Pharmaceutical treatment of osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To review the current state of pharmaceutical treatment recommendations for the management of osteoarthritis. METHOD: A narrative review was drafted to describe treatment guidelines, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, and toxicity for nine classes of pharmaceuticals: 1) oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), 2) topical NSAIDs, 3) COX-2 inhibitors, 4) duloxetine, 5) intra-articular corticosteroids, 6) intra-articular hyaluronic acid, 7) acetaminophen (paracetamol), 8) tramadol, and 9) capsaicin. RESULTS: In general, oral and topical NSAIDs, including COX-2 inhibitors, are strongly recommended first-line treatments for osteoarthritis due to their ability to improve pain and function but are associated with increased risks in patients with certain comorbidities (e.g., heightened cardiovascular risks). Intra-articular corticosteroid injections are generally recommended for osteoarthritis management and have relatively minor adverse effects. Other treatments, such as capsaicin, tramadol, and acetaminophen, are more controversial, and many updated guidelines offer differing recommendations. CONCLUSION: The pharmaceutical management of osteoarthritis is a constantly evolving field. Promising treatments are emerging, and medicines that were once considered conventional (e.g., acetaminophen) are gradually becoming less acceptable based on concerns with efficacy and safety. Clinicians need to consider the latest evidence and recommendations to make an informed decision with their patients about how to optimize treatment plans for patients with knee, hip, polyarticular, or hand osteoarthritis.

A Phase 2b randomized trial of lorecivivint, a novel intra-articular CLK2/DYRK1A inhibitor and Wnt pathway modulator for knee osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Lorecivivint (LOR; SM04690), an investigational Wnt pathway modulator, previously demonstrated patient-reported and radiographic outcome improvements vs placebo in clinically relevant subjects with moderate to severe knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study's objective was to identify effective LOR doses. DESIGN: Subjects in this 24-week, Phase 2b, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled trial received an intra-articular injection of 2 mL LOR (0.03, 0.07, 0.15, or 0.23 mg), PBO, or dry-needle sham. The primary efficacy endpoints were changes in Pain NRS [0-10], WOMAC Pain [0-100], WOMAC Function [0-100], and radiographic mJSW outcomes, which were measured using baseline-adjusted analysis of covariance at Week 24. Multiple Comparison Procedure-Modeling (MCP-Mod) was performed for dose modeling. RESULTS: In total, 695/700 subjects were treated. Pain NRS showed significant improvements vs PBO after treatment with 0.07 mg and 0.23 mg LOR at Weeks 12 (-0.96, 95% CI [-1.54, -0.37], P = 0.001; -0.78 [-1.39, -0.17], P = 0.012) and 24 (-0.70 [-1.34, -0.06], P = 0.031; -0.82 [-1.51, -0.12], P = 0.022). Additionally, 0.07 mg LOR significantly improved WOMAC Pain and Function subscores vs PBO at Week 12 (P = 0.04, P = 0.021), and 0.23 mg LOR significantly improved both WOMAC subscores at Week 24 (P = 0.031, P = 0.017). No significant differences from PBO were observed for other doses. No radiographic progression was observed in any group at Week 24. MCP-Mod identified 0.07 mg LOR as the lowest effective dose. CONCLUSION: This 24-week Phase 2b trial demonstrated the efficacy of LOR on PROs in knee OA subjects. The optimal dose for future studies was identified as 0.07 mg LOR.

Mobile health technologies for the management of systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to perform a standardized review of available mobile health (mHealth) applications (apps) for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and to conduct a systematic review of the literature on mHealth technologies in SLE. METHODS: Google Play and AppStore in the United States of America were queried and the quality of eligible mHealth apps was assessed using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS). Web of Science, EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched from inception through June 2019. RESULTS: Of 324 mHealth apps found, 20 were eligible for inclusion; 10 focused on education, 7 offered tools to track patient-reported symptoms, 5 included interactive online communities, and 1 enabled emoji sharing. The reviewed apps scored poorly on the MARS quality scale with a mean score 2.3 (0.6) out of 5. Of 1147 studies identified in the literature review, 21 were eligible for inclusion; 11 studies (52.4%) focused on the development and use of mHealth for providing patient information, while only 2 (9.5%) were randomized trials of mHealth interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is growing interest in the development of mHealth technologies to support SLE patients, currently available tools are of poor quality and limited functionality, and the literature examining this area is sparse.

OARSI guidelines for the non-surgical management of knee, hip, and polyarticular osteoarthritis

To update and expand upon prior Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) guidelines by developing patient-focused treatment recommendations for individuals with Knee, Hip, and Polyarticular osteoarthritis (OA) that are derived from expert consensus and based on objective review of high-quality meta-analytic data. We sought evidence for 60 unique interventions. A systematic search of all relevant databases was conducted from inception through July 2018. After abstract and full-text screening by two independent reviewers, eligible studies were matched to PICO questions. Data were extracted and meta-analyses were conducted using RevMan software. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence Profiles were compiled using the GRADEpro web application. Voting for Core Treatments took place first. Four subsequent voting sessions took place via anonymous online survey, during which Panel members were tasked with voting to produce recommendations for all joint locations and comorbidity classes. We designated non-Core treatments to Level 1A, 1B, 2, 3, 4A, 4B, or 5, based on the percentage of votes in favor, in addition to the strength of the recommendation. Core Treatments for Knee OA included arthritis education and structured land-based exercise programs with or without dietary weight management. Core Treatments for Hip and Polyarticular OA included arthritis education and structured land-based exercise programs. Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were strongly recommended for individuals with Knee OA (Level 1A). For individuals with gastrointestinal comorbidities, COX-2 inhibitors were Level 1B and NSAIDs with proton pump inhibitors Level 2. For individuals with cardiovascular comorbidities or frailty, use of any oral NSAID was not recommended. Intra-articular (IA) corticosteroids, IA hyaluronic acid, and aquatic exercise were Level 1B/Level 2 treatments for Knee OA, dependent upon comorbidity status, but were not recommended for individuals with Hip or Polyarticular OA. The use of Acetaminophen/Paracetamol (APAP) was conditionally not recommended (Level 4A and 4B), and the use of oral and transdermal opioids was strongly not recommended (Level 5). A treatment algorithm was constructed in order to guide clinical decision-making for a variety of patient profiles, using recommended treatments as input for each decision node. These guidelines offer comprehensive and patient-centered treatment profiles for individuals with Knee, Hip, and Polyarticular OA. The treatment algorithm will facilitate individualized treatment decisions regarding the management of OA.

OARSI guidelines for the non-surgical management of knee, hip, and polyarticular osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To update and expand upon prior Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) guidelines by developing patient-focused treatment recommendations for individuals with Knee, Hip, and Polyarticular osteoarthritis (OA) that are derived from expert consensus and based on objective review of high-quality meta-analytic data. METHODS: We sought evidence for 60 unique interventions. A systematic search of all relevant databases was conducted from inception through July 2018. After abstract and full-text screening by two independent reviewers, eligible studies were matched to PICO questions. Data were extracted and meta-analyses were conducted using RevMan software. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence Profiles were compiled using the GRADEpro web application. Voting for Core Treatments took place first. Four subsequent voting sessions took place via anonymous online survey, during which Panel members were tasked with voting to produce recommendations for all joint locations and comorbidity classes. We designated non-Core treatments to Level 1A, 1B, 2, 3, 4A, 4B, or 5, based on the percentage of votes in favor, in addition to the strength of the recommendation. RESULTS: Core Treatments for Knee OA included arthritis education and structured land-based exercise programs with or without dietary weight management. Core Treatments for Hip and Polyarticular OA included arthritis education and structured land-based exercise programs. Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were strongly recommended for individuals with Knee OA (Level 1A). For individuals with gastrointestinal comorbidities, COX-2 inhibitors were Level 1B and NSAIDs with proton pump inhibitors Level 2. For individuals with cardiovascular comorbidities or frailty, use of any oral NSAID was not recommended. Intra-articular (IA) corticosteroids, IA hyaluronic acid, and aquatic exercise were Level 1B/Level 2 treatments for Knee OA, dependent upon comorbidity status, but were not recommended for individuals with Hip or Polyarticular OA. The use of Acetaminophen/Paracetamol (APAP) was conditionally not recommended (Level 4A and 4B), and the use of oral and transdermal opioids was strongly not recommended (Level 5). A treatment algorithm was constructed in order to guide clinical decision-making for a variety of patient profiles, using recommended treatments as input for each decision node. CONCLUSION: These guidelines offer comprehensive and patient-centered treatment profiles for individuals with Knee, Hip, and Polyarticular OA. The treatment algorithm will facilitate individualized treatment decisions regarding the management of OA.

Intra-articular corticosteroids and the risk of knee osteoarthritis progression: results from the Osteoarthritis Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: A recent randomized clinical trial reported that repeated intra-articular corticosteroids (IACs) were associated with a greater cartilage loss. This study aimed to examine the relation of IACs to knee radiographic osteoarthritis (ROA) progression in a real-world setting. DESIGN: A cohort that initiated IACs and a comparison cohort without IACs from participants with mild to moderate knee ROA in the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) were assembled (from 0-month to 48-month). Two measures of knee ROA progression were assessed during the follow-up period: (1) an increase in Kellgren and Lawrence (KL) grade by ≥1 grade or having a knee replacement (i.e., KL grade worsening); and (2) a decrease in joint space width (JSW) by ≥0.7 mm or having a knee replacement (i.e., JSW worsening). The associations of IACs initiation using a propensity-score matched cohort study and continuous IACs using marginal structural models with the risk of knee ROA progression were examined. RESULTS: Among 684 propensity-score matched participants at baseline (148 IACs initiators, 536 comparators), 65 knees (21.7/100 person-years) in the IACs initiation cohort and 90 knees (7.1/100 person-years) in the comparison cohort experienced KL worsening. The hazard ratios (HRs) of KL worsening from IACs initiation and continuous IACs were 3.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.19-4.16) and 4.67 (95% CI, 2.92-7.47), respectively. The corresponding HRs of JSW worsening were 2.93 (95% CI, 2.13-4.02) and 3.26 (95% CI, 1.78-5.96), respectively. All HRs for continuous use of IACs were further away from the null. CONCLUSIONS: IACs, especially continuous IACs, may be associated with an increased risk of knee ROA progression.

Efficacy and safety of single-dose onabotulinumtoxinA in the treatment of symptoms of osteoarthritis of the knee: results of a placebo-controlled, double-blind study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate intraarticular onabotulinumtoxinA 400 U and 200 U in reducing symptoms of knee osteoarthritis (OA) in patients with nociceptive pain. DESIGN: A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted in adults with knee OA and a painDETECT questionnaire score of ≤12 (indicating nociceptive pain). Patients were randomized to receive intraarticular onabotulinumtoxinA 400 U or 200 U or placebo (saline) in the study knee on a 1:1:2 ratio and were followed-up for 24 weeks posttreatment. The primary efficacy measure was the daily average numeric rating scale pain score for the study knee over 7 days at week 8. Secondary efficacy measures included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index pain and physical function scores, the patient global impression of change score and the 7-day average worst pain score. RESULTS: Of the 176 enrolled patients, 158 completed the study. The daily average pain score was reduced by approximately two points for all treatments (week 8); the reduction was sustained throughout follow-up, with no significant between-group difference between onabotulinumtoxinA and placebo (both doses: 0.22 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.33, 0.76]; 400 U: 0.42 [95% CI: -0.26, 1.10]; 200 U: -0.03 [95% CI: -0.70, 0.64]). Similar results were found for all secondary efficacy measures. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 3.4% of the pooled onabotulinumtoxinA group and placebo group; none were serious. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences between onabotulinumtoxinA and placebo in reducing average pain score at week 8 compared with baseline in patients with knee OA. No safety concerns were identified. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02230956.

Are bisphosphonates efficacious in knee osteoarthritis? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To clarify the effects of bisphosphonates in knee osteoarthritis (OA) using an up-to-date meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). DESIGN: The protocol is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017073449). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database from inception until August 2017. We included only RCTs comparing any bisphosphonates vs placebo in knee OA patients and reporting validated pain and function scales, radiographic progression, and adverse events (AEs) outcomes. We excluded studies using active comparators or concomitant medications besides non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen. We calculated standardized mean differences (SMDs) to account for variation in outcome scales. Random effects meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: We included seven RCTs (3013 patients, 69% female); most patients (N = 2767) received oral risedronate. No pain or function outcomes, regardless of dose, route, time point or measuring instrument, revealed statistically significant results (end of trial pain SMD = -0.16 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.34, 0.02]). Similarly, we found no statistically significant effect on radiographic progression (risk ratio = 0.98 [95% CI: 0.77, 1.26]). One small RCT in patients with bone marrow lesions (BMLs) suggested a reduction in BML size at 6 months. Bisphosphonates displayed good tolerability, with no statistically significant differences in AE outcomes vs placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to prior reviews, our analysis showed that bisphosphonates neither provide symptomatic relief nor defer radiographic progression in knee OA. However, these agents may still be beneficial in certain subsets of patients who display high rates of subchondral bone turnover. Future studies should be directed at defining such OA subsets and investigating the effects of bisphosphonates in those patients.

A novel Wnt pathway inhibitor, SM04690, for the treatment of moderate to severe osteoarthritis of the knee: results of a 24-week, randomized, controlled, phase 1 study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, and exploratory efficacy of SM04690, a novel Wnt pathway inhibitor, as a potential disease modifying treatment for knee osteoarthritis (OA). DESIGN: Subjects with Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2-3 knee OA were randomized in successive dose-escalation cohorts to receive a knee intra-articular (IA) injection with 0.03, 0.07, or 0.23 mg SM04690, or placebo (PBO) (4:1 ratio). Safety, pharmacokinetics, efficacy (WOMAC Total/Function/Pain, Pain VAS, Physician Global Assessment [MDGA], and OMERACT-OARSI Response), OA-related biomarker (P1NP, ß-CTX, and cartilage oligomeric matrix protein [COMP]), and radiographic/imaging data were collected at baseline and during 24-week follow-up. RESULTS: 61 subjects (SM04690 n = 50; PBO n = 11) enrolled. Two dose limiting toxicities (DLTs), increased pain following injection and paroxysmal tachycardia (also the single serious AE), were reported in the 0.07 mg cohort. A total of 72 AEs were reported; Sixteen (occurring in eight subjects) were considered related to study medication. There were three discontinuations; one due to an AE (0.03 mg cohort). Bone marrow edema (BME) remained constant for most subjects. No doses were excluded from further study due to DLT criteria. Plasma levels of SM04690 were below the limit of detection at all time points. At Week 24, improvements from baseline were seen in all cohorts for the exploratory measures WOMAC Total, WOMAC Function, WOMAC Pain, MDGA, Pain VAS, and OMERACT-OARSI response. Joint space width (JSW) improvement was observed in the 0.07 mg cohort (P = 0.02 vs PBO). CONCLUSION: SM04690 appeared safe and well tolerated, with no evidence of systemic exposure. Exploratory efficacy analyses suggested positive trends for measurements of OA pain, function and disease-modifying osteoarthritis drug (DMOAD) properties. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV REGISTRATION: NCT02095548.

Patterns of intra-articular injection use after initiation of treatment in patients with knee osteoarthritis: data from the osteoarthritis initiative.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe and evaluate longitudinal use of intra-articular injections after treatment initiation among adults with radiographically confirmed knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHOD: Using data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI), we included participants with radiographically confirmed OA (Kellgren-Lawrence grade (K-L) ≥ 2) in ≥1 knee at baseline. With 9 years of data, 412 participants newly initiating hyaluronic acid or corticosteroid injections with their index visit were identified. For each type of injection initiated, socio-demographic and clinical characteristics were described by patterns of treatments (one-time use, switched, or continued injections). Multinomial logistic models estimated the extent to which patient-reported symptoms (post-initial injection and changes over time) were associated with patterns of injection use. RESULTS: Of those initiating injections, ∼19% switched, ∼21% continued injection type, and ∼60% did not report any additional injections. For participants initiating corticosteroid injections, greater symptoms post-initial injection were associated with lower odds of continued use compared to one-time users (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain: 0.91; 95%, confidence interval (CI): 0.83 to 0.99; aORstiffness: 0.77; CI: 0.63 to 0.94; aORphysical function: 0.97; CI: 0.94 to 1.00). Symptom changes over time (e.g., worsened or improved) were not associated with patterns of injections use. CONCLUSION: After treatment initiation, the proportion of patients switching injection use and one-time users was substantial. Symptoms post-initial injection appear to be associated with patterns of injection use. The extent to which these patterns are an indication of lack of impact on patient-reported symptoms should be explored.

The relationship between meniscal pathology and osteoarthritis depends on the type of meniscal damage visible on magnetic resonance images: data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of different types of meniscal pathology with knee pain, bone marrow lesion (BML) volume, and end-stage knee osteoarthritis (esKOA). DESIGN: Participants were selected from an ancillary project to the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) who had at least one knee with symptomatic osteoarthritis. Baseline magnetic resonance images (MRI) were evaluated for meniscal pathology using a modified International Society of Arthroscopy, Knee Surgery, and Orthopaedic Sports Medicine (ISAKOS) classification system. We collapsed 10 types of meniscal pathology into five categories: normal, intrameniscal signal, morphological deformity/extrusion (altered meniscal shape and/or extrusion but no apparent substance loss), tear, and maceration. Outcomes included Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) knee pain and BML volume at baseline and after 2 years. We defined the prevalence of esKOA based on a validated algorithm. We performed logistic regression and adjusted for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: The 463 participants (53% male) included in the analysis had mean age 63 (9.2) years, BMI 29.6 (4.6) kg/m2, and 71% had Kellgren-Lawrence grade ≥2. Morphological deformity/extrusion and maceration, but no other types of meniscal pathology, were associated with BML volume (morphological deformity/extrusion odds ratio [OR] = 2.47, 95% CI: 1.49, 4.09, maceration OR = 5.85, 95% CI: 3.40, 10.06) and change in BML volume (morphological deformity/extrusion OR = 2.17, 95% CI: 1.37, 3.45, maceration OR = 3.12, 95% CI: 1.87, 5.19). Only maceration was associated with baseline WOMAC knee pain (OR = 2.82, 95% CI: 1.79, 4.43) and prevalence of esKOA (OR = 7.53, 95% CI: 4.25, 13.31). CONCLUSIONS: Based on MRI, morphologic deformity/extrusion and maceration rather than intrameniscal signal or tear were associated with osteoarthritis severity and progression, which highlights the importance of differentiating distinct types of meniscal pathology.

Comparative safety profile of hyaluronic acid products for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Intra-articular (IA) hyaluronic acid (HA) is considered a safer alternative to oral Non-Steroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids for knee osteoarthritis (OA). A recent review raised potential safety concerns about HA, warranting further review of safety outcomes. We examined the risks of HA compared with IA placebo and investigated whether the risks vary among individual HA preparations. METHODS: We searched all relevant databases from inception to October 2015 and sought unpublished data. We included all knee OA trials which compared any of the 18 HA products and reported on adverse events (AEs) and withdrawals. We calculated odds ratios for safety data reported at the longest follow-up. Network meta-analysis was performed using a Bayesian hierarchical random effects model for mixed multiple treatment comparisons. RESULTS: We identified 74 studies involving 13,032 participants aged between 45 and 75 years. The proportion of women ranged from 28% to 100%. The overall incidence of local reactions reported across all products was 8.5%. Commonly reported AEs were transient local reactions, such as pain, swelling and arthralgia, which subsided rapidly. None of the HA products were statistically significantly different from IA placebo or from each other with regard to incidence of AEs. Three treatment-related serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported among 9214 participants. CONCLUSIONS: Given the very low incidence of any particular AEs, we conclude that HA products are relatively well tolerated. These products have a similar safety profile compared to each other. This information along with the comparative effectiveness profile and relative cost would be helpful for clinicians in delivering individualized patient care.

Clinical algorithms to aid osteoarthritis guideline dissemination.

BACKGROUND: Numerous scientific organisations have developed evidence-based recommendations aiming to optimise the management of osteoarthritis (OA). Uptake, however, has been suboptimal. The purpose of this exercise was to harmonize the recent recommendations and develop a user-friendly treatment algorithm to facilitate translation of evidence into practice. METHODS: We updated a previous systematic review on clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for OA management. The guidelines were assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation for quality and the standards for developing trustworthy CPGs as established by the National Academy of Medicine (NAM). Four case scenarios and algorithms were developed by consensus of a multidisciplinary panel. RESULTS: Sixteen guidelines were included in the systematic review. Most recommendations were directed toward physicians and allied health professionals, and most had multi-disciplinary input. Analysis for trustworthiness suggests that many guidelines still present a lack of transparency. A treatment algorithm was developed for each case scenario advised by recommendations from guidelines and based on panel consensus. CONCLUSION: Strategies to facilitate the implementation of guidelines in clinical practice are necessary. The algorithms proposed are examples of how to apply recommendations in the clinical context, helping the clinician to visualise the patient flow and timing of different treatment modalities.

The OA Trial Bank: meta-analysis of individual patient data from knee and hip osteoarthritis trials show that patients with severe pain exhibit greater benefit from intra-articular glucocorticoids.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of intra-articular (IA) glucocorticoids for knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA) in specific subgroups of patients with severe pain and inflammatory signs using individual patient data (IPD) from existing trials. DESIGN: Randomized trials evaluating one or more IA glucocorticoid preparation in patients with knee or hip OA, published from 1995 up to June 2012 were selected from the literature. IPD obtained from original trials included patient and disease characteristics and outcomes measured. The primary outcome was pain severity at short-term follow-up (up to 4 weeks). The subgroup factors assessed included severe pain (≥70 points, 0-100 scale) and signs of inflammation (dichotomized in present or not) at baseline. Multilevel regression analyses were applied to estimate the magnitude of the effects in the subgroups with the individuals nested within each study. RESULTS: Seven out of 43 published randomized clinical trials (n = 620) were included. Patients with severe baseline pain had a significantly larger reduction in short-term pain, but not in mid- and long-term pain, compared to those with less severe pain at baseline (Mean Difference 13.91; 95% Confidence Interval 1.50-26.31) when receiving IA glucocorticoid injection compared to placebo. No statistical significant interaction effects were found between inflammatory signs and IA glucocorticoid injections compared to placebo and to tidal irrigation at all follow-up points. CONCLUSIONS: This IPD meta-analysis demonstrates that patients with severe knee pain at baseline derive more benefit from IA glucocorticoid injection at short-term follow-up than those with less severe pain at baseline.

The relationship between smoking and knee osteoarthritis in the Osteoarthritis Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the extent that smoking history is associated with symptoms and disease progression among individuals with radiographically confirmed knee Osteoarthritis (OA). METHOD: Both cross-sectional (baseline) and longitudinal studies employed data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) (n = 2250 participants). Smoking history was assessed at baseline with 44% current or former smokers. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) was used to measure knee pain, stiffness, and physical function. Disease progression was measured using joint space width (JSW). We used adjusted multivariable linear models to examine the relationship between smoking status and exposure in pack years (PY) with symptoms and JSW at baseline. Changes in symptoms and JSW over time were further assessed. RESULTS: In cross-sectional analyses, compared to never-smokers high PY (≥15 PY) was associated with slightly greater pain (beta 0.36, 95% CI: 0.01-0.71) and stiffness (beta 0.20, 95% CI: 0.03-0.37); and low PY (<15 PY) was associated with better JSW (beta 0.15, 95% CI: 0.02-0.28). Current smoking was associated with greater pain (beta 0.59, 95% CI: 0.04-1.15) compared to never-smokers. These associations were not confirmed in the longitudinal study. Longitudinally, no associations were found between high or low PY or baseline smoking status with changes in symptoms (at 72 months) or JSW (at 48 months). CONCLUSION: Cross-sectional findings are likely due residual confounding. The more robust longitudinal analysis found no associations between smoking status and symptoms or JSW. Long-term smoking provides no benefits to knee OA patients while exposing them to other well-documented serious health risks.

OARSI Clinical Trials Recommendations: Design, conduct, and reporting of clinical trials for knee osteoarthritis.

The goal of this document is to update the original OARSI recommendations specifically for the design, conduct, and reporting of clinical trials that target symptom or structure modification among individuals with knee osteoarthritis (OA). To develop recommendations for the design, conduct, and reporting of clinical trials for knee OA we initially drafted recommendations through an iterative process. Members of the working group included representatives from industry and academia. After the working group members reviewed a final draft, they scored the appropriateness for recommendations. After the members voted we calculated the median score among the nine members of the working group who completed the score. The document includes 25 recommendations regarding randomization, blocking and stratification, blinding, enhancing accuracy of patient-reported outcomes (PRO), selecting a study population and index knee, describing interventions, patient-reported and physical performance measures, structural outcome measures, biochemical biomarkers, and reporting recommendations. In summary, the working group identified 25 recommendations that represent the current best practices regarding clinical trials that target symptom or structure modification among individuals with knee OA. These updated recommendations incorporate novel technologies (e.g., magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)) and strategies to address the heterogeneity of knee OA.

The association between vitamin K status and knee osteoarthritis features in older adults: the Health, Aging and Body Composition Study.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin K-dependent (VKD) proteins, including the mineralization inhibitor matrix-gla protein (MGP), are found in joint tissues including cartilage and bone. Previous studies suggest low vitamin K status is associated with higher osteoarthritis (OA) prevalence and incidence. OBJECTIVE: To clarify what joint tissues vitamin K is relevant to in OA, we investigated the cross-sectional and longitudinal association between vitamin K status and knee OA structural features measured using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Plasma phylloquinone (PK, vitamin K1) and dephosphorylated-uncarboxylated MGP ((dp)ucMGP) were measured in 791 older community-dwelling adults who had bilateral knee MRIs (mean ± SD age = 74 ± 3 y; 67% female). The adjusted odds ratios (and 95% confidence intervals) [OR (95%CI)] for presence and progression of knee OA features according to vitamin K status were calculated using marginal models with generalized estimating equations (GEEs), adjusted for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), triglycerides and other pertinent confounders. RESULTS: Longitudinally, participants with very low plasma PK (<0.2 nM) were more likely to have articular cartilage and meniscus damage progression after 3 years [OR (95% CIs): 1.7(1.0-3.0), 2.6(1.3-5.2) respectively] compared to sufficient PK (≥ 1.0 nM). Higher plasma (dp)ucMGP (reflective of lower vitamin K status) was associated with higher odds of meniscus damage, osteophytes, bone marrow lesions, and subarticular cysts cross-sectionally [ORs (95% CIs) comparing highest to lowest quartile: 1.6(1.1-2.3); 1.7(1.1-2.5); 1.9(1.3-2.8); 1.5(1.0-2.1), respectively]. CONCLUSION: Community-dwelling men and women with very low plasma PK were more likely to have progression of articular cartilage and meniscus damage. Plasma (dp)ucMGP was associated with presence of knee OA features but not progression. Future studies are needed to clarify mechanisms underlying vitamin Ks role in OA.

OARSI guidelines for the non-surgical management of knee osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To develop concise, up-to-date, patient-focused, evidence-based, expert consensus guidelines for the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA), intended to inform patients, physicians, and allied healthcare professionals worldwide. METHOD: Thirteen experts from relevant medical disciplines (primary care, rheumatology, orthopedics, physical therapy, physical medicine and rehabilitation, and evidence-based medicine), three continents and ten countries (USA, UK, France, Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, Australia, Japan, and Canada) and a patient representative comprised the Osteoarthritis Guidelines Development Group (OAGDG). Based on previous OA guidelines and a systematic review of the OA literature, 29 treatment modalities were considered for recommendation. Evidence published subsequent to the 2010 OARSI guidelines was based on a systematic review conducted by the OA Research Society International (OARSI) evidence team at Tufts Medical Center, Boston, USA. Medline, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were initially searched in first quarter 2012 and last searched in March 2013. Included evidence was assessed for quality using Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) criteria, and published criticism of included evidence was also considered. To provide recommendations for individuals with a range of health profiles and OA burden, treatment recommendations were stratified into four clinical sub-phenotypes. Consensus recommendations were produced using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Delphi voting process. Treatments were recommended as Appropriate, Uncertain, or Not Appropriate, for each of four clinical sub-phenotypes and accompanied by 1-10 risk and benefit scores. RESULTS: Appropriate treatment modalities for all individuals with knee OA included biomechanical interventions, intra-articular corticosteroids, exercise (land-based and water-based), self-management and education, strength training, and weight management. Treatments appropriate for specific clinical sub-phenotypes included acetaminophen (paracetamol), balneotherapy, capsaicin, cane (walking stick), duloxetine, oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs; COX-2 selective and non-selective), and topical NSAIDs. Treatments of uncertain appropriateness for specific clinical sub-phenotypes included acupuncture, avocado soybean unsaponfiables, chondroitin, crutches, diacerein, glucosamine, intra-articular hyaluronic acid, opioids (oral and transdermal), rosehip, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and ultrasound. Treatments voted not appropriate included risedronate and electrotherapy (neuromuscular electrical stimulation). CONCLUSION: These evidence-based consensus recommendations provide guidance to patients and practitioners on treatments applicable to all individuals with knee OA, as well as therapies that can be considered according to individualized patient needs and preferences.