Etoricoxib improves pain, function and quality of life: results of a real‐world effectiveness trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of etoricoxib in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) with suboptimal response to existing pain regimens. METHODS: A multicenter, prospective, open-label, single-arm study. OA patients (n = 500) taking nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or other analgesics who had inadequate response as determined by their physicians (>or= 40 mm on a 0-100 mm pain scale) were switched directly to etoricoxib 60 mg once daily for 4 weeks without prior medication washout. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with >or= 30% improvement in Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain walking on a flat surface after 4 weeks of treatment. Other endpoints included WOMAC Pain, Stiffness, and Physical Function subscales, Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), investigator's global assessment of response to therapy (IGART), the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) and Short Form 36 (SF36). Safety and tolerability were assessed by collecting adverse events. RESULTS: After switching to etoricoxib, 52% (95% confidence interval: 47%, 57%) of patients reported a clinically meaningful reduction (>or= 30%) for WOMAC pain walking on a flat surface. Disability in daily activities and pain interference were significantly improved (P < 0.0001). IGART scores improved after the switch to etoricoxib (P < 0.05). Results from TSQM demonstrated that patient perceptions of effectiveness, convenience and overall satisfaction increased. Etoricoxib was generally well tolerated in most patients. The most commonly reported adverse event was edema (4.2%). CONCLUSIONS: In OA patients experiencing inadequate relief from a wide variety of analgesics, pain, function, quality of life, and treatment satisfaction significantly improved when switched to etoricoxib.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".