Corticosteroids, hyaluronic acid, platelet-rich plasma, and cell-based therapies for knee osteoarthritis - literature trends are shifting in the injectable treatments' evidence: a systematic review and expert opinion.

IF 4 3区 医学 Q2 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-09 DOI:10.1080/14712598.2025.2465833
Alessandro Bensa, Luca Bianco Prevot, Giacomo Moraca, Alessandro Sangiorgio, Angelo Boffa, Giuseppe Filardo
{"title":"Corticosteroids, hyaluronic acid, platelet-rich plasma, and cell-based therapies for knee osteoarthritis - literature trends are shifting in the injectable treatments' evidence: a systematic review and expert opinion.","authors":"Alessandro Bensa, Luca Bianco Prevot, Giacomo Moraca, Alessandro Sangiorgio, Angelo Boffa, Giuseppe Filardo","doi":"10.1080/14712598.2025.2465833","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The aim of this systematic review was to quantify the data available on corticosteroids (CS), hyaluronic acid, (HA), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and cell-based therapies for knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science according to the PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria: clinical studies of any level of evidence, written in English, evaluating the intra-articular use of CS, HA, PRP, or cell-based therapies for knee OA treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The initial search identified 17,415 records. A total of 766 studies from 1959 were included. Of these, 401 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 110 comparative studies, and 255 case series, for a total of 75,834 patients. (11,245 treated with CS, 40,862 with HA, 16,174 with PRP, and 7,553 with cell-based therapies). The number of placebo-controlled RCTs remains limited and a negligible percentage of studies investigated possible disease-modifying effects of these treatments for knee OA.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The evidence on injective knee OA treatments is increasing at different speeds with a more rapidly growing literature focusing on orthobiologics. Currently, HA has the largest evidence, followed by PRP that recently surpassed the number of studies evaluating CS. Cell-based therapies are also growing rapidly, although the number of studies is still lower. The rapid literature shift toward orthobiologics urges an update in societies' guidelines to align with the new body of evidence on knee OA treatments.</p><p><strong>Protocol registration: </strong>www.crd.york.ac.uk/prosperoi dentifier is CRD42024592972.</p>","PeriodicalId":12084,"journal":{"name":"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"309-318"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14712598.2025.2465833","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this systematic review was to quantify the data available on corticosteroids (CS), hyaluronic acid, (HA), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and cell-based therapies for knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment.

Methods: A literature search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science according to the PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria: clinical studies of any level of evidence, written in English, evaluating the intra-articular use of CS, HA, PRP, or cell-based therapies for knee OA treatment.

Results: The initial search identified 17,415 records. A total of 766 studies from 1959 were included. Of these, 401 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 110 comparative studies, and 255 case series, for a total of 75,834 patients. (11,245 treated with CS, 40,862 with HA, 16,174 with PRP, and 7,553 with cell-based therapies). The number of placebo-controlled RCTs remains limited and a negligible percentage of studies investigated possible disease-modifying effects of these treatments for knee OA.

Conclusions: The evidence on injective knee OA treatments is increasing at different speeds with a more rapidly growing literature focusing on orthobiologics. Currently, HA has the largest evidence, followed by PRP that recently surpassed the number of studies evaluating CS. Cell-based therapies are also growing rapidly, although the number of studies is still lower. The rapid literature shift toward orthobiologics urges an update in societies' guidelines to align with the new body of evidence on knee OA treatments.

Protocol registration: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prosperoi dentifier is CRD42024592972.

皮质类固醇、透明质酸、富血小板血浆和基于细胞的治疗膝关节骨性关节炎的文献趋势正在改变注射治疗的证据:系统回顾和专家意见。
本系统综述的目的是量化关于皮质类固醇(CS)、透明质酸(HA)、富血小板血浆(PRP)和细胞疗法治疗膝骨关节炎(OA)的数据。方法:根据PRISMA指南,在PubMed、Cochrane、WebofScience上进行文献检索。纳入标准:任何水平证据的临床研究,用英文书写,评估CS、HA、PRP或细胞疗法在膝关节OA治疗中的关节内应用。结果:最初的搜索确定了17,415条记录。共纳入了1959年以来的766项研究。其中,401项为随机对照试验,110项为比较研究,255项为病例系列,共计75,834例患者。(11,245人接受CS治疗,40,862人接受HA治疗,16,174人接受PRP治疗,7,553人接受细胞治疗)。结论:关于膝关节关节炎注射治疗的证据正以不同的速度增加,而聚焦于骨科的文献增长更快。目前,HA拥有最多的证据,其次是PRP,最近超过了评估CS的研究数量。细胞疗法也在迅速发展,尽管研究的数量仍然较少。快速转向骨科的文献促使社会指南更新,以配合膝关节OA治疗的新证据。协议注册:www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero标识为CRD42024592972。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy 医学-生物工程与应用微生物
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
96
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy (1471-2598; 1744-7682) is a MEDLINE-indexed, international journal publishing peer-reviewed research across all aspects of biological therapy. Each article is structured to incorporate the author’s own expert opinion on the impact of the topic on research and clinical practice and the scope for future development. The audience consists of scientists and managers in the healthcare and biopharmaceutical industries and others closely involved in the development and application of biological therapies for the treatment of human disease. The journal welcomes: Reviews covering therapeutic antibodies and vaccines, peptides and proteins, gene therapies and gene transfer technologies, cell-based therapies and regenerative medicine Drug evaluations reviewing the clinical data on a particular biological agent Original research papers reporting the results of clinical investigations on biological agents and biotherapeutic-based studies with a strong link to clinical practice Comprehensive coverage in each review is complemented by the unique Expert Collection format and includes the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results; Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信