MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161229325 · doi:10.3389/fphar.2021.646310

Clinical Efficacy of Cortex Daphnes (Zushima) Patch in Patients With Symptomatic Knee Osteoarthritis: A Multicenter Non-Inferiority Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

2021· article· en· W3161229325 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yanting Li, Juan Jiao, Yi Zhang, Cibo Huang, Haidong Wang, Bei Wang, Xiao Su, Hui Song, Mian-song Zhao, De-Xun Jiang, Jiaqiang Wang, Quan Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pharmacology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisVisual analogue scaleRandomized controlled trialPopulationConfidence intervalPhysical therapyClinical trialInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is imposing substantial burdens on individuals and society with the aging population. Cortex Daphnes patch is widely used for symptomatic knee OA in China with a satisfying clinical efficacy; however, there is scant clinical evidence supporting its use. To evaluate its efficacy, we conducted a multicenter, non-inferiority, randomized, parallel-group study comparing Cortex Daphnes patch with topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with knee OA (NCT02770950). Methods: A total of 264 symptomatic knee OA patients were treated with Cortex Daphnes or indomethacin cataplasms applied to affected sites once daily for 2 weeks. The primary outcome was improvement in knee pain on walking as assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS). The non-inferiority margin based on the full analysis population was set as –5 mm on the pain VAS. The secondary outcomes were changes of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) total score, WOMAC scores for pain, function and stiffness, the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and global assessment of knees by the patients. Responder rates for pain VAS, WOMAC total score, and WOMAC pain were also included in the secondary outcomes. Results: The Cortex Daphnes patch was non-inferior to indomethacin cataplasms for the primary outcome with a group difference (Cortex Daphnes patch–indomethacin cataplasm) of 2.1 mm (95% confidence interval: 2.1–6.4); similar results were found in the per-protocol population. For all other outcomes, no significant differences were found in the full analysis set or in the per-protocol analysis set, except the responder rates for WOMAC pain was higher in the Cortex Daphnes patch group than in the indomethacin cataplasm group (78.4 vs. 64.7%, p = 0.022) in the per-protocol analysis set. Overall, 28.8% patients in the Cortex Daphnes patch group and 9.8% in the indomethacin cataplasm group reported treatment-related adverse events, the vast majority of which were mild-to-moderate skin irritation, resulting in only 3.8 and 0.8% of patients dropping out, respectively. Conclusion: The Cortex Daphnes patch, which provides satisfactory analgesic efficacy and enhances the physical function of the knee, as well as improving quality of life, may be a promising alternative to knee OA.

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PharmacologySame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207