| Literature DB >> 30538759 |
Sung Hae Chang1, Yun-Kyung Song2, Seong-Su Nah1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gumiganghwal-tang (GMGHT) is a traditional herbal medicine consisting of nine different herbs. GMGHT inhibits the mRNA expression and production of inflammatory cytokines tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF- α), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and TNF- β on lipopolysaccharide- (LPS-) stimulated peritoneal macrophages in a dose-dependent manner. It is empirically used for the treatment of inflammatory disease, but there are few reports of clinical trials that investigate its efficacy and safety. The current study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of GMGHT in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA).Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30538759 PMCID: PMC6261401 DOI: 10.1155/2018/3165125
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Composition of Gumiganghwal-tang.
| Latin Name |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 1Screening, randomization, and follow-up. GMGHT, Gumiganghwal-tang; A/E, adverse event.
Demographic data and baseline characteristics.
| Characteristics | GMGHT group (n= 70) | Placebo group (n= 73) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex (female), n (%) | 67 (95.7) | 62 (84.9) | 0.05 |
| Age | 58.5 (8.7) | 59.7 (7.5) | 0.41 |
| Height (m) | 1.57 (0.06) | 1.57 (0.07) | 0.77 |
| Body weight | 59.1 (6.7) | 62.3 (9.3) | 0.02 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 23.9 (2.2) | 25.2 (4.2) | 0.02 |
| Duration of symptomatic OA (months) | 51.7 (54.3) | 61.4 (63.3) | 0.33 |
| Radiographic findings (Kellgren and Lawrence X-ray grade ) | |||
| Grade 2, n (%) | 45 (64.3) | 42 (57.5) | 0.43 |
| Grade 3, n (%) | 20 (28.6) | 28 (38.4) | |
| Grade 4, n (%) | 5 (7.1) | 3 (4.1) | |
| Patient's global assessment (0-100 VAS) | 65.1 (17.5) | 69.2 (13.0) | 0.13 |
| Patient's pain assessment (0-100 VAS) | 68.4 (11.5) | 71.0 (13.6) | 0.22 |
| Physician's global assessment (0-100 VAS) | 65.7 (11.8) | 68.1 (13.4) | 0.28 |
| WOMAC score | |||
| Pain | 11.1 (2.3) | 11.3 (3.0) | 0.70 |
| Stiffness | 4.7 (1.3) | 4.3 (1.4) | 0.17 |
| Function | 39.6 (10.0) | 40.5 (9.6) | 0.55 |
| Total | 55.4 (12.7) | 56.2 (12.9) | 0.70 |
Values are presented as numbers (%) or mean (SD) unless otherwise stated.
BMI: body mass index, GMGHT: Gumiganghwal-tang, OA: osteoarthritis, SD: standard deviation, VAS: visual analog scale, WOMAC: the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index.
Comparisons of total WOMAC score (primary end point).
| GMGHT group (n= 61) | Placebo group (n= 66) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total WOMAC score | |||
| Baseline (day =0) | 55.8 (13.0) | 54.1 (13.9) | 0.48 |
| 2nd week | 45.5 (14.9) | 51.6 (14.0) | 0.20 |
| 4th week | 37.5(18.2) | 50.0 (13.7) | 3.07 x 10−5 |
| 6th week | 34.7 (18.1) | 46.9 (14.5) | 5.53 x 10−5 |
| Change in total WOMAC score from baseline | |||
| 2nd week | -10.3 (11.2) | -2.5 (4.6) | 2.93 x 10−6 |
| 4th week | -18.3 (16.9) | -4.1 (5.2) | 2.38 x 10−8 |
| 6th week | -21.1 (17.5) | -7.1 (8.1) | 1.85 x 10−7 |
Values are presented as mean (SD) unless otherwise stated.
GMGHT: Gumiganghwal-tang, SD: standard deviation, WOMAC: the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index.
Figure 2The mean change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score. There was significant improvement in the mean change of (a) total WOMAC, (b) WOMAC stiffness, (c) WOMAC pain, and (d) WOMAC function score from baseline in each group over the 6 weeks. ∗ indicates statistically significant results compared to baseline measurement (p value ≤ 0.05).
Comparisons of secondary efficacy.
| GMGHT group (n= 61) | Placebo group (n= 66) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Change in patient's global assessment from baseline | |||
| 2nd week | -10.4 (10.8) | -1.7 (5.8) | 2.50 x 10−7 |
| 4th week | -17.4 (19.0) | -4.5 (6.6) | 3.24 x 10−6 |
| 6th week | -22.5 (20.7) | -9.0 (12.8) | 3.04 x 10−5 |
| Change in patient's pain assessment from baseline | |||
| 2nd week | -11.1 (11.0) | -2.2 (5,2) | 1.32 x 10−7 |
| 4th week | -17.5 (19.7) | -5.4 (6.6) | 2.07 x 10−5 |
| 6th week | -22.4 (21.3) | -9.6 (14.4) | 1.62 x 10−4 |
| Change in physician's global assessment from baseline | |||
| 2nd week | -13.3 (12.0) | -0.5 (6.1) | 4.67 x 10−11 |
| 4th week | -21.0 (19.4) | -1.8 (8.3) | 3.89 x 10−10 |
| 6th week | -23.8 (20.9) | -7.9 (16.9) | 6.57 x 10−6 |
| Change in pain WOMAC score from baseline | |||
| 2nd week | -2.8 (2.6) | -0.7 (1.8) | 1.45 x 10−6 |
| 4th week | -3.9 (4.0) | -1.2 (2.0) | 8.12 x 10−6 |
| 6th week | -4.5 (4.0) | -1.7 (2.4) | 6.82 x 10−6 |
| Change in stiffness WOMAC score from baseline | |||
| 2nd week | -0.2 (1.4) | -0.1 (1.3) | 0.75 |
| 4th week | -1.6 (1.6) | -0.7 (1.3) | 1.27 x 10−3 |
| 6th week | -1.6 (1.6) | -1.3 (1.7) | 0.22 |
| Change in function WOMAC score from baseline | |||
| 2nd week | -7.3 (8.6) | -1.7 (3.0) | 7.49 x 10−6 |
| 4th week | -12.8 (12.2) | -2.2 (3.3) | 7.16 x 10−9 |
| 6th week | -15.0 (12.8) | -4.2 (5.3) | 3.26 x 10−8 |
Values are presented as mean (SD) unless otherwise stated.
GMGHT: Gumiganghwal-tang, SD: standard deviation, WOMAC: the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index.
Figure 3Patient's global assessment, pain, and physician's global assessment score using the visual analogue scale. There was significant improvement in the mean change of (a) patient's global assessment (PGA), (b) patient's pain, and (c) physician's global assessment (PhyGA) visual analogue score from baseline in each group over the 6 weeks.