Dataset Information

Cell-based versus corticosteroid injections for knee pain in osteoarthritis: a randomized phase 3 trial.

ABSTRACT: Various types of cellular injection have become a popular and costly treatment option for patients with knee osteoarthritis despite a paucity of literature establishing relative efficacy to each other or corticosteroid injections. Here we aimed to identify the safety and efficacy of cell injections from autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate, autologous adipose stromal vascular fraction and allogeneic human umbilical cord tissue-derived mesenchymal stromal cells, in comparison to corticosteroid injection (CSI). The study was a phase 2/3, four-arm parallel, multicenter, single-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial with 480 patients with a diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence II-IV). Participants were randomized to the three different arms with a 3:1 distribution. Arm 1: autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate (n = 120), CSI (n = 40); arm 2: umbilical cord tissue-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (n = 120), CSI (n = 40); arm 3: stromal vascular fraction (n = 120), CSI (n = 40). The co-primary endpoints were the visual analog scale pain score and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score pain score at 12 months versus baseline. Analyses of our primary endpoints, with 440 patients, revealed that at 1 year post injection, none of the three orthobiologic injections was superior to another, or to the CSI control. In addition, none of the four groups showed a significant change in magnetic resonance imaging osteoarthritis score compared to baseline. No procedure-related serious adverse events were reported during the study period. In summary, this study shows that at 1 year post injection, there was no superior orthobiologic as compared to CSI for knee osteoarthritis. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03818737.

SUBMITTER: Mautner K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10719084 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cell-based versus corticosteroid injections for knee pain in osteoarthritis: a randomized phase 3 trial.

Mautner Ken K Gottschalk Michael M Boden Scott D SD Akard Alison A Bae Won C WC Black Lora L Boggess Blake B Chatterjee Paramita P Chung Christine B CB Easley Kirk A KA Gibson Greg G Hackel Josh J Jensen Katie K Kippner Linda L Kurtenbach Chad C Kurtzberg Joanne J Mason R Amadeus RA Noonan Benjamin B Roy Krishnendu K Valentine Verle V Yeago Carolyn C Drissi Hicham H

Nature medicine 20231102 12

Various types of cellular injection have become a popular and costly treatment option for patients with knee osteoarthritis despite a paucity of literature establishing relative efficacy to each other or corticosteroid injections. Here we aimed to identify the safety and efficacy of cell injections from autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate, autologous adipose stromal vascular fraction and allogeneic human umbilical cord tissue-derived mesenchymal stromal cells, in comparison to corticoste ...[more]

PMID: 37919438

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIntra-articular corticosteroid injection is commonly used for pain relief in ankle osteoarthritis (OA). The effects of corticosteroids (CS) are short-lived, whereas hyaluronic acid (HA) have longer-lasting effects. The objective was to compare the efficacy of dual injections of CS and HA to CS alone. We hypothesized that intra-articular injections of dual agents would be more effective than CS alone.MethodsA single-blind, randomized, controlled trial was designed to investigate this hypothesis. 135 patients with ankle OA were enrolled into an intra-articular CS injection group (CS group, n = 61) or dual HA plus CS injection group (CS + HA group, n = 74). The CS group received 1 mL of corticosteroid and 1 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine and 1 mL of normal saline once, and the CS + HA group received 3 mL of a total of 5 mL mixtures containing 2 mL of HA, or 1 mL of corticosteroid, 0.5% bupivacaine, and normal saline in the first week, followed by 2 mL of HA in the second and third weeks. Clinical evaluations were performed before injection, 6 and 12 weeks after the first injections. The Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale (AOS) was used as the primary outcome measure, and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and complications were used as secondary outcomes.ResultsThe mean AOS change from baseline was significantly greater in the CS + HA group than in the CS group at 6 (p ≤ 0.01) and 12 weeks (p ≤ 0.01). The mean VAS change from baseline was significantly greater in the CS group than in the CS + HA group at 6 weeks (p = 0.023), but not at 12 weeks (p = 0.731). The mean SF-36 change from baseline was not significant between the CS and CS + HA groups at 6 (p = 0.416) and 12 weeks (p = 0.215).ConclusionsThe combination of corticosteroid and HA injection is more effective than corticosteroid alone in relieving pain in ankle OA.Trial registrationClinical Research Information Service in South Korea, KCT0008690 // Registration Date (First Posted): July 21th, 2023 ( http://cris.nih.go.kr ).

Project description:BackgroundIntra-articular (IA) corticosteroid (CS) injections are the mainstay of treatment for symptomatic management in knee osteoarthritis (OA), particularly in the UK. IA platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections are a promising alternative, but no systematic reviews to date have compared them to the current standard of care, IA CS injections. We aim to investigate the effect of IA PRP injections versus IA corticosteroid injections for the symptomatic management of knee OA.MethodsAll published trials comparing IA PRP and CS injections for knee OA were included. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science were searched through June 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. A random effects model was used to calculate standardized mean difference with 95% confidence interval in WOMAC/VAS score (or subscores), comparing IA PRP to CS injections across studies.ResultsIncluded were eight studies and 648 patients, 443 (68%) were female, mean age 59 years, with a mean BMI of 28.4. Overall, the studies were considered at low risk of bias. Compared with CS injections, PRP was significantly better in reducing OA symptoms (pain, stiffness, functionality) at 3, 6 and 9 months post-intervention (P < 0.01). The greatest effect was observed at 6 and 9 months (- 0.78 (- 1.34 to - 0.23) standard mean deviations (SMD) and - 1.63 (- 2.14 to - 1.12) SMD respectively). At 6 months, this equates to an additional reduction of 9.51 in WOMAC or 0.97 on the VAS pain scales. At 6 months PRP allowed greater return to sporting activities than CS, measured by the KOOS subscale for sporting activity, of magnitude 9.7 (- 0.45 to 19.85) (P = 0.06). Triple injections of PRP, generally separated by a week, were superior to single injections over 12 months follow-up (P < 0.01).ConclusionsIA-PRP injections produce superior outcomes when compared with CS injections for symptomatic management of knee OA, including improved pain management, less joint stiffness and better participation in exercise/sporting activity at 12 months follow-up. Giving three IA-PRP, with injections separated by a week, appears more effective than 1 IA-PRP injection.Prospero trial registration numberCRD42020181928 .

Project description:BackgroundKnee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a high-priority problem among the aging population. While exercise has been shown to be beneficial in management of the disease, scalable and low-cost interventions to improve exercise in this population are lacking. Recent controversy over the value of corticosteroid injections for palliation has also arisen. Therefore, we designed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial with a 2-period crossover design to study (1) behavioral incentives to promote exercise and (2) corticosteroid injections to reduce pain and improve function in patients with KOA when compared to lidocaine only.MethodsThe study design is a pragmatic factorial and crossover randomized clinical trial. Patients with KOA who are deemed eligible by their provider to receive knee injections and are able to walk without assistive devices will be recruited from clinical practices at four sites within the Veterans Affairs (VA) Health System in the USA. In total, 220 participants will be randomized to receive social incentives with gamification (i.e., incorporation of game elements) to promote exercise and compared to controls that receive a Fitbit but no incentive. Each patient will also be assigned to receive a blinded corticosteroid injection and a lidocaine-only injection in random order. The primary outcomes are the change in average daily step counts from baseline and the change in Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) from baseline. The study team will continuously collect step count, heart rate, and sleep data using activity monitors and patient-reported outcomes using the Way to Health (WTH) platform at two four-week intervals over eight months of follow-up. Mixed effects regression incorporating all available data points will be used for analysis.DiscussionThe "Marching on for Veterans with Osteoarthritis of the Knee" (MOVE-OK) trial will take a pragmatic approach to evaluate (1) whether incentives based on behaviorally enhanced gamification can improve physical activity in this patient population and (2) whether corticosteroids injections reduce pain and disability in patients with KOA. Results of this trial will help to direct clinical practice and inform management guidelines.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05035810 . Registered on 5 September 2021.

Project description:BackgroundSubacromial pain syndrome (SAPS) accounts for around 50 % of all cases of shoulder pain. The most commonly used treatments are glucocorticosteroid (steroid) injections and exercise therapy; however, despite treatment SAPS patients often experience relapse of their symptoms. Therefore the clinical effect of combining steroid and exercise therapy is highly relevant to clarify. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to investigate if exercise therapy added to steroid injection in patients with SAPS will improve the effect of the injection therapy on shoulder pain.MethodsIn this two-arm randomized trial running over 26 weeks, patients with unilateral shoulder pain (> 4 weeks) and thickened subacromial bursa (> 2 mm on US) were included. At baseline all participants received two steroid injections into the painful shoulder with an interval of one week. Subsequently they were randomized (1:1) to either 10 weeks exercise of the involved shoulder (intervention group) or exercise of the uninvolved shoulder (control group). The patients were re-examined after the exercise program (at week 13) and again at week 26. The primary outcome assessed after 26 weeks was change in shoulder pain analyzed using the intention-to-treat principle (non-responder imputation).ResultsNinety-nine SAPS patients (58 female) participated (49 intervention/50 control). At both follow up visits (week 13 and 26) no statistically significant between-group differences in pain changes on a visual analog scale (mm) were seen (13 weeks: pain at rest 1.7 (95 % CI -3.6 to 7.0; P = 0.53); pain in activity 2.2 (95 % CI -6.5 to 10.9; P = 0.61), 26 weeks: rest 5.6 (95 % CI -0.9 to 12.1; P = 0.09); activity 2.2 (95 % CI -6.8 to 11.2; P = 0.62). The reduction in pain was most evident in the control group at all four pain measurements. The only difference between groups was seen by US examination at week 13, where fewer participants with impingement were observed in the intervention group compared with the controls (9 vs. 19 participants; P = 0.03).ConclusionExercise therapy in the painful shoulder in SAPS patients did not improve the effectiveness of steroid injections for shoulder pain in patients with unilateral SAPS and enlarged subacromial bursa on US examination.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01506804 ). Registration date 5 May 2011.

Project description:BackgroundCorticosteroid injections can be performed blind (landmark-guided) or with image guidance, and this may account for variable clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of image-guided versus blind corticosteroid injections in improving pain and function among adults with shoulder pain.MethodsMEDLINE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and EMBASE were searched to May 2010. Additional studies were identified by searching bibliographies of shortlisted articles. Search items included blind, landmark, anatomical, clinical exam, image-guided, ultrasound, fluoroscopy, steroid injection, frozen shoulder, random allocation, randomized controlled trial (RCT) and clinical trial.Randomized controlled studies comparing image-guided versus blind (landmark-guided) corticosteroid shoulder injections that examined pain, function and/or adverse events were included. Independent extraction was done by two authors using a form with pre-specified data fields, including risk of bias appraisal. Conflicts were resolved by discussion. The decision to pool data was based on assessment of clinical design homogeneity. When warranted, studies were pooled under a random-effects model.ResultsTwo RCTs for pain, function and adverse events (n = 101) met eligibility criteria. No serious threats to validity were found. Both trials compared ultrasound-guided versus landmark-guided injections and were judged similar in clinical design. Low to moderate heterogeneity was observed: shoulder pain I2 = 60%, function I2 = 22%. A meta-analysis demonstrated greater improvement with ultrasound-guided injections at 6 weeks after injection in both pain (mean difference = 2.23 [95% CI: 1.27, 3.18]), as assessed with a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale, and shoulder function (standardised mean difference = 1.09 [95% CI: 0.61, 1.57]) as assessed with shoulder function scores. Although more adverse events (all mild) were reported with landmark-guided injections, the difference was not statistically significant (risk ratio = 0.20 [95% CI: 0.04, 1.13]).This review was only based on two moderate-sized trials. Blinding of patients was not performed in both trials, causing some risk of bias in outcome assessment since primary endpoints were wholly or partially patient-reported.ConclusionThere is a paucity of RCTs on image-guided versus landmark-guided corticosteroid shoulder injections examining pain, function and adverse events. In this review, patients who underwent image-guided (ultrasound) injections had statistically significant greater improvement in shoulder pain and function at 6 weeks after injection. Image-guided (ultrasound) corticosteroid injections potentially offer a significantly greater clinical improvement over blind (landmark-guided) injections in adults with shoulder pain. However, this apparent benefit requires confirmation from further studies (adequately-powered and well-executed RCTs).

Dataset Information

Cell-based versus corticosteroid injections for knee pain in osteoarthritis: a randomized phase 3 trial.

Publications

Cell-based versus corticosteroid injections for knee pain in osteoarthritis: a randomized phase 3 trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets