MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987292977 · doi:10.7150/ijms.7.366

Comparative Efficacy and Tolerability of 5-Loxin<sup>®</sup> and Aflapin<sup>® </sup>Against Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Double Blind, Randomized, Placebo Controlled Clinical Study

2010· article· en· W1987292977 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Medical Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacological Effects of Medicinal Plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTolerabilityMedicineOsteoarthritisPlaceboAdverse effectClinical trialRandomized controlled trialVisual analogue scalePhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aflapin(®) is a novel synergistic composition derived from Boswellia serrata gum resin (Indian Patent Application No. 2229/CHE/2008). Aflapin is significantly better as an anti-inflammatory agent compared to the Boswellia extracts presently available in the market. A 90-day, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted to evaluate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of 5-Loxin(®) and Aflapin(®) in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee (Clinical trial registration number: ISRCTN80793440). Sixty OA subjects were included in the study. The subjects received either 100 mg (n=20) of 5-Loxin(®) or 100 mg (n=20) of Aflapin(®) or a placebo (n=20) daily for 90 days. Each patient was evaluated for pain and physical functions by using the standard tools (visual analog scale, Lequesne's Functional Index, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) at the baseline (day 0), and at days 7, 30, 60 and 90. A battery of biochemical parameters in serum, urine and hematological parameters in citrated whole blood were performed to assess the safety of 5-Loxin(®) and Aflapin(®) in OA subjects. Fifty seven subjects completed the study. At the end of the study, both 5-Loxin(®) and Aflapin conferred clinically and statistically significant improvements in pain scores and physical function scores in OA subjects. Interestingly, significant improvements in pain score and functional ability were recorded as early as 7 days after initiation of the study in the treatment group supplemented with 100 mg Aflapin. Corroborating the improvements in pain scores in treatment groups, our in vitro studies provide evidences that Aflapin(®) is capable of inhibiting cartilage degrading enzyme MMP-3 and has the potential to regulate the inflammatory response by inhibiting ICAM-1. Aflapin(®) and 5-Loxin(®) reduce pain and improve physical functions significantly in OA subjects. Aflapin exhibited better efficacy compared to 5-Loxin(®). In comparison with placebo, the safety parameters were almost unchanged in the treatment groups. Hence both 5-Loxin(®) and Aflapin(®) are safe for human consumption.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.362 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it