Suppr超能文献

口服依托度酸和萘丁美酮治疗膝部活动性骨关节炎患者安全性和有效性的双盲、安慰剂对照比较

Double-blind, placebo-controlled comparison of the safety and efficacy of orally administered etodolac and nabumetone in patients with active osteoarthritis of the knee.

作者信息

Schnitzer T J, Ballard I M, Constantine G, McDonald P

机构信息

Rush Presbyterian, St. Luke's Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

出版信息

Clin Ther. 1995 Jul-Aug;17(4):602-12. doi: 10.1016/0149-2918(95)80037-9.

Abstract

This 4-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of etodolac and nabumetone in the treatment of patients with active osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. Ninety-one patients received etodolac 400 mg twice daily, 89 received nabumetone 1500 mg once daily, and 90 received placebo. Both active treatments significantly improved the patients' condition relative to baseline (P < or = 0.001) at all evaluations during treatment and relative to placebo (P < or = 0.05) by visit 4. Improvement relative to placebo in investigator's global assessments was earlier in the etodolac group (ie, by visit 3) than in the nabumetone group. At visit 4, improvement in investigator's and patient's global assessment scores, and in the distribution of investigator's assessment scores, was significantly (P < or = 0.05) greater in the etodolac group than in the nabumetone group. Other than hypokalemia, which occurred only in three patients in the nabumetone group (P = 0.035), there were no significant differences among the groups in the frequency of study events or premature discontinuation from the study as a result of study events. Study events considered at least possibly treatment related were reported for 26 patients in the etodolac group (28.6%), 20 in the nabumetone group (22.5%), and 23 in the placebo group (25.6%). The most frequently reported symptoms for all groups were dyspepsia, nausea, and headache. Four patients treated with nabumetone (4.5%) had elevations in aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase during treatment. The results of this study show that etodolac 400 mg twice daily is at least as effective as nabumetone 1500 mg once daily and is equally well tolerated in the treatment of patients with active OA of the knee; etodolac may have an earlier onset of action and/or a relatively greater efficacy in patient and investigator global assessments than nabumetone.

摘要

这项为期4周的随机、双盲、双模拟、安慰剂对照、平行组、多中心研究旨在比较依托度酸和萘丁美酮治疗膝关节活动性骨关节炎(OA)患者的疗效和安全性。91例患者每日两次服用400 mg依托度酸,89例患者每日一次服用1500 mg萘丁美酮,90例患者服用安慰剂。在治疗期间的所有评估中,与基线相比,两种活性治疗均显著改善了患者状况(P≤0.001),到第4次访视时,与安慰剂相比也有显著改善(P≤0.05)。依托度酸组在研究者整体评估中相对于安慰剂的改善比萘丁美酮组更早(即第3次访视时)。在第4次访视时,依托度酸组研究者和患者的整体评估得分以及研究者评估得分分布的改善均显著高于萘丁美酮组(P≤0.05)。除了低钾血症(仅在萘丁美酮组的3例患者中出现,P = 0.035)外,各组间研究事件的发生率或因研究事件导致的提前退出研究情况无显著差异。依托度酸组有26例患者(28.6%)、萘丁美酮组有20例患者(22.5%)、安慰剂组有23例患者(25.6%)报告了至少可能与治疗相关的研究事件。所有组最常报告的症状是消化不良、恶心和头痛。4例接受萘丁美酮治疗的患者(4.5%)在治疗期间出现天冬氨酸转氨酶或丙氨酸转氨酶升高。这项研究结果表明,每日两次服用400 mg依托度酸在治疗膝关节活动性OA患者时至少与每日一次服用1500 mg萘丁美酮同样有效,且耐受性相当;在患者和研究者的整体评估中,依托度酸的起效可能更早和/或疗效相对更高。

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