OBJECTIVE: To compare classic Ayurveda, methotrexate (MTX), and their combination in a double-blind, randomized, double-dummy, pilot trial in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for 36 weeks. METHODS:Forty-three seropositive RA patients by American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria with disease duration of less than 7 years were assigned to the following treatment groups: MTX plus Ayurvedic placebo (n = 14), Ayurveda plus MTX placebo (n = 12), or Ayurveda plus MTX (n = 17). Outcomes included the Disease Activity Score (DAS28-CRP), ACR20/50/70, and Health Assessment Questionnaire--Disability Index. All measures were obtained every 12 weeks for 36 weeks. Analyses included descriptive statistics, analysis of variance, χ², or Student t test. The unique features of this study included the development of placebos for each Ayurvedic pharmacological dosage form and individualization of Ayurvedic therapy. RESULTS: All groups were comparable at baseline in demographics and disease characteristics. There were no statistically significant differences among the 3 groups on the efficacy measures. ACR20 results were MTX 86%, Ayurveda 100%, and combination 82%, and DAS28-CRP response were MTX -2.4, Ayurveda -1.7, and combination -2.4. Differences in adverse events among groups were also not statistically significant, although the MTX groups experienced more adverse event (MTX 174, Ayurveda 112, combination 176). No deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In this first-ever, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study comparing Ayurveda, MTX, and their combination, all 3 treatments were approximately equivalent in efficacy, within the limits of a pilot study. Adverse events were numerically fewer in the Ayurveda-only group. This study demonstrates that double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized studies are possible when testing individualized classic Ayurvedic versus allopathic treatment in ways acceptable to western standards and to Ayurvedic physicians. It also justifies the need for larger studies.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare classic Ayurveda, methotrexate (MTX), and their combination in a double-blind, randomized, double-dummy, pilot trial in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for 36 weeks. METHODS: Forty-three seropositive RApatients by American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria with disease duration of less than 7 years were assigned to the following treatment groups: MTX plus Ayurvedic placebo (n = 14), Ayurveda plus MTX placebo (n = 12), or Ayurveda plus MTX (n = 17). Outcomes included the Disease Activity Score (DAS28-CRP), ACR20/50/70, and Health Assessment Questionnaire--Disability Index. All measures were obtained every 12 weeks for 36 weeks. Analyses included descriptive statistics, analysis of variance, χ², or Student t test. The unique features of this study included the development of placebos for each Ayurvedic pharmacological dosage form and individualization of Ayurvedic therapy. RESULTS: All groups were comparable at baseline in demographics and disease characteristics. There were no statistically significant differences among the 3 groups on the efficacy measures. ACR20 results were MTX 86%, Ayurveda 100%, and combination 82%, and DAS28-CRP response were MTX -2.4, Ayurveda -1.7, and combination -2.4. Differences in adverse events among groups were also not statistically significant, although the MTX groups experienced more adverse event (MTX 174, Ayurveda 112, combination 176). No deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In this first-ever, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study comparing Ayurveda, MTX, and their combination, all 3 treatments were approximately equivalent in efficacy, within the limits of a pilot study. Adverse events were numerically fewer in the Ayurveda-only group. This study demonstrates that double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized studies are possible when testing individualized classic Ayurvedic versus allopathic treatment in ways acceptable to western standards and to Ayurvedic physicians. It also justifies the need for larger studies.
Authors: Christian S Kessler; Thomas Ostermann; Larissa Meier; Elmar Stapelfeldt; Silvia Schütte; Joachim Duda; Andreas Michalsen Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2013-09-01 Impact factor: 2.629
Authors: Claudia M Witt; Andreas Michalsen; Stephanie Roll; Antonio Morandi; Shivnarain Gupta; Mark Rosenberg; Ludwig Kronpass; Elmar Stapelfeldt; Syed Hissar; Matthias Müller; Christian Kessler Journal: Trials Date: 2013-05-23 Impact factor: 2.279