Sulfato de glucosamina y condroitín sulfato, fármacos para el tratamiento de la artrosis, acusados de no presentar eficacia clínica. ¿Culpables?

Q4 Medicine
Rosario Calvo
{"title":"Sulfato de glucosamina y condroitín sulfato, fármacos para el tratamiento de la artrosis, acusados de no presentar eficacia clínica. ¿Culpables?","authors":"Rosario Calvo","doi":"10.1016/j.gmb.2012.08.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Glucosamine sulphate and chondroitin sulphate have been approved by the Spanish Medications and Health Products Agency for the symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis arthritis. Their efficacy and safety have been demonstrated in multiple clinical studies and via meta-analyses. Recently, based on a meta-analysis published in the British Medical Journal (2010), the therapeutic advantage of glucosamine and chondroitin sulphate versus other older drugs has been seriously questioned. The publication was criticized from key opinion leaders in the field and the journal published a rectification criticizing some aspects of the paper, particularly its conclusions on a possible veto on funding and prescription of these drugs, which were not directly related to the results. The methodology employed was also widely criticized and therefore the entire paper should be interpreted with reserve. Despite subsequent support for the use of these drugs, the impact of that first publication on their funding and use remains considerable.</p><p>The present study analyzes, from a pharmacological point of view, the causes that may have contributed to a false and imprudent accusation. The aim is to define the correct place of glucosamine sulphate and chondroitin sulphate in the treatment of osteoarthritis arthritis, a chronic disease whose prevalence is increasing and which, by 2020, could become the fourth most important cause of disability worldwide.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":35686,"journal":{"name":"Gaceta Medica de Bilbao","volume":"109 4","pages":"Pages 158-164"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.gmb.2012.08.001","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gaceta Medica de Bilbao","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304485812000704","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Glucosamine sulphate and chondroitin sulphate have been approved by the Spanish Medications and Health Products Agency for the symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis arthritis. Their efficacy and safety have been demonstrated in multiple clinical studies and via meta-analyses. Recently, based on a meta-analysis published in the British Medical Journal (2010), the therapeutic advantage of glucosamine and chondroitin sulphate versus other older drugs has been seriously questioned. The publication was criticized from key opinion leaders in the field and the journal published a rectification criticizing some aspects of the paper, particularly its conclusions on a possible veto on funding and prescription of these drugs, which were not directly related to the results. The methodology employed was also widely criticized and therefore the entire paper should be interpreted with reserve. Despite subsequent support for the use of these drugs, the impact of that first publication on their funding and use remains considerable.

The present study analyzes, from a pharmacological point of view, the causes that may have contributed to a false and imprudent accusation. The aim is to define the correct place of glucosamine sulphate and chondroitin sulphate in the treatment of osteoarthritis arthritis, a chronic disease whose prevalence is increasing and which, by 2020, could become the fourth most important cause of disability worldwide.

硫酸氨基葡萄糖和硫酸软骨素,治疗骨关节炎的药物,被指控没有临床疗效。¿有罪吗?
硫酸氨基葡萄糖和硫酸软骨素已被西班牙药品和保健品管理局批准用于骨关节炎的对症治疗。其有效性和安全性已在多项临床研究和荟萃分析中得到证实。最近,根据《英国医学杂志》(2010)上发表的一项荟萃分析,氨基葡萄糖和硫酸软骨素相对于其他老药的治疗优势受到了严重质疑。该出版物受到了该领域主要意见领袖的批评,该杂志发表了一篇纠正文章,批评了该论文的某些方面,特别是其关于可能否决这些药物的资助和处方的结论,这些结论与结果没有直接关系。所采用的方法也受到了广泛的批评,因此整篇论文的解释应该有所保留。尽管后来支持使用这些药物,但首次出版物对其筹资和使用的影响仍然很大。本研究分析,从药理学的角度来看,可能导致错误和轻率的指控的原因。目的是确定硫酸氨基葡萄糖和硫酸软骨素在治疗骨关节炎中的正确地位。关节炎是一种慢性疾病,其发病率正在上升,到2020年可能成为全球第四大致残原因。
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
Gaceta Medica de Bilbao
Gaceta Medica de Bilbao Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信