Exploring a novel outcome measure of symptom progression in knee osteoarthritis utilizing a large randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Explore a newly defined composite measure of symptom progression for knee osteoarthritis (KOA) in a large, randomized study of a potential disease-modifying osteoarthritis drug (DMOAD). DESIGN: Using longitudinal KOA studies, a potential composite endpoint of time to symptom progression was defined as the first occurrence of worsening of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain of ≥10 points with no improvement (≤9 point decrease) in WOMAC Function (0-100 scale). A post hoc analysis explored discrimination and association with structural outcomes in the sprifermin FORWARD trial through Years 3 and 5. All treatment arms of the intent-to-treat population were analyzed. RESULTS: Among the 549 FORWARD participants, 442 (80.5%) completed Year 3, and 378 (68.9%) completed Year 5. Sprifermin showed dose-dependent benefits in the time to symptom progression at Year 3 with hazard ratio (95% CI) for each sprifermin treatment arm vs placebo as follows: 100 μg every 6 months (Q6M), 0.51 (0.28, 0.93); 100 μg Q12M, 0.69 (0.40, 1.20); 30 μg Q6M, 0.89 (0.53, 1.50); and 30 μg Q12M, 0.80 (0.47, 1.35). Similar findings were seen through Year 5 and for a subgroup based on modern clinical trial inclusion criteria. There were increased numbers of knee replacements in symptom progressors (n=8, 5.6%) vs non-progressors (n=7, 1.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The symptom progression endpoint discriminated between placebo and treatment responses in a post hoc analysis of a Phase 2 investigational DMOAD KOA trial. The endpoint requires validation and further exploration in DMOAD clinical trials. TRIAL NUMBER: NCT01919164.
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 | 0.038 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; 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".