Predictors of osteoarthritis(OA) improvement in patients treated with Hylan G-F for knee OA.

Aim of study: Different criteria for treatment response were explored to identify predictors of OA improvement. Analyses were based on data from a previously reported 1-year randomized controlled trial of appropriate care with or without hylan G-F 20 in patients with knee OA. Methods: Five definitions of ‘‘patient responder’’ from baseline to month 12 were examined: at least 20% reduction in WOMAC pain score; at least 20% reduction in WOMAC pain score and at least 20% reduction in either the WOMAC stiffness or function score; OARSI responder criteria (Propositions A and B) for intra-articular drugs; and OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria (Proposition D). As an a posteriori analysis, multivariable logistic regression models for each definition of patient responder were developed using a forward selection method. The following variables were defined prior to modeling and considered in the model along with two-way interactions: age (O65 years), BMI, gender, X-ray grade (0, I, II vs III, IV), co-morbidity (1 or 2 conditions vs 3 or more), duration of OA in study knee (years), previous surgery of study knee, hylan G-F 20 injection technique, WOMAC pain, stiffness and function, and treatment group. Results: Hylan G-F 20 was a predictor of improvement for all patient responder definitions P ! 0.001; odds of improvement were 2.7 or higher for patients in the hylan G-F 20 group compared to appropriate care without hylan G-F 20. For three of the five patient responder definitions, X-ray grade was a predictor of improvement (P ! 0.10; lower X-ray grade increased the odds of improvement). For four of the five patient responder definitions, duration of OA was a predictor of improvement (P ! 0.10; shorter duration of OA increased the odds of improvement). Conclusion: Analyses showed that appropriate care with hylan G-F 20 is the dominant predictor of patient improvement. While high grade structural damage does not preclude a response, patients who are targeted early in the disease process when less structural damage has occurred, may have a greater chance of improvement.

Prevalence of patient with low intensity pain symptom severity states during treatment with Rofecoxib and Ibuprofen for osteoarthritis

Aim of study: To examine the prevalence of low intensity symptom severity states in patients taking placebo, rofecoxib 12.5 mg once daily, rofecoxib 25 mg once daily, or ibuprofen 800 mg three times daily using a post-hoc definition of low pain intensity states (BLISS Index) based on the WOMAC Index. Methods: Two 6-week, double-blind, parallel-group, placebocontrolled, ibuprofen-comparator studies were conducted to measure the efficacy of rofecoxib in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis. These studies employed a flare design requiring a minimum level of symptoms at entry following discontinuation of prior analgesics. The WOMAC Pain subscale (100 mm visual analog scale) was used as the pain measure. In separate analyses, WOMAC pain subscale scores from each patient were compared to five thresholds of pain:%5 mm, %10 mm, %15 mm, %20 mm, and %25 mm. The percent of patients with BLISS states (1) on average over 6 weeks, (2) at any time during the study, and (3) at week 6 was computed for each treatment group and threshold. The treatment group percentages were compared using Fisher’s exact test. Results: During the study, patients received placebo (N Z 143), rofecoxib 12.5 mg (N Z 461), rofecoxib 25 mg (N Z 459), or ibuprofen (N Z 465). For each pain threshold and treatment group, the percent of patients with BLISS states at any time (e.g., 50% for rofecoxib 25 mg) exceeded the percentage at week 6 (e.g., 40% for rofecoxib 25 mg) which, in turn, exceeded the percentage with BLISS states on average (e.g., 32% for rofecoxib 25 mg). The percentages of patients in the active treatment groups with BLISS states on average were significantly different than observed in the placebo group at the%15 mm threshold (8–11% points vs placebo, P ! 0.01), %20 mm level (10–15% points, P ! 0.01), and %25 mm level (14–17% points, P ! 0.001). Significant differences between the active treatments and placebo were also observed at the %10 mm threshold (8–9% points, P ! 0.05) for measurements at week 6 and at the%10 (12–14% points, P !0.001) and%5 mm thresholds (5–7% points, P ! 0.05) for patients with BLISS states at any time. Conclusion: These measures of BLISS states differentiate all three active treatment groups from placebo and further confirm, at an individual patient level, the clinical benefit of rofecoxib in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Furthermore, they provide information on the prevalence of patients achieving low (%15 mm, %20 mm, %25 mm), and very low (%5 mm, %10 mm) pain severity states.