A randomized controlled trial to evaluate the slow‐acting symptom‐modifying effects of colchicine in osteoarthritis of the knee: A preliminary report

Objective

To determine if colchicine added to nimesulide may have a beneficial effect on osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.

Methods

Colchicine 0.5 mg twice daily or placebo was added to nimesulide (a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug) in 36 patients with OA of the knee in a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial over a 5‐month period.

Results

The 30% improvement rate at 20 weeks was higher in the colchicine group than in the control group receiving placebo, as measured by total Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis scores (57.9% versus 23.5%) and visual analog scale for index knee pain (52.6% versus 17.6%) (primary measures of response). The significance persisted on combined analysis by Mantel‐Haenszel test (P = 0.062). Comparison of means also showed significant improvement in the colchicine group versus the control group in a multivariate analysis performed using T² test (P = 0.0115).

Conclusion

Among patients with OA of the knee, the group receiving colchicine plus nimesulide exhibited significantly greater symptomatic benefit at 20 weeks than did the control group receiving nimesulide plus placebo.

     

Intraarticular injection of anakinra in osteoarthritis of the knee: A multicenter,randomized, double‐blind,placebo‐controlled study

Objective

To evaluate the clinical response, safety, and tolerability of a single intraarticular injection of anakinra in patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.

Methods

Patients with OA of the knee were enrolled in a multicenter, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study and randomized 2:1:2 to receive a single intraarticular injection of placebo, anakinra 50 mg, or anakinra 150 mg in their symptomatic knee. Patients were evaluated for 12 weeks postinjection. The primary end point was the change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score from baseline to week 4. Safety assessments included the evaluation of adverse events (AEs), laboratory tests, and vital signs. Pharmacokinetic parameters were assessed in a subset of patients.

Results

Of 170 patients who enrolled, 160 (94%) completed the study. The mean improvements from baseline to week 4 in the WOMAC score were not statistically different between the placebo group and the patients who received 50 mg of anakinra (P = 0.67) or 150 mg of anakinra (P = 0.77). Anakinra was well tolerated. No withdrawals due to AEs or serious AEs, and no serious infections or deaths were reported. No clinically significant trends were noted in laboratory values or vital signs. Pharmacokinetic parameters demonstrated that the mean terminal half‐life of anakinra in serum after intraarticular injection was ∼4 hours.

Conclusion

Anakinra was well tolerated as a single 50‐mg or 150‐mg intraarticular injection in patients with OA of the knee. However, anakinra was not associated with improvements in OA symptoms compared with placebo.

     

Randomized,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled glucosamine discontinuation trial in knee osteoarthritis

Objective

To assess the efficacy of glucosamine sulfate in knee osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

A 4‐center, 6‐month, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled glucosamine discontinuation trial was conducted in 137 current users of glucosamine with knee OA who had experienced at least moderate improvement in knee pain after starting glucosamine. Study medication dosage was equivalent to the dosage of glucosamine taken prior to the study (maximum 1,500 mg/day). Followup continued for 6 months or until disease flare, whichever occurred first. The primary outcome was the proportion of disease flares in the glucosamine and placebo groups using an intent‐to‐treat analysis. Secondary outcomes included time to disease flare; analgesic medication use; severity of disease flare; and change in pain, stiffness, function and quality of life in the glucosamine and placebo groups.

Results

Disease flare was seen in 28 (42%) of 66 placebo patients and 32 (45%) of 71 glucosamine patients (difference ?3%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] ?19, 14; P = 0.76). In the Cox regression analysis, after adjustment for sex, study site, and OA radiographic severity, time to disease flare was not significantly different in the glucosamine compared with placebo group (hazard ratio of flare = 0.8; 95% CI 0.5, 1.4; P = 0.45). At final study visit, acetaminophen was used in 27% and 21% of placebo and glucosamine patients, respectively (P = 0.40), nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs were used in 29% and 30% (P = 0.92), and both were used in 20% and 21% (P = 0.84). No differences were found in severity of disease flare or other secondary outcomes between placebo and glucosamine patients.

Conclusion

In patients with knee OA with at least moderate subjective improvement with prior glucosamine use, this study provides no evidence of symptomatic benefit from continued use of glucosamine sulfate.

     

Risedronate decreases biochemical markers of cartilage degradation but does not decrease symptoms or slow radiographic progression in patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee: Results of the two‐year multinational knee osteoarthritis structural arthritis study

Objective

Bisphosphonates have slowed the progression of osteoarthritis (OA) in animal models and have decreased pain in states of high bone turnover. The Knee OA Structural Arthritis (KOSTAR) study, which is the largest study to date investigating a potential structure‐modifying OA drug, tested the efficacy of risedronate in providing symptom relief and slowing disease progression in patients with knee OA.

Methods

The study group comprised 2,483 patients with medial compartment knee OA and 2–4 mm of joint space width (JSW), as determined using fluoroscopically positioned, semiflexed‐view radiography. Patients were enrolled in 2 parallel 2‐year studies in North America and the European Union. These studies evaluated the efficacy of risedronate at dosages of 5 mg/day, 15 mg/day, 35 mg/week (in Europe), and 50 mg/week (in North America) compared with placebo in reducing signs and symptoms, as measured by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index and patient global assessment (PGA) scores, and in slowing radiographic progression.

Results

A reduction of ∼20% in signs and symptoms, as measured by WOMAC subscales and PGA scores, was observed in all groups, with no treatment effect of risedronate demonstrated. Risedronate did not significantly reduce radiographic progression as measured by decreased JSW or using a dichotomous definition of progression (joint space loss of ≥0.6 mm). Thirteen percent of patients receiving placebo demonstrated significant disease progression over 2 years. A dose‐dependent reduction in the level of C‐terminal crosslinking telopeptide of type II collagen, a cartilage degradation marker associated with progressive OA, was seen in patients who received risedronate. No increase in the number of adverse events was demonstrated for risedronate compared with placebo.

Conclusion

Although risedronate (compared with placebo) did not improve signs or symptoms of OA, nor did it alter progression of OA, a reduction in the level of a marker of cartilage degradation was observed. A sustained clinically relevant improvement in signs and symptoms was observed in all treatment and placebo groups.

     

Symptomatic effects of chondroitin 4 and chondroitin 6 sulfate on hand osteoarthritis: A randomized,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled clinical trial at a single center

Objective

To evaluate the symptomatic effects of highly purified chondroitin 4 and chondroitin 6 sulfate (CS) therapy in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the hand.

Methods

This investigator‐initiated, single‐center, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled clinical trial included 162 symptomatic patients with radiographic evidence of hand OA (American College of Rheumatology criteria). Inclusion criteria included patient's assessment of global spontaneous hand pain of at least 40 mm on a 0–100‐mm visual analog scale (VAS) and functional impairment of at least 6 (0–30 scale) on the Functional Index for Hand OA (FIHOA) in the most symptomatic hand. Patients received either 800 mg of CS (n = 80 patients) or placebo (n = 82 patients) once daily for 6 months and were analyzed in an intent‐to‐treat approach. The two primary outcomes were the change in the patient's assessment of global spontaneous hand pain and in hand function (by FIHOA score) from baseline to month 6. Secondary outcomes were improvement in grip strength, duration of morning stiffness, acetaminophen consumption, and the investigator's global impression of treatment efficacy.

Results

There was a significantly more pronounced decrease in the patient's global assessment of hand pain in the CS group than in the placebo group (difference VAS scores −8.7 mm; P = 0.016). Hand function improved significantly more in the CS group than in the placebo group (difference in FIHOA scores −2.14; P = 0.008). There was a statistically significant between‐group difference in favor of CS for the duration of morning stiffness and for the investigator's global impression of treatment efficacy. Changes in grip strength, acetaminophen consumption, and safety end points were not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that CS improves hand pain and function in patients with symptomatic OA of the hand and shows a good safety profile.

     

Evaluation of the structure‐modifying effects of diacerein in hip osteoarthritis: ECHODIAH,a three‐year,placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To evaluate the ability of diacerein, an interleukin‐1β inhibitor, to slow the progressive decrease in joint space width observed in patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

In this randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled 3‐year study, 507 patients with primary OA of the hip (by the American College of Rheumatology criteria) received diacerein (50 mg twice a day) or placebo. The minimal hip joint space width was measured by a central reader on yearly pelvic radiographs, using a 0.1‐mm–graduated magnifying glass.

Results

Baseline characteristics were comparable in the 2 treatment groups (255 patients receiving diacerein, 252 receiving placebo); 238 patients (47%) discontinued the study, mainly because of adverse events in the diacerein group (25% versus 12% with placebo) and because of inefficacy in the placebo group (14% versus 7% with diacerein). The percentage of patients with radiographic progression, defined by a joint space loss of at least 0.5 mm, was significantly lower in patients receiving diacerein than in patients receiving placebo, both in the intent‐to‐treat analysis and in the completer analysis (50.7% versus 60.4% [P = 0.036] and 47.3% versus 62.3% [P = 0.007], respectively). In those patients who completed 3 years of treatment, the rate of joint space narrowing was significantly lower with diacerein (mean ± SD 0.18 ± 0.25 mm/year versus 0.23 ± 0.23 mm/year with placebo; P = 0.042). Diacerein had no evident effect on the symptoms of OA in this study. However, a post hoc covariate analysis that took into account the use of analgesics and antiinflammatory drugs showed an effect of diacerein on the Lequesne functional index. Diacerein was well tolerated during the 3‐year study. The most frequent adverse events were transient changes in bowel habits.

Conclusion

This study confirms previous clinical findings indicating that the demonstration of a structure‐modifying effect in hip OA is feasible, and shows, for the first time, that treatment with diacerein for 3 years has a significant structure‐modifying effect as compared with placebo, coupled with a good safety profile. The clinical relevance of these findings requires further investigation.

     

Transdermal fentanyl for improvement of pain and functioning in osteoarthritis: A randomized,placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

Although common treatments for osteoarthritis (OA) pain, such as nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), simple analgesics, and weak opioids, provide relief in some cases, they fail to control pain or are poorly tolerated in many cases. Strong opioids have been used to successfully treat several types of noncancer pain but have rarely been tested in controlled studies. Therefore, we tested the effects of transdermal fentanyl (TDF) in patients with moderate‐to‐severe OA pain, in a placebo‐controlled study.

Methods

The cohort comprised patients with radiologically confirmed OA of the hip or knee (meeting the American College of Rheumatology criteria) requiring joint replacement and with moderate‐to‐severe pain that had been inadequately controlled by weak opioids. The patients were randomized to receive TDF or placebo for 6 weeks after a 1‐week pretreatment run‐in phase. During study treatment, previously prescribed NSAIDs and simple analgesics were continued, but weak opioids were discontinued. All patients had access to paracetamol and metoclopramide. Pain was recorded on a visual analog scale (VAS), and function was assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC).

Results

Data were available for 399 patients (202 receiving TDF, 197 receiving placebo), of whom 199 (50%) completed the study. TDF provided significantly better pain relief than placebo, as demonstrated by the primary outcome measure (area under the curve for VAS scores −20 in the TDF group versus −14.6 in the placebo group; P = 0.007). TDF was also associated with significantly better overall WOMAC scores and pain scores. The most common adverse events were nausea, vomiting, and somnolence, and these occurred more often in the TDF group.

Conclusion

TDF can reduce pain and improve function in patients with knee or hip OA.

     

The efficacy and safety of diacerein in the treatment of painful osteoarthritis of the knee: A randomized,multicenter, double‐blind,placebo‐controlled study with primary end points at two months after the end of a three‐month treatment period

Objective

To determine whether the efficacy of diacerein persists at 2 months after the end of a 3‐month treatment period, compared with placebo, in patients with painful knee osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

After a 1‐week nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug washout period, patients received either diacerein or placebo for 3 months, followed by an off‐treatment period of 3 months to determine the carryover effects of the drug. Although patients were followed up through month 6, the primary efficacy end point was the percent change from baseline in pain (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC] A) at month 5 (i.e., 2 months after the end of treatment) compared with placebo. The co–primary efficacy end point was the percent change from baseline in the total WOMAC score, also at month 5 versus placebo.

Results

Two hundred three patients were screened, and 168 patients with painful knee OA were randomized. One hundred sixty‐five patients were analyzed in an intent‐to‐treat analysis. At month 5, diacerein showed statistically significant superiority versus placebo as assessed with both the WOMAC A (P < 0.0001) and the total WOMAC (P < 0.0001), demonstrating the carryover effect of the drug. This superiority was already evident from month 2 for pain (P = 0.001) and month 1 for total WOMAC (P = 0.0021). Diacerein was safe and well tolerated. No serious or previously undocumented adverse events were observed during the study.

Conclusion

This is the first published study of a symptomatic slow‐acting OA drug in which the time of assessment of the primary outcome end points was 2 months after the end of a 3‐month treatment period. The results show that diacerein is safe and effective for the treatment of knee OA and has a long carryover effect.

     

Pilot study of the effects of a heat‐retaining knee sleeve on joint pain,stiffness, and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis

Objective

To identify changes in joint pain, stiffness, and functional ability in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) after use of a knee sleeve that prevents loss of body heat by the joint.

Methods

Subjects with symptomatic knee OA (n = 52) were randomized to 2 treatment groups: verum sleeve (specially fabricated to retain body heat) or placebo sleeve (standard cotton/elastane sleeve). Subjects wore the sleeve over the more painful OA knee for at least 12 hours daily for 4 weeks. Pain, stiffness, and functional impairment (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]) in the index knee were measured at baseline and after 4 weeks of wear, after which sleeve use was discontinued. Telephone followup interviews were conducted 2 and 4 weeks later.

Results

After 4 weeks of sleeve wear, subjects in the active treatment group reported a 16% decrease in mean WOMAC pain score relative to baseline (P = 0.001). Those who wore the placebo sleeve reported a 9.7% decrease from baseline (P = 0.002). The difference between treatment groups was not statistically significant (P = 0.12). However, it was found that the 12 subjects who believed correctly that they had received the verum sleeve reported a highly significant decrease in WOMAC pain score (?27.5% relative to baseline, P = 0.0001). In comparison, subjects who received the verum sleeve but believed they had received the placebo sleeve exhibited only a marginally significant improvement in pain (?13.0% relative to baseline, P = 0.07). In the placebo group, the modest improvement in pain scores appeared unrelated to the subject's impression of the type of sleeve worn.

Conclusion

This pilot study was insufficiently powered to be a definitive trial of the heat‐retaining sleeve. Given the magnitude of changes in knee pain in the active treatment group, heat retention merits further scientific investigation as a treatment modality for patients with knee OA.

     

Efficacy and safety of four doses of lumiracoxib versus diclofenac in patients with knee or hip primary osteoarthritis: A phase II,four‐week,multicenter, randomized,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To compare the efficacy and tolerability of the novel cyclooxygenase 2‐selective inhibitor lumiracoxib with placebo and diclofenac in osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

Adults (n = 583) with knee or hip OA were randomized to receive for 4 weeks lumiracoxib 50, 100, or 200 mg twice daily or 400 mg once daily; placebo; or diclofenac 75 mg twice daily. Efficacy assessments included overall joint pain intensity and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index subscales; tolerability was evaluated by adverse event and physician reporting.

Results

All lumiracoxib doses were superior to placebo in relieving pain, improving stiffness, and improving physical function after 4 weeks. At study endpoint, pain relief was comparable among all lumiracoxib dosages and similar to diclofenac. Lumiracoxib tolerability was superior to diclofenac and comparable to placebo.

Conclusion

Lumiracoxib provides predictable and sustained relief from pain, stiffness, and impaired physical function in OA. Lumiracoxib shows clinically comparable efficacy and superior tolerability to diclofenac.

     

Tidal irrigation as treatment for knee osteoarthritis: A sham‐controlled,randomized, double‐blinded evaluation

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of tidal irrigation (TI) in comparison with a well‐matched sham irrigation (SI) procedure as a treatment for knee osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

One hundred eighty subjects with knee OA were randomized to receive TI or SI, with clinical followup over the ensuing 12 months. The primary outcomes of interest were change in pain and function, as measured by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Subjects and the nurse assessor were blinded, and success of blinding was assessed.

Results

Although the study groups were otherwise comparable, the baseline WOMAC pain and physical functioning scores were higher (worse) in the SI group. After adjustment for baseline, there were no differences between the effects of SI and TI. Blinding was successful, with ∼90% of SI and TI subjects stating that they had received the TI procedure.

Conclusion

Most, if not all, of the effect of TI appears to be attributable to a “placebo response.”

     

Comparison of radiographic joint space width with magnetic resonance imaging cartilage morphometry: Analysis of longitudinal data from the osteoarthritis initiative

Objective

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and radiography are established imaging modalities for the assessment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). The objective of our study was to compare the responsiveness of radiographic joint space width (JSW) with MRI‐derived measures of cartilage morphometry for OA progression in participants from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI).

Methods

This study examined the baseline and 12‐month visits of a subset of 150 subjects from the OAI. Measurement of radiographic JSW was facilitated by the use of automated software that delineated the femoral and tibial margins of the joint. Measures of medial compartment minimum JSW and JSW at fixed locations were compared with cartilage morphometry measures derived from MRI. The results were stratified by Kellgren/Lawrence (K/L) scale grade and by tibiofemoral anatomic axis angle. In order to examine the relative responsiveness of various techniques, we calculated the standardized response mean (SRM) between the 2 visits.

Results

The SRM for radiographic JSW measured at the optimal location was ?0.32 compared with ?0.39 for the most responsive MRI measure. For the subgroup with a K/L scale grade of 2 or 3, the most responsive SRM values were ?0.34 for radiographic JSW and ?0.42 for MRI.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates that new measures using a software analysis of digital knee radiographic images are comparable with MRI in detecting OA progression, and potentially superior when considering the cost‐effectiveness of the 2 imaging modalities.

     

Effects of a ginger extract on knee pain in patients with osteoarthritis

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a standardized and highly concentrated extract of 2 ginger species, Zingiber officinale and Alpinia galanga (EV.EXT 77), in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.

Methods

Two hundred sixty‐one patients with OA of the knee and moderate‐to‐severe pain were enrolled in a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, multicenter, parallel‐group, 6‐week study. After washout, patients received ginger extract or placebo twice daily, with acetaminophen allowed as rescue medication. The primary efficacy variable was the proportion of responders experiencing a reduction in “knee pain on standing,” using an intent‐to‐treat analysis. A responder was defined by a reduction in pain of ≥15 mm on a visual analog scale.

Results

In the 247 evaluable patients, the percentage of responders experiencing a reduction in knee pain on standing was superior in the ginger extract group compared with the control group (63% versus 50%; P = 0.048). Analysis of the secondary efficacy variables revealed a consistently greater response in the ginger extract group compared with the control group, when analyzing mean values: reduction in knee pain on standing (24.5 mm versus 16.4 mm; P = 0.005), reduction in knee pain after walking 50 feet (15.1 mm versus 8.7 mm; P = 0.016), and reduction in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis composite index (12.9 mm versus 9.0 mm; P = 0.087). Change in global status and reduction in intake of rescue medication were numerically greater in the ginger extract group. Change in quality of life was equal in the 2 groups. Patients receiving ginger extract experienced more gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events than did the placebo group (59 patients versus 21 patients). GI adverse events were mostly mild.

Conclusion

A highly purified and standardized ginger extract had a statistically significant effect on reducing symptoms of OA of the knee. This effect was moderate. There was a good safety profile, with mostly mild GI adverse events in the ginger extract group.

     

Safety and efficacy of long‐term intraarticular steroid injections in osteoarthritis of the knee: A randomized,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of long‐term intraarticular (IA) steroid injections for knee pain related to osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

In a randomized, double‐blind trial, 68 patients with OA of the knee received IA injections of triamcinolone acetonide 40 mg (34 patients) or saline (34 patients) into the study knee every 3 months for up to 2 years. The primary outcome variable was radiologic progression of joint space narrowing of the injected knee after 2 years. Measurements of minimum joint space width were performed by an automated computerized method on standardized fluoroscopically guided radiographs taken with the patient standing and with the knee in a semiflexed position. The clinical efficacy measure of primary interest was the pain subscale from the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index (WOMAC). Efficacy measures of secondary interest were the total score on the WOMAC, physician's global assessment, patient's global assessment, patient's assessment of pain, range of motion (ROM) of the affected knee, and 50‐foot walking time. Clinical symptoms were assessed just before each injection.

Results

At the 1‐year and 2‐year followup evaluations, no difference was noted between the two treatment groups with respect to loss of joint space over time. The steroid‐injected knees showed a trend toward greater symptom improvement, especially at 1 year, for the WOMAC pain subscale, night pain, and ROM values (P = 0.05) compared with the saline‐injected knees. Using area under the curve analyses, knee pain and stiffness were significantly improved throughout the 2‐year study by repeated injections of triamcinolone acetonide, but not saline (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Our findings support the long‐term safety of IA steroid injections for patients with symptomatic knee OA. No deleterious effects of the long‐term administration of IA steroids on the anatomical structure of the knee were noted. Moreover, long‐term treatment of knee OA with repeated steroid injections appears to be clinically effective for the relief of symptoms of the disease.

     

Steroid injection for osteoarthritis of the hip: A randomized,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To determine the efficacy of fluoroscopically guided corticosteroid injection for hip osteoarthritis (OA) in a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial.

Methods

Fifty‐two patients with symptomatic hip OA were randomly allocated to receive placebo (10 mg bipuvicaine, 2 ml saline) (n = 21) or corticosteroid treatment (10 mg bipuvicaine, 40 mg triamcinolone hexacetonide) (n = 31). Patients were followed up for 1, 2, 3, and 6 months. The primary outcome measure was the pain improvement response, defined as a 20% decrease in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index (WOMAC) pain score (on 5 100‐mm visual analog scales [VAS]) (WOMAC20) from baseline to 2 months postinjection. Secondary outcomes were a 50% decrease in the WOMAC pain score (WOMAC50), changes in other WOMAC subscale scores, patient's global assessment of health (on a 100‐mm VAS), and Short Form 36 (SF‐36) quality of life indices. Analyses were based on the intent‐to‐treat principle.

Results

The mean WOMAC pain score fell 49.2% (decreasing from 310.1 mm to 157.4 mm) at 2 months postinjection in patients receiving corticosteroid, compared with a decrease of 2.5% (from 314.3 mm to 306.5 mm) in the placebo group (P < 0.0001). The proportion of WOMAC20 responders at 2 months' followup was significantly higher in the corticosteroid group (67.7%) compared with the placebo group (23.8%) (P = 0.004); similar proportions of WOMAC50 responders were observed between groups (61.3% in the corticosteroid group versus 14.3% in the placebo group; P = 0.001). Response differences were maintained at 3 months' followup (58.1% responders in the corticosteroid group versus 9.5% responders in the placebo group; P = 0.004). Significant differences in the WOMAC stiffness and physical function scores (P < 0.0001), patient's global health scores (P = 0.005), and SF‐36 physical component scores (P = 0.04) were observed, with patients in the corticosteroid group showing greater improvements. There were no differences in the frequency of adverse events between groups.

Conclusion

This placebo‐controlled trial confirms that corticosteroid injection can be an effective treatment of pain in hip OA, with benefits lasting up to 3 months in many cases. Future studies should address questions related to the benefits of repeated steroid injection and the effects of this treatment on disease modification.

     

Association of the interleukin‐1 gene cluster on chromosome 2q13 with knee osteoarthritis

Objective

To investigate whether the interleukin‐1 (IL‐1) ligand gene cluster at 2q13 encodes for genetic susceptibility to primary osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

Seven single‐nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and a variable‐number tandem repeat (VNTR) polymorphism from within the IL‐1 ligand genes IL1A, IL1B, and IL1RN were genotyped in a cohort of 557 OA cases and 557 age‐matched controls.

Results

None of the variants demonstrated association in the unstratified data set. However, when cases were stratified according to sex and site of disease (hip or knee), 4 SNPs showed marginal evidence for association (P < 0.1) in knee cases (n = 136) and male knee cases (n = 58). For 2 of these SNPs, evidence for association was enhanced when probands from 60 knee‐only affected sibling pair families were genotyped and combined with the original knee cases (P ≤ 0.05). Further analysis revealed that the associated alleles at 2 of these SNPs were markers for the same haplotype, the frequency of which was significantly elevated when knee cases and knee probands were combined (P = 0.01, odds ratio [OR] 1.4) and when male knee cases and male knee probands were combined (P = 0.009, OR 1.7). Furthermore, linkage analysis of 2q revealed suggestive evidence for linkage to the IL‐1 gene clusters in affected sibling pairs concordant for knee OA but no evidence for linkage in affected sibling pairs concordant for hip OA.

Conclusion

The IL‐1 ligand cluster encodes for susceptibility to knee OA but not to hip OA, highlighting the genetic heterogeneity of this common, complex disease.

     

Nonrandom evolution of end‐stage osteoarthritis of the lower limbs

Objective

Patients with unilateral hip or knee replacements for end‐stage osteoarthritis (OA) are at high risk for future progression of OA in other joints of the lower extremities, often requiring additional joint replacements. Although the risks of future surgery in the contralateral cognate joints (i.e., contralateral hip replacement after an initial hip replacement) have been evaluated, the evolution of end‐stage hip OA to OA involving the knee joints, and vice versa (i.e., noncognate progression) has not been investigated. Because characterization of OA progression in noncognate joints may shed light on the pathogenesis of multijoint OA, we investigated the pattern of evolution of end‐stage lower extremity OA in a large, clinical cohort.

Methods

Total joint replacement (TJR) was selected as a marker of end‐stage OA, and a database comprising all lower extremity TJRs performed at a large referral center between 1981 and 2001 was accessed. Of the 5,894 patients identified, 486 patients with idiopathic OA who underwent hip replacement and 414 who underwent initial knee replacement were analyzed to determine the relative likelihood of subsequent TJRs. Patients with the systemic inflammatory arthropathy, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), were evaluated as a control population because RA progression is not considered to be a primarily mechanically mediated process.

Results

The contralateral cognate joint was the most common second joint to undergo replacement in both the OA and the RA groups. However, in OA patients for whom the second TJR was in a noncognate joint, that joint was >2‐fold more likely to be on the contralateral limb than on the ipsilateral limb (hip to knee P < 0.001; knee to hip P = 0.013). In contrast, among the RA cohort, the evolution was random and no laterality for noncognate TJR was observed at either the hip or the knee (P = 0.782).

Conclusion

This characterization of end‐stage lower extremity OA demonstrates that the disease evolves nonrandomly; after 1 joint is replaced, the contralateral limb is significantly more likely to show progression of OA than is the ipsilateral limb. Thus, OA in 1 weight‐bearing joint appears to influence the evolution of OA in other joints. The absence of such laterality in RA suggests that OA progression may be mediated by extrinsic factors such as altered joint loading.

     

Effects of doxycycline on progression of osteoarthritis: Results of a randomized,placebo‐controlled,double‐blind trial

Objective

To confirm preclinical data suggesting that doxycycline can slow the progression of osteoarthritis (OA). The primary outcome measure was joint space narrowing (JSN) in the medial tibiofemoral compartment.

Methods

In this placebo‐controlled trial, obese women (n = 431) ages 45–64 years with unilateral radiographic knee OA were randomly assigned to receive 30 months of treatment with 100 mg doxycycline or placebo twice a day. Tibiofemoral JSN was measured manually in fluoroscopically standardized radiographic examinations performed at baseline, 16 months, and 30 months. Severity of joint pain was recorded at 6‐month intervals.

Results

Seventy‐one percent of all randomized subjects completed the trial. Radiographs were obtained from 85% of all randomized subjects at 30 months. Adherence to the dosing regimen was 91.8% among subjects who completed the study per protocol. After 16 months of treatment, the mean ± SD loss of joint space width in the index knee in the doxycycline group was 40% less than that in the placebo group (0.15 ± 0.42 mm versus 0.24 ± 0.54 mm); after 30 months, it was 33% less (0.30 ± 0.60 mm versus 0.45 ± 0.70 mm). Doxycycline did not reduce the mean severity of joint pain, although pain scores in both treatment groups were low at baseline and remained low throughout the trial, suggesting the presence of a floor effect. However, the frequency of followup visits at which the subject reported a ≥20% increase in pain in the index knee, relative to the previous visit, was reduced among those receiving doxycycline. In contrast, doxycycline did not have an effect on either JSN or pain in the contralateral knee. In both treatment groups, subjects who reported a ≥20% increase in knee pain at the majority of their followup visits had more rapid JSN than those whose pain did not increase.

Conclusion

Doxycycline slowed the rate of JSN in knees with established OA. Its lack of effect on JSN in the contralateral knee suggests that pathogenetic mechanisms in that joint were different from those in the index knee.

     

Comparing the efficacy of cyclooxygenase 2–specific inhibitors in treating osteoarthritis: Appropriate trial design considerations and results of a randomized,placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To compare the efficacy of the cyclooxygenase 2 (COX‐2)–specific inhibitors celecoxib and rofecoxib in treating the signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

In this randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind, multicenter study, 475 patients with OA of the knee received either celecoxib 200 mg/day (n = 189), rofecoxib 25 mg/day (n = 190), or placebo (n = 96) for 6 weeks. Arthritis assessments were performed at baseline, week 3, and week 6 (or at the time of early termination).

Results

In primary measures of efficacy (OA pain score on a 100‐mm visual analog scale [VAS] and total domain score on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index), celecoxib 200 mg/day and rofecoxib 25 mg/day demonstrated similar efficacy. At week 6, celecoxib was associated with a 34‐mm mean improvement on the VAS for OA pain, compared with 31.6 mm for rofecoxib and 21.2 mm for placebo. The difference between celecoxib and rofecoxib was −2.5 mm, with an upper limit of the 95% confidence interval of 2.7 mm and within the prespecified definition of noninferiority. Secondary measures of efficacy showed similar results. All differences in primary and secondary measures of efficacy between the 2 active treatments and placebo were statistically significant (P < 0.02), whereas all of the comparisons of efficacy between celecoxib and rofecoxib met the predefined criteria for noninferiority. All treatments were well tolerated throughout the study, with similar proportions of patients withdrawing due to adverse events.

Conclusion

Celecoxib 200 mg/day and rofecoxib 25 mg/day are equally efficacious in treating the signs and symptoms of OA.