Comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of chondroitin plus glucosamine and D-002 (beeswax alcohols) in subjects with osteoarthritis symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Osteoarthritis (OA), the commonest joint disorder, is a leading cause of disability. Symptomatic slow-acting drugs for OA (SYSADOA), particularly glucosamine plus chondroitin sulphate (GS/CS), are effective for symptom relief, protect joint cartilage and delay OA progression, with a good safety profile. D-002, a mixture of beeswax alcohols that inhibits both cyclooxygenase and 5-lipoxygenase activities, has been effective in experimental and clinical OA studies, showing also a chondroprotective effect. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of D-002 and GS/SC administered for 12 weeks on OA symptoms. METHODS: Participants were randomized to GS/CS (375/300 mg) or 50 mg D-002 once daily for 12 weeks. Symptoms were assessed by the Western Ontario and McMaster Individual Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Visual Analogy Scale (VAS) scores. The primary outcome was the reduction of the total WOMAC score. Secondary outcomes included WOMAC pain, stiffness and function scores, VAS score and rescue medication consumption. RESULTS: Of 60 randomized patients, 59 completed the study. D-002 and GS/SC reduced significantly total WOMAC score (72.1% and 78.5%, respectively), and pain, joint stiffness and physical function scores versus baseline. VAS scores decreased significantly with D-002 (76.6%) and GS/SC (76.8%). The reductions, significant from the second week, were enhanced over the trial. Rescue medications were consumed by 3/30 D-002 and 4/30 GS/SC patients. No differences between groups were found. Treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: D-002 (50 mg/day) administered for 12 weeks was safe and comparable to GS/SC for alleviating OA symptoms (pain, stiffness, and functional limitation) (RPCEC00000180).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".