在关节内注射生物制剂治疗膝骨关节炎的临床试验中,安慰剂效应更大。

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY
Johanna M Borst, Severin Ruoss, Ian Palmer, Trevor Smith, Kenneth Kalunian, Samuel R Ward
{"title":"在关节内注射生物制剂治疗膝骨关节炎的临床试验中,安慰剂效应更大。","authors":"Johanna M Borst, Severin Ruoss, Ian Palmer, Trevor Smith, Kenneth Kalunian, Samuel R Ward","doi":"10.1002/acr.25526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) rely on symptomatic treatments where up to 75% of the pain reduction can be attributed to the placebo effect. This effect may vary based on treatment type (e.g., biologics vs. non-biologic injection) and route of administration (e.g., intra-articular vs. topical vs. oral). The placebo effect is an integral part of treatment effect size calculation; thus, network analyses comparing efficacies of different treatments may be inaccurate. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that placebo effects differ between treatment types and route of delivery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature search was carried out in August 2019. Randomized trials comparing pain outcomes of oral, topical, or intra-articular placebo interventions to active treatments were included. The outcome measure of interest was change in pain scores from baseline. Data were stratified by length of follow up and treatment subcategory.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>129 papers were included with 9218 patients receiving placebo treatments. Reduction in pain from baseline occurred in 93% of the subcategory data points. Biologic IA placebo injections had the greatest pain reduction at one month (VAS: -32.2 ± 24.6; WOMAC -16.3 ± 3.81). At one month and two months, placebo intra-articular injections had a greater pain reduction than oral placeboes (P ≤0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The robust placebo effect is influenced by the active treatment category and changes over time. The variation in placebo response despite analogous placebo methodologies implies using network meta-analyses to compare treatments from different active treatment categories by evaluating the change from placebo is inaccurate.</p>","PeriodicalId":8406,"journal":{"name":"Arthritis Care & Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Placebo Effect Sizes are Larger in Clinical Trials of Knee Osteoarthritis using Intra-Articular Injections of Biologic Agents.\",\"authors\":\"Johanna M Borst, Severin Ruoss, Ian Palmer, Trevor Smith, Kenneth Kalunian, Samuel R Ward\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/acr.25526\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) rely on symptomatic treatments where up to 75% of the pain reduction can be attributed to the placebo effect. This effect may vary based on treatment type (e.g., biologics vs. non-biologic injection) and route of administration (e.g., intra-articular vs. topical vs. oral). The placebo effect is an integral part of treatment effect size calculation; thus, network analyses comparing efficacies of different treatments may be inaccurate. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that placebo effects differ between treatment types and route of delivery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature search was carried out in August 2019. Randomized trials comparing pain outcomes of oral, topical, or intra-articular placebo interventions to active treatments were included. The outcome measure of interest was change in pain scores from baseline. Data were stratified by length of follow up and treatment subcategory.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>129 papers were included with 9218 patients receiving placebo treatments. Reduction in pain from baseline occurred in 93% of the subcategory data points. Biologic IA placebo injections had the greatest pain reduction at one month (VAS: -32.2 ± 24.6; WOMAC -16.3 ± 3.81). At one month and two months, placebo intra-articular injections had a greater pain reduction than oral placeboes (P ≤0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The robust placebo effect is influenced by the active treatment category and changes over time. The variation in placebo response despite analogous placebo methodologies implies using network meta-analyses to compare treatments from different active treatment categories by evaluating the change from placebo is inaccurate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthritis Care & Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthritis Care & Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.25526\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthritis Care & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.25526","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:膝骨关节炎(KOA)患者依赖于对症治疗,其中高达75%的疼痛减轻可归因于安慰剂效应。这种效果可能根据治疗类型(例如,生物制剂与非生物制剂注射)和给药途径(例如,关节内、局部和口服)而有所不同。安慰剂效应是治疗效应大小计算的一个组成部分;因此,比较不同治疗效果的网络分析可能是不准确的。本研究的目的是检验安慰剂效应在治疗类型和给药途径之间存在差异的假设。方法:于2019年8月进行系统文献检索。包括比较口服、局部或关节内安慰剂干预与积极治疗的疼痛结局的随机试验。结果测量感兴趣的是疼痛评分从基线的变化。数据按随访时间和治疗亚类进行分层。结果:共纳入129篇论文,9218名接受安慰剂治疗的患者。93%的子类别数据点的疼痛从基线开始减轻。生物IA安慰剂注射在1个月时疼痛减轻最大(VAS: -32.2±24.6;Womac -16.3±3.81)。在1个月和2个月时,安慰剂关节内注射比口服安慰剂更能减轻疼痛(P≤0.01)。结论:强有力的安慰剂效应受积极治疗类别的影响,并随时间变化。尽管有类似的安慰剂方法,但安慰剂反应的变化表明,通过评估安慰剂的变化,使用网络荟萃分析来比较不同积极治疗类别的治疗是不准确的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Placebo Effect Sizes are Larger in Clinical Trials of Knee Osteoarthritis using Intra-Articular Injections of Biologic Agents.

Objective: Patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) rely on symptomatic treatments where up to 75% of the pain reduction can be attributed to the placebo effect. This effect may vary based on treatment type (e.g., biologics vs. non-biologic injection) and route of administration (e.g., intra-articular vs. topical vs. oral). The placebo effect is an integral part of treatment effect size calculation; thus, network analyses comparing efficacies of different treatments may be inaccurate. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that placebo effects differ between treatment types and route of delivery.

Methods: A systematic literature search was carried out in August 2019. Randomized trials comparing pain outcomes of oral, topical, or intra-articular placebo interventions to active treatments were included. The outcome measure of interest was change in pain scores from baseline. Data were stratified by length of follow up and treatment subcategory.

Results: 129 papers were included with 9218 patients receiving placebo treatments. Reduction in pain from baseline occurred in 93% of the subcategory data points. Biologic IA placebo injections had the greatest pain reduction at one month (VAS: -32.2 ± 24.6; WOMAC -16.3 ± 3.81). At one month and two months, placebo intra-articular injections had a greater pain reduction than oral placeboes (P ≤0.01).

Conclusions: The robust placebo effect is influenced by the active treatment category and changes over time. The variation in placebo response despite analogous placebo methodologies implies using network meta-analyses to compare treatments from different active treatment categories by evaluating the change from placebo is inaccurate.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
6.40%
发文量
368
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Arthritis Care & Research, an official journal of the American College of Rheumatology and the Association of Rheumatology Health Professionals (a division of the College), is a peer-reviewed publication that publishes original research, review articles, and editorials that promote excellence in the clinical practice of rheumatology. Relevant to the care of individuals with rheumatic diseases, major topics are evidence-based practice studies, clinical problems, practice guidelines, educational, social, and public health issues, health economics, health care policy, and future trends in rheumatology practice.
×
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