Efficacy and safety of fasinumab in an NSAID-controlled study in patients with pain due to osteoarthritis of the knee or hip
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis (OA) causes significant musculoskeletal pain. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of fasinumab, an investigational nerve growth factor inhibitor, in patients with moderate-to-severe OA pain of the knee/hip. METHODS: In this Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-controlled study, patients with OA (Kellgren-Lawrence grade ≥ 2; Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index [WOMAC] pain score ≥ 4) received (2:1:1:1) fasinumab 1 mg every 4 weeks, diclofenac 75 mg twice daily, celecoxib 200 mg daily, or placebo for 24 weeks. Co‑primary endpoints were change in WOMAC pain and physical function scores to Week 24 versus placebo. For safety, joints were imaged in all patients at pre‑specified times, regardless of symptoms. RESULTS: Of 4531 patients screened, 1650 were randomized. At Week 24, greater improvements were observed for fasinumab versus placebo; least-squares mean difference: -0.63 (p = 0.0003) for WOMAC pain and -0.64 (p = 0.0003) for physical function. Improvements were numerically greater for fasinumab versus NSAIDs for physical function (-0.64 versus -0.31; nominal p < 0.05) and pain (-0.63 versus - 0.39; p = NS). Adjudicated arthropathies occurred in 1.6% of placebo-treated, 1.5% of NSAID-treated, and 5.6% of fasinumab-treated patients; joint replacements occurred in 3.6% of placebo-treated, 4.8% of NSAID-treated, and 3.4% of fasinumab-treated patients. CONCLUSION: Fasinumab significantly improved WOMAC pain and physical function scores versus placebo in < 24 weeks in difficult-to-treat patients with pain due to OA of the knee/hip. Adjudicated arthropathies were more frequent with fasinumab; there were no differences in the proportions of patients with joint replacements. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03304379. Date of first registration: October 2, 2017.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".