4.5 Article

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Intraarticular Trans-Capsaicin for Pain Associated With Osteoarthritis of the Knee

期刊

ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATOLOGY
卷 71, 期 9, 页码 1524-1533

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/art.40894

关键词

-

资金

  1. Centrexion Therapeutics Corp Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of high-purity synthetic trans-capsaicin (CNTX-4975) in patients with chronic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis (OA)-associated knee pain. Methods In this phase II multicenter double-blind study, patients ages 45-80 years who had stable knee OA were randomized in a 2:1:2 ratio to receive a single intraarticular injection of placebo, CNTX-4975 0.5 mg, or CNTX-4975 1.0 mg. The primary efficacy end point was area under the curve (AUC) for change from baseline in daily Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index pain with walking score (range 0-10, 0 = none and 10 = extreme) through week 12. Secondary efficacy end points included a similar AUC analysis of outcomes in patients treated with CNTX-4975 0.5 mg, and evaluations extending to 24 weeks. Results Efficacy was evaluated in 172 patients (placebo group, n = 69; CNTX-4975 0.5 mg group, n = 33; CNTX-4975 1.0 mg group, n = 70). At week 12, greater decreases in the AUC for the pain score were observed with CNTX-4975 in the 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg groups versus placebo (0.5 mg group least squares mean difference [LSMD] -0.79, P = 0.0740; 1.0 mg group LSMD -1.6, P < 0.0001). Significant improvements were maintained at week 24 in the 1.0 mg group (LSMD -1.4, P = 0.0002). Treatment-emergent adverse events were similar in the placebo and CNTX-4975 1.0 mg groups. Conclusion In this study, CNTX-4975 provided dose-dependent improvement in knee OA-associated pain. CNTX-4975 1.0 mg produced a significant decrease in OA knee pain through 24 weeks; CNTX-4975 0.5 mg significantly improved pain at 12 weeks, but the effect was not evident at 24 weeks.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据