A Phase 3, 28-week, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (OA-10) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single injection of lorecivivint in the target knee joint of moderately to severely symptomatic osteoarthritis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of an intra-articular (IA) CLK/DYRK inhibitor, lorecivivint (LOR), for the treatment of moderate to severe symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: This was a Phase 3, 28-week, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the efficacy and safety of a single IA injection of LOR. Patients with ACR-defined knee OA, Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grades 2-3, and pain Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) ≥4 and ≤8 in the target knee were randomised (1:1) to receive LOR 0.07 mg or vehicle placebo (PBO) on Day 1. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in Pain NRS at Week 12 between LOR and PBO. Additional outcomes included the change from baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Function, WOMAC Pain, Patient Global Assessment and safety. RESULTS: 498 patients were randomised, and 51.9% had KL Grade 3 severity. In the full analysis set (FAS), LOR failed to meet the primary endpoint when compared to PBO. No significant treatment differences were noted in other efficacy endpoints. A post-hoc analysis demonstrated a positive treatment effect of LOR relative to PBO in the KL Grade 2 subgroup; the difference in weekly Pain NRS between LOR and PBO groups showed nominal statistical significance at Week 4 (p<0.05). Incidences, seriousness, and severity of adverse events were similar across the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: LOR was well tolerated despite not meeting the primary endpoint. Efficacy signals were identified in patients with less severe structural knee OA disease, suggesting earlier intervention may be more effective.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".