MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135081033 · doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2009.08.019

Poster 6: Duloxetine 60 to 120 mg Once Daily Versus Placebo in the Treatment of Patients With Osteoarthritis Knee Pain

2009· article· en· W2135081033 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kevin W. Piezer, Yuri Belenkov, Jacques P. Brown, Amy S. Chappell, D. Desaiah, Jerry Hall, Hong Liu‐Seifert, Vladimir Skljarevski, Shuyu Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenuePM&R · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuloxetineMedicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

K. Piezer, Lilly USA, LLC, Employment; Lilly USA. Reduction of pain is crucial to the management of osteoarthritis (OA) as it is a common cause of disability in OA patients. Duloxetine is efficacious in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia. In this study, duloxetine (60-120 mg once daily) was evaluated in the treatment of OA knee pain. 13-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Outpatients. Patients meeting American College of Rheumatology clinical and radiographic criteria for OA of the knee, with pain for ≥14 days each month for 3 months before study entry and mean 24-hour average pain score ≥4. Patients were randomized to duloxetine (N = 128) or placebo (N = 128) and stratified by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory use. At week 7, patients (33/128) who did not respond to 60-mg dose (≤30% reduction in pain) increased their dose to 120 mg. The primary efficacy outcome was Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) 24-hour average pain, analyzed using a mixed-effects repeated measures approach. Secondary outcomes included Patient's Global Impressions-Improvement (PGI-I), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) pain and physical functioning, Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S), BPI-Severity and -Interference, and weekly 24-hour average pain. Tolerability was also assessed. Compared with placebo-treated patients, duloxetine-treated patients had significantly greater reductions from baseline on the primary outcome, BPI average pain, from visit 3 through visit 5 (P < .001). Compared with placebo, duloxetine significantly reduced the WOMAC total scores (P = .044), weekly 24-hour average pain (P = .008), and CGI-S (P = .009). The PGI-I was improved significantly in duloxetine treated patients from visit 3 through visit 5 (P ≤ .05). Frequency of nausea, constipation, and hyperhidrosis were significantly higher in duloxetine group compared with placebo (P ≤ .05). Significantly more duloxetine-treated patients discontinued due to adverse events (P = .002). Compared with placebo, duloxetine treatment effectively reduced the pain and improved function in patients with OA knee pain; it was well tolerated.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.557
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePM&RSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207