Colchicine is not effective for reducing osteoarthritic hand pain compared to placebo: a randomised, placebo-controlled trial (COLAH)

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.

Erosive Hand Osteoarthritis: Recent Advances and Future Treatments

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Erosive hand osteoarthritis (EHOA) is an aggressive form of hand osteoarthritis that leads to significant disability, and recent data suggests that it is increasing in prevalence. This review provides an update of our current understanding of epidemiology, genetic associations, biomarkers, pathogenesis, and treatment of EHOA, with particular focus on studies published within the last 5 years.

RECENT FINDINGS

New studies of EHOA have identified new genetic loci associated with disease, including variants in genes involved in inflammation and bone remodeling. Preclinical studies implicate pathways of innate immunity, including some that may be causal in the condition. Recent novel studies showed that inflammatory features identified by ultrasound and MRI are associated with development of erosive lesions over time on conventional radiography. In the future, these imaging modalities may be useful in identifying patients at risk of adverse outcomes. Promising new findings in genetics, biomarkers, and treatment targets will hopefully allow for future therapeutic options for this debilitating condition.

Association of Low-Dose Colchicine With Incidence of Knee and Hip Replacements : Exploratory Analyses From a Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blind Trial

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis is a major contributor to pain and disability worldwide. Given that inflammation plays an important role in the development of osteoarthritis, anti-inflammatory drugs may slow disease progression.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether colchicine, 0.5 mg daily, reduces incident total knee replacements (TKRs) and total hip replacements (THRs).

DESIGN

Exploratory analysis of the LoDoCo2 (Low-Dose Colchicine 2) randomized, controlled, double-blind trial. (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12614000093684).

SETTING

43 centers in Australia and the Netherlands.

PATIENTS

5522 patients with chronic coronary artery disease.

INTERVENTION

Colchicine, 0.5 mg, or placebo once daily.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was time to first TKR or THR since randomization. All analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

A total of 2762 patients received colchicine and 2760 received placebo during a median follow-up of 28.6 months. During the trial, TKR or THR was performed in 68 patients (2.5%) in the colchicine group and 97 (3.5%) in the placebo group (incidence rate, 0.90 vs. 1.30 per 100 person-years; incidence rate difference, -0.40 [95% CI, -0.74 to -0.06] per 100 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.69 [CI, 0.51 to 0.95]). In sensitivity analyses, similar results were obtained when patients with gout at baseline were excluded and when joint replacements that occurred in the first 3 and 6 months of follow-up were omitted.

LIMITATION

LoDoCo2 was not designed to investigate the effect of colchicine in osteoarthritis of the knee or hip and did not collect information specifically on osteoarthritis.

CONCLUSION

In this exploratory analysis of the LoDoCo2 trial, use of colchicine, 0.5 mg daily, was associated with a lower incidence of TKR and THR. Further investigation of colchicine therapy to slow disease progression in osteoarthritis is warranted.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None.

Colchicine twice a day for hand osteoarthritis (COLOR): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Colchicine has been suggested for osteoarthritis treatment, but evidence is contradictory. We aimed to investigate colchicine's efficacy and safety compared with placebo in people with hand osteoarthritis.

METHODS

In this single-centre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial we recruited adults with symptomatic hand osteoarthritis and finger pain of at least 40 mm on a 100 mm visual analogue scale from an outpatient clinic in Denmark. The hand with the most severe finger pain at inclusion was the target hand. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to 0·5 mg colchicine or placebo taken orally twice a day for 12 weeks, stratified by BMI (≥30 kg/m2), sex, and age (≥75 years). Participants, outcome assessors, and data analysts were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to week 12 in target hand finger pain, assessed on a 100 mm visual analogue scale with a pre-specified minimal clinically important difference of 15 mm, in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed at week 12 in the intention-to-treat population. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04601883, and with EudraCT, 2020-002803-20.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 15, 2021, and March 3, 2022, 186 people were screened for eligibility, and 100 were randomly assigned to receive colchicine (n=50) or placebo (n=50). Participants had a mean age of 70·9 (SD 7·5) years, 69 (69%) of 100 were women and 31 (31%) were men. All participants completed the study. The mean change from baseline to week 12 in finger pain were -13·9 mm (SE 2·8) in the colchicine group and -13·5 mm (2·8) in the placebo group, with a between-group difference (colchicine vs placebo) of -0·4 mm (95% CI -7·6 to 6·7; p=0·90). In the colchicine group, there were 76 adverse events in 36 (72%) of 50 participants and one serious adverse advent (migraine attack leading to hospital admission). In the placebo group, there were 42 adverse events in 22 (44%) of 50 participants and two serious adverse events (cholecystitis and elevated alanine aminotransferase concentrations, in the same patient).

INTERPRETATION

In people with painful hand osteoarthritis, treatment with 0·5 mg of colchicine twice day for 12 weeks did not effectively relieve pain, and treatment with colchicine was associated with more adverse events.

FUNDING

The Oak Foundation, IMK Almene Fond, Minister Erna Hamilton's Scholarship for Science and Art, AP Moller and Wife Chastine McKinney Moller's Foundation for Medical Science Advancement, The Danish Medical Association, the Velux Foundation, Aase and Ejnar Danielsen's Foundation, and Director Emil C Hertz and Wife Inger Hertz's foundation.

Osteoarthritis year in review 2022: epidemiology & therapy

This 'Year in Review' provides a synopsis of key research themes and individual studies from the clinical osteoarthritis (OA) field, focused on epidemiology and therapy. The electronic database search for the review was adapted from the 2021 year in review search, to increase search specificity for relevant study designs, and was conducted in Medline, Embase and medRxiv (31^st March 2021 to 4^th March 2022). Following screening for eligibility, studies were grouped according to their key research design, including reviews, cohorts and randomised trials. 11 key themes emerged, including the importance of several comorbidities in predicting OA incidence and prevalence, surgical approaches that can reduce the risk of post-traumatic OA, the heterogenous but nevertheless relatively stable nature of OA subgroup trajectories, the paucity of robust studies particularly of surgery for OA and the very modest benefit of many therapies under evaluation in trials. A particular interest of the authors was to consider whether new studies are helping determine how to better ensure the right patient with OA is matched to the right treatment at the right time. There are several new studies developing improved predictive models through big data analytics and machine learning which show promise, need validation, and may support new approaches to stratified care.

Efficacy and safety of colchicine for the treatment of osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of intervention trials

OBJECTIVE

Colchicine, an approved treatment for gout, has been trialed in many diseases including osteoarthritis (OA) due to its anti-inflammatory effects. However, its efficacy and safety remain unclear in OA. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of colchicine for the treatment of OA.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Central were searched from inception through September 2022. Two reviewers independently screened for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing colchicine with placebo or other active comparators for the treatment of OA (knee, hand, or hip OA), extracted data, and performed Cochrane risk of bias assessments.

RESULT

Nine RCTs for the knee OA and one for the hand OA were identified, consisting of 847 patients (429 in colchicine arms, 409 in control arms). The studies were conducted between 2002 and 2021 with follow-up periods ranging from 2 to 12 months, in India, Iran, Turkey, Australia, Singapore, and Iraq. Moderate-quality evidence showed no clinically important pain reduction with colchicine compared to control (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], - 0.55, 0.22). Moderate-quality evidence showed no improvement in function with colchicine compared to control in knee OA patients (SMD, - 0.37; 95% CI, - 0.87, 0.13). Colchicine showed an acceptable safety profile with AEs/SAEs comparable to control.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence does not suggest a benefit of colchicine in reducing pain and improving physical function in the overall cohort of hand/knee OA patients. Future trials should focus on the subgroups of OA patients with local or systemic inflammation and/or mineralization who might benefit from colchicine.

Osteoarthritis of hand joints: prevalence, risk factors, phenotypes, diagnosis, treatment

Osteoarthritis is the most common rheumatic disease, accompanied by constant pain and dysfunction of the joints, the progression of which leads to a deterioration in the quality of life and often to disability of patients. The article presents the prevalence, predictors of development and progression of osteoarthritis of the hand joints (OHJ). Clinical classification of OHJ, clinical picture depending on the localization of the process, topical features of involvement of the hand joints in different types of OHJ are given. Clinical, laboratory and instrumental methods for diagnosing of the disease, classification and diagnostic criteria are described, much attention is paid to modern principles of OHJ therapy in accordance with Russian clinical guidelines, as well as EULAR and ACR recommendations.

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.

Prescription-grade crystalline glucosamine sulfate as an add-on therapy to conventional treatments in erosive osteoarthritis of the hand: results from a 6-month observational retrospective study

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of prescription-grade Crystalline Glucosamine Sulfate (pCGS) as an add-on treatment to conventional therapy, compared to usual therapy alone, in patients with erosive osteoarthritis of the hand (EHOA).

Methods

This 6-month retrospective case–control study included patients with concomitant knee osteoarthritis and symptomatic EHOA. Participants were stratified into two groups based on whether or not pCGS (1500 mg/day) was added to the conventional therapy (education and training in ergonomic principles, exercise and use on-demand of symptomatic drugs) for hand osteoarthritis. Patients were evaluated at baseline, after 3 and 6 months. Primary outcomes were the change from baseline to month 6 in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) hand pain and in Functional Index for Hand Osteoarthritis (FIHOA) score. A set of secondary parameters was also evaluated.

Results

123 patients were included as follows: 67 treated with pCGS in addition to conventional therapy (pCGS Group) and 56 with conventional therapy alone (Control Group). After 6 months a significant difference in VAS and in FIHOA score (p < 0.01 and p < 0.001, respectively) was observed in favor of pCGS Group. Similar results were found for morning stiffness duration (p < 0.05), health assessment questionnaire (p < 0.01) and physical and mental component score of 36-item short form (p < 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively). A significant reduction of symptomatic drug consumption at 3 and 6 months was reported in the pCGS Group (p < 0.001). No serious adverse event was recorded in both groups.

Conclusions

Despite all the limitations inherent to an observational study, our results suggest the potential effectiveness of pCGS, when used in combination with conventional therapy in EHOA. Further randomized placebo-controlled trials are needed to confirm these positive findings.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, date of registration: February 2, 2022, NCT05237596. The present trial was retrospectively registered.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40520-022-02151-7.

Osteoarthritis year in review 2021: epidemiology & therapy

This "Year in review" presents a selection of research themes and individual studies from the clinical osteoarthritis (OA) field (epidemiology and therapy) and includes noteworthy descriptive, analytical-observational, and intervention studies. The electronic database search for the review was conducted in Medline, Embase and medRxiv (15th April 2020 to 1st April 2021). Following study screening, the following OA-related themes emerged: COVID-19; disease burden; occupational risk; prediction models; cartilage loss and pain; stem cell treatments; novel pharmacotherapy trials; therapy for less well researched OA phenotypes; benefits and challenges of Individual Participant Data (IPD) meta-analyses; patient choice-balancing benefits and harms; OA and comorbidity; and inequalities in OA. Headline study findings included: a longitudinal cohort study demonstrating no evidence for a harmful effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in terms of COVID-19 related deaths; a Global Burden of Disease study reporting a 102% increase in crude incidence rate of OA in 2017 compared to 1990; a longitudinal study reporting cartilage thickness loss was associated with only a very small degree of worsening in pain over 2 years; an exploratory analysis of a non-OA randomised controlled trial (RCT) finding reduced risk of total joint replacement with an Interleukin -1β inhibitor (canakinumab); a significant relationship between cumulative disadvantage and clinical outcomes of pain and depression mediated by perceived discrimination in a secondary analysis from a RCT; worsening socioeconomic circumstances were associated with future arthritis diagnosis in an innovative natural experiment (with implications for unique research possibilities arising from the COVID-19 pandemic context).

The Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Oral Colchicine in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trails

Objective. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral colchicine in the treatment for knee OA. Design. Meta-analysis. Data Sources. Embase, PubMed (MEDLINE), the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to December 12, 2021. Study Selection. RCTs comparing colchicine with placebo for knee OA were included. No language or date restrictions were applied. Two authors abstracted data and determined quality. Outcomes of interest included VAS-pain, WOMAC total index, and patient-reported adverse events. Results. A total of five RCTs including 400 adult patients with OA met the inclusion criteria. The mean age of patients included was 56.05 years (range 21 to 79), and 80.87% were female. There was no difference in VAS-pain (MD -1.49; 95% CI -3.15, 0.17; $p=0.08$ ) when compared colchicine group with placebo group. And there was no statistically difference in WOMAC total index (std. MD -0.13; 95% CI -0.64, 0.38; $p=0.61$ ) and patient report adverse events (RR 1.23; 95% CI 0.72, 2.11; $p=0.46$ ). Conclusion. Colchicine is not currently recommended as a treatment for knee OA but might have insignificant effect. The conclusion is limited due to the variation in assessment indicator among available data. Further RCTs with larger sample size and longer follow-up are needed to confirm the findings.

New developments in osteoarthritis pharmacological therapies

OA is an increasingly common, painful condition with complex aetiology and limited therapies. Approaches to expanding our therapeutic armamentarium have included repurposing existing therapies used for other rheumatological conditions, modifying existing OA preparations to enhance their benefits, and identifying new therapeutics. HCQ and low-dose MTX have been unsuccessful in improving hand OA pain or reducing structural progression. Anti-IL-6 and anti-GM-CSF also did not improve symptoms in hand OA trials, but IL-1 remains an intriguing target for large-joint OA, based on reduced joint replacements in a post hoc analysis from a large cardiovascular disease trial. The peripheral nociceptive pathway appears an attractive target, with mAbs to nerve growth factor and IA capsaicin demonstrating efficacy; tropomyosin receptor kinase A inhibitors are at an earlier stage of development. Limited evidence suggests pharmacological therapies can modify cartilage and bone structural progression, though evidence of synchronous symptom benefits are lacking.

Handarthrose: Colchicin vs. Placebo

Die Handarthrose, unter der im hohen Alter die Hälfte aller Frauen und ein Viertel der Männer leiden, beeinträchtigt die Lebensqualität und erschwert die Aufgaben des täglichen Lebens. Da Schmerzmittel die Beschwerden, die mit dieser degenerativen Erkrankung einhergehen, nur teilweise und für eine begrenzte Zeit lindern können, sind neue Behandlungsmethoden gefordert.