Suppr超能文献

用于膝关节骨关节炎安全性和有效性比较的两种透明质酸制剂(CHASE)研究:一项多中心、随机、双盲、为期26周的非劣效性试验,比较杜罗蓝(Durolane)和阿尔茨(Artz)。

Comparison of two hyaluronic acid formulations for safety and efficacy (CHASE) study in knee osteoarthritis: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, 26-week non-inferiority trial comparing Durolane to Artz.

作者信息

Zhang Heng, Zhang Ke, Zhang Xianlong, Zhu Zhenan, Yan Shigui, Sun Tiansheng, Guo Ai, Jones John, Steen R Grant, Shan Bin, Zhang Jenny, Lin Jianhao

机构信息

Arthritis Clinic & Research Center, Peking University People's Hospital, 11 Xizhimen South Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100044, China.

Department of Orthopedics, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.

出版信息

Arthritis Res Ther. 2015 Mar 10;17(1):51. doi: 10.1186/s13075-015-0557-x.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid (HA) is often used as therapy for knee osteoarthritis because it is less expensive and less aggressive than total knee replacement. Therefore, it is important to document whether HA is safe and efficacious. We tested whether single and multiple injection viscosupplementation with HA is associated with clinically meaningful pain relief in a new randomized clinical trial (RCT). Our objective was to compare safety and efficacy of intra-articular HA in two formulations: one 3.0 ml injection of Durolane versus five 2.5 ml injections of Artz for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis pain.

METHODS

Patients (N=349) from the People's Republic of China were randomized to treatment (Durolane=175, Artz=174). The Durolane group received a 3.0 ml injection at week 0 (baseline), with sham skin punctures at weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4. The Artz group received one 2.5 ml injection at each of the same time points. The primary assessment tool was the Likert-type Western Ontario and McMaster University (WOMAC) pain scale at weeks 0, 6, 10, 14, 18, and 26. Secondary assessments were WOMAC physical function, knee stiffness, and global self-assessment, at identical time points. Statistically-controlled analyses were non-inferiority of Durolane over 18, then over 26 weeks, with a priori non-inferiority defined as 8% of the relevant scale. Acetaminophen was permitted as rescue analgesia and all adverse events (AEs) were recorded.

RESULTS

Overall study retention was excellent; 332 patients (95.1%) completed 18 weeks and 319 (91.4%) completed 26 weeks, with no significant retention difference between treatment arms. All variables met non-inferiority criteria over 18 and 26 weeks. Efficacy response in both arms was >90%. Treatment-related AEs were 9.8% (17/174) for Artz and 13.1% (23/175) for Durolane.

CONCLUSIONS

A single injection of Durolane is non-inferior to 5 injections of Artz over 18 and 26 weeks for pain, physical function, global self-assessment, and knee stiffness. Both treatments were efficacious, safe, and well tolerated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01295580 . Registered 11 February 2011.

摘要

引言

关节腔内注射透明质酸(HA)常用于治疗膝关节骨关节炎,因为它比全膝关节置换术成本更低且侵入性更小。因此,记录HA是否安全有效很重要。在一项新的随机临床试验(RCT)中,我们测试了单次和多次注射HA进行粘弹性补充是否能带来具有临床意义的疼痛缓解。我们的目的是比较两种剂型的关节腔内HA的安全性和有效性:一种是3.0毫升的Durolane注射剂,另一种是五次2.5毫升的Artz注射剂,用于治疗膝关节骨关节炎疼痛。

方法

来自中华人民共和国的患者(N = 349)被随机分配接受治疗(Durolane组 = 175人,Artz组 = 174人)。Durolane组在第0周(基线)接受一次3.0毫升注射,在第1、2、3和4周进行假皮肤穿刺。Artz组在相同时间点各接受一次2.5毫升注射。主要评估工具是在第0、6、10、14、18和26周使用的李克特式西安大略和麦克马斯特大学(WOMAC)疼痛量表。次要评估是在相同时间点进行的WOMAC身体功能、膝关节僵硬程度和整体自我评估。统计学控制分析是比较Durolane在18周及以后、26周及以后是否不劣于对照,先验非劣效性定义为相关量表的8%。允许使用对乙酰氨基酚作为急救镇痛药物,并记录所有不良事件(AE)。

结果

总体研究保留率极佳;332名患者(95.1%)完成了18周的治疗,319名患者(91.4%)完成了26周的治疗,各治疗组之间的保留率无显著差异。在18周和26周时,所有变量均符合非劣效性标准。两组的疗效反应均>90%。与治疗相关的不良事件在Artz组为9.8%(17/174),在Durolane组为13.1%(23/175)。

结论

在18周和26周时,单次注射Durolane在疼痛、身体功能、整体自我评估和膝关节僵硬程度方面不劣于5次注射Artz。两种治疗方法均有效、安全且耐受性良好。

试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01295580。于2011年2月11日注册。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验