Gastrointestinal safety and efficacy of long-term GCSB-5 use in patients with osteoarthritis: A 24-week, multicenter study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ETHNOPHARMACOLOGY RELEVANCE: A previous study indicated non-inferiority of GCSB-5 to celecoxib regarding efficacy and safety in treating OA; however, the gastrointestinal (GI) safety data was limited to 12 weeks. Accordingly, a longer term study with a larger number of patients was necessary to establish the GI safety of GCSB-5. AIM OF STUDY: The primary goal was to determine the safety and efficacy of 24-week use of GCSB-5. The secondary goal was to compare the GI safety data of GCSB-5 with that of the previously reported Celecoxib Long-term Arthritis Safety Study (CLASS). METHOD: This was a 24-week, multicenter, single-arm phase IV Study for the safety and efficacy of GCSB-5. A total of 761 patients were enrolled and 756 patients received at least one dose of GCSB-5. Among them, 629 patients (82.7%) completed the 24 week follow up. The primary goal was to determine the safety and efficacy of GCSB-5 for 24 weeks. The secondary goal was to compare the GI safety data of GCSB-5 with that of the previously reported Celecoxib Long-term Arthritis Safety Study (CLASS). RESULTS: The incidence of GI disorders of GCSB-5 was 23.7%. The annual rate of perforation, ulcer obstruction, or bleeding (PUB) incidence was 0.0%. The drop-out rate due to GI disorders following GCSB-5 use was 4.8%. Compared to celecoxib data from CLASS, the incidence of GI disorders (23.7% vs. 31.4%, p<0.001), annual rate of PUB and gastroduodenal ulcers (0.0% vs 2.2%, p=0.004), and drop-out rate due to GI disorders following GCSB-5 use were significantly low (4.8% vs 8.7%, p<0.001). Efficacy was proven by significant improvements in Western Ontario McMaster Questionnaire (WOMAC) scale, Korean Knee Score (KKS), 100-mm pain visual analogue scale (VAS), and physician's global assessments of patient's response to therapy (PGART). CONCLUSIONS: The safety and efficacy profile of GCSB-5 are comparable to celecoxib. These results indicate GCSB-5 is safe for a long-term treatment of knee OA patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01604239).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".