. Decision-tree analyses were generally replaced by Markov models or, occasionally, stochastic or discrete event simulation. Finally, outcomes have progressed from GI-centric measures to also include quality-adjusted life-years.

CONCLUSION

Methods used by CEAs of oral non-disease-altering OA treatments have evolved in response to changing treatments with different safety profiles and efficacies as well as technical advances in the application of decision science to health care.

A Review on the Management of Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis

Arthritis is the most common chronic condition affecting patients over the age of 70. The prevalence of osteoarthritis increases with age, and with an aging population, the effect of this disease will represent an ever-increasing burden on health care. The knee is the most common joint affected in osteoarthritis, with up to 41% of limb arthritis being located in the knee, compared to 30% in hands and 19% in hips. We review the current concepts with regard to the disease process and risk factors for developing hip and knee osteoarthritis. We then explore the nonsurgical management of osteoarthritis as well as the operative management of hip and knee arthritis. We discuss the indications for surgical treatment of hip and knee arthritis, looking in particular at the controversies affecting young and obese patients in both hip and knee replacements. Patient and implant related outcomes along with survivorships are addressed as well as the experiences and controversies described in national joint registries.

Double-blind placebo-controlled trial of hydroxytyrosol of Olea europaea on pain in gonarthrosis

Hydroxytyrosol is mainly found in olive leaves after hydrolysis of oleuropein and has anti-oxidant, anti-bacterial, and anti-inflammatory properties. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of hydroxytyrosol for alleviating the pain in patients with gonarthrosis. We conducted a double-blind clinical trial in which hydroxytyrosol or placebo was administered to adult patients with gonarthrosis for 4 weeks. The group administered hydroxytyrosol showed significant improvement in the Japanese Orthopedic Association score (pain measurement index) and the visual analog scale score compared to the placebo group.

The modern pharmacology of paracetamol: therapeutic actions, mechanism of action, metabolism, toxicity and recent pharmacological findings

Paracetamol is used worldwide for its analgesic and antipyretic actions. It has a spectrum of action similar to that of NSAIDs and resembles particularly the COX-2 selective inhibitors. Paracetamol is, on average, a weaker analgesic than NSAIDs or COX-2 selective inhibitors but is often preferred because of its better tolerance. Despite the similarities to NSAIDs, the mode of action of paracetamol has been uncertain, but it is now generally accepted that it inhibits COX-1 and COX-2 through metabolism by the peroxidase function of these isoenzymes. This results in inhibition of phenoxyl radical formation from a critical tyrosine residue essential for the cyclooxygenase activity of COX-1 and COX-2 and prostaglandin (PG) synthesis. Paracetamol shows selectivity for inhibition of the synthesis of PGs and related factors when low levels of arachidonic acid and peroxides are available but conversely, it has little activity at substantial levels of arachidonic acid and peroxides. The result is that paracetamol does not suppress the severe inflammation of rheumatoid arthritis and acute gout but does inhibit the lesser inflammation resulting from extraction of teeth and is also active in a variety of inflammatory tests in experimental animals. Paracetamol often appears to have COX-2 selectivity. The apparent COX-2 selectivity of action of paracetamol is shown by its poor anti-platelet activity and good gastrointestinal tolerance. Unlike both non-selective NSAIDs and selective COX-2 inhibitors, paracetamol inhibits other peroxidase enzymes including myeloperoxidase. Inhibition of myeloperoxidase involves paracetamol oxidation and concomitant decreased formation of halogenating oxidants (e.g. hypochlorous acid, hypobromous acid) that may be associated with multiple inflammatory pathologies including atherosclerosis and rheumatic diseases. Paracetamol may, therefore, slow the development of these diseases. Paracetamol, NSAIDs and selective COX-2 inhibitors all have central and peripheral effects. As is the case with the NSAIDs, including the selective COX-2 inhibitors, the analgesic effects of paracetamol are reduced by inhibitors of many endogenous neurotransmitter systems including serotonergic, opioid and cannabinoid systems. There is considerable debate about the hepatotoxicity of therapeutic doses of paracetamol. Much of the toxicity may result from overuse of combinations of paracetamol with opioids which are widely used, particularly in USA.

Intraindividual differences in pain relief and functional improvement in osteoarthritis with diclofenac or tramadol

OBJECTIVES

To investigate how individual patients with painful osteoarthritis (OA) respond to the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) diclofenac and the centrally acting analgesic tramadol when individual on-demand dose titration is allowed. In addition, we studied whether the differences in the mode of action of the different analgesics were important for functional outcome in OA patients.

METHODS

This was performed as a double-blind, crossover, randomised study in 60 patients with OA of the hip (19 patients) or knee (41 patients) without clinical joint inflammation. Patients received either tramadol (50 to 100mg up to three times daily, on demand) for 4 weeks, followed by diclofenac (25 to 50mg up to three times daily, on demand) for 4 weeks, or vice versa. The multidimensional 'Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index' (WOMAC) questionnaire (pain, stiffness and functional impairment) was used to assess the effect of the drugs on pain and functional capability.

RESULTS

54 patients completed both study periods. The mean (+/- SD) daily dose of tramadol consumed was 164.8mg (+/- 54.1mg) and that of diclofenac was 86.9mg (+/- 21.4mg). Both treatments modestly improved median pain intensity, paralleled by an improvement in functional parameters, and there were no statistically significant differences between the groups. However, individual treatment effects varied greatly, and within individual patients there were considerable variations in analgesic effectiveness between the two treatments. Consistently, pain relief correlated linearly with functional improvement. More patients reported adverse events with tramadol than with diclofenac (20 vs 3%, p = 0.0056), but there was no difference in adverse event-related withdrawals (p = 0.69).

CONCLUSION

OA patients' response to analgesic treatment was highly individual and the response to one drug was not predictive of that to another drug. A significant proportion of patients were not treated satisfactorily with diclofenac or tramadol alone. The results obtained from a descriptive analysis of group effects (means, medians) were inappropriate for drawing conclusions on individual treatment benefits. Improvement of functional capability apparently was a consequence of pain relief. Effective pain relief should therefore be the main therapeutic goal in patients with OA where inflammation is less prominent.

Treatment satisfaction after switching to another therapy in Spanish orthopaedic clinic outpatients with knee or hip osteoarthritis previously refractory to paracetamol

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Hip and knee osteoarthritis is highly prevalent in the elderly, and the incidence is estimated to increase in the coming decades. Prior to surgery, symptomatic treatment, starting with non-pharmacological therapies, should be prescribed. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is the recommended first pharmacological treatment for osteoarthritis. If paracetamol is ineffective, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) treatment is indicated. The superiority of NSAIDs over paracetamol has been demonstrated in several studies. Furthermore, the assessment of patient satisfaction could be an adequate indicator of the quality of care given and is likely related to the evolution of the condition and the therapeutic regimen. The objective of this study was to assess the satisfaction of patients diagnosed with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis who had been previously treated with paracetamol and switched to NSAID treatment due to a lack of effectiveness by paracetamol.

METHODS

An observational, prospective, multicentre and comparative study was conducted in 2009 among patients diagnosed with hip and knee OA who visited outpatient orthopaedic clinics. The evaluation of treatment effectiveness was carried out using a patient-based visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). The satisfaction regarding change of treatment due to a lack of effectiveness and/or the presence of adverse effects was evaluated using the osteoARthritis Treatment Satisfaction (ARTS) questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 2437 patients were evaluated (knee OA: 1438 [59%]; hip OA: 621 [25.5%]; knee and hip OA: 124 [5.1%]; and without OA location registered: 254 [10.4%]). The study findings showed an increase in patient satisfaction after abandoning the use of paracetamol to treat OA. Statistically significant increases in both overall satisfaction mean (from 57.7 [SD 13.5] to 71.3 [SD 12.0]) and in each of the four domains of the ARTS questionnaire were observed (p < 0.0001 in all cases). According to the WOMAC and a VAS, treatment effectiveness increased significantly after 3 months (p < 0.0001) and significant correlations with satisfaction were observed (r = -0.32 and r = -0.29, respectively; p < 0.0001). The mean (SD) change in global satisfaction in patients treated with NSAIDs was 14.9 (15.5) versus 7.2 (14.4) for patients treated with non-NSAIDs (p < 0.0001). Patients taking NSAID treatment showed substantially more improvement over those taking non-NSAID treatment.

CONCLUSION

NSAIDs relieve pain due to OA in paracetamol-resistant patients and improve treatment effectiveness and patient satisfaction with treatment. Furthermore, paracetamol-refractory subjects under conventional medical treatment with NSAIDs experienced the drug as more effective and also tended to be more satisfied with treatment than those treated with non-NSAIDs.

Treatment satisfaction after switching to another therapy in Spanish orthopaedic clinic outpatients with knee or hip osteoarthritis previously refractory to paracetamol

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Hip and knee osteoarthritis is highly prevalent in the elderly, and the incidence is estimated to increase in the coming decades. Prior to surgery, symptomatic treatment, starting with non-pharmacological therapies, should be prescribed. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is the recommended first pharmacological treatment for osteoarthritis. If paracetamol is ineffective, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) treatment is indicated. The superiority of NSAIDs over paracetamol has been demonstrated in several studies. Furthermore, the assessment of patient satisfaction could be an adequate indicator of the quality of care given and is likely related to the evolution of the condition and the therapeutic regimen. The objective of this study was to assess the satisfaction of patients diagnosed with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis who had been previously treated with paracetamol and switched to NSAID treatment due to a lack of effectiveness by paracetamol.

METHODS

An observational, prospective, multicentre and comparative study was conducted in 2009 among patients diagnosed with hip and knee OA who visited outpatient orthopaedic clinics. The evaluation of treatment effectiveness was carried out using a patient-based visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). The satisfaction regarding change of treatment due to a lack of effectiveness and/or the presence of adverse effects was evaluated using the osteoARthritis Treatment Satisfaction (ARTS) questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 2437 patients were evaluated (knee OA: 1438 [59%]; hip OA: 621 [25.5%]; knee and hip OA: 124 [5.1%]; and without OA location registered: 254 [10.4%]). The study findings showed an increase in patient satisfaction after abandoning the use of paracetamol to treat OA. Statistically significant increases in both overall satisfaction mean (from 57.7 [SD 13.5] to 71.3 [SD 12.0]) and in each of the four domains of the ARTS questionnaire were observed (p < 0.0001 in all cases). According to the WOMAC and a VAS, treatment effectiveness increased significantly after 3 months (p < 0.0001) and significant correlations with satisfaction were observed (r = -0.32 and r = -0.29, respectively; p < 0.0001). The mean (SD) change in global satisfaction in patients treated with NSAIDs was 14.9 (15.5) versus 7.2 (14.4) for patients treated with non-NSAIDs (p < 0.0001). Patients taking NSAID treatment showed substantially more improvement over those taking non-NSAID treatment.

CONCLUSION

NSAIDs relieve pain due to OA in paracetamol-resistant patients and improve treatment effectiveness and patient satisfaction with treatment. Furthermore, paracetamol-refractory subjects under conventional medical treatment with NSAIDs experienced the drug as more effective and also tended to be more satisfied with treatment than those treated with non-NSAIDs.

Comparative efficacy of methyl salicylate iontophoresis and moist heat pack in the management of knee osteoarthritis

Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of methyl salicylate iontophoresis in reducing pain and disability in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA).

Materials and methods: A total of 40 patients with knee OA patients who were admitted at the outpatient physiotherapy clinic participated in this study. The patients were randomly assigned into two groups. Group A received methyl salicylate iontophoresis while group B received moist packs daily for a period of two weeks. Patients were evaluated for pain and functional capacity using numerical pain rating scale (NPRS), walking speed test (WST), modified get up and go test (MGUGT), total single limb standing test (TSLST) and Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) before therapy and after 2 weeks of intervention.

Results: The mean age and duration of symptoms were 56.45±6.30, and 2.27±1.05 years respectively for individuals treated with methyl salicylate iontophoresis and 56.8±5.47, 2.12±0.86 years for individuals treated with moist pack. After 2 weeks of intervention, significant differences were observed in all outcome parameters for both groups when compared to baseline values (P<0.01). Also, significant difference was found in most of the parameters except MGUGT in both groups post interventionally (P<0.001, P=0.103).

Conclusion: Methyl salicylate iontophoresis can be included in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis to enhance pain relief and functional activity.

Efficacy of etoricoxib, celecoxib, lumiracoxib, non-selective NSAIDs, and acetaminophen in osteoarthritis: a mixed treatment comparison

Objective:

To compare the efficacy of etoricoxib, lumiracoxib, celecoxib, non-selective (ns) NSAIDs and acetaminophen in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA)

Methods:

Randomized placebo controlled trials investigating the effects of acetaminophen 4000mg, diclofenac 150mg, naproxen 1000mg, ibuprofen 2400mg, celecoxib 100-400mg, lumiracoxib 100-400mg, and etoricoxib 30-60mg with treatment duration of at least two weeks were identified with a systematic literature search. The endpoints of interest were pain, physical function and patient global assessment of disease status (PGADS). Pain and physical function reported on different scales (VAS or LIKERT) were translated into effect sizes (ES). An ES 0.2 - 0.5 was defined as a “small” treatment effect, whereas ES of 0.5 – 0.8 and > 0.8 were defined as “moderate” and “large”, respectively. A negative effect indicated superior effects of the treatment group compared to the control group. Results of all trials were analyzed simultaneously with a Bayesian mixed treatment comparison.

Results:

There is a >95% probability that etoricoxib (30 or 60mg) shows the greatest improvement in pain and physical function of all interventions compared. ESs of etoricoxib 30mg relative to placebo, celecoxib 200mg, ibuprofen 2400mg, and diclofenac 150mg were -0.66 (95% Credible Interval -0.83; -0.49), -0.32 (-0.50; -0.14), -0.25 (-0.53; 0.03), and -0.17 (-0.41; 0.08), respectively. Regarding physical functioning, ESs of etoricoxib 30mg relative to placebo, celecoxib 200mg, ibuprofen 2400mg, and diclofenac 150mg were -0.61 (-0.76; -0.46), -0.27 (-0.43; -0.10), -0.20 (-0.47; 0.07), and -0.09 (- 0.33; 0.14) respectively. The greatest improvements in PGADS were expected with either etoricoxib or diclofenac.

Conclusion:

The current study estimated the efficacy of acetaminophen, nsNSAIDs, and COX-2 selective NSAIDs in OA and found that etoricoxib 30 mg is likely to result in the greatest improvements in pain and physical function. Differences in PGADS between interventions were smaller.

Acute and chronic acetaminophen use and renal disease: a case-control study using pharmacy and medical claims

BACKGROUND

Studies have examined the association between acetaminophen (APAP) use and renal disease; however, their interpretation is limited by a number of methodological issues.

OBJECTIVE

To study the association between acute and chronic prescription-acquired APAP use and renal disease.

METHODS

This was a retrospective case-control study of medical and pharmacy claims of a 10% random sample of the enrollees from the IMS LifeLink Health Plans commercial claims dataset for dates of service from January 1, 1997, through December 31, 2009. Subjects were continuously enrolled and aged 18 years or older. Cases had at least 1 incident claim of renal disease defined by ICD-9-CM codes in the primary diagnosis field. Controls were randomly selected from individuals without evidence of renal disease, liver disease, or asthma in medical claims and matched to cases in a 3-to-1 ratio based on 3 variables (age, gender, and geographic region). APAP exposure, dosage, and duration of use were measured in the 7 and 30 days (acute) and in the 1-year (chronic) look-back periods. Multivariable conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the risk of APAP exposure adjusted for comorbidities, use of other nephrotoxic drugs, and health system factors.

RESULTS

There were 4,724 cases and 14,172 controls with a mean (SD) age of 60.8 (17.8) years, and 52.6% were males; 10.9% of cases and 4.2% of controls had APAP exposure in the 30 days pre-index with mean potential maximum daily dosages of 3,846.5 mg and 3,190.8 mg, respectively. Acute APAP exposure was significantly associated with renal disease, and the risk decreased with longer look-back periods (7 days: adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.61-2.30); 30 days: OR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.48-1.97). Cumulative APAP dosage greater than 1 kg and APAP use for longer than 30 days in the pre-index year were not significantly associated with an increased risk of renal disease (both P values = 0.900).

CONCLUSIONS

Acute prescription-acquired APAP use was associated with renal disease, while chronic use was not. Because this study assessed APAP use in pharmacy claims, further research accounting for over-the-counter APAP use is warranted before the safety of chronic APAP consumption can be firmly established.

NSAIDs vs acetaminophen in knee and hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review regarding heterogeneity influencing the outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To identify sources of heterogeneity (statistical, methodological, and clinical) in studies evaluating non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) vs acetaminophen in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) to elucidate variations in outcomes.

METHOD

A database search (1966 to January 2010) was made for (randomized) controlled trials ((R)CTs) comparing NSAIDs vs acetaminophen in knee and hip OA. Extracted data included baseline demographic/clinical characteristics, outcomes at follow-up, and characteristics of study design. Heterogeneity was examined with subgroup analyses by exploring changes in effect size and with I(2) of Higgins. Pain measures were expressed as standardized mean differences.

RESULTS

15 RCTs, including 21 comparisons of NSAIDs and acetaminophen were included. Statistical heterogeneity was absent (Cochran's Q-test=14.11; I(2)=0; P=0.78). Moderate clinical heterogeneity was found for comparisons which included both hip and knee OA vs knee OA only (I(2)=51; P=0.09). NSAIDs seemed slightly more effective than acetaminophen if more patients with hip OA were included. However, the pooled effect sizes of comparisons with knee OA vs both knee and hip OA are equal. Low clinical heterogeneity was found for comparisons with low dosage of acetaminophen, normal dosage of NSAIDs, and moderate pain intensity at baseline. Low methodological heterogeneity was found for comparisons with a short duration.

CONCLUSION

Future trials should present the results of hip and knee OA separately, as moderate clinical heterogeneity was found. There might be differences in effectiveness of NSAIDs vs acetaminophen in patients with hip vs knee OA. No significant methodological and statistical heterogeneity was found in studies evaluating NSAIDs vs acetaminophen.

Paracetamol and the placebo effect in osteoarthritis trials: a missing link?

This paper addresses the role of paracetamol in placebo-controlled osteoarthritis (OA) trials and the potential contribution to the large placebo response in such trials. Paracetamol is used as rescue medication in nearly all OA placebo-controlled trials. Triggered by the discussion about the placebo effect in general and because of the lack of systematic reviews of placebo effect in OA trials, a recent meta-analysis examined the placebo effect and its potential determinants in the treatment of OA, as the main result came out that placebo is very effective in the treatment of OA, especially for pain, stiffness, and self-reported function. However, mostly limited data are available from published OA trials on the starting dose, final dose, dose over time of paracetamol use, and the percentage of patients who used rescue medication during the study. Paracetamol may be an important additional simulated effect of placebo administration mimicking the true placebo effect and thus a missing link contributing partially to the large placebo response in OA trials. Therefore, the positive effect of paracetamol on symptom relief as well as the need for standardized recording of rescue medication should be taken into account when designing, executing, and interpreting placebo-controlled OA studies.

Eicosanoids in inflammation and cancer: the role of COX-2

Eicosanoids, a family of oxygenated metabolites of eicosapolyenoic fatty acids, such as arachidonic acid, formed via the lipoxygenase, cyclooxygenase (COX) and epoxygenase pathways, play an important role in the regulation of various pathophysiological processes, including inflammation and cancer. COX-2, the inducible isoform of COX, has emerged as the key enzyme regulating inflammation, and promises to play a considerable role in cancer. Although NSAIDs have been in use for centuries, the COX-2 selective inhibitors - coxibs - have emerged as potent anti-inflammatory drugs with fewer gastric side effects. As COX-2 plays a major role in neoplastic transformation and cancer growth, by downregulating apoptosis and promoting angiogenesis, invasion and metastasis, coxibs have a potential role in the prevention and treatment of cancer. Recent studies indicate their possible application in overcoming drug resistance by downregulating the expression of MDR-1. However, the cardiac side effects of some of the coxibs have limited their application in treating various inflammatory disorders and warrant the development of COX-2 inhibitors without side effects. This review will focus on the role of COX-2 in inflammation and cancer, with an emphasis on novel approaches to the development of COX-2 inhibitors without side effects.

Clinical efficacy and safety of glucosamine, chondroitin sulphate, their combination, celecoxib or placebo taken to treat osteoarthritis of the knee: 2-year results from GAIT

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a major cause of pain and functional limitation in older adults, yet longer-term studies of medical treatment of OA are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of glucosamine and chondroitin sulphate (CS), alone or in combination, as well as celecoxib and placebo on painful knee OA over 2 years.

METHODS

A 24-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, conducted at nine sites in the US ancillary to the Glucosamine/chondroitin Arthritis Intervention Trial, enrolled 662 patients with knee OA who satisfied radiographic criteria (Kellgren/Lawrence grade 2 or 3 changes and baseline joint space width of at least 2 mm). This subset continued to receive their randomised treatment: glucosamine 500 mg three times daily, CS 400 mg three times daily, the combination of glucosamine and CS, celecoxib 200 mg daily, or placebo over 24 months. The primary outcome was a 20% reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain over 24 months. Secondary outcomes included an Outcome Measures in Rheumatology/Osteoarthritis Research Society International response and change from baseline in WOMAC pain and function.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, the odds of achieving a 20% reduction in WOMAC pain were celecoxib: 1.21, glucosamine: 1.16, combination glucosamine/CS: 0.83 and CS alone: 0.69, and were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Over 2 years, no treatment achieved a clinically important difference in WOMAC pain or function as compared with placebo. However, glucosamine and celecoxib showed beneficial but not significant trends. Adverse reactions were similar among treatment groups and serious adverse events were rare for all treatments.

Adverse event profile of tramadol in recent clinical studies of chronic osteoarthritis pain

OBJECTIVE

To review the safety profile of tramadol hydrochloride (tramadol) in the treatment of chronic osteoarthritis pain, with specific reference to the incidence of adverse events (AEs) reported in large clinical trials.

METHODS

An extensive review of published clinical trials with tramadol was conducted, using literature searches in MEDLINE and EMBASE (since 1997) and the key search terms: tramadol, immediate-release (IR), extended-release (ER), sustained-release (SR), chronic pain, and osteoarthritis. Studies were included based on appropriate study design, appropriately reported safety data, and chronic osteoarthritis as a pain condition. Secondary analyses of previously published pain studies were excluded.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The most common AEs reported across all tramadol formulations were nausea, dizziness, constipation, vomiting, somnolence, and headache. Most AEs were mild to moderate in severity and occurred more commonly during initial treatment than during maintenance treatment. Differences in the rates of selected gastrointestinal and central nervous system AEs were seen between long-acting and immediate-release tramadol formulations, both within individual studies and across all studies. AEs appeared to be dose-dependent in fixed-dose studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides a robust base for descriptive assessment of AEs associated with long-acting tramadol formulations. Although the actions of different tramadol formulations are biologically similar, differences in pharmacokinetics, drug-release patterns, and availability may influence the incidence of AEs associated with tramadol. Because of the limitations of a qualitative safety analysis across studies with different populations and study designs, any observed differences should be interpreted with caution, but these differences may help educate healthcare providers about tramadol treatment in patients with chronic osteoarthritis pain and help them select the optimal dose for specific patients.

Do NSAIDs affect longitudinal changes in knee cartilage volume and knee cartilage defects in older adults?

BACKGROUND

The effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on knee osteoarthritis progression are unclear. The aim of this longitudinal study was to determine the associations between use of NSAIDs and changes in knee cartilage volume and knee cartilage defects over 2.9 years in older adults.

METHODS

T(1)-weighted fat-suppressed magnetic resonance imaging on the right knee was performed in a total of 395 randomly selected subjects (mean age 62 years, range 51-80 years, and 50% female) to assess knee cartilage volume at tibial sites and knee cartilage defects (0-4 scale) at baseline and 2.9 years later. Medication use in the last month was recorded by questionnaire.

RESULTS

Compared with nonusers of NSAIDs (n = 334), users of cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors (n = 40) had decreased knee cartilage defect development in the medial tibiofemoral compartment (odds ratio [OR] 0.4, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2-0.99), whereas users of conventional NSAIDs (n = 21) had increased knee cartilage defect development in both medial (OR 3.1, 95% CI, 1.0-9.1) and lateral (OR 2.6, 95% CI, 1.0-6.7) tibiofemoral compartments. Comparing users of COX-2 inhibitors with users of conventional NSAIDs, the latter had higher knee cartilage volume loss (-5.3% vs -3.1% at medial tibia and -3.6% vs -1.1% at lateral tibia; all P <.05). All associations were adjusted for potential confounders including knee pain and radiographic osteoarthritis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that nonselective NSAIDs may have deleterious effects, while selective COX-2 inhibitors might have beneficial effects on knee cartilage. Randomized controlled trials examining knee structure to confirm this finding are warranted.

Cost effectiveness of COX 2 selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs alone or in combination with a proton pump inhibitor for people with osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the cost effectiveness of cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX 2) selective inhibitors and traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and the addition of proton pump inhibitors to these treatments, for people with osteoarthritis.

DESIGN

An economic evaluation using a Markov model and data from a systematic review was conducted. Estimates of cardiovascular and gastrointestinal adverse events were based on data from three large randomised controlled trials, and observational data were used for sensitivity analyses. Efficacy benefits from treatment were estimated from a meta-analysis of trials reporting total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index score. Other model inputs were obtained from the relevant literature. The model was run for a hypothetical population of people with osteoarthritis. Subgroup analyses were conducted for people at high risk of gastrointestinal or cardiovascular adverse events. Comparators Licensed COX 2 selective inhibitors (celecoxib and etoricoxib) and traditional NSAIDs (diclofenac, ibuprofen, and naproxen) for which suitable data were available were compared. Paracetamol was also included, as was the possibility of adding a proton pump inhibitor (omeprazole) to each treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measure was cost effectiveness, which was based on quality adjusted life years gained. Quality adjusted life year scores were calculated from pooled estimates of efficacy and major adverse events (that is, dyspepsia; symptomatic ulcer; complicated gastrointestinal perforation, ulcer, or bleed; myocardial infarction; stroke; and heart failure).

RESULTS

Addition of a proton pump inhibitor to both COX 2 selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs was highly cost effective for all patient groups considered (incremental cost effectiveness ratio less than pound1000 (euro1175, $1650)). This finding was robust across a wide range of effectiveness estimates if the cheapest proton pump inhibitor was used. In our base case analysis, adding a proton pump inhibitor to a COX 2 selective inhibitor (used at the lowest licensed dose) was a cost effective option, even for patients at low risk of gastrointestinal adverse events (incremental cost effectiveness ratio approximately pound10 000). Uncertainties around relative adverse event rates meant relative cost effectiveness for individual COX 2 selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs was difficult to determine.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescribing a proton pump inhibitor for people with osteoarthritis who are taking a traditional NSAID or COX 2 selective inhibitor is cost effective. The cost effectiveness analysis was sensitive to adverse event data and the specific choice of COX 2 selective inhibitor or NSAID agent should, therefore, take into account individual cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risks.

Osteoarthritis: An Update on Data Currently Reshaping Practice

Osteoarthritis is common, has considerable health consequences, and will affect increasing numbers of persons in coming years. Nonpharmacological interventions are of paramount importance in achieving adequate symptom control. Acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) play a pivotal role in osteoarthritis pharmacotherapy. Acetaminophen, due to its safety profile, should be adequately trialed before resorting to NSAIDs. NSAIDs and celecoxib, a selective inhibitor of cyclooxygenase-2, should be selected thoughtfully so as to balance the likelihood of treatment success with gastrointestinal bleeding and cardiovascular events. Celecoxib may be used when the risk for gastrointestinal bleeding is high and the risk of cardiovascular events low. Otherwise, NSAIDs, usually naproxen, should be paired with a gastroprotective agent. Topical NSAIDs, including a recently approved diclofenac patch and gel, may also be useful when systemic exposure is undesirable. The role of glucosamine and chondroitin is controversial and the data conflicting. Other modalities, such as tramadol, opioids, and viscosupplementation should be tailored to the patient and clinical situation. Appropriate deployment of agents in the osteoarthritis armamentarium can maximize efficacy and safety thereby improving the disease burden for patients.

The effect of glucosamine and/or chondroitin sulfate on the progression of knee osteoarthritis: a report from the glucosamine/chondroitin arthritis intervention trial

OBJECTIVE

Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee causes significant morbidity and current medical treatment is limited to symptom relief, while therapies able to slow structural damage remain elusive. This study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate (CS), alone or in combination, as well as celecoxib and placebo on progressive loss of joint space width (JSW) in patients with knee OA.

METHODS

A 24-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, conducted at 9 sites in the United States as part of the Glucosamine/Chondroitin Arthritis Intervention Trial (GAIT), enrolled 572 patients with knee OA who satisfied radiographic criteria (Kellgren/Lawrence [K/L] grade 2 or grade 3 changes and JSW of at least 2 mm at baseline). Patients with primarily lateral compartment narrowing at any time point were excluded. Patients who had been randomized to 1 of the 5 groups in the GAIT continued to receive glucosamine 500 mg 3 times daily, CS 400 mg 3 times daily, the combination of glucosamine and CS, celecoxib 200 mg daily, or placebo over 24 months. The minimum medial tibiofemoral JSW was measured at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months. The primary outcome measure was the mean change in JSW from baseline.

RESULTS

The mean JSW loss at 2 years in knees with OA in the placebo group, adjusted for design and clinical factors, was 0.166 mm. No statistically significant difference in mean JSW loss was observed in any treatment group compared with the placebo group. Treatment effects on K/L grade 2 knees, but not on K/L grade 3 knees, showed a trend toward improvement relative to the placebo group. The power of the study was diminished by the limited sample size, variance of JSW measurement, and a smaller than expected loss in JSW.

CONCLUSION

At 2 years, no treatment achieved a predefined threshold of clinically important difference in JSW loss as compared with placebo. However, knees with K/L grade 2 radiographic OA appeared to have the greatest potential for modification by these treatments.

The effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

In this study, we planned to investigate the effects of pulse electromagnetic field (PEMF) on pain relief and functional capacity of patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). Fifty-five patients with knee OA were included in a randomized, placebo-controlled study. At the end of the therapy, there was statistically significant improvement in pain scores in both groups (P < 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed within the groups (P > 0.05). We observed statistically significant improvement in some of the subgroups of Lequesne index. These are morning stiffness and activities of daily living activities compared to placebo group. However, we could not observe statistically significant differences in total of the scale between two groups (P > 0.05). Applying between-group analysis, we were unable to demonstrate a beneficial symptomatic effect of PEMF in the treatment of knee OA in all patients. Further studies using different types of magnetic devices, treatment protocols and patient populations are warranted to confirm the general efficacy of PEMF therapy in OA and other conditions.

Once-daily, controlled-release tramadol and sustained-release diclofenac relieve chronic pain due to osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The present study was a randomized, parallel, double-blind comparison between controlled-release (CR) tramadol and sustained-release (SR) diclofenac in patients with chronic pain due to osteoarthritis of the hips and/or knees.

METHODS

Patients with at least moderate pain intensity, and having received analgesics over the past three months, underwent a two- to seven-day washout of current analgesics before initiation of 200 mg CR tramadol or 75 mg SR diclofenac. During the eight-week study, patients returned to the clinic biweekly. CR tramadol doses were titrated to a maximum of 200 mg, 300 mg or 400 mg per day. SR diclofenac doses were titrated to 75 mg or 100 mg once daily, or 75 mg twice a day based on pain relief and the presence of side effects. For rescue analgesic, patients took acetaminophen as needed, up to 650 mg three times a day.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients on CR tramadol and 52 patients on SR diclofenac were evaluable. Significant improvements from prestudy treatment were shown for visual analogue scale pain (P=0.0001), stiffness (P<0.0005) and physical function (P=0.0001) scores for both treatments. There were no significant differences between the two treatments in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities subscales, overall pain, pain and sleep, or the clinical effectiveness evaluation. Overall incidence of adverse events was similar in both groups, with more opioid-related adverse events with CR tramadol, and two serious adverse events occurring with the use of SR diclofenac.

CONCLUSIONS

CR tramadol is as effective as SR diclofenac in the treatment of pain due to knee or hip osteoarthritis, with the potential for fewer of the serious side effects that characterize nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug administration.

Outcome measures for gait and ambulation in the spinal cord injury population

BACKGROUND

At the 2006 National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) sponsored pre-conference on spinal cord injury (SCI) outcomes, several gait and ambulation measures were evaluated for utility in clinical practice, validity, and reliability as research measurement tools. The Conference Subcommittee on Gait and Ambulation chose to review the Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury II (WISCI II), 50-Foot Walk Test (50FTWT), 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), 10-Meter Walk Test (10MWT), and Functional Independence Measure-Locomotor (FIM-L).

METHODS

A subcommittee of international experts evaluated each instrument for test construct, administration, population applicability, reliability, sensitivity to change, and validity. Evaluations for each outcome measure were compiled, distributed to the whole committee, and then further reviewed with addition of comments and recommendations for consensus. An audience of experts voted on the validity and usefulness of each measure.

RESULTS

WISCI II and 10MWT were found to be the most valid and clinically useful tests to measure improvement in gait for patients with SCI. FIM-L had little utility and validity for research in SCI. 6MWT and 50FTWT were found to be useful but in need of further validation or changes for the SCI population.

CONCLUSION

A combination of the 10MWT and WISCI II would provide the most valid measure of improvement in gait and ambulation in as much as objective changes of speed, and functional capacity allow for interval measurement. To provide the most comprehensive battery, however, it will be important to include a measure of endurance such as the 6MWT. Further validation and study should be devoted to WISCI II, 10MWT, and 6MWT as primary outcome measures for gait in SCI.

Exercise for health and wellness at midlife and beyond: balancing benefits and risks

As noted in research on frailty in women, regular exercise can limit age-related functional decline. However, physical activity has been implicated in the etiology of such musculoskeletal disorders as osteoarthritis. Proper exercise plans must strike a balance between promoting health and limiting the risk of injury. This article discusses age-related musculoskeletal changes and gender-specific conditions that may predispose midlife and older women to musculoskeletal injuries. The controversy about how physical activity may relate to osteoarthritis is discussed, along with common osteoarthritic-related spinal and appendicular conditions. Exercise prescription for women is briefly presented. The consistent message in the literature is that exercise is a safe and powerful tool to prevent and treat many medical, psychological, and musculoskeletal conditions in females at midlife and beyond.

Acetaminophen safety and hepatotoxicity--where do we go from here?

Acetaminophen has been widely used for > 50 years in the treatment of pain and fever and provides for the safe and effective relief of these symptoms. In a small minority of patients, however, acetaminophen is responsible for life-threatening liver injury and accounts for up to 50% of all adult cases of acute liver failure in the US. Although approximately two-thirds of adult overdoses are associated with suicide attempts, many are inadvertent, often due to the use of multiple acetaminophen formulations over many days. Additionally, some individuals appear to experience acetaminophen toxicity at 'therapeutic' doses of < 4 g/day, for reasons unknown. In pediatric populations, the overwhelming majority of acetaminophen overdoses are due to unintentional overdoses, except for the predominance of suicidal ingestions in the teenage population. This article seeks to review the mechanism and metabolism of acetaminophen and the features of toxicity in adults, pediatric and special populations. Additionally, expert opinion is presented herein to aid in reducing the frequency and severity of liver injury from acetaminophen.

Aceclofenac vs paracetamol in the management of symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee: a double-blind 6-week randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of aceclofenac, 200 mg/day, and paracetamol, 3000 mg/day, in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.

METHODS

This was a double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre clinical trial involving patients with symptomatic OA of the knee, conducted in Spain. Patients were randomly allocated to aceclofenac 100 mg twice daily (n=82) or paracetamol 1000 mg three times daily (n=86). Patients were assessed at baseline and 6 weeks. Primary efficacy measures were severity of pain (visual analogue scale, VAS), Lequesne OA knee index, and patient's and physician's global assessment of disease activity. Severity of knee pain at rest or walking, stiffness, knee swelling and tenderness, and assessment of health-related quality of life (Health Assessment Questionnaire, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and Short Form 36) were included as secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

Both treatment groups showed significant improvement compared with their baseline values in the four primary endpoints. Mean between-treatment differences favoured aceclofenac over paracetamol on pain (VAS, 7.64 mm [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.44-14.85 mm]), Lequesne OA index (1.41 [95% CI, 0.45-2.36]), and patient's (0.33 [95% CI, 0.06-0.61]) and physician's (0.23 [95% CI, 0.01-0.47]) global assessments. Adverse events were similar for both drugs (paracetamol, 29% patients vs aceclofenac, 32%; P=0.71). Four patients withdrew in each group due to adverse events. Patients tended to prefer aceclofenac to paracetamol (P=0.001), and more treated with paracetamol withdrew from the study due to lack of efficacy (n=8 vs n=1, P=0.035, for paracetamol and aceclofenac, respectively).

CONCLUSION

At 6 weeks, patients with symptomatic OA of the knee showed a greater improvement in pain and functional capacity with aceclofenac than paracetamol with no difference in tolerability.