Efficacy and Tolerability of GCSB-5 for Hand Osteoarthritis: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

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

Objective

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

Method

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Systematic review and network meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of parmacotherapy for hand osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

Hand osteoarthritis poses a significant health challenge globally due to its increasing prevalence and the substantial burden on individuals and the society. In current clinical practice, treatment options for hand osteoarthritis encompass a range of approaches, including biological agents, antimetabolic drugs, neuromuscular blockers, anti-inflammatory drugs, hormone medications, pain relievers, new synergistic drugs, and other medications. Despite the diverse array of treatments, determining the optimal regimen remains elusive. This study seeks to conduct a network meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness and safety of various drug intervention measures in the treatment of hand osteoarthritis. The findings aim to provide evidence-based support for the clinical management of hand osteoarthritis.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search across PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted until September 15th, 2022, to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. After meticulous screening and data extraction, the Cochrane Handbook's risk of bias assessment tool was applied to evaluate study quality. Data synthesis was carried out using Stata 15.1 software.

RESULTS

21 studies with data for 3965 patients were meta-analyzed, involving 20 distinct Western medicine agents. GCSB-5, a specific herbal complex that mainly regulate pain in hand osteoarthritis, showed the greatest reduction in pain [WMD = -13.00, 95% CI (-26.69, 0.69)]. CRx-102, s specific medication characterized by its significant effect for relieving joint stiffness symptoms, remarkably mitigated stiffness [WMD = -7.50, 95% CI (-8.90, -6.10)]. Chondroitin sulfate displayed the highest incidence of adverse events [RR = 0.26, 95% CI (0.06, 1.22)]. No substantial variation in functional index for hand osteoarthritis score improvement was identified between distinct agents and placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, GCSB-5 and CRx-102 exhibit efficacy in alleviating pain and stiffness in HOA, respectively. However, cautious interpretation of the results is advised. Tailored treatment decisions based on individual contexts are imperative.

The traditional utilization, biological activity and chemical composition of edible fern species

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

Ferns form an important part of the human diet. Young fern fiddleheads are mostly consumed as vegetables, while the rhizomes are often extracted for starch. These edible ferns are also often employed in traditional medicine, where all parts of the plant are used, mostly to prepare extracts. These extracts are applied either externally as lotions and baths or internally as potions, decoctions and teas. Ailments traditionally treated with ferns include coughs, colds, fevers, pain, burns and wounds, asthma, rheumatism, diarrhoea, or skin diseases (eczema, rashes, itching, leprosy).

AIM OF THE REVIEW

This review aims to compile the worldwide knowledge on the traditional medicinal uses of edible fern species correlating to reported biological activities and isolated bioactive compounds.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The articles and books published on edible fern species were searched through the online databases Web of Science, Pubmed and Google Scholar, with critical evaluation of the hits. The time period up to the end of 2022 was included.

RESULTS

First, the edible fern species were identified based on the literature data. A total of 90 fern species were identified that are eaten around the world and are also used in traditional medicine. Ailments treated are often associated with inflammation or bacterial infection. However, only the most common and well-known fern species, were investigated for their biological activity. The most studied species are Blechnum orientale L., Cibotium barometz (L.) J. Sm., Diplazium esculentum (Retz.) Sw., Marsilea minuta L., Osmunda japonica Thunb., Polypodium vulgare L., and Stenochlaena palustris (Burm.) Bedd. Most of the fern extracts have been studied for their antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial activities. Not surprisingly, antioxidant capacity has been the most studied, with results reported for 28 edible fern species. Ferns have been found to be very rich sources of flavonoids, polyphenols, polyunsaturated fatty acids, carotenoids, terpenoids and steroids and most of these compounds are remarkable free radical scavengers responsible for the outstanding antioxidant capacity of fern extracts. As far as clinical trials are concerned, extracts from only three edible fern species have been evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS

The extracts of edible fern species exert antioxidant anti-inflammatory and related biological activities, which is consistent with their traditional medicinal use in the treatment of wounds, burns, colds, coughs, skin diseases and intestinal diseases. However, studies to prove pharmacological activities are scarce, and require chemical-biological standardization. Furthermore, correct botanical classification needs to be included in publications to simplify data acquisition. Finally, more in-depth phytochemical studies, allowing the linking of traditional use to pharmacological relevance are needed to be done in a standardized way.

Medical treatment of osteoarthritis: botanical pharmacologic aspect

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis, and its prevalence is expected to further increase as our society ages. Despite many approaches to cure OA, no drugs are currently proven to modulate the progression of OA. Nowadays, new OA treatment options are holistically developed and one of the approaches of treatment option is botanical drugs. Some botanical drugs for OA have shown both therapeutic effect comparable to refined drugs in small studies and fewer side effects. Hence, there are various health functional foods which are known to relieve symptoms of OA. However, since there are many botanical products, clinicians are not familiar to the efficacy of each botanical product, making it challenging to use them appropriately in clinical practice. Here, we summarize the botanical products available for treating OA, including prescription botanical drugs and health functional foods available in Korea. Further studies and the purification of effective molecules from botanical products will be necessary in future.

Efficacy of Herbal Medicine in Hand Osteoarthritis: A Narrative Review

OBJECTIVE

Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most prevalent joint disorders in the world that has placed an enormous economic and social burden on governments and healthcare sectors in many countries. Hand OA (HOA) is the most common peripheral arthritis, which is less investigated than knee and hip OA. Due to limited approved drug choices and adverse effects of long-term use of current regimens, we aimed to review the existing evidence that were used as oral herbal medicine to treat HOA.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched for both observational and interventional studies that have investigated herbal medicine safety and efficacy in HOA, written in English and published between 2010 and 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 5 original articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, and each article assessed a different herbal regimen. Overall, it seems desirable to add specific herbal treatments to the regimen of HOA patients, specifically in case of early stages of HOA.

CONCLUSION

Currently, the need for a low-risk alternative treatment in HOA patients is felt more than ever. There are reliable references relating to the safety of Korean red ginseng, GCSB-5, XLGB, and GS-GCu in these patients, although their efficacy was limited. Additionally, herbs like curcumin and Boswellia serrata have positively affected patients with knee osteoarthritis. However, there is a lack of strong evidence supporting their effectiveness in hand osteoarthritis (HOA). This emphasizes the potential benefits that these herbs may have for HOA patients.

GCSB-5 regulates inflammatory arthritis and pain by modulating the mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling pathway in a murine model of rheumatoid arthritis

Objectives

This study aimed to determine whether GCSB-5 has anti-inflammatory and antinociceptive effects in mice with collagen-induced arthritis (CIA), an animal model of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and investigate the influence of GCSB-5 on the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway.

Materials and methods

The experimental animal study was designed to include five groups: CIA mice treated with GCSB-5 (300 mg/kg), GCSB-5 (600 mg/kg), celecoxib (60 mg/kg), or saline for four weeks, and nontreated control mice. The clinical severity of arthritis was scored. Nociceptive thresholds were measured by using a von Frey dynamic plantar analgesimeter. The MAPK pathway was evaluated in mouse synovium. The expression of channels associated with pain signaling was assessed by western blot and immunohistochemical staining.

Results

GCSB-5 treatment diminished the severity of clinical arthritis and increased the nociceptive threshold in mice with CIA. Celecoxib, a positive control drug, also showed comparable changes. Clinical arthritis scores were inversely related to mechanical thresholds. GCSB-5 administration decreased the levels of anti-type II collagen antibody and inflammatory cytokines in the sera of mice with CIA. Furthermore, ERK, p38 MAPK, and JNK phosphorylation were downregulated and TRPV1 and ASIC3 expression were decreased in the synovium of GCSB-5-treated mice compared to salinetreated mice. Interleukin-6-induced TRPV1 and ASIC3 upregulation were also inhibited by GCSB-5 in human RA fibroblast-like synoviocytes in vitro.

Conclusion

GCSB-5 decreased inflammatory arthritis and pain in a murine model of RA. The results present evidence that GCSB-5 may be beneficial for relieving pain as well as decreasing inflammation in autoimmune arthritis, such as RA.

Management of hand osteoarthritis: from an US evidence-based medicine guideline to a European patient-centric approach

Hand osteoarthritis is the most common joint condition and is associated with significant morbidity. It is of paramount importance that patients are thoroughly assessed and examined when complaining of hand stiffness, pain, deformity or disability and that the patient's concerns and expectations are addressed by the healthcare professional. In 2019 the American College of Rheumatology and Arthritis Foundation (ACR/AF) produced guidelines which included recommendations for the treatment of hand osteoarthritis. An ESCEO expert working group (including patients) was convened and composed this paper with the aim to assess whether these guidelines were appropriate for the treatment of hand osteoarthritis therapy in Europe and whether they met with the ESCEO patient-centered approach. Indeed, patients are the key stakeholders in healthcare and eliciting the patient's preference is vital in the context of an individual consultation but also for informing research and policy-making. The patients involved in this working group emphasised the often-neglected area of aesthetic changes in hand osteoarthritis, importance of developing pharmacological therapies which can alleviate pain and disability and the need of the freedom to choose which approach (out of pharmacological, surgical or non-pharmacological) they wished to pursue. Following robust appraisal, it was recommended that the ACR/AF guidelines were suitable for a European context (as described within the body of the manuscript) and it was emphasised that patient preferences are key to the success of individual consultations, future research and future policy-making.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Predictors of a placebo response in patients with hand osteoarthritis: post-hoc analysis of two randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Placebo can have a significant therapeutic effect in patients with hand osteoarthritis (OA). This aim of the study is to identify factors associated with a clinically meaningful placebo response in patients with hand OA.

METHODS

This post-hoc analysis of two double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of GCSB-5 or diacerein as treatments for hand OA analyzed the efficacy of a placebo. Clinical and laboratory factors associated with a clinically meaningful response, defined as an improvement in the Australian/Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index (AUSCAN) pain score > 10 at 4 weeks relative to baseline, were identified.

RESULTS

The mean improvement in the AUSCAN pain score was - 6.0 ± 20.3, with marked variation between 143 hand OA patients (range: - 76.4 to 33.2). A clinically meaningful improvement was observed in 54 (37.8%) patients. Placebo responders had worse AUSCAN pain scores (55.7 ± 19.7 vs. 43.6 ± 21.6, p = 0.001) and a worse AUSCAN stiffness (68.2 ± 20.5 vs. 57.5 ± 24.5, p = 0.008) at baseline than non-responders. Improvements in pain correlated with the baseline pain level (Pearson r = - 427, p < 0.001). Structural joint changes such as tender, swollen, enlarged, or deformed joint counts did not differ between placebo responders and non-responders. In a multivariable analysis, only baseline AUSCAN pain was associated with a clinically meaningful placebo response (OR: 1.054, 95% CI [1.019-1.089], p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

High levels of pain at baseline are predictive of a clinically meaningful placebo response in patients with hand OA. Further studies are needed to optimize and utilize the benefit of placebo responses in patients with hand OA.

Hand osteoarthritis: clinical phenotypes, molecular mechanisms and disease management

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a highly prevalent condition, and the hand is the most commonly affected site. Patients with hand OA frequently report symptoms of pain, functional limitations and frustration in undertaking everyday activities. The condition presents clinically with changes to the bone, ligaments, cartilage and synovial tissue, which can be observed using radiography, ultrasonography or MRI. Hand OA is a heterogeneous disorder and is considered to be multifactorial in aetiology. This Review provides an overview of the epidemiology, presentation and burden of hand OA, including an update on hand OA imaging (including the development of novel techniques), disease mechanisms and management. In particular, areas for which new evidence has substantially changed the way we understand, consider and treat hand OA are highlighted. For example, genetic studies, clinical trials and careful prospective imaging studies from the past 5 years are beginning to provide insights into the pathogenesis of hand OA that might uncover new therapeutic targets in the disease.

Effects of SHINBARO2 on Rat Models of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a major cause of chronic low back pain; however, only a few therapies which have been used in clinics still have limited effects on functional recovery. SHINBARO2 is a refined traditional formulation for inflamed lesions and relieve pain of muscular skeletal disease. This study aimed at investigating the effects of SHINBARO2 on LSS and at determining its underlying molecular mechanism in rat models. The LSS rat models were set up by surgical operations in 6-week-old male Sprague-Dawley rats. SHINBARO2 was orally or intraperitoneally administered for 14 days. The motor and sensory ability of rats were evaluated using the activity cage and hot plate method. On the termination day, total vertebrae including the disc and spinal cord were excised for ex vivo study. SHINBARO2 improved locomotor functions and pain sensitivity in LSS rat models. Mechanism study suggested that SHINBARO2 inhibited the production of nitric oxide and prostaglandin E₂ in tissues from LSS-induced rats. SHINBARO2 also suppressed the expression of proinflammatory cytokines including tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukin-1β. The activation of NF-κB by LSS surgery was effectively reduced by SHINBARO2, which coincided with the inhibition of IκB degradation. In addition, brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), a potent promoter of neurite growth, and its downstream ERK signaling were also regulated by SHINBARO2. These findings suggest that the effect of SHINBARO2 might be associated in part with the anti-inflammation and pain control in LSS rat models.