Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Contextual effects (i.e., placebo response ) refer to all health changes resulting from administering an apparently inactive treatment. In a randomized clinical trial (RCT), the overall treatment effect (i.e., the post-treatment effect in the intervention group) can be regarded as the true effect of the intervention plus the impact of contextual effects. This meta-research was conducted to examine the average proportion of the overall treatment effect attributable to contextual effects in RCTs across clinical conditions and treatments and explore whether it varies with trial contextual factors. Methods Data was extracted from trials included in the main meta-analysis from the latest update of the Cochrane review on “ Placebo interventions for all clinical conditions” (searched from 1966 to March 2008). Only RCTs reported in English having an experimental intervention group, a placebo comparator group, and a no-treatment control group were eligible. Results In total, 186 trials (16,655 patients) were included. On average, 54% (0.54, 95%CI 0.46 to 0.64) of the overall treatment effect was attributable to contextual effects. The contextual effects were higher for trials with blinded outcome assessor and concealed allocation. The contextual effects appeared to increase proportional to the placebo effect, lower mean age, and proportion of females. Conclusion Approximately half of the overall treatment effect in RCTs seems attributable to contextual effects rather than to the specific effect of treatments. As the study did not include all important contextual factors (e.g., patient-provider interaction), the true proportion of contextual effects could differ from the study’s results. However, contextual effects should be considered when assessing treatment effects in clinical practice. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42019130257 . Registered on April 19, 2019.

Since the prevalence of obesity continues to increase, there is a demand for effective and safe anti-obesity agents that can produce and maintain weight loss and improve comorbidity. We did a meta-analysis of all published randomised controlled trials to assess the efficacy and safety of the newly approved anti-obesity agent rimonabant. We searched The Cochrane database and Controlled Trials Register, Medline via Pubmed, Embase via WebSpirs, Web of Science, Scopus, and reference lists up to July, 2007. We collected data from four double-blind, randomised controlled trials (including 4105 participants) that compared 20 mg per day rimonabant with placebo. Patients given rimonabant had a 4·7 kg (95% CI 4·1–5·3 kg; p<0·0001) greater weight reduction after 1 year than did those given placebo. Rimonabant caused significantly more adverse events than did placebo (OR=1·4; p=0·0007; number needed to harm=25 individuals [95% CI 17–58]), and 1·4 times more serious adverse events (OR=1·4; p=0·03; number needed to harm=59 [27–830]). Patients given rimonabant were 2·5 times more likely to discontinue the treatment because of depressive mood disorders than were those given placebo (OR=2·5; p=0·01; number needed to harm=49 [19–316]). Furthermore, anxiety caused more patients to discontinue treatment in rimonabant groups than in placebo groups (OR=3·0; p=0·03; number needed to harm=166 [47–3716]). Our findings suggest that 20 mg per day rimonabant increases the risk of psychiatric adverse events—ie, depressed mood disorders and anxiety—despite depressed mood being an exclusion criterion in these trials. Taken together with the recent US Food and Drug Administration finding of increased risk of suicide during treatment with rimonabant, we recommend increased alertness by physicians to these potentially severe psychiatric adverse reactions.

Objectives To investigate biomechanical changes in lumbar disc herniations. Methods Patients with lumbar disc herniation verified on a 1.5–3-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner were imaged in a weight-bearing 0.25-T MRI scanner in (1) standing position, (2) conventional supine position with relative lumbar flexion, and (3) supine position with a forced lumbar extension by adding a lumbar pillow. The L2-S1 lordosis angle, the disc cross-sectional area, the disc cross-sectional diameter, and the spinal canal cross-sectional diameter were measured for each position. Disc degeneration and nerve root compression were graded, and the pain intensity was reported during each scan position. Results Forty-three herniated discs in 37 patients (36.7 ± 11.9 years) were analyzed in each position. The L2-S1 lumbar angle increased in the standing position (mean difference [MD]: 5.61°, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 3.44 to 7.78) and with the lumbar pillow in the supine position (MD: 14.63°, 95% CI: 11.71 to 17.57), both compared with the conventional supine position. The herniated disc cross-sectional area and diameter increased during standing compared with during conventional supine position. No changes were found in the spinal canal cross-sectional diameter between positions. Higher nerve root compression grades for paracentral herniations were found during standing compared with during conventional supine position. This was neither found with a lumbar pillow nor for central herniations in any position compared with conventional supine. Conclusion Disc herniations displayed dynamic behavior with morphological changes in the standing position, leading to higher nerve root compression grades for paracentral herniated discs. Key Points • Lumbar herniated discs increased in size in the axial plane during standing. • Increased nerve root compression grades for paracentral herniated discs were found during standing. • Weight-bearing MRI may increase the diagnostic sensitivity of nerve root compression in lumbar disc herniations.

ObjectiveKellgren-Lawrence grades (KLG) are frequently used for patient selection in clinical trials. The Ahlbäck radiographic grading system has been developed for moderate and severe knee OA. KLG 3 is comparable to Ahlbäck 1 and KLG 4 is subdivided into Ahlbäck 2–5. The objective of this study was to investigate if the Ahlbäck scoring system is able to subdivide patients with moderate to severe knee OA (KLG 3/4) into groups with different sensitivity to change in cartilage thickness.Materials and methodsThis study was based on 108 Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) participants with KLG 3/4. Baseline KLG scores were available from the OAI database; Ahlbäck scores were performed using the same x-rays. Cartilage thickness change in the weight-bearing femorotibial cartilage was analysed from baseline and year 1 3D FLASH MRI for the entire femorotibial joint (FTJ), the medial (MFTC) and the lateral compartment (LFTC) and for the location-independent ordered values 1 and 16 (OV 1/OV 16) representing the subregions with largest loss (OV 1) and gain (OV 16) within each knee.ResultsOf the 108 patients, n = 30/78 had KLG 3/4. The corresponding Ahlbäck scores (1–5) were n = 30/33/36/9/10. Cartilage thickness changes between Ahlbäck groups showed no statistically significant difference for FTJ, MFTC, LFTC and OV 1, but change in OV 16 was significantly higher in Ahlbäck 4 knees (p = 0.03) compared to Ahlbäck 1–3 knees.ConclusionRadiographic knee OA grading with Ahlbäck scores was not superior to KLG for prediction of cartilage thickness loss over 1 year, in patients with moderate and severe knee OA supporting the continuous use of the easier and more widely used KLG.

Background Knee osteoarthritis is a highly prevalent and painful joint disorder with limited long-term treatment options. Intra-articular corticosteroids and hyaluronic acid offer only short-term relief and may have safety concerns. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term effectiveness and safety of a single intra-articular injection of 2.5% polyacrylamide hydrogel in individuals with moderate to severe knee osteoarthritis. Methods This prospective, multicentre, open-label, single-arm clinical study enrolled 49 participants who received a single 6 mL intra-articular injection of 2.5% polyacrylamide hydrogel. After 1 year, 35 participants entered an extension study with yearly assessments up to 5 years post treatment. The primary outcomes for the extension phase included changes from baseline in WOMAC subscales (pain, stiffness, physical function) and Patient Global Assessment (PGA). Safety was evaluated through the incidence of adverse events. Statistical analyses included a mixed model for repeated measures and sensitivity analyses using ANCOVA and baseline observation carried forward. Results Of the 49 participants, 27 completed the five-year follow-up. Statistically significant improvements from baseline were observed in WOMAC pain (−14.6; 95% CI: −21.4 to −7.7; p  = 0.0002), stiffness (−19.6; 95% CI: −29.9 to −9.3; p  = 0.0006), physical function (−12.5; 95% CI: −19.8 to −5.2; p  = 0.0015), and PGA (−13.4; 95% CI: −23.3 to −3.5; p  = 0.0100). These improvements were sustained throughout the five-year period. A total of 47 adverse events were reported in the extension study, with no serious events attributed to the investigational device. No new adverse device effects were reported in the extension study. Conclusions A single intra-articular injection of 2.5% polyacrylamide hydrogel demonstrated sustained improvements in WOMAC pain, stiffness, physical function, and PGA for up to five years, with a favourable safety profile. These findings support its potential as a long-term treatment option for knee osteoarthritis. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04179552.

Objective There are few effective osteoarthritis (OA) therapies. A novel injectable polyacrylamide hydrogel (iPAAG) previously demonstrated efficacy and safety up to week 26 in an open-label study of knee OA. Here we report longer-term effectiveness and safety data. Methods This multi-centre, open-label study included patients with symptomatic and radiographic knee OA. Primary outcome was WOMAC pain (0–100 scale) at 13 weeks, and patients continued to 26 weeks before entering a further 26-week extension phase. Secondary efficacy outcomes included WOMAC stiffness and function subscales, Patient Global Assessment (PGA) and proportion of OMERACT-OARSI responders. Safety outcomes were adverse events (AEs). Results 49 participants (31 women, mean age 70) received an ultrasound-guided, intra-articular injection of 6 ml iPAAG; 46 completed the extension phase to 52 weeks. There was a significant reduction in the WOMAC pain score from baseline to 52 weeks (− 17.7 points (95% CI − 23.1; − 12.4); p  < 0.0001). Similar sustained improvements were observed for WOMAC stiffness (11.0 points; 95% CI − 17.0; − 4.9), physical function (18.0 points; 95% CI − 19.1; − 10.6), and PGA (16.3 points; 95% CI − 23.1; − 9.4). At 52 weeks 62.2% of patients were OMERACT-OARSI responders. From 26 to 52 weeks, 8 adverse effects (AE), including 1 serious AE (cerebrovascular accident) were reported in 5 subjects. None of the new adverse events were thought to be device related. Conclusion This open-label study suggests persistent benefits and safety of iPAAG through 52 weeks after a single injection. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04179552.

Complement activation correlates to rheumatoid arthritis disease activity, and increased amounts of the complement split product C5a is observed in synovial fluids from rheumatoid arthritis patients. Blockade of C5a or its receptor (C5aR) is efficacious in several arthritis models. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of C5a and C5aR in human rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis-both with respect to expression and function. Synovial fluid, blood and synovial samples were obtained from rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and osteoarthritis patients as a less inflammatory arthritis type, and blood from healthy subjects. Cells infiltrating synovial tissue were analysed by immunohistochemistry and flow cytometry. SF and blood were analysed for biomarkers by flow cytometry or ELISA. The effect of a blocking anti-human C5aR mAb on leukocyte migration was determined using a Boyden chamber. Appropriate statistical tests were applied for comparisons. C5aR+ cells were detected in most rheumatoid arthritis, in all psoriatic arthritis, but not in non-inflammatory control synovia. C5aR+ cells were primarily neutrophils and macrophages. C5aR+ macrophages were mainly found in lymphoid aggregates in close contact with T cells. C5a levels were increased in both rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis synovial fluid compared to osteoarthritis, and in blood from rheumatoid arthritis compared to healthy subjects. Neutrophil and monocyte migration to rheumatoid arthritis synovial fluid was significantly inhibited by anti-C5aR. The data support that the C5a-C5aR axis may be driving the infiltration of inflammatory cells into the synovial fluid and synovium in both rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis, and suggest that C5a or C5aR may be a promising treatment target in both diseases.

Background It is unclear whether sex or age modify the association of glucocorticoid (GC) use with reduced bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods We studied cross-sectional data of RA patients with current or previous GC treatment in a single center cohort study ( Rh-GIOP cohort). Our primary outcome was the minimum T-score (measured by DXA) of either lumbar spine, total femur, or femoral neck. Current GC dose was the main exposure; cumulative GC dose and cumulative duration of GC use were also assessed. Following a predefined statistical analysis plan, linear regression analyses with adjustment for confounders assessed whether the association of GC use with BMD was modified by sex (men versus women) or age (≥ 65 versus < 65 years). Results Four hundred eighty-three patients with RA (mean age 64 ± 12 years, 80% women) were included. 33% were not currently taking GCs, 32% were treated with a dose of 5 mg/d prednisone equivalent and 11% with more than 7.5 mg/d. 23% of patients had osteoporosis by DXA (minimum T-score ≤ -2.5). The slope, i.e., the association between changes in minimum T-scores with 1 mg/d change in current GC dose, was similar in men and women (-0.07 and -0.04, respectively; difference -0.03 [-0.11 to 0.04]; p for interaction = 0.41). Slopes were also similar for elderly and non-elderly patients (-0.03 and -0.04, respectively; difference -0.01 [-0.06 to 0.05]; p for interaction = 0.77). Using cumulative dose and duration of use as exposures did not lead to substantial changes of these results. Conclusions In our sample, the association of GC use with reduced BMD in RA was not modified by sex or age.

With the present study we wanted to explore the impact of treatment with a tumor necrosis factor-α -inhibitor (TNFi) on levels of soluble biomarkers in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and to identify predictors of impaired drug levels and development of anti-TNFi antibodies (anti-TNFi Abs). Blood samples from 26 patients with established RA were taken at baseline and following 6 months of treatment with adalimumab or infliximab. Samples were analyzed for levels of TNFi, interleukin (IL)-6, and soluble TNF-receptors 1 and -2 (sTNF-R1 and -2) and for presence of anti-TNFi Abs. Clinical and demographic data were recorded as well. During the initial 6 months treatment, DAS28(CRP) (Disease activity score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein) and levels of IL-6 and sTNF-R2 decreased significantly in patients without anti-TNFi Abs and in patients retaining detectable drug levels. The levels of other tested cytokines (TNF-α, TNF-β, IL-1ra, IL-1b, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12(p70), IL-13, IL-17A, IL-17F, and IL-33) were generally below detection limits. Higher baseline levels of IL-6 associated with undetectable levels of TNFi at follow-up. Anti-TNFi Abs were associated with decreased drug levels, but no predictors for anti-TNFi Ab development could be found. The effect of treatment with TNFi on RA disease activity depends on levels of active drug, and by presence of anti-TNFi Abs. In patients who retain detectable drug levels, and in the absence of anti-TNFi Abs, clinical outcome is improved during treatment, and circulating levels of IL-6 and sTNF-R2 decrease. Baseline levels of IL-6 may predict depletion of TNFi and may identify patients at risk of treatment failure.

IntroductionHand osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent joint disorder with limited treatment options. Accumulating evidence suggests that the antidiabetic drug metformin has beneficial effects on knee OA and may likewise be beneficial for hand OA. The objective of this randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial is to investigate the effect of metformin 1000 mg two times a day, or maximum tolerated dose, compared with placebo on reducing finger joint pain after 16 weeks of treatment.Methods and analysisThe participants will be enrolled from the OA clinic at the Parker Institute at Copenhagen University Hospital - Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark and from the Department of Rheumatology, Hospitalsenhed Midt, Silkeborg, Denmark. 150 participants with painful hand OA according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria will be randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive either metformin or a matching placebo for 16 weeks. The initial dose of 500 mg of metformin or placebo once daily is increased by 500 mg every week until the target dose of 1000 mg two times a day, or the maximum tolerated dose, is reached. The participants will have clinical visits every 4 weeks, except the week 12 visit, which is by telephone. The primary endpoint is the between-group difference in least squares means for the change in the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) finger joint pain scores between the metformin and placebo groups at 16 weeks. The main analysis will be conducted on the intention-to-treat population, comprising all participants assessed and randomly assigned at baseline. Least squares means and the differences between them, along with their respective 95% CIs, will be derived from a mixed-effects model for repeated measurements (outcomes collected at baseline and at weeks 4, 8, 12 and 16). Adverse events will be registered systematically.Ethics and disseminationApproval has been obtained from the European Medicines Agency (EudraCT: 2023-509181-38-00), which also includes approval from the local health research ethics committee. Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Study findings will be published in international peer-reviewed journals and will be presented in relevant media and at international scientific conferences.Trial registration numberEudraCT, 2023-509181-38-00; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06367283.