Catherine L Hill1, Lynette M March2, Dawn Aitken3, Susan E Lester4, Ruth Battersby4, Kristen Hynes3, Tanya Fedorova2, Susanna M Proudman5, Michael James5, Leslie G Cleland5, Graeme Jones3. 1. Rheumatology Unit, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville, South Australia University of Adelaide, The Health Observatory, Adelaide, South Australia. 2. Royal North Shore Hospital, Institute of Bone and Joint Research, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia. 3. Menzies Research Institute, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia. 4. Rheumatology Unit, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville, South Australia. 5. Rheumatology Unit, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether high-dose fish oil is superior to low-dose supplementation for symptomatic and structural outcomes in knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: A randomised, double-blind, multicentre trial enrolled 202 patients with knee OA and regular knee pain. They were randomised 1:1 to high-dose fish oil (4.5 g omega-3 fatty acids) 15 mL/day or (2) low-dose fish oil (blend of fish oil and sunola oil; ratio of 1:9, 0.45 g omega-3 fatty acids) 15 mL/day. The primary endpoints were Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months, and change in cartilage volume at 24 months. Secondary outcomes included WOMAC function, quality of life, analgesic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use and bone marrow lesion score. RESULTS: Although there was improvement in both groups, the low-dose fish oil group had greater improvement in WOMAC pain and function scores at 2 years compared with the high-dose group, whereas between-group differences at 1 year did not reach statistical significance. There was no difference between the two groups in cartilage volume loss at 2 years. For other secondary endpoints, there was no difference between the two groups at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: In people with symptomatic knee OA, there was no additional benefit of a high-dose fish oil compared with low-dose fish oil. The combination comparator oil appeared to have better efficacy in reducing pain at 2 years, suggesting that this requires further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN 12607000415404). Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether high-dose fish oil is superior to low-dose supplementation for symptomatic and structural outcomes in knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: A randomised, double-blind, multicentre trial enrolled 202 patients with knee OA and regular knee pain. They were randomised 1:1 to high-dose fish oil (4.5 g omega-3 fatty acids) 15 mL/day or (2) low-dose fish oil (blend of fish oil and sunola oil; ratio of 1:9, 0.45 g omega-3 fatty acids) 15 mL/day. The primary endpoints were Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months, and change in cartilage volume at 24 months. Secondary outcomes included WOMAC function, quality of life, analgesic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use and bone marrow lesion score. RESULTS: Although there was improvement in both groups, the low-dose fish oil group had greater improvement in WOMAC pain and function scores at 2 years compared with the high-dose group, whereas between-group differences at 1 year did not reach statistical significance. There was no difference between the two groups in cartilage volume loss at 2 years. For other secondary endpoints, there was no difference between the two groups at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: In people with symptomatic knee OA, there was no additional benefit of a high-dose fish oil compared with low-dose fish oil. The combination comparator oil appeared to have better efficacy in reducing pain at 2 years, suggesting that this requires further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN 12607000415404). Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Authors: Jessica L Krok-Schoen; Theodore M Brasky; Rebecca P Hunt; Thomas E Rohan; Tamara A Baker; Wenjun Li; Laura Carbone; Rachel H Mackey; Linda Snetselaar; Maryam B Lustberg; Marian L Neuhouser Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2018-06-18 Impact factor: 4.910
Authors: J S Chen; C L Hill; S Lester; C D Ruediger; R Battersby; G Jones; L G Cleland; L M March Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2015-12-22 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Kimberly T Sibille; Christopher King; Timothy J Garrett; Toni L Glover; Hang Zhang; Huaihou Chen; Divya Reddy; Burel R Goodin; Adriana Sotolongo; Megan E Petrov; Yenisel Cruz-Almeida; Matthew Herbert; Emily J Bartley; Jeffrey C Edberg; Roland Staud; David T Redden; Laurence A Bradley; Roger B Fillingim Journal: Clin J Pain Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 3.442
Authors: Maryam B Lustberg; Tonya S Orchard; Raquel Reinbolt; Rebecca Andridge; Xueliang Pan; Martha Belury; Rachel Cole; Amanda Logan; Rachel Layman; Bhuvaneswari Ramaswamy; Robert Wesolowski; Michael Berger; Elaine Patterson; Charles Loprinzi; Charles L Shapiro; Lisa Yee Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-11-03 Impact factor: 4.872