OBJECTIVES: To determine the proportion of responders in two identical osteoarthritis (OA) trials using Outcome Measures in Arthritis Clinical Trials-Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) criteria and to assess the comparability and correlation of individual component measurements. METHODS: Data were pooled from two identical 26-week, double-blind, randomized, parallel, multicenter trials comparing once daily etoricoxib 30 mg (N=475), celecoxib 200 mg (N=488), and placebo (N=244) in patients with OA of the knee or hip. OMERACT-OARSI criteria were (1) improvement in pain or physical function > or =50% and an absolute change > or =20 mm on a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS); or (2) improvement of > or =20% and with an absolute change > or =10 mm in at least two of the following three categories: pain, physical function, and patient's global assessment. Correlations were assessed between endpoints measured as time-weighted average change from baseline over 12 weeks using Pearson's correlation coefficient (r). RESULTS: There were significantly greater proportions of responders in the etoricoxib (66.2%) and celecoxib (63.5%) groups compared with the placebo group (43.0%; P<0.001). There was no difference between the two active treatment groups. There was high correlation between pain and physical function (r=0.903), pain and global assessment (r=0.778), and physical function and global assessment (r=0.820). There was high sensitivity (75-87%) and specificity (80-96%) for changes in individual component measurements to predict OMERACT-OARSI responders. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly more patients receiving etoricoxib or celecoxib than placebo were OMERACT-OARSI responders. The high correlation between individual scales composing this composite response measurement suggests some redundancies between individual components, particularly between pain and physical function.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To determine the proportion of responders in two identical osteoarthritis (OA) trials using Outcome Measures in Arthritis Clinical Trials-Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) criteria and to assess the comparability and correlation of individual component measurements. METHODS: Data were pooled from two identical 26-week, double-blind, randomized, parallel, multicenter trials comparing once daily etoricoxib 30 mg (N=475), celecoxib 200 mg (N=488), and placebo (N=244) in patients with OA of the knee or hip. OMERACT-OARSI criteria were (1) improvement in pain or physical function > or =50% and an absolute change > or =20 mm on a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS); or (2) improvement of > or =20% and with an absolute change > or =10 mm in at least two of the following three categories: pain, physical function, and patient's global assessment. Correlations were assessed between endpoints measured as time-weighted average change from baseline over 12 weeks using Pearson's correlation coefficient (r). RESULTS: There were significantly greater proportions of responders in the etoricoxib (66.2%) and celecoxib (63.5%) groups compared with the placebo group (43.0%; P<0.001). There was no difference between the two active treatment groups. There was high correlation between pain and physical function (r=0.903), pain and global assessment (r=0.778), and physical function and global assessment (r=0.820). There was high sensitivity (75-87%) and specificity (80-96%) for changes in individual component measurements to predict OMERACT-OARSI responders. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly more patients receiving etoricoxib or celecoxib than placebo were OMERACT-OARSI responders. The high correlation between individual scales composing this composite response measurement suggests some redundancies between individual components, particularly between pain and physical function.
Authors: Marc C Hochberg; Johanne Martel-Pelletier; Jordi Monfort; Ingrid Möller; Juan Ramón Castillo; Nigel Arden; Francis Berenbaum; Francisco J Blanco; Philip G Conaghan; Gema Doménech; Yves Henrotin; Thomas Pap; Pascal Richette; Allen Sawitzke; Patrick du Souich; Jean-Pierre Pelletier Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2015-01-14 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Jeffrey B Driban; Matthew S Harkey; Lori Lyn Price; Grace H Lo; Timothy E McAlindon Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2020-06-15 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Kushang V Patel; Robert Allen; Laurie Burke; John T Farrar; Jennifer S Gewandter; Ian Gilron; Nathaniel P Katz; John D Markman; Scott F Marshall; Malca Resnick; Andrew S C Rice; Michael C Rowbotham; Shannon M Smith; Geertrui F Vanhove; Ajay D Wasan; Shuyu Zhang; Robert H Dworkin; Dennis C Turk Journal: Pain Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 7.926
Authors: Carolien H Teirlinck; Arianne P Verhagen; Elja A E Reijneveld; Jos Runhaar; Marienke van Middelkoop; Leontien M van Ravesteyn; Lotte Hermsen; Ingrid B de Groot; Sita M A Bierma-Zeinstra Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-10-10 Impact factor: 3.390