16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Emerging Trend in the Pharmacotherapy of Osteoarthritis

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative joint disorder and one of the most prevalent diseases among the elderly population. Due to the limited spontaneous healing capacity of articular cartilage, it still remains challenging to find satisfactory treatment for OA. This review covers the emerging trends of pharmacologic therapies for OA such as traditional OA drugs (acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), intra-articular injections of corticosteroids, and dietary supplements), which are effective in pain relief but not in reversing damage, and are frequently associated with adverse events. Alternatively, disease-modifying drugs provide promising alternatives for the management of OA. The development of these emerging OA therapeutic agents requires a comprehensive understanding of the pathophysiology of OA progression. The process of cartilage anabolism/catabolism, subchondral bone remodeling and synovial inflammation are identified as potential targets. These emerging OA drugs such as bone morphogenetic protein-7 (BMP-7), fibroblast growth factor-18 (FGF-18), human serum albumin (HSA), interleukin-1 (IL-1) inhibitor, β-Nerve growth factor (β-NGF) antibody, matrix extracellular phosphoglycoprotein (MEPE) and inverse agonist of retinoic acid-related orphan receptor alpha (RORα) etc. have shown potential to modify progression of OA with minimal adverse effects. However, large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to investigate the safety and efficacy before translation from bench to bedside.

          Related collections

          Most cited references74

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          OARSI recommendations for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis, Part II: OARSI evidence-based, expert consensus guidelines.

          To develop concise, patient-focussed, up to date, evidence-based, expert consensus recommendations for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), which are adaptable and designed to assist physicians and allied health care professionals in general and specialist practise throughout the world. Sixteen experts from four medical disciplines (primary care, rheumatology, orthopaedics and evidence-based medicine), two continents and six countries (USA, UK, France, Netherlands, Sweden and Canada) formed the guidelines development team. A systematic review of existing guidelines for the management of hip and knee OA published between 1945 and January 2006 was undertaken using the validated appraisal of guidelines research and evaluation (AGREE) instrument. A core set of management modalities was generated based on the agreement between guidelines. Evidence before 2002 was based on a systematic review conducted by European League Against Rheumatism and evidence after 2002 was updated using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, the Cochrane Library and HTA reports. The quality of evidence was evaluated, and where possible, effect size (ES), number needed to treat, relative risk or odds ratio and cost per quality-adjusted life years gained were estimated. Consensus recommendations were produced following a Delphi exercise and the strength of recommendation (SOR) for propositions relating to each modality was determined using a visual analogue scale. Twenty-three treatment guidelines for the management of hip and knee OA were identified from the literature search, including six opinion-based, five evidence-based and 12 based on both expert opinion and research evidence. Twenty out of 51 treatment modalities addressed by these guidelines were universally recommended. ES for pain relief varied from treatment to treatment. Overall there was no statistically significant difference between non-pharmacological therapies [0.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16, 0.34] and pharmacological therapies (ES=0.39, 95% CI 0.31, 0.47). Following feedback from Osteoarthritis Research International members on the draft guidelines and six Delphi rounds consensus was reached on 25 carefully worded recommendations. Optimal management of patients with OA hip or knee requires a combination of non-pharmacological and pharmacological modalities of therapy. Recommendations cover the use of 12 non-pharmacological modalities: education and self-management, regular telephone contact, referral to a physical therapist, aerobic, muscle strengthening and water-based exercises, weight reduction, walking aids, knee braces, footwear and insoles, thermal modalities, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and acupuncture. Eight recommendations cover pharmacological modalities of treatment including acetaminophen, cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) non-selective and selective oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), topical NSAIDs and capsaicin, intra-articular injections of corticosteroids and hyaluronates, glucosamine and/or chondroitin sulphate for symptom relief; glucosamine sulphate, chondroitin sulphate and diacerein for possible structure-modifying effects and the use of opioid analgesics for the treatment of refractory pain. There are recommendations covering five surgical modalities: total joint replacements, unicompartmental knee replacement, osteotomy and joint preserving surgical procedures; joint lavage and arthroscopic debridement in knee OA, and joint fusion as a salvage procedure when joint replacement had failed. Strengths of recommendation and 95% CIs are provided. Twenty-five carefully worded recommendations have been generated based on a critical appraisal of existing guidelines, a systematic review of research evidence and the consensus opinions of an international, multidisciplinary group of experts. The recommendations may be adapted for use in different countries or regions according to the availability of treatment modalities and SOR for each modality of therapy. These recommendations will be revised regularly following systematic review of new research evidence as this becomes available.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            COX-3, a cyclooxygenase-1 variant inhibited by acetaminophen and other analgesic/antipyretic drugs: cloning, structure, and expression.

            Two cyclooxygenase isozymes, COX-1 and -2, are known to catalyze the rate-limiting step of prostaglandin synthesis and are the targets of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs. Here we describe a third distinct COX isozyme, COX-3, as well as two smaller COX-1-derived proteins (partial COX-1 or PCOX-1 proteins). COX-3 and one of the PCOX-1 proteins (PCOX-1a) are made from the COX-1 gene but retain intron 1 in their mRNAs. PCOX-1 proteins additionally contain an in-frame deletion of exons 5-8 of the COX-1 mRNA. COX-3 and PCOX mRNAs are expressed in canine cerebral cortex and in lesser amounts in other tissues analyzed. In human, COX-3 mRNA is expressed as an approximately 5.2-kb transcript and is most abundant in cerebral cortex and heart. Intron 1 is conserved in length and in sequence in mammalian COX-1 genes. This intron contains an ORF that introduces an insertion of 30-34 aa, depending on the mammalian species, into the hydrophobic signal peptide that directs COX-1 into the lumen of the endoplasmic reticulum and nuclear envelope. COX-3 and PCOX-1a are expressed efficiently in insect cells as membrane-bound proteins. The signal peptide is not cleaved from either protein and both proteins are glycosylated. COX-3, but not PCOX-1a, possesses glycosylation-dependent cyclooxygenase activity. Comparison of canine COX-3 activity with murine COX-1 and -2 demonstrates that this enzyme is selectively inhibited by analgesic/antipyretic drugs such as acetaminophen, phenacetin, antipyrine, and dipyrone, and is potently inhibited by some nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs. Thus, inhibition of COX-3 could represent a primary central mechanism by which these drugs decrease pain and possibly fever.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              OARSI recommendations for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis, part I: critical appraisal of existing treatment guidelines and systematic review of current research evidence.

              As a prelude to developing updated, evidence-based, international consensus recommendations for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) Treatment Guidelines Committee undertook a critical appraisal of published guidelines and a systematic review (SR) of more recent evidence for relevant therapies. Sixteen experts from four medical disciplines (primary care two, rheumatology 11, orthopaedics one and evidence-based medicine two), two continents and six countries (USA, UK, France, Netherlands, Sweden and Canada) formed the guidelines development team. Three additional experts were invited to take part in the critical appraisal of existing guidelines in languages other than English. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, CINAHL, AMED, Cochrane Library, seven Guidelines Websites and Google were searched systematically to identify guidelines for the management of hip and/or knee OA. Guidelines which met the inclusion/exclusion criteria were assigned to four groups of four appraisers. The quality of the guidelines was assessed using the AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation) instrument and standardised percent scores (0-100%) for scope, stakeholder involvement, rigour, clarity, applicability and editorial independence, as well as overall quality, were calculated. Treatment modalities addressed and recommended by the guidelines were summarised. Agreement (%) was estimated and the best level of evidence to support each recommendation was extracted. Evidence for each treatment modality was updated from the date of the last SR in January 2002 to January 2006. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the Oxman and Guyatt, and Jadad scales for SRs and randomised controlled trials (RCTs), respectively. Where possible, effect size (ES), number needed to treat, relative risk (RR) or odds ratio and cost per quality-adjusted life year gained (QALY) were estimated. Twenty-three of 1462 guidelines or consensus statements retrieved from the literature search met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Six were predominantly based on expert opinion, five were primarily evidence based and 12 were based on both. Overall quality scores were 28%, 41% and 51% for opinion-based, evidence-based and hybrid guidelines, respectively (P=0.001). Scores for aspects of quality varied from 18% for applicability to 67% for scope. Thirteen guidelines had been developed for specific care settings including five for primary care (e.g., Prodigy Guidance), three for rheumatology (e.g., European League against Rheumatism recommendations), three for physiotherapy (e.g., Dutch clinical practice guidelines for physical therapy) and two for orthopaedics (e.g., National Institutes of Health consensus guidelines), whereas 10 did not specify the target users (e.g., Ontario guidelines for optimal therapy). Whilst 14 guidelines did not separate hip and knee, eight were specific for knee but only one for hip. Fifty-one different treatment modalities were addressed by these guidelines, but only 20 were universally recommended. Evidence to support these modalities ranged from Ia (meta-analysis/SR of RCTs) to IV (expert opinion). The efficacy of some modalities of therapy was confirmed by the results of RCTs published between January 2002 and 2006. These included exercise (strengthening ES 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23, 0.42, aerobic ES 0.52, 95% CI 0.34, 0.70 and water-based ES 0.25, 95% CI 0.02, 0.47) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (ES 0.32, 95% CI 0.24, 0.39). Examples of other treatment modalities where recent trials failed to confirm efficacy included ultrasound (ES 0.06, 95% CI -0.39, 0.52), massage (ES 0.10, 95% CI -0.23, 0.43) and heat/ice therapy (ES 0.69, 95% CI -0.07, 1.45). The updated evidence on adverse effects also varied from treatment to treatment. For example, while the evidence for gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity of non-selective NSAIDs (RR=5.36, 95% CI 1.79, 16.10) and for increased risk of myocardial infarction associated with rofecoxib (RR=2.24, 95% CI 1.24, 4.02) were reinforced, evidence for other potential drug related adverse events such as GI toxicity with acetaminophen or myocardial infarction with celecoxib remained inconclusive. Twenty-three guidelines have been developed for the treatment of hip and/or knee OA, based on opinion alone, research evidence or both. Twenty of 51 modalities of therapy are universally recommended by these guidelines. Although this suggests that a core set of recommendations for treatment exists, critical appraisal shows that the overall quality of existing guidelines is sub-optimal, and consensus recommendations are not always supported by the best available evidence. Guidelines of optimal quality are most likely to be achieved by combining research evidence with expert consensus and by paying due attention to issues such as editorial independence, stakeholder involvement and applicability. This review of existing guidelines provides support for the development of new guidelines cognisant of the limitations in existing guidelines. Recommendations should be revised regularly following SR of new research evidence as this becomes available.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)
                Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)
                Front. Endocrinol.
                Frontiers in Endocrinology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-2392
                02 July 2019
                2019
                : 10
                : 431
                Affiliations
                [1] 1School of Medicine, Southeast University , Nanjing, China
                [2] 2Department of Integrative Medical Biology, Umeå University , Umeå, Sweden
                [3] 3Australian Institute of Robotic Orthopaedics , Perth, WA, Australia
                [4] 4School of Surgery, The University of Western Australia , Perth, WA, Australia
                [5] 5School of Science, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Curtin University , Perth, WA, Australia
                [6] 6Department of Materials Science and Engineering, College of Engineering, University of North Texas , Denton, TX, United States
                [7] 7Research Centre for Regenerative Medicine, Guangxi Medical University , Nanning, China
                [8] 8Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University , Nanning, China
                [9] 9Guangxi Key Laboratory of Regenerative Medicine, Guangxi Medical University , Nanning, China
                [10] 10School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Western Australia , Perth, WA, Australia
                Author notes

                Edited by: Deborah Mason, Cardiff University, United Kingdom

                Reviewed by: Jawed Akhtar Siddiqui, University of Nebraska Medical Center, United States; Maria Felicia Faienza, University of Bari Aldo Moro, Italy

                *Correspondence: Weiwei Chen chenww08@ 123456126.com

                This article was submitted to Bone Research, a section of the journal Frontiers in Endocrinology

                Article
                10.3389/fendo.2019.00431
                6614338
                31312184
                9081b399-3a5a-46a5-960a-e079d9fa7cea
                Copyright © 2019 Zhang, Robertson, Zhao, Chen and Xu.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 02 October 2018
                : 14 June 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 1, Equations: 0, References: 88, Pages: 9, Words: 7649
                Funding
                Funded by: National Natural Science Foundation of China 10.13039/501100001809
                Award ID: 81702186
                Award ID: 81501910
                Funded by: China Postdoctoral Science Foundation 10.13039/501100002858
                Award ID: 2017M623296XB
                Funded by: Natural Science Foundation of Guangxi Province 10.13039/501100004607
                Award ID: 2015GXNSFDA139019
                Award ID: 2017GXNSFBA198061
                Categories
                Endocrinology
                Review

                Endocrinology & Diabetes
                osteoarthritis,articular cartilage,clinical trials,pharmacologic therapy,regenerative therapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article