The effects of sprifermin on symptoms and structure in a subgroup at risk of progression in the FORWARD knee osteoarthritis trial

30 Years of MRI-based cartilage & bone morphometry in knee osteoarthritis: From correlation to clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

The first publication on morphometric analysis of articular cartilage using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in 1994 set the scene for a game change in osteoarthritis (OA) research. The current review highlights milestones in cartilage and bone morphometry, summarizing the rapid progress made in imaging, its application to understanding joint (patho-)physiology, and its use in interventional clinical trials.

METHODS

Based on a Pubmed search of articles from 1994 to 2023, the authors subjectively selected representative work illustrating important steps in the development or application of magnetic resonance-based cartilage and bone morphometry, with a focus on studies in humans, and on the knee. Research on OA-pathophysiology is addressed only briefly, given length constraints. Compositional and semi-quantitative assessment are not covered here.

RESULTS

The selected articles are presented in historical order as well as by content. We review progress in the technical aspects of image acquisition, segmentation and analysis, advances in understanding tissue growth, physiology, function, and adaptation, and a selection of clinical trials examining the efficacy of interventions on knee cartilage and bone. A perspective is provided of how lessons learned may be applied to future research and clinical management.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past 30 years, MRI-based morphometry of cartilage and bone has contributed to a paradigm shift in understanding articular tissue physiology and OA pathophysiology, and to the development of new treatment strategies. It is likely that these technologies will continue to play a key role in the development and (accelerated) approval of therapy, potentially targeted to different OA phenotypes.

Imaging Biomarkers of Osteoarthritis

Currently no disease-modifying osteoarthritis drug has been approved for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) that can reverse, hold, or slow the progression of structural damage of OA-affected joints. The reasons for failure are manifold and include the heterogeneity of structural disease of the OA joint at trial inclusion, and the sensitivity of biomarkers used to measure a potential treatment effect.This article discusses the role and potential of different imaging biomarkers in OA research. We review the current role of radiography, as well as advances in quantitative three-dimensional morphological cartilage assessment and semiquantitative whole-organ assessment of OA. Although magnetic resonance imaging has evolved as the leading imaging method in OA research, recent developments in computed tomography are also discussed briefly. Finally, we address the experience from the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health Biomarker Consortium biomarker qualification study and the future role of artificial intelligence.

Quantitative measurement of cartilage morphology in osteoarthritis: current knowledge and future directions

Quantitative measures of cartilage morphology ("cartilage morphometry") extracted from high resolution 3D magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences have been shown to be sensitive to osteoarthritis (OA)-related change and also to treatment interventions. Cartilage morphometry is therefore nowadays widely used as outcome measure for observational studies and randomized interventional clinical trials. The objective of this narrative review is to summarize the current status of cartilage morphometry in OA research, to provide insights into aspects relevant for the design of future studies and clinical trials, and to give an outlook on future developments. It covers the aspects related to the acquisition of MRIs suitable for cartilage morphometry, the analysis techniques needed for deriving quantitative measures from the MRIs, the quality assurance required for providing reliable cartilage measures, and the appropriate participant recruitment criteria for the enrichment of study cohorts with knees likely to show structural progression. Finally, it provides an overview over recent clinical trials that relied on cartilage morphometry as a structural outcome measure for evaluating the efficacy of disease-modifying OA drugs (DMOAD).

A Review of Cyclic Phosphatidic Acid and Other Potential Therapeutic Targets for Treating Osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis (OA), a chronic degenerative joint disease, is the most common form of arthritis. OA occurs when the protective cartilage that cushions the ends of bones gradually breaks down. This leads to the rubbing of bones against each other, resulting in pain and stiffness. Cyclic phosphatidic acid (cPA) shows promise as a treatment for OA. In this article, we review the most recent findings regarding the biological functions of cPA signaling in mammalian systems, specifically in relation to OA. cPA is a naturally occurring phospholipid mediator with unique cyclic phosphate rings at the sn-2 and sn-3 positions in the glycerol backbone. cPA promotes various responses, including cell proliferation, migration, and survival. cPA possesses physiological activities that are distinct from those elicited by lysophosphatidic acid; however, its biochemical origin has rarely been studied. Although there is currently no cure for OA, advances in medical research may lead to new therapies or strategies in the future, and cPA has potential therapeutic applications.

Innovation in Targeted Intra-articular Therapies for Osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis is the most common chronic joint disease characterized by progressive damage to the joints, leading to pain and loss of function. There is currently no cure or disease-modifying therapy for osteoarthritis. Hence, the increasing disease prevalence linked with ageing and obesity represents a substantial socio-economic burden. Intra-articular therapy by injection of drugs into affected joints can optimize local drug bioavailability, while reducing risks of systemic toxicity, a concern in an ageing patient population. In this review, we investigate the current landscape of intra-articular drug therapies for osteoarthritis, including established approaches and those in clinical development. We performed a literature review using PubMed, complemented with a search for clinical trials using the ClinicalTrials.gov repository. Additionally, conference abstracts and presentations were identified and systematic snowballing was applied. Identified drugs were divided into several groups by main mechanism of action, and include drugs that reduce inflammation (anti-inflammatory), drugs aiming to prevent or reverse structural damage (structure modifying), drugs that aim to reduce the pain, and other drugs with a specific target. Most studies have been performed for osteoarthritis of the knee, a joint that is easily accessible for intra-articular treatments. Optimal therapy would provide symptomatic relief, while preventing further damage to the joint. The field of intra-articular drug therapies for osteoarthritis is rapidly evolving with clear challenges identified: definition of relevant outcome measures, optimization of clinical trial set-ups, and dealing with placebo responses. While many uncertainties persist, it appears that the innovation in drug development and improved clinical trial set-up may finally deliver successful therapies for this important disease.

Evaluation of S201086/GLPG1972, an ADAMTS-5 inhibitor, for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis in ROCCELLA: a phase 2 randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the anti-catabolic ADAMTS-5 inhibitor S201086/GLPG1972 for the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.

DESIGN

ROCCELLA (NCT03595618) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, phase 2 trial in adults (aged 40-75 years) with knee osteoarthritis. Participants had moderate-to-severe pain in the target knee, Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2 or 3 and Osteoarthritis Research Society International joint space narrowing (grade 1 or 2). Participants were randomized 1:1:1:1 to once-daily oral S201086/GLPG1972 75, 150 or 300 mg, or placebo for 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to week 52 in central medial femorotibial compartment cartilage thickness (cMFTC) assessed quantitatively by magnetic resonance imaging. Secondary endpoints included change from baseline to week 52 in radiographic joint space width, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index total and subscores, and pain (visual analogue scale). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were also recorded.

RESULTS

Overall, 932 participants were enrolled. No significant differences in cMFTC cartilage loss were observed between placebo and S201086/GLPG1972 therapeutic groups: placebo vs 75 mg, P = 0.165; vs 150 mg, P = 0.939; vs 300 mg, P = 0.682. No significant differences in any of the secondary endpoints were observed between placebo and treatment groups. Similar proportions of participants across treatment groups experienced TEAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite enrolment of participants who experienced substantial cartilage loss over 52 weeks, during the same time period, S201086/GLPG1972 did not significantly reduce rates of cartilage loss or modify symptoms in adults with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.

Worsening of Articular Tissue Damage as Defined by Semi-Quantitative MRI Is Associated With Concurrent Quantitative Cartilage Loss Over 24 Months

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of worsening of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) semi-quantitative (SQ) tissue features with concurrent change in quantitative (Q) cartilage thickness measurements over 24 months within the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) Biomarker Consortium study.

METHODS

In all, 599 participants were included. SQ assessment included cartilage damage, meniscal extrusion and damage, osteophytes, bone marrow lesions (BMLs), and effusion- and Hoffa-synovitis. Change in medial compartment Q cartilage thickness was stratified by concurrent ipsicompartmental SQ changes. Between-group comparisons were performed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with adjustment for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). Results were presented as adjusted mean difference.

RESULTS

Knees with any increase in SQ cartilage scores in the medial compartment (n = 268) showed more Q cartilage loss compared to knees that remained stable (mean adjusted difference [MAD] = -0.16 mm, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [-0.19, -0.13] mm). Knees with any increase in meniscal extrusion in the medial compartment (n = 98) showed more Q cartilage loss than knees without (MAD = -0.18 mm, 95% CI: [-0.22, -0.14] mm. Comparable findings were seen for meniscal damage worsening. Regarding BMLs, an increase by one subregion resulted in a MAD of Q cartilage loss of -0.10 mm, 95% CI: [-0.14, -0.06] mm, while this effect almost tripled for change in two or more subregions. Increase in either effusion- and/or Hoffa-synovitis by one grade resulted in a MAD of -0.07 mm, 95% CI: [-0.10, -0.03] mm.

CONCLUSION

Worsening of SQ cartilage damage, meniscal extrusion and damage, number of subregions affected by BML, maximum size of BMLs and worsening of effusion- and/or Hoffa synovitis is associated with increased Q cartilage loss.

Osteoarthritis today: Lost in translation?

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a highly prevalent joint disease that is associated with pain, loss of function, and high direct and indirect economic costs. The current therapeutic options are inadequate, providing only a moderate symptom relief without the possibility of disease modification. While treatment options and personalized medicines are increasing for many complex diseases, OA drug development has been impeded by the advanced state of disease at the time of diagnosis and intervention, heterogeneity in both symptoms and rates of progression, and a lack of validated biomarkers and relevant outcome measures. This review article summarizes the OA landscape, including therapies in development as potential OA treatments, potential biomarkers undergoing evaluation by the US Food and Drug Administration, and a summary of current OA treatment guidelines, with a particular focus on the knee OA.

Strategic application of imaging in DMOAD clinical trials: focus on eligibility, drug delivery, and semiquantitative assessment of structural progression

Despite decades of research efforts and multiple clinical trials aimed at discovering efficacious disease-modifying osteoarthritis (OA) drugs (DMOAD), we still do not have a drug that shows convincing scientific evidence to be approved as an effective DMOAD. It has been suggested these DMOAD clinical trials were in part unsuccessful since eligibility criteria and imaging-based outcome evaluation were solely based on conventional radiography. The OA research community has been aware of the limitations of conventional radiography being used as a primary imaging modality for eligibility and efficacy assessment in DMOAD trials. An imaging modality for DMOAD trials should be able to depict soft tissue and osseous pathologies that are relevant to OA disease progression and clinical manifestations of OA. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) fulfills these criteria and advances in technology and increasing knowledge regarding imaging outcomes likely should play a more prominent role in DMOAD clinical trials. In this perspective article, we will describe MRI-based tools and analytic methods that can be applied to DMOAD clinical trials with a particular emphasis on knee OA. MRI should be the modality of choice for eligibility screening and outcome assessment. Optimal MRI pulse sequences must be chosen to visualize specific features of OA.

FDA/Arthritis Foundation osteoarthritis drug development workshop recap: Assessment of long-term benefit

OBJECTIVE

To summarize proceedings of a workshop convened to discuss the current state of science in the disease of osteoarthritis (OA), identify the knowledge gaps, and examine the developmental and regulatory challenges in bringing these products to market.

DESIGN

Summary of the one-day workshop held virtually on June 22nd, 2021.

RESULTS

Speakers selected by the Planning Committee presented data on the current approach to assessment of OA therapies, biomarkers in OA drug development, and the assessment of disease progression and long-term benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

Demonstrated by numerous failed clinical trials, OA is a challenging disease for which to develop therapeutics. The challenge is magnified by the slow time of onset of disease and the need for clinical trials of long duration and/or large sample size to demonstrate the effect of an intervention. The OA science community, including academia, pharmaceutical companies, regulatory agencies, and patient communities, must continue to develop and test better clinical endpoints that meaningfully reflect disease modification related to long-term patient benefit.

Biological Therapy for Osteoarthritis, Efficacy and Safety: Focus on Monoclonal Antibodies against Nerve Growth Factor and Fibroblast Growth Factor-18

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common chronic progressive musculoskeletal disease, affected cartilage, and surrounded tissues: Subchondral bones, ligaments, and meniscus. Current OA treatment based on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen (paracetamol), opioids, and intra-articular corticosteroid injections do not prevent the progression of the disease. Understanding of the pathogenesis of OA with continued structural damage accompanied by chronic pain led to appearance of monoclonal antibodies to fibroblast growth factor-18 (FGF)-18 and anti-nerve growth factor (NGF). This review provides an overview of biological therapy with FGF-18 and anti-NGF for OA. Search process was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar for the following terms: “FGF-18” or “anti-NGF” and “OA,” “monoclonal antibody” and “OA.” Results of the analysis of clinical trials revealed that therapy targeting NGF resulted in significant analgesic effect and functional improvement of joints in OA; however, it was associated with considerable increase in adverse events. The mon\oclonal antibody to FGF-18 demonstrated the structure-modifying effects on cartilage with decrease the cartilage loss and improvement of cartilage thickness. However, further clinical longitudinal studies characterized the risk-benefit are needed to establish safety and efficacy of these medications.

The Extracellular Matrix of Articular Cartilage Controls the Bioavailability of Pericellular Matrix-Bound Growth Factors to Drive Tissue Homeostasis and Repair

The extracellular matrix (ECM) has long been regarded as a packing material; supporting cells within the tissue and providing tensile strength and protection from mechanical stress. There is little surprise when one considers the dynamic nature of many of the individual proteins that contribute to the ECM, that we are beginning to appreciate a more nuanced role for the ECM in tissue homeostasis and disease. Articular cartilage is adapted to be able to perceive and respond to mechanical load. Indeed, physiological loads are essential to maintain cartilage thickness in a healthy joint and excessive mechanical stress is associated with the breakdown of the matrix that is seen in osteoarthritis (OA). Although the trigger by which increased mechanical stress drives catabolic pathways remains unknown, one mechanism by which cartilage responds to increased compressive load is by the release of growth factors that are sequestered in the pericellular matrix. These are heparan sulfate-bound growth factors that appear to be largely chondroprotective and displaced by an aggrecan-dependent sodium flux. Emerging evidence suggests that the released growth factors act in a coordinated fashion to drive cartilage repair. Thus, we are beginning to appreciate that the ECM is the key mechano-sensor and mechano-effector in cartilage, responsible for directing subsequent cellular events of relevance to joint health and disease.

Repurposed and investigational disease-modifying drugs in osteoarthritis (DMOADs)

In spite of a major public health burden with increasing prevalence, current osteoarthritis (OA) management is largely palliative with an unmet need for effective treatment. Both industry and academic researchers have invested a vast amount of time and financial expense to discover the first diseasing-modifying osteoarthritis drugs (DMOADs), with no regulatory success so far. In this narrative review, we discuss repurposed drugs as well as investigational agents which have progressed into phase II and III clinical trials based on three principal endotypes: bone-driven, synovitis-driven and cartilage-driven. Then, we will briefly describe the recent failures and lessons learned, promising findings from predefined post hoc analyses and insights gained, novel methodologies to enhance future success and steps underway to overcome regulatory hurdles.

99mTc-NTP 15-5 is a companion radiotracer for assessing joint functional response to sprifermin (rhFGF-18) in a murine osteoarthritis model

With the emergence of disease modifying osteoarthritis drugs (DMOAD), imaging methods to quantitatively demonstrate their efficacy and to monitor osteoarthritis progression at the functional level are urgently needed. Our group showed that articular cartilage can be quantitatively assessed in nuclear medicine imaging by our radiotracer ^99mTc-NTP 15-5 targeting cartilage proteoglycans. In this work, surgically induced DMM mice were treated with sprifermin or saline. We investigated cartilage remodelling in the mice knees by ^99mTc-NTP 15-5 SPECT-CT imaging over 24 weeks after surgery, as wells as proteoglycan biochemical assays. OA alterations were scored by histology according to OARSI guidelines. A specific accumulation of ^99mTc-NTP 15-5 in cartilage joints was evidenced in vivo by SPECT-CT imaging as early as 30 min post-iv injection. In DMM, ^99mTc-NTP 15-5 accumulation in cartilage within the operated joints, relative to contralateral ones, was observed to initially increase then decrease as pathology progressed. Under sprifermin, ^99mTc-NTP 15-5 uptake in pathological knees was significantly increased compared to controls, at 7-, 12- and 24-weeks, and consistent with proteoglycan increase measured 5 weeks post-surgery, as a sign of cartilage matrix remodelling. Our work highlights the potential of ^99mTc-NTP 15-5 as an imaging-based companion to monitor cartilage remodelling in OA and DMOAD response.

Heterogeneity of cartilage damage in Kellgren and Lawrence grade 2 and 3 knees: the MOST study

OBJECTIVE

Eligibility for clinical trials in osteoarthritis (OA) is usually limited to Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grades 2 and 3 knees. Our aim was to describe the prevalence and severity of cartilage damage in KL 2 and 3 knees by compartment and articular subregion.

DESIGN

The Multicenter Osteoarthritis (MOST) study is a cohort study of individuals with or at risk for knee OA. All baseline MRIs with radiographic disease severity KL2 and 3 were included. Knee MRIs were read for cartilage damage in 14 subregions. We determined the frequencies of no, any and widespread full-thickness cartilage damage by knee compartment, and the prevalence of any cartilage damage in 14 articular subregions.

RESULTS

665 knees from 665 participants were included (mean age 63.8 ± 7.9 years, 66.5% women). 372 knees were KL2 and 293 knees were KL3. There was no cartilage damage in 78 (21.0%) medial tibio-femoral joint (TFJ), 157 (42.2%) lateral TFJ and 62 (16.7%) patello-femoral joint (PFJ) compartments of KL2 knees, and 17 (5.8%), 115 (39.3%) and 35 (12.0%) compartments, respectively, of KL3 knees. There was widespread full-thickness damage in 94 (25.3%) medial TFJ, 36 (9.7%) lateral TFJ and 176 (47.3%) PFJ compartments of KL2 knees, and 217 (74.1%), 70 (23.9%) and 104 (35.5%) compartments, respectively, of KL3 knees. The subregions most likely to have any damage were central medial femur (80.5%), medial patella (69.8%) and central medial tibia (69.9).

CONCLUSIONS

KL2 and KL3 knees vary greatly in cartilage morphology. Heterogeneity in the prevalence, severity and location of cartilage damage in in KL2 and 3 knees should be considered when planning disease modifying trials for knee OA.

Osteoarthritis Pathophysiology: Therapeutic Target Discovery may Require a Multifaceted Approach

Molecular understanding of osteoarthritis (OA) has greatly increased through careful analysis of tissue samples, preclinical models, and large-scale agnostic "-omic" studies. There is broad acceptance that systemic and biomechanical signals affect multiple tissues of the joint, each of which could potentially be targeted to improve patient outcomes. In this review six experts in different aspects of OA pathogenesis provide their independent view on what they believe to be good tractable approaches to OA target discovery. We conclude that molecular discovery has been high but future transformative studies require a multidisciplinary holistic approach to develop therapeutic strategies with high clinical efficacy.

Overview of First-Line and Second-Line Pharmacotherapies for Osteoarthritis with Special Focus on Intra-Articular Treatment

Osteoarthritis (OA) can be defined as the result of pathological processes of various etiologies leading to damage to the articular structures. Although the mechanism of degenerative changes has become better understood due to the plethora of biochemical and genetic studies, the drug that could stop the degenerative cascade is still unknown. All available forms of OA therapy are based on symptomatic treatment. According to actual guidelines, comprehensive treatment of OA should always include a combination of various therapeutic options aimed at common goals, which are pain relief in the first place, and then the improvement of function. Local treatment has become more common practice, which takes place between rehabilitation and pharmacological treatment in the hierarchy of procedures. Only in the case of no improvement and the presence of advanced lesions visible in imaging tests, should surgery be considered. Currently, an increasing number of studies are being published suggesting that intra-articular injections may be as effective or even more effective than non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and result in fewer systemic adverse events. The most commonly used preparations are hyaluronic acid (HA), glucocorticosteroids (GS), and also platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in recent years. This review aims to present the mechanism of action and clinical effectiveness of different pharmacological options in relieving pain and improving functions in OA as well as the emerging approach in intra-articular treatment with PRP.

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.

Efficacy of platelet-rich plasma and plasma for symptomatic treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a double-blinded placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial

Background

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has a still conflicting efficacy for knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and might be a minimally invasive and safe treatment alternative. The potential benefit of only plasma (non-enriched) has never been investigated. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and plasma to improve pain and function in participants with KOA over 24 weeks.

Methods

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with 3 groups (n = 62): PRP (n = 20), plasma (n = 21) and saline (n = 21). Two ultrasound-guided knee injections were performed with a 2-week interval. The primary outcome was visual analog scale 0-10 cm (VAS) for overall pain at week 24, with intermediate assessments at weeks 6 and 12. Main secondary outcomes were: KOOS, OMERACT-OARSI criteria and TUGT.

Results

At baseline, 92% of participants were female, with a mean age of 65 years, mean BMI of 28.0 Kg/m²and mean VAS pain of 6.2 cm. Change in pain from baseline at week 24 were -2.9 (SD 2.5), -2.4 (SD 2.5) and -3.5 cm (SD 3.3) for PRP, plasma and saline, respectively (p intergroup = 0.499). There were no differences between the three groups at weeks 6 and 12. Similarly, there were no differences between groups regarding secondary outcomes. The PRP group showed higher frequency of adverse events (65% versus 24% and 33% for plasma and saline, respectively, p = 0.02), mostly mild transitory increase in pain.

Conclusions

PRP and plasma were not superior to placebo for pain and function improvement in KOA over 24 weeks. The PRP group had a higher frequency of mild transitory increase in pain.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03138317, 03/05/2017.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04706-7.

Long-term structural and symptomatic effects of intra-articular sprifermin in patients with knee osteoarthritis: 5-year results from the FORWARD study

OBJECTIVE

The FORWARD (FGF-18 Osteoarthritis Randomized Trial with Administration of Repeated Doses) trial assessed efficacy and safety of the potential disease-modifying osteoarthritis drug (DMOAD) sprifermin in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Here, we report 5-year efficacy and safety results.

METHODS

Patients were randomised to intra-articular sprifermin 100 µg or 30 µg every 6 months (q6mo) or 12 months, or placebo, for 18 months. The primary analysis was at year 2, with follow-up at years 3, 4 and 5. Additional post hoc exploratory analyses were conducted in patients with baseline minimum radiographic joint space width 1.5-3.5 mm and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain 40-90, a subgroup at risk (SAR) of progression.

RESULTS

378 (69%) patients completed the 5-year follow-up. A significant dose-response in total femorotibial joint cartilage thickness with sprifermin (trend test, p<0.001) and a 0.05 mm mean difference with sprifermin 100 µg q6mo versus placebo (95% CI 0.00 to 0.10; p=0.015) were sustained to year 5. WOMAC pain scores improved ~50% from baseline in all groups. No patient in the 100 µg q6mo group had replacement of the treated knee. 96%-98% of patients receiving sprifermin and 98% placebo reported adverse events, most were mild or moderate and deemed unrelated to treatment. Adverse event-related study withdrawals were <10%. Differentiation in WOMAC pain between sprifermin 100 µg q6mo and placebo in the SAR (n=161) at year 3 was maintained to year 5 (-10.08; 95% CI -25.68 to 5.53).

CONCLUSION

In the longest DMOAD trial reported to date, sprifermin maintained long-term structural modification of articular cartilage over 3.5 years post-treatment. Potential translation to clinical benefit was observed in the SAR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01919164.