MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097938982 · doi:10.1185/030079903125002090

An open-label study of a second course of hylan G-F 20 for the treatment of pain associated with knee osteoarthritis

2003· article· en· W2097938982 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David D. Waddell, Charles A. Cefalu, DeWayne C. Bricker

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Medical Research and Opinion · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUCB Pharma
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisTolerabilityVisual analogue scalePhysical therapyKnee painAnalgesicRandomized controlled trialSurgeryAnesthesiaAdverse effectInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a second course of hylan G-F 20 for the treatment of osteoarthritic knee pain in patients who experienced a clinical benefit with an initial course of therapy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this prospective, open-label study, men or women (>/=40 years of age) with knee osteoarthritis (OA) received three weekly injections of hylan G-F 20. Consecutive patients who requested a second course of hylan G-F 20 therapy due to OA knee pain subsequent to pain relief with a first course of therapy were enrolled between October 26, 2000 and January 18, 2001. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain while walking on a flat surface (Western Ontario and McMaster's Universities Osteoarthritis Index, WOMAC, question A1), WOMAC domain C (physical functioning), full WOMAC, and patient and investigator overall visual analog scales (VAS). Efficacy variables were measured at baseline and at weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 26. An analgesic washout was required before all efficacy evaluations. RESULTS: Patients receiving at least one injection of hylan G-F 20 (n = 71) were predominantly Caucasian (84.5%) and female (64.8%), with a mean age of 65.5 years and mean weight of 200.1 pounds. The mean time between the first and second courses of hylan G-F 20 was 19.6 months (median 17.6 months). With hylan G-F 20, pain while walking on a flat surface was significantly lower (p < 0.001) than baseline at all time points up to week 26 (mean +/- SEM: -1.40 +/- 0.10 at week 26). Actual scores decreased from 2.4 +/- 0.10 at baseline to 0.97 +/- 0.11 at week 26. Scores for the WOMAC domain C, full WOMAC and patient and investigator overall VAS also significantly improved (p < 0.001) at all time points. A second course of hylan G-F 20 was generally well-tolerated, based on the low incidence of local adverse events (AEs) - only one patient (1.4%) experienced a severe event, the types of AEs, and the fact that no patients discontinued the study due to these AEs. The types of related AEs observed were not qualitatively different from those listed in the current product information and published literature. CONCLUSION: A second course of hylan G-F 20 therapy is an appropriate therapy for the treatment of OA knee pain in patients who had a previous favorable clinical response. For continued relief of osteoarthritis knee pain, this study supports repeat use of hylan G-F 20 in these patients.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Medical Research and OpinionSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207