Comparing Patient-Reported Outcomes From Sham and Saline-Based Placebo Injections for Knee Osteoarthritis: Data From a Randomized Clinical Trial of Lorecivivint
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Durable, meaningful symptom responses to intra-articular saline placebo injections are observed in knee osteoarthritis (OA) trials, but it is unclear if these are due to physiological effects. Purpose: To perform a prospective comparison of patient-reported outcome responses among participants with knee OA who underwent intra-articular injection of saline-based placebo or sham (dry needle). Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: From a 24-week randomized double-blind trial, participants with moderate to severe knee OA received 2-mL intra-articular injections of saline-based placebo (PBO; 99.45% PBS) or sham (dry needle) to the target knee. Least squares mean differences of changes from baseline to week 24 were compared between the PBO and sham groups for the following: pain Numeric Rating Scale; Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain, stiffness, and function; and patient global assessment. Bang Blinding Index was used to evaluate all-group blinding on day 1 and week 24. Results: In total, 116 and 117 participants were randomized to the PBO and sham groups, respectively. Within the full trial population, the mean ± SD age and body mass index were 59.0 ± 8.5 years and 28.97 ± 4.01, respectively. An overall 406 (58.4%) were female, and 394 (57.3%) had Kellgren-Lawrence grade 3 target knee OA. The PBO and sham groups demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements (≥10%) from baseline in all patient-reported outcomes at all time points (ie, weeks 4-24). Mean differences (95% CI) at week 24 between the PBO and sham groups were as follows: pain Numeric Rating Scale, –0.10 (–0.79 to 0.59; P = .78); WOMAC pain, –2.89 (–9.70 to 3.92; P = .40); WOMAC stiffness, –2.37 (–9.37 to 4.63; P = .51); and WOMAC function, –1.39 (–8.06 to 5.29; P = .68). Bang Blinding Index indicated that blinding was maintained. Conclusion: PBO and sham groups demonstrated equivalent patient-reported outcomes at all time points through week 24, suggesting that responses attributed to saline were contextual (ie, to the procedure) and not physiological. Registration: NCT03122860 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).
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 | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".