Efficacy and Safety of Undenatured Type II Collagen in The Treatment of Osteoarthritis of The Knee: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Available medication for pain and joint stiffness release in osteoarthritis (OA) often gives considerable side effects. Undenatured type II collagen (UC-II) has been considered as a treatment for OA for its ability to prevent the progress of articular cartilage damage. Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UC-II in modulating knee joint function.METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study involving 102 OA subjects. Subjects were randomized into two groups: receiving an oral daily dose of 40 mg/day UC-II or placebo containing microcrystalline cellulose for 90 days. Efficacy was evaluated by using the Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Lequesne’s Functional Index (LFI), and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score on day-1, -7, -30, -60, and -90. Safety was evaluated by assessing the adverse events (AEs) and abnormal laboratory findings.RESULTS: The WOMAC total score showed a significant difference between the UC-II group vs. the placebo group from day-7 (p<0.05) to day-90 (p<0.01). UC-II was more effective in reducing the WOMAC total scores by 81.6% compared to 19.2% in the placebo group after 90 days. The total LFI and VAS score was significantly reduced in subjects supplemented with UC-II compared to the placebo group (75.8% vs. 7.8%; 67.9% vs. 12.2%, respectively). No significant changes were observed in vital signs and clinical laboratory tests compared to the placebo. The UC-II had a good safety profile with no serious adverse events among participants.CONCLUSION: UC-II significantly improved the knee pain, stiffness, and functional mobility of OA patients and was well-tolerated.KEYWORDS: osteoarthritis, undenatured type II collagen, WOMAC, VAS, LFI
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".