Placebo Response to Oral Administration in Osteoarthritis Clinical Trials and Its Associated Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: In osteoarthritis (OA) clinical trials, a placebo is often used as control. Therefore, a thorough understanding of the placebo response is important for guiding drug development in OA. Objective: To develop an oral placebo response model for OA. Data Sources: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically from January 1, 1991, to July 2, 2022. Study Selection: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials of patients with primary OA were included. The interventions and placebo were administered orally. A total of 3032 trials were identified; of these, 130 (4.3%) met the inclusion criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, dosage form of the placebo, sample size, proportion of patients who previously used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, publication year, intervention categories, Kellgren-Lawrence grades, proportion of White patients, duration of pain, funding source, and risk of bias were extracted. A model-based meta-analysis was used to evaluate the time course of the placebo response in OA treatment and estimate the influencing factors. For subgroup analyses, a meta-analysis with a random-effects model was used to summarize the typical values of the model parameters and their SEs. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the time course of the oral placebo response on the WOMAC pain, stiffness, and function subscale scores. Results: The 130 trials selected for analysis included 12 673 participants (mean age, 59.9 years; 68.9% women). The baseline scores of WOMAC pain, stiffness, and function subscales were found to be significantly associated with the placebo response. The placebo response reached 90% of its maximum response between 5 and 7 weeks. The placebo responses on the WOMAC subscales were also associated with the sample size, proportion of patients who had previously used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, intervention drugs, and publication year. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, an oral placebo response model of OA was developed that may quantitatively describe the placebo response at different baseline levels of symptoms. The findings may provide valuable references for future clinical trial design and decision-making.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.118 | 0.106 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".