MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411487093 · doi:10.1111/ijcp.12807

Efficacy and safety of fulranumab as monotherapy in patients with moderate to severe, chronic knee pain of primary osteoarthritis: a randomised, placebo- and active-controlled trial

2016· article· en· W2411487093 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Arthur J. Mayorga, S. Wang, Kathleen Kelly, John Thipphawong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Clinical Practice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJanssen Research and Development
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboOsteoarthritisOxycodoneClinical endpointInternal medicineClinical trialPlacebo-controlled studyAnesthesiaPhysical therapyDouble blindOpioid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: The efficacy and safety of monotherapy with fulranumab, a monoclonal antibody that neutralises human nerve growth factor (NGF), was evaluated compared with placebo and an active comparator, controlled-release (CR) oxycodone, in patients with moderate to severe chronic knee pain of primary osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: In this phase-2, double-blind (DB), double-dummy, placebo- and active-controlled study, patients (40-80 years) were randomised (1:1:1:1) to placebo, fulranumab 3 or 9mg every 4 weeks (Q4 wk), or oxycodone CR twice-daily. Primary efficacy end-point: responder rates based on percent improvement in average osteoarthritis-related pain intensity (OAPI) scores from baseline to week-12 or when Food and Drug Administration (FDA) put a clinical hold on all anti-NGF trials, whichever was earlier. Secondary efficacy end-points: average OAPI score (week-16), Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index Global Score and subscales (pain, physical function, stiffness), and Patient Global Assessment. RESULTS: As of an FDA clinical hold on all anti-NGF trials, only 196/300 patients were randomised and 33% (65/196) had completed 12 weeks of the 16-week DB phase. Responders were patients who did not withdraw and whose pain improved. Responder rates were not significantly different between fulranumab treatment groups (3mgQ4wk: 71%, p = 0.739; 9mgQ4wk: 80%, p = 0.843) and placebo (77%), whereas, oxycodone CR (56%) had significantly lower responder rates in comparison to both fulranumab (3mgQ4wk: p = 0.008; 9mgQ4wk: p = 0.012) and placebo (p = 0.0021). Secondary efficacy results were consistent with primary. None of the joint replacements (four in three patients) were adjudicated as rapidly progressing OA/osteonecrosis. CONCLUSION: Low sample size because of early termination make interpretation of this study difficult, but fulranumab monotherapy resulted in significantly better pain relief and function compared with oxycodone CR (but not against placebo) and was generally well-tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01094262.

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)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score0.741

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations38
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Clinical PracticeSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207