Dataset Information

Crystalline glucosamine sulfate in the management of knee osteoarthritis: efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic properties.

ABSTRACT: Glucosamine is an amino monosaccharide and a natural constituent of glycosaminoglycans in articular cartilage. When administered exogenously, it is used for the treatment of osteoarthritis as a prescription drug or a dietary supplement. The latter use is mainly supported by its perception as a cartilage building block, but it actually exerts specific pharmacologic effects, mainly decreasing interleukin 1-induced gene expression by inhibiting the cytokine intracellular signaling cascade in general and nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-kB) activation in particular. As a whole, the use of glucosamine in the management of osteoarthritis is supported by the clinical trials performed with the original prescription product, that is, crystalline glucosamine sulfate. This is the stabilized form of glucosamine sulfate, while other formulations or different glucosamine salts (e.g. hydrochloride) have never been shown to be effective. In particular, long-term pivotal trials of crystalline glucosamine sulfate 1500 mg once daily have shown significant and clinically relevant improvement of pain and function limitation (symptom-modifying effect) in knee osteoarthritis. Continuous administration for up to 3 years resulted in significant reduction in the progression of joint structure changes compared with placebo as assessed by measuring radiologic joint space narrowing (structure-modifying effect). The two effects combined may suggest a disease-modifying effect that was postulated based on an observed decrease in the risk of undergoing total joint replacement in the follow up of patients receiving the product for at least 12 months in the pivotal trials. The safety of the drug was good in clinical trials and in the postmarketing surveillance. Crystalline glucosamine sulfate 1500 mg once daily is therefore recommended in the majority of clinical practice guidelines and was found to be cost effective in pharmacoeconomic analyses. Compared with other glucosamine formulations, salts, or dosage forms, the prescription product achieves higher plasma and synovial fluid concentrations that are above the threshold for a pharmacologically relevant effect, and may therefore justify its distinct therapeutic characteristics.

SUBMITTER: Rovati LC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3400104 | biostudies-other | 2012 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Crystalline glucosamine sulfate in the management of knee osteoarthritis: efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic properties.

Rovati Lucio C LC Girolami Federica F Persiani Stefano S

Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease 20120601 3

Glucosamine is an amino monosaccharide and a natural constituent of glycosaminoglycans in articular cartilage. When administered exogenously, it is used for the treatment of osteoarthritis as a prescription drug or a dietary supplement. The latter use is mainly supported by its perception as a cartilage building block, but it actually exerts specific pharmacologic effects, mainly decreasing interleukin 1-induced gene expression by inhibiting the cytokine intracellular signaling cascade in genera ...[more]

PMID: 22850875

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee causes significant morbidity and current medical treatment is limited to symptom relief, while therapies able to slow structural damage remain elusive. This study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate (CS), alone or in combination, as well as celecoxib and placebo on progressive loss of joint space width (JSW) in patients with knee OA. METHODS:A 24-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, conducted at 9 sites in the United States as part of the Glucosamine/Chondroitin Arthritis Intervention Trial (GAIT), enrolled 572 patients with knee OA who satisfied radiographic criteria (Kellgren/Lawrence [K/L] grade 2 or grade 3 changes and JSW of at least 2 mm at baseline). Patients with primarily lateral compartment narrowing at any time point were excluded. Patients who had been randomized to 1 of the 5 groups in the GAIT continued to receive glucosamine 500 mg 3 times daily, CS 400 mg 3 times daily, the combination of glucosamine and CS, celecoxib 200 mg daily, or placebo over 24 months. The minimum medial tibiofemoral JSW was measured at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months. The primary outcome measure was the mean change in JSW from baseline. RESULTS:The mean JSW loss at 2 years in knees with OA in the placebo group, adjusted for design and clinical factors, was 0.166 mm. No statistically significant difference in mean JSW loss was observed in any treatment group compared with the placebo group. Treatment effects on K/L grade 2 knees, but not on K/L grade 3 knees, showed a trend toward improvement relative to the placebo group. The power of the study was diminished by the limited sample size, variance of JSW measurement, and a smaller than expected loss in JSW. CONCLUSION:At 2 years, no treatment achieved a predefined threshold of clinically important difference in JSW loss as compared with placebo. However, knees with K/L grade 2 radiographic OA appeared to have the greatest potential for modification by these treatments.

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the efficacy and safety of chondroitin sulfate plus glucosamine hydrochloride (CS+GH) versus celecoxib in patients with knee osteoarthritis and severe pain.MethodsDouble-blind Multicentre Osteoarthritis interVEntion trial with SYSADOA (MOVES) conducted in France, Germany, Poland and Spain evaluating treatment with CS+GH versus celecoxib in 606 patients with Kellgren and Lawrence grades 2-3 knee osteoarthritis and moderate-to-severe pain (Western Ontario and McMaster osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) score ?301; 0-500 scale). Patients were randomised to receive 400 mg CS plus 500 mg GH three times a day or 200 mg celecoxib every day for 6 months. The primary outcome was the mean decrease in WOMAC pain from baseline to 6 months. Secondary outcomes included WOMAC function and stiffness, visual analogue scale for pain, presence of joint swelling/effusion, rescue medication consumption, Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials and Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) criteria and EuroQoL-5D.ResultsThe adjusted mean change (95% CI) in WOMAC pain was -185.7 (-200.3 to -171.1) (50.1% decrease) with CS+GH and -186.8 (-201.7 to -171.9) (50.2% decrease) with celecoxib, meeting the non-inferiority margin of -40: -1.11 (-22.0 to 19.8; p=0.92). All sensitivity analyses were consistent with that result. At 6 months, 79.7% of patients in the combination group and 79.2% in the celecoxib group fulfilled OMERACT-OARSI criteria. Both groups elicited a reduction >50% in the presence of joint swelling; a similar reduction was seen for effusion. No differences were observed for the other secondary outcomes. Adverse events were low and similarly distributed between groups.ConclusionsCS+GH has comparable efficacy to celecoxib in reducing pain, stiffness, functional limitation and joint swelling/effusion after 6 months in patients with painful knee osteoarthritis, with a good safety profile.Trial registration numberNCT01425853.

Project description:Background/objective:The objective of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous (SC) and intravenous (IV) tanezumab administration in osteoarthritis (OA) patients. Materials and methods:Study 1027 (NCT01089725), a placebo-controlled trial, evaluated the efficacy of SC tanezumab (ie, 2.5, 5, and 10 mg) and the therapeutic equivalence of 10 mg tanezumab given subcutaneously versus intravenously every 8 weeks in the symptomatic treatment of OA. Coprimary endpoints were: change from baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) Pain and Physical Function indices, and Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of OA. Study 1043 (NCT00994890) was a long-term, noncontrolled safety study of tanezumab (ie, 2.5, 5, and 10 mg) subcutaneously administered every 8 weeks. Both studies were discontinued prematurely due to a US Food and Drug Administration partial clinical hold. Results:Due to the clinical hold, Study 1027 was underpowered, and no statistical analyses were performed. Mean (standard error [SE]) change from baseline to week 8 in WOMAC Pain in tanezumab groups ranged from -3.59 (0.26) to -3.89 (0.32), versus -2.74 (0.25) with placebo. Mean (SE) change from baseline to week 8 in WOMAC Physical Function ranged from -3.13 (0.25) to -3.51 (0.28) with tanezumab and was -2.26 (0.24) with placebo. PGA mean (SE) change from baseline to week 8 ranged from -0.90 (0.11) to -1.08 (0.12) with tanezumab and was -0.78 (0.10) with placebo. Similar effectiveness was associated with tanezumab in Study 1043. Few patients in either study (1.4%-5.2%) discontinued due to adverse events. Five patients required total joint replacements in Study 1027 (placebo, n=2 [2.8%]; tanezumab 2.5 mg, n=3 [4.1%]) and 34 patients in Study 1043 (tanezumab 2.5 mg, n=11 [4.8%]; tanezumab 5 mg, n=8 [3.6%]; tanezumab 10 mg, n=15 [6.6%]). Conclusion:Preliminary results show similar efficacy and safety for both SC and IV administration of tanezumab based on the direct comparisons reported here and indirect comparisons with published results, confirming pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling predictions.

Project description:ObjectiveTo perform a meta-analysis comparing the structural progression and clinical symptom outcomes as well as adverse events experienced from intra-articular injections of sprifermin compared to a placebo treatment for patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA).MethodWe systematically searched the literature for studies that compared long-term outcomes between sprifermin and placebo injections for KOA treatment. Meta-analysis was performed with RevMan5.3 using an inverse variance approach with fixed or random effects models. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated.ResultsEight studies were included. Overall, there was significantly less improvement of WOMAC total scores in patients receiving sprifermin, compared with the placebo (mean difference (MD) = 3.23, 95% CI 0.76-5.69; I2 = 0%; P = 0.01). Further, sprifermin injection patients gained more, and lost less, cartilage thickness and volume in total femorotibial joint (cartilage thickness: standardized mean differences (SMD) = 0.55, 95% CI 0.26-0.84; I2 = 78%; P = 0.0002; cartilage volume: SMD = 0.39, 95% CI 0.20-0.58; I2 = 49%; P < 0.0001). Changes in the cartilage surface morphology of the medial tibio-femoral joint (MD = -0.30, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.16; I2 = 0%; P < 0.0001) and patello-femoral joint (MD = -0.22; 95% CI -0.37 to -0.07; I2 = 0%; P = 0.004) showed a significant difference between the sprifermin and placebo injections. Moreover, there were no significant differences between sprifermin and the placebo in the risk of treatment-emergent adverse events (OR = 1.05; 95% CI 0.52-2.14; I2 = 48%; P = 0.89).ConclusionThe data from the included studies provide strong evidence to determine the effect of intra-articular sprifermin on joint structure in individuals with KOA and show no specific adverse effects. Nevertheless, intra-articular sprifermin did not likely have any positive effect on symptom alleviation.

Project description:BACKGROUND: The purpose of the present study was to determine relationship between disease activity, systemic markers of cartilage degradation, urinary C-terminal cross-linking telopeptides of type II collagen (uCTX-II), and bone degradation, urinary C-terminal cross-linking telopeptides of type I collagen (uCTX-I), structural progression of osteoarthritis (OA) and potential therapeutic efficacy of type II collagen (COLLII) in combination with glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate (GC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observational retrospective study, 1-year follow-up, on 104 patients with OA (nodular osteoarthritis of the hand, erosive osteoarthritis of the hand, EOA, osteoarthritis of the knee or hip) who were treated with GC or glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate and collagen type II (GCC). The following information was collected at entry: demographics, BMI, characteristics of OA, patient global assessment (VAS), C-terminal cross-linking telopeptides of collagen types I (uCTX-I) and II (uCTX-II) and radiographs. After 6 months: VAS, uCTX-I and uCTX-II. After 1 year: VAS, uCTX-I, uCTX-II and radiographs. RESULTS: After 6 months and 1 year of treatment VAS, uCTX-I and uCTX-II mean values were significantly lower than the baseline. 57 were treated with GCC and 47 with GC. The group that received GCC showed a similar VAS mean value after 6 months and 1 year when compared with the group treated with GC. uCTX-I and uCTX-II mean level was lower in the group treated with GCC (P < 0.05). Radiological score (Kellgren and Lawrence summarized score for hands) after 1 year showed a reduced progression compared to the baseline in the hand osteoarthritis group, especially after GCC treatment (P < 0.05). Finally, uCTX-I has better correlation with radiological score and with GC in the EOA subgroup (Pearson index: R = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS: (a) uCTX-I and uCTX-II proved to be useful biomarkers in OA monitoring; (b) uCTX-I is better correlated with hand EOA and could represent a potential further marker to assess the evolution of EOA bone damage; (c) GC slow down OA progression; (d) finally COLLII could represent a further protective factor in OA cartilage.

Dataset Information

Crystalline glucosamine sulfate in the management of knee osteoarthritis: efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic properties.

Publications

Crystalline glucosamine sulfate in the management of knee osteoarthritis: efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic properties.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets