A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of a Krill Oil, Astaxanthin, and Oral Hyaluronic Acid Complex on Joint Health in People with Mild Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Osteoarthritis is a significant global health problem. Many patients seek more effective alternatives to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medicines or commercial supplements to manage joint pain and inflammation. FlexPro MD® (FP-MD) combines krill oil, astaxanthin, and lower molecular weight hyaluronic acid to support joint health. A 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial compared the efficacy and safety of FP-MD and placebo once daily in participants (n = 100) with mild osteoarthritis of the knee or hip joint. For the primary endpoint of joint pain score, per-protocol participants (n = 75) in the FP-MD group (n = 37) had a statistically significantly greater mean reduction from baseline in the Korean Visual Analog Scale (K-VAS) at week 12 compared with participants in the placebo group (n = 38) (20.8 ± 16.16 mm vs. 10.6 ± 17.58, p = 0.0105). The Korean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (K-WOMAC) total score was also significantly improved in the FP-MD group at week 12 compared with placebo (−13.0 ± 13.62 vs. −5.5 ± 18.08, p = 0.0489), especially an improvement in pain score (−2.5 ± 2.92 vs. −1.3 ± 3.94, p = 0.02635). FP-MD group had greater improvement in joint function scoring by investigator assessment (p = 0.0127) and by group participants (p = 0.0070). A statistically significantly greater number of patients reported adverse events in the placebo group compared with the FP-MD group (16% vs. 4%, p = 0.0455), most commonly gastrointestinal disorders in both of the groups. These findings suggest that FP-MD is well tolerated and can be effectively used to address joint pain in patients diagnosed with mild osteoarthritis, the main symptom of this condition.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".