Health claims assessment in the field of joint and cartilage: a consensus viewpoint of the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science.

INTRODUCTION: In 2006, the European Parliament and Council issued a regulation (No. 1924/2006) for the nutrition and health claims made on foods, including food supplements. According to the regulation, the use of nutrition and health claims shall only be permitted if the substance in respect of which the claim is made has been shown to have a beneficial nutritional or physiological effect. In the field of joint and cartilage health, there is no clear scientific-based definition of the nature of such a beneficial nutritional or physiological effect. The objective of this paper is to scientifically define the possible content of health claims related to joint and cartilage health and to provide scientific guidelines for the design of clinical studies which need to be adopted to substantiate such health claims. METHODS: Literature review up to September 2011 followed by a consensus expert discussion organized by the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES). RESULTS: In line with the general principles of the PASSCLAIM and the Codex recommendations, the GREES identified four acceptable health claims related to joint and cartilage health based on the effects on discomfort, joint and cartilage structural integrity or risk factors for joint and cartilage diseases. The GREES considers that randomized controlled trials on a relevant outcome is the best design to assess health claims. Moreover, animal studies could also be of interest to substantiate some health claims, to assess the clinical relevance of endpoints used in human studies or to extrapolate data obtained in patients to the target (apparently) healthy population. CONCLUSION: According to the methodology and biomarkers used in the study and whether or not additional animal studies are provided to support the claim, various health claims can be acceptable in the field of joint and cartilage health.

Assessment of health claims in the field of bone: a view of the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES).

UNLABELLED: Health claims for food products in Europe are permitted if the nutrient has been shown to have a beneficial nutritional or physiological effect. This paper defines health claims related to bone health and provides guidelines for the design and the methodology of clinical studies to support claims. INTRODUCTION: Regulation (EC) no. 1924/2006 on nutrition and health claims targeting food products was introduced in Europe stating that health claims shall only be permitted if the substance in respect of which the claim is made has been shown to have a beneficial nutritional or physiological effect. The objective of this paper is to define health claims related to bone health and to provide guidelines for the design and the methodology of clinical studies which need to be adopted to assert such health claims. METHODS: Literature review followed by a consensus discussion during two 1-day meetings organized by the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES). RESULTS: The GREES identified six acceptable health claims related to bone health based on the potential of food products to show an effect on either the bioavailability of calcium or osteoclast regulatory proteins or bone turnover markers or bone mineral density or bone structure or fracture incidence. The GREES considers that well-designed human randomized controlled trial on a relevant outcome is the best design to assess health claims. The substantiation of health claim could also be supported by animal studies showing either an improvement in bone strength with the food product or showing the relationship between changes induced by the food product on a surrogate marker and changes in bone strength. CONCLUSION: The consensus reached is that the level of health claim may differ according to the surrogate endpoint used and on additional animal studies provided to support the claim.

Primary osteoarthritis of hip, knee, and hand in relation to occupational exposure.

AIM: To identify occupations with excess prevalence of osteoarthritis of the knee, hip, and hand in a nationwide survey and to compare occupations with and without excess prevalence with regard to biomechanical stresses and severity of osteoarthritis. METHODS: Patients presenting with osteoarthritis of the knee, hip, or hand were recruited throughout France by their treating physician who collected information on history, including age at onset, occupation, and occupational stresses to joints. Severity was assessed using joint specific functional status questionnaires: Lequesne for the hip and knee and Dreiser for the hand. The distribution of osteoarthritis patients by occupation was compared with the distribution of occupations in all workers in France to obtain prevalence rate ratios. RESULTS: Occupations with the greatest prevalence rate ratio were female cleaners (6.2; 95% CI 4.6 to 8.0), women in the clothing industry (5.0; 95% CI 3.9 to 6.3), male masons and other construction workers (2.9; 95% CI 2.6 to 3.3), and agriculture male and female workers (2.8; 95% CI 2.5 to 3.2). A twofold greater prevalence rate was observed within certain occupations between self-employed and salaried workers. Early onset of osteoarthritis was seen in the more heavy labour jobs with almost 40% of patients reporting their first symptoms before the age of 50. CONCLUSION: The early onset and severity of osteoarthritis in certain occupations warrants an urgent need for occupation specific studies for the development and evaluation of preventive strategies in this leading cause of disability in Western countries.

Measuring the contribution of pharmacological treatment to advice to stay active in patients with subacute low-back pain: a randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: In clinical guidelines for acute and subacute low-back pain, pharmacological treatment is recommended for short-term symptomatic relief. The objective was to study the effect of the guidelines' advise to remain active, alone and with the addition of the drug adenosine tri-phosphate (ATP), in patients with subacute low-back pain. METHODS: A drug-guidelines effectiveness trial was undertaken simultaneously to an experimental drug efficacy placebo controlled trial in subacute (4-12 weeks) non-specific low-back pain patients. The 132 participating primary care physicians across France were randomised to participate to either trial. In the drug-guidelines trial, all physicians received a quick consultation card containing the key elements of the clinical guidelines and a brochure that gave their patients practical tips to remain active. Patients were then randomised to receive Atepadene, containing 90 mg of ATP by mouth daily for 30 days (guidelines plus ATP group), or nothing beside the rescue drug that was made available to all patients (guidelines alone group). The principal outcome was functional improvement on the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) at 90 days. RESULTS: In the drug-guidelines effectiveness trial, 157 patients were randomised. The rate of improvement in the RDQ over the 90 days of follow-up was superior in the group guidelines plus ATP (8.3 points, 95% confidence interval (CI): 7.3-9.3) than in the group guidelines alone (6.5 points, 95%CI: 5.3-7.7) (p = 0.02). In terms of probability of improving between two to five points on the RDQ at 90 days this difference translated in a 2 to 13 times higher probability compared to the group guidelines alone (odds ratios ranging from 2.1, 95%CI: 0.9-5.0 to 12.9, 95%CI: 1.6-103.4). Patients in the group guidelines plus ATP were also three times less likely to report a condition that had worsened or remained unimproved at 90 days (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: This drug-guidelines effectiveness trial showed a modest advantage of combined specific pharmacologic and non-pharmacological treatments on absolute improvement on the RDQ. A threefold reduction in the risk of chronicity was observed, an important goal in low-back pain guidelines.

Total joint replacement of hip or knee as an outcome measure for structure modifying trials in osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: The Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES) organized a working group to assess the value of time to joint surgery as a potential therapeutic failure outcome criterion for osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip or knee in the assessment of potential structure modifying agents. METHODS: PubMed was searched for manuscripts from 1976 to 2004. Relevant studies were discussed at a 1-day meeting. RESULTS: There are no accepted guidelines for 'time to' and 'indications for' joint replacement surgery. A limited number of trials have examined joint replacement surgery within the study population. Several parameters, particularly joint space narrowing (interbone distance), correlate with surgical intervention. However, at the level of the knee, none of the parameters have positive predictive value for joint replacement surgery better than 30%. In contrast, lack of significant joint space narrowing has a strong negative predictive value for joint replacement surgery (>90%), that remains after controlling for OA pain severity. CONCLUSION: At this time, GREES cannot recommend time to joint surgery as a primary endpoint of failure for structure modifying trials of hip or knee OA-as the parameter has sensitivity but lacks specificity. In contrast, in existing trials, a lack of progression of joint space narrowing has predictive value of >90% for not having surgery. GREES suggests utilizing joint space narrowing (e.g., >0.3-0.7 mm) combined with a lack of clinically relevant improvement in symptoms (e.g., >/=20-25%) for 'failure' of a secondary outcome in structure modifying trials of the hip and knee.

Primary osteoarthritis and occupations: a national cross sectional survey of 10 412 symptomatic patients.

AIMS: To describe the age standardised prevalence of symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) in a nationwide cross sectional survey of 10 412 patients in France, and their functional and work limitations. METHODS: Cases in the survey were compared with their expected counterpart by age, gender, and occupational groupings using data from the 1998 French National Survey on Health Impairment and Disability. RESULTS: Women represented 66.2% of the sample; mean age was 66.2 years. One third of patients had OA of the knee, 16% of the hip, and 12% of the hand; a third had multiple joint OA. Peak prevalence of symptomatic OA was in the 60-69 year category in women and in the 70-79 year category in men. Agricultural workers showed a significant excess prevalence of OA, with an observed to expected (O/E) ratio of 1.7 in women and 2.3 in men. Linear trends in prevalences between white collar, "mixed" collar, and blue collar workers were also significant, with odds ratios respectively of 1.0, 2.9, and 2.6 in women and 1.0, 1.2, and 1.7 in men. Specific excess prevalence was found in women among housekeepers (O/E 4.4), and in men among unskilled labour workers (O/E 10.3) and truck drivers (O/E 6.7). Total work disability was highest among blue collar workers and partial disability among agricultural workers. CONCLUSION: Results contribute to the mounting evidence that OA is potentially aetiologically linked to occupation in a sizeable segment of the population and that OA can no longer be considered an inevitable disease of ageing.

Guidelines for clinical studies assessing the efficacy of drugs for the management of acute low back pain.

In this paper we propose guidelines for clinical trials aimed at assessing the efficacy of drugs for acute non-specific low back pain (LBP) with or without radicular pain, preliminary to their approval and registration. To this end, consensus statements were obtained from a group of experts in the fields of rheumatology, clinical medicine, public health and epidemiology. EBM resources were systematically used as references. Four diagnostic categories were defined: type 1--LBP with no radiation; type 2--LBP radiating no further than the knee; type 3--LBP radiating beyond the knee, but with no neurologic signs; and type 4--LBP radiating to a specific and entire leg dermatome, with or without neurologic signs. Studies should be designed on the basis of the claimed indications for the drug, but must be double-blinded whatever the indication. The duration of the study may be shorter for LBP type 1 or 2 (one week) than for LBP types 3 and 4 (up to one month), depending on the aim of the study and the indications for the drug. The comparator may be inactive (placebo) or active (for a superiority trial, e.g., versus paracetamol). Specific inclusion and exclusion criteria have been defined here for each category. An appropriate wash-out period for any drugs that could affect the pain status should be planned. Paracetamol may be allowed as rescue medication. The primary endpoint should be based on a validated pain assessment tool that may be either generic (type 1 or 2) or oriented (back and knee for types 3 and 4). Secondary endpoints could include the assessment of functional performance; the duration of any period of bed-rest; work limitation; a global assessment comprising pain at rest, standing and walking; the time elapsed before epidural injection, the prescription of other therapeutic agents, or surgery; and the use of rescue medication. Adverse events (AE) should be monitored systematically using a methodology that reflects the mode of action of the tested drug. With the application of these guidelines, LBP could serve as an appropriate disease for testing analgesic drugs. Rigorous evaluation may also help to improve the management of acute LBP.

The use of placebo-controlled and non-inferiority trials for the evaluation of new drugs in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Registration of new agents for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis has been based over the past few years on placebo-controlled phase III trials with the incidence of patients with new vertebral/nonvertebral fractures as the most usual primary endpoint. The use of a placebo in diseases where an active treatment is available has been a matter of debate following the update of the Declaration of Helsinki by the World Medical Association which questioned this trial design. Current regulatory recommendations within the European Union suggest that placebo-controlled trials are still the best option when assessing the efficacy and safety of new drugs intended for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. This suggestion seems to be in apparent contradiction with the current content of the Declaration of Helsinki. This paper addresses the ethics and feasibility of placebo-controlled trials in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis, in the light of available therapeutic options, and discusses possible alternative approaches in those patients where placebo treatment could be deemed to be unethical. It is concluded that placebo-controlled trials remain the most efficient design to establish the efficacy and safety of a new agent for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Such trials are feasible and ethically acceptable in patients with osteoporosis but without prevalent vertebral fractures. Conversely, in patients with prevalent vertebral fractures, placebo-controlled trials are ethically questionable and non-inferiority trials are more appropriate. A relative margin of non-inferiority of 20-30% is suggested, to be discussed on a case by case basis.

[Current medical possibilities in the treatment of arthrosis]. / Possibilités thérapeutiques médicales actuelles de l'arthrose.

DRUG CLASSES: Three drug classes can be distinguished. The first includes drugs used for symptomatic care. This class includes a subclass of rapid action drugs (antalgesics, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, NSAID) and a subclass of symptomatic slow acting drugs. The second class corresponds to antiosteoartritis drugs called chondroprotective drugs or structure modifying. The third class includes drugs used for local care. TREATMENT STRATEGY: For episodes of acute pain, the first intention prescription should include rapid action drugs for symptomatic relief (paracetamol then NSAID). A symptomatic slow acting antiosteoarthritis drug can also be associated then continued after interrupting the rapid action symptomatic drugs. Diacerein is a drug with prolonged antiosteoarthritis action that has proven efficacy for symptom relief equi-valent to NSAID assessed in terms of pain relief and function: the ECHODIAH study provides arguments favoring its chondromodulating effect.

Background for studies on the treatment of male osteoporosis: state of the art.

Male osteoporosis represents an important, although long underestimated, public health problem. Both in men and in women aging is accompanied by continuous bone loss and by an exponential increase in the incidence of osteoporotic fracture, with a female to male incidence ratio of about 2 to 3 to 1 in the elderly for hip and vertebral fractures. Morbidity after osteoporotic fractures appears to be more serious and mortality more common in men than in women. To date, no single treatment has been proved to be effective and safe in published prospective studies. The present report, based on a systematic search of the literature on male osteoporosis, summarises the state of the art on the clinical consequences of male osteoporosis and its risk factors, in relation to the present state of knowledge about female osteoporosis. This constitutes the background for the design of rational clinical development strategies for therapeutic interventions in male osteoporosis. From this review of the literature it is apparent that notwithstanding the existing sex differences in pathophysiology of osteoporosis and the difference in age-specific incidence of osteoporotic fractures, there are also important similarities between osteoporosis in women and men. The higher incidence of fracture in women than in men results from quantitative differences in risk factors rather than from different risk factors. Even though there are sex differences in bone geometry, incidence of fracture seems to be similar in men and women for a same absolute areal bone mineral density. However, the lack of data on the changes in fracture rates in men resulting from pharmacological intervention, leading to changes in bone mineral density or bone turnover, remains the main limitation for extrapolation of established treatment outcomes from women to men.

Fluoride salts are no better at preventing new vertebral fractures than calcium-vitamin D in postmenopausal osteoporosis: the FAVOStudy.

Although fluoride salts have been shown to be capable of linearly increasing spinal bone mineral density (BMD) in postmenopausal osteoporosis, the effects of this gain in density on the vertebral fracture rate remain controversial. We conducted a 2-year multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-masked clinical trial in 354 osteoporotic women with vertebral fractures (mean age 65.7 years). They received either fluoride (208 patients), given as sodium fluoride (50 mg/day) or as monofluorophosphate (200 mg/day or 150 mg/day), or a placebo (146 patients). All patients received daily supplements of 1 g of calcium (Ca) and 800 IU of vitamin D2 (D). A 1-year open follow-up on Ca-D was obtained in 124 patients. After 2 years the fluoride group and the Ca-D group had increased their lumbar BMD by 10.8% and 2.4% respectively (p = 0.0001). However, the rate of patients with at least one new vertebral fracture, defined by semiquantitative assessment and evaluable on an intention-to-treat basis in 89% of patients, was similar in the fluoride groups and the Ca-D group. No difference between the three fluoride regimens was found. The percentage of patients with nonvertebral fractures was not different in the fluoride and Ca-D groups (1.9% and 1.4% respectively for hip fractures). A lower limb pain syndrome occurred more frequently in the fluoride groups. In the 124 patients followed for 1 year after cessation of fluoride therapy, the percentage of patients with at least one new vertebral fracture after 36 months was identical to the percentages in the previous fluoride group and the Ca-D group. We conclude that fluoride-Ca-D regimen was no more effective that Ca-D supplements for the prevention of new vertebral fractures in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Validation of the French version of the Dallas Pain Questionnaire in chronic low back pain patients.

OBJECTIVES: To translate and to validate the metrological properties of the Dallas Pain Questionnaire, an instrument designed to evaluate the impact of low back pain on four aspects of patients' lives: daily activities, work and leisure activities, anxiety/depression and social interest. METHODS: The Dallas Pain Questionnaire, originally in English, was translated into French. The metrological properties of the French version were investigated in a cohort of 59 patients with chronic low back pain due to degenerative disk disease. Duration of the pain was between three and 24 months. Treatment consisted of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and/or analgesics, local corticosteroid injections and a plaster lumbar corset. Patients were evaluated at baseline, after ten days (under the same treatment), and at completion of the treatment. RESULTS: Results were reproducible for all four areas of the questionnaire (CCI > 0.75). Internal structural validity was satisfactory for the four areas (Cronbach alpha test = 0.89 to 0.91). At baseline, the pain score on a visual analog scale was significantly correlated with the Dallas scores for daily activities, anxiety/depression and social interest (external structural validity). The daily activities, work/leisure and anxiety/depression scores were sensitive to change (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, and P = 0.003, respectively), whereas the social interest score was not (P = 0.11). CONCLUSION: The French version of the Dallas Pain Questionnaire is valid, reproducible, and sensitive to change in chronic low back pain patients.