MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953974433 · doi:10.1089/acm.2019.0121

Efficacy and Safety of Honey Bee Venom ( <i>Apis mellifera)</i> Dermal Injections to Treat Osteoarthritis Knee Pain and Physical Disability: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2019· article· en· W2953974433 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vicki J. Conrad, Lydie Hazan, Agustin J. Latorre, Anna Jakubowska, Christopher M. H. Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare and Venom Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisRandomized controlled trialVisual analogue scalePhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: To evaluate purified honey bee (Apis mellifera) venom (HBV) biotherapy for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) knee pain and physical function. Design and Patients: Five hundred and thirty-eight patients with Kellgren/Lawrence grade 1–3 radiographic knee OA and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score ≥2 were randomized 1:2 to either control (“histamine”) or HBV in this double-blind study. Interventions: After a dose escalation period, patients received 12 weekly dermal injections of control (“histamine”) or HBV. At each of the 12 weekly visits, a set of 15 dermal injections (each containing 2.75 μg histamine or 100 μg HBV) were administered at prespecified acupuncture points (5 on each knee: knee top, eye-1 medial, eye-2 lateral, ST 34, BL 40 and 5 near the spinous processes: BL 19, 21, 23, 25, and 27). Outcome Measures: Assessments included WOMAC pain and physical function subscales, visual analog scale (VAS), patient global assessment (PGA), and physician global assessment (PhGA). Rescue medication use (acetaminophen) and routine safety parameters were monitored. Results: HBV biotherapy demonstrated a highly significant improvement over control in WOMAC pain score after 12 weeks (1.1 U mean difference; confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.3–2.0; analysis of covariance [ANCOVA] p = 0.0010 with baseline as covariate) that was also sustained 4 weeks post-treatment. Furthermore, WOMAC physical function was significantly improved over control with HBV (3.1 U mean difference; 95% CI: 0.3–5.9; ANCOVA p = 0.0046), and sustained 4 weeks post-treatment. VAS scores were significantly improved with HBV versus control, as well as PGA and PhGA evaluations, which showed that patients responded more favorably (”very good/good”) to their overall OA condition (82.0% vs. 62.4% [p = 0.0001] and 82.1% vs. 54.9% [p = 0.0015], respectively). Use of rescue acetaminophen was similar between the groups (77%–78% of patients). HBV was associated with higher incidence of injection site reactions (<5%); however, the overall safety profiles were comparable between the treatment groups. Conclusions: This phase 3 trial demonstrated that HBV biotherapy resulted in significant improvements in knee OA pain and physical function.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations29
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Alternative and Complementary MedicineSame topicHealthcare and Venom ResearchFrench-language works237,207