MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7073734132

Effect of atorvastatin on knee cartilage volume in patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: results from a randomized placebo-controlled trial

2021· article· en· W7073734132 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic Crystal and Fiber Optics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisPlaceboCartilageAtorvastatinConfidence intervalMagnetic resonance imagingWOMAC
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Objective To determine whether atorvastatin slows tibial cartilage volume loss in patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Methods Participants ages 40-70 years were randomized to receive oral atorvastatin (40 mg once daily) (n = 151) or matching placebo (n = 153). The primary end point was annual percentage change in tibial cartilage volume over 2 years, assessed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The prespecified secondary end points were progression of cartilage defects and bone marrow lesions over 2 years, which were assessed using MRI and change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) Index pain, stiffness, and function scores. Results A total of 248 of 304 participants (81.6%) completed the trial (mean age 55.7 years; 55.6% women). The annual change in tibial cartilage volume differed minimally between the atorvastatin and placebo groups (mean change -1.66% versus -2.17%, between-group difference 0.50% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) -0.17%, 1.17%]). There were no significant differences in the progression of cartilage defects (odds ratio [OR] 0.86 [95% CI 0.52, 1.41]) or progression of bone marrow lesions (OR 1.00 [95% CI 0.62, 1.63]). Moreover, there were no significant differences in change in WOMAC pain, stiffness, or function scores over 2 years between the atorvastatin and placebo groups (mean change in pain score -36.0 versus -29.5, adjusted difference -2.7 [95% CI -27.1, 21.7]; mean change in stiffness score -14.2 versus -11.8, adjusted difference -0.2 [95% CI -12.2, 11.8]; mean change in function score -89.4 versus -87.5, adjusted difference 0.3 [95% CI -83.1, 83.6]). The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar between the atorvastatin and placebo groups (57 [37.7%] versus 52 [34.0%] experiencing AEs). Conclusion Treatment with oral atorvastatin (40 mg once daily), compared to placebo, did not significantly reduce cartilage volume loss over 2 years in patients with symptomatic knee OA. These findings do not support the use of atorvastatin for the treatment of knee OA.</p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.182 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicPhotonic Crystal and Fiber OpticsFrench-language works237,207