Lücker P W, Pawlowski C, Friedrich I, Faiella F, Magni E
Institut für Klinische Pharmakologie, Grünstadt, Germany.
Eur J Rheumatol Inflamm. 1994;14(2):29-38.
In a double-blind study, the efficacy and tolerability of nimesulide 200mg/day, administered orally, was compared with etodolac 600mg/day in the treatment, for 3 months, of 200 patients suffering from osteoarthritis of the knee. Although spontaneous pain showed a significant improvement during the course of the study, there was no difference in the efficacy of either compound. Similarly, there was a progressive and significant reduction in the Lequesne functional index although no statistical difference was found between nimesulide and etodolac. The physician's overall assessment of efficacy was significantly in favour of nimesulide but the same assessment for patients who completed all 12 weeks showed no such bias. Adverse events (AEs) were generally mild or moderate and were commonly gastrointestinal in origin. There was no difference in the rate of incidence of AEs and, with the exception of week 8 where etodolac was apparently better tolerated, there were no statistical differences in tolerability between the two therapies.
在一项双盲研究中,将口服200mg/天尼美舒利的疗效和耐受性与600mg/天依托度酸进行了比较,对200例膝骨关节炎患者进行了为期3个月的治疗。尽管在研究过程中自发疼痛有显著改善,但两种化合物的疗效并无差异。同样,Lequesne功能指数也有逐步且显著的降低,尽管尼美舒利和依托度酸之间未发现统计学差异。医生对疗效的总体评估明显倾向于尼美舒利,但对完成全部12周治疗的患者进行的同样评估并未显示出这种偏差。不良事件(AE)一般为轻度或中度,且通常源于胃肠道。不良事件的发生率没有差异,除了第8周依托度酸的耐受性明显更好外,两种治疗方法在耐受性方面没有统计学差异。