Page last updated: 2024-10-24

celecoxib and Osteoarthritis, Knee

celecoxib has been researched along with Osteoarthritis, Knee in 150 studies

Osteoarthritis, Knee: Noninflammatory degenerative disease of the knee joint consisting of three large categories: conditions that block normal synchronous movement, conditions that produce abnormal pathways of motion, and conditions that cause stress concentration resulting in changes to articular cartilage. (Crenshaw, Campbell's Operative Orthopaedics, 8th ed, p2019)

Research Excerpts

ExcerptRelevanceReference
"Naproxen/esomeprazole produced a significant absolute moderate early pain response, which was maintained for 12 weeks."9.20Onset and durability of pain relief in knee osteoarthritis: Pooled results from two placebo trials of naproxen/esomeprazole combination and celecoxib. ( Bello, AE; Fort, JG; Grahn, AY; Holt, RJ; Kent, JD, 2015)
"IDEA-033 was not superior to ketoprofen-free vehicle, but both formulations were superior to oral placebo and non-inferior to celecoxib in reducing OA knee pain."9.17A multicentre, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of topical ketoprofen in Transfersome gel (IDEA-033) with ketoprofen-free vehicle (TDT 064) and oral celecoxib for knee pain associated with osteoarthritis. ( Bolten, W; Cevc, G; Conaghan, PG; Dickson, J; Rother, M, 2013)
"The result of this study supports that GCSB-5 is comparable to Celecoxib in terms of the efficacy and safety for the treatment of osteoarthritis of knee joint."9.17A prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparative study on the safety and efficacy of Celecoxib and GCSB-5, dried extracts of six herbs, for the treatment of osteoarthritis of knee joint. ( Bin, SI; Ha, CW; Han, CD; Jung, YB; Kim, HC; Lim, HC; Park, YG, 2013)
"To compare the efficacy of etoricoxib 30 mg with the generally maximum recommended dose of celecoxib, 200 mg, in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) in two identically designed studies."9.12Efficacy and safety of etoricoxib 30 mg and celecoxib 200 mg in the treatment of osteoarthritis in two identically designed, randomized, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority studies. ( Bingham, CO; Bird, S; Fitzgerald, BJ; Kremer, J; O'Brien, K; Rubin, BR; Ruoff, GE; Sebba, AI; Smugar, SS; Tershakovec, AM, 2007)
"To compare the effects of continuous and intermittent celecoxib treatment in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis in flare."9.12A prospective randomised multicentre study comparing continuous and intermittent treatment with celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. ( De Clerck, L; De Keyser, F; Geusens, P; Hauzeur, JP; Luyten, FP; Malaise, M; Mathy, L; Raeman, F; Van den Bosch, F; Vander Mijnsbrugge, D; Westhovens, R, 2007)
"Glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate alone or in combination did not reduce pain effectively in the overall group of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee."9.12Glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and the two in combination for painful knee osteoarthritis. ( Bingham, CO; Bradley, JD; Brandt, KD; Clegg, DO; Cush, JJ; Furst, DE; Harris, CL; Hooper, MM; Jackson, CG; Klein, MA; Lane, NE; Molitor, JA; Moreland, LW; Moskowitz, RW; O'Dell, JR; Oddis, CV; Reda, DJ; Sawitzke, AD; Schnitzer, TJ; Schumacher, HR; Shi, H; Weisman, MH; Williams, HJ; Wolfe, F; Yocum, DE, 2006)
"The present data confirm our previous observations in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, further suggesting that nimesulide represents an effective agent for the treatment of joint pain, with particular reference to the rapid onset of its analgesic effect."9.10A randomised, double-blind, clinical trial comparing the efficacy of nimesulide, celecoxib and rofecoxib in osteoarthritis of the knee. ( Bianchi, M; Broggini, M, 2003)
"A total of 400 elderly patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and knee will be recruited from five institutions in Japan."7.30Protocol for the RETHINK study: a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, non-inferiority clinical trial comparing acetaminophen and NSAIDs for treatment of chronic pain in elderly patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. ( Aono, H; Endo, M; Hara, T; Kawahara, S; Kawano, T; Mawatari, T; Miyaji, T; Miyake, M; Nakashima, Y; Sakamoto, S; Sato, T; Shimokawa, M; Takano, T; Tokunaga, M; Zenda, S, 2023)
"Rofecoxib 25 mg was significantly better than celecoxib 200 mg in relieving night pain at 6 weeks in one study; this was not confirmed in the accompanying study."6.72Rofecoxib 12.5 mg, rofecoxib 25 mg, and celecoxib 200 mg in the treatment of symptomatic osteoarthritis: results of two similarly designed studies. ( Polis, AB; Rubin, BR; Schnitzer, TJ; Smugar, SS; Tershakovec, AM; Weaver, AL, 2006)
"Acupuncture treatment, celecoxib, and placebo medication have different modulation effects on vlPAG DPMS in KOA knee pain patients."5.69Modulation effects of different treatments on periaqueductal gray resting state functional connectivity in knee osteoarthritis knee pain patients. ( Chen, Y; Cheng, S; Dong, X; He, W; Hu, S; Jiang, N; Li, X; Li, Z; Liang, F; Sun, N; Sun, R; Tang, C; Wintermark, M; Yang, W; Zeng, F; Zhang, X; Zhou, J; Zhou, Y, 2023)
"Intra-articular PRP is significantly better than celecoxib in improving pain, function and stiffness in early knee OA."5.34Clinical comparison of platelet-rich plasma injection and daily celecoxib administration in the treatment of early knee osteoarthritis: A randomized clinical trial. ( Cruz-Santiago, L; Garcia-Cruz, CR; Lugo-Radillo, A; Mendoza-Cano, O; Reyes-Sosa, R, 2020)
"Celecoxib is frequently prescribed to treat knee osteoarthritis (KOA), but how celecoxib influences the activity of the central nervous system to alleviate chronic pain remains unclear."5.30Cerebral mechanism of celecoxib for treating knee pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled parallel trial. ( Chen, Y; Cheng, S; Dong, X; He, W; Huang, Y; Li, Z; Liang, F; Sheng, Y; Tang, C; Wu, X; Yin, B; Zeng, F; Zhou, J, 2019)
"In a multicenter, double-blind, placebo- and celecoxib-controlled trial, patients with moderate to severe OA pain were randomized to placebo; celecoxib 200 mg daily for 16 weeks; or galcanezumab 5, 50, 120, and 300 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks, twice."5.27CGRP blockade by galcanezumab was not associated with reductions in signs and symptoms of knee osteoarthritis in a randomized clinical trial. ( Brown, R; Camporeale, A; de la Peña, A; Deeg, MA; Jin, Y; Kivitz, AJ; McNearney, TA; Monteith, D; Raddad, E; Schnitzer, TJ; Smith, C; Xiao, N, 2018)
"Naproxen/esomeprazole produced a significant absolute moderate early pain response, which was maintained for 12 weeks."5.20Onset and durability of pain relief in knee osteoarthritis: Pooled results from two placebo trials of naproxen/esomeprazole combination and celecoxib. ( Bello, AE; Fort, JG; Grahn, AY; Holt, RJ; Kent, JD, 2015)
"IDEA-033 was not superior to ketoprofen-free vehicle, but both formulations were superior to oral placebo and non-inferior to celecoxib in reducing OA knee pain."5.17A multicentre, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of topical ketoprofen in Transfersome gel (IDEA-033) with ketoprofen-free vehicle (TDT 064) and oral celecoxib for knee pain associated with osteoarthritis. ( Bolten, W; Cevc, G; Conaghan, PG; Dickson, J; Rother, M, 2013)
"The result of this study supports that GCSB-5 is comparable to Celecoxib in terms of the efficacy and safety for the treatment of osteoarthritis of knee joint."5.17A prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparative study on the safety and efficacy of Celecoxib and GCSB-5, dried extracts of six herbs, for the treatment of osteoarthritis of knee joint. ( Bin, SI; Ha, CW; Han, CD; Jung, YB; Kim, HC; Lim, HC; Park, YG, 2013)
"This 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial evaluated tramadol ER (extended-release tramadol) in the management of osteoarthritis pain."5.15Tramadol hydrochloride extended-release once-daily in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee and/or hip: a double-blind, randomized, dose-ranging trial. ( Benson, C; DeLemos, BP; Fleming, B; Gana, TJ; Pascual, ML; Rosanna, R; Xiang, J, 2011)
" The meta-analysis indicated that celecoxib reduced pain more effectively than diclofenac sodium in patients with KOA, as evaluated by the VAS score."5.12Meta-analysis Comparing Celecoxib with Diclofenac Sodium in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis. ( Hou, S; Huang, H; Liang, G; Liang, H; Liu, J; Luo, M; Pan, J; Yang, W; Zeng, L; Zhao, J, 2021)
"To compare the efficacy of etoricoxib 30 mg with the generally maximum recommended dose of celecoxib, 200 mg, in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) in two identically designed studies."5.12Efficacy and safety of etoricoxib 30 mg and celecoxib 200 mg in the treatment of osteoarthritis in two identically designed, randomized, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority studies. ( Bingham, CO; Bird, S; Fitzgerald, BJ; Kremer, J; O'Brien, K; Rubin, BR; Ruoff, GE; Sebba, AI; Smugar, SS; Tershakovec, AM, 2007)
"To compare the effects of continuous and intermittent celecoxib treatment in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis in flare."5.12A prospective randomised multicentre study comparing continuous and intermittent treatment with celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. ( De Clerck, L; De Keyser, F; Geusens, P; Hauzeur, JP; Luyten, FP; Malaise, M; Mathy, L; Raeman, F; Van den Bosch, F; Vander Mijnsbrugge, D; Westhovens, R, 2007)
"Glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate alone or in combination did not reduce pain effectively in the overall group of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee."5.12Glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and the two in combination for painful knee osteoarthritis. ( Bingham, CO; Bradley, JD; Brandt, KD; Clegg, DO; Cush, JJ; Furst, DE; Harris, CL; Hooper, MM; Jackson, CG; Klein, MA; Lane, NE; Molitor, JA; Moreland, LW; Moskowitz, RW; O'Dell, JR; Oddis, CV; Reda, DJ; Sawitzke, AD; Schnitzer, TJ; Schumacher, HR; Shi, H; Weisman, MH; Williams, HJ; Wolfe, F; Yocum, DE, 2006)
"The present data confirm our previous observations in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, further suggesting that nimesulide represents an effective agent for the treatment of joint pain, with particular reference to the rapid onset of its analgesic effect."5.10A randomised, double-blind, clinical trial comparing the efficacy of nimesulide, celecoxib and rofecoxib in osteoarthritis of the knee. ( Bianchi, M; Broggini, M, 2003)
" All treatments except acetaminophen showed clinically significant improvement from baseline pain."4.91Comparative effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. ( Bannuru, RR; Kent, DM; McAlindon, TE; Schmid, CH; Vaysbrot, EE; Wong, JB, 2015)
" Therefore, this study examined the effect of KML29 alone as well as in combination with low-dose celecoxib (CXB) on joint pain and inflammation in the monoiodoacetate (MIA) model of osteoarthritis (OA) pain."3.96Combatting joint pain and inflammation by dual inhibition of monoacylglycerol lipase and cyclooxygenase-2 in a rat model of osteoarthritis. ( McDougall, JJ; Philpott, HT, 2020)
" In this study, we compared the release profile of prostanoids, which are involved in inflammation, of HFP from OA patients vs patients with a focal cartilage defect (CD) without evidence for OA on MRI and investigated the prostanoid modulatory anti-inflammatory action of celecoxib on HFP."3.88Celecoxib-mediated reduction of prostanoid release in Hoffa's fat pad from donors with cartilage pathology results in an attenuated inflammatory phenotype. ( Bastiaansen-Jenniskens, YM; Caron, MMJ; Emans, PJ; Timur, UT; van Osch, GJVM; van Rhijn, LW; Welting, TJM, 2018)
"In patients with multiple comorbidities, naproxen- and ibuprofen-containing regimens are more effective and cost-effective in managing OA pain than opioids, celecoxib or SOC."3.83Cost-effectiveness of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis in older patients with multiple comorbidities. ( Collins, JE; Hunter, DJ; Jordan, JM; Katz, JN; Losina, E; Paltiel, AD; Smith, SR; Solomon, DH; Suter, LG; Yelin, E, 2016)
"8% of sciatica patients requesting oxycodone would receive a prescription for oxycodone, compared with 1% of those making no specific request (P = 0."3.80Effects of patient medication requests on physician prescribing behavior: results of a factorial experiment. ( Fischer, MA; Katz, JN; Marceau, LD; McKinlay, JB; Trachtenberg, F, 2014)
"A total of 400 elderly patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and knee will be recruited from five institutions in Japan."3.30Protocol for the RETHINK study: a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, non-inferiority clinical trial comparing acetaminophen and NSAIDs for treatment of chronic pain in elderly patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. ( Aono, H; Endo, M; Hara, T; Kawahara, S; Kawano, T; Mawatari, T; Miyaji, T; Miyake, M; Nakashima, Y; Sakamoto, S; Sato, T; Shimokawa, M; Takano, T; Tokunaga, M; Zenda, S, 2023)
"Diacerein and celecoxib combination therapy is as safe and effective as corresponding monotherapies."3.30Efficacy and safety of diacerein and celecoxib combination therapy for knee osteoarthritis: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled prospective study. ( Choi, JH; Choi, WS; Kim, C; Kim, SM; Youn, S, 2023)
" Altogether 128 patients with knee osteoarthritis in the middle and early stage admitted to our hospital from January 2018 to July 2019 were selected and grouped into the control group (CG) (celecoxib tablet therapy) and the combination group (ComG) (celecoxib combined with glucosamine hydrochloride therapy)."3.01Effect of celecoxib combined with glucosamine hydrochloride in promoting the functional recovery and decreasing the inflammatory factor levels in patients with knee osteoarthritis. ( Ge, R; Yang, Z; Zhang, J, 2021)
" Adverse events (AEs) were similar between patients treated with tanezumab 2."3.01Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Subcutaneous Tanezumab Versus Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs for Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Trial. ( Brown, MT; Carrino, JA; Fountaine, RJ; Guermazi, A; Hickman, A; Hochberg, MC; Nakajo, S; Pixton, G; Schnitzer, TJ; Verburg, KM; Viktrup, L; Walsh, DA; West, CR; White, A, 2021)
"Diacerein was non-inferior to celecoxib in reducing knee OA pain and improving physical function."2.94An international, multicentre, double-blind, randomized study (DISSCO): effect of diacerein vs celecoxib on symptoms in knee osteoarthritis. ( Bessette, L; Dokoupilova, E; Dorais, M; Martel-Pelletier, J; Morin, F; Paiement, P; Pavelka, K; Pelletier, JP; Raynauld, JP, 2020)
"Using celecoxib to treat knee osteoarthritis can significantly improve the total therapeutic rate and reduce the rate of adverse effect."2.87Clinical therapeutic effect and safety of celecoxib in treating knee osteoarthritis. ( Bi, J; Yu, C; Yu, X; Yu, Z; Zhao, L, 2018)
" No difference in adverse events was observed between the two groups."2.87Efficacy and safety of adalimumab by intra-articular injection for moderate to severe knee osteoarthritis: An open-label randomized controlled trial. ( Wang, J, 2018)
" The results obtained during the 18-week trial extension with polmacoxib 2 mg were consistent with those observed during the 6-week treatment period, indicating that polmacoxib can be considered safe for long-term use based on this relatively small scale of study in a Korean population."2.84A Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Polmacoxib Compared with Celecoxib and Placebo for Patients with Osteoarthritis. ( Bin, SI; Cho, S; Choi, CH; Han, SB; In, Y; Kang, SB; Kim, J; Kim, JG; Kim, YM; Kyung, HS; Lee, BK; Lee, M; Moon, YW; Yoo, J, 2017)
" The groups were treated, respectively, with Zhuanggu joint capsules combined with celecoxib capsule simulants, Zhuanggu joint capsules combined with celecoxib capsules, and celecoxib capsules combined with Zhuanggu joint capsule simulants for 4 weeks consecutively."2.82Efficacy and Safety of Zhuanggu Joint Capsules in Combination with Celecoxib in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Multi-center, Randomized, Double-blind, Double-dummy, and Parallel Controlled Trial. ( Cai, XY; Fan, WM; Liu, JG; Ma, JZ; Weng, XS; Yang, J; Yang, L; Yun, XQ; Zhang, XL, 2016)
" These results indicate GCSB-5 is safe for a long-term treatment of knee OA patients."2.82Gastrointestinal safety and efficacy of long-term GCSB-5 use in patients with osteoarthritis: A 24-week, multicenter study. ( Bae, KC; Bin, SI; Cho, SD; Choi, ES; Ha, CW; Han, CS; Kang, JS; Kim, CW; Kim, JG; Kyung, HS; Lee, DC; Lee, JH; Lee, MC; Lee, WS; Lim, HC; Park, SE; Park, YB; Seon, JK; Won, YY, 2016)
"Celecoxib was as effective as naproxen in reducing OA pain (least squares mean change from baseline in visual analogue scale score [standard error] -37."2.82Efficacy and safety of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in Asian patients with knee osteoarthritis: summary of a randomized, placebo-controlled study. ( Bao, W; Behar, R; Essex, MN; O'Connell, MA, 2016)
" Adverse event frequency was higher with tanezumab than with NSAIDs and highest with combination therapy."2.80Efficacy and safety of tanezumab monotherapy or combined with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of knee or hip osteoarthritis pain. ( Brown, MT; Ekman, EF; Greenberg, HS; Schnitzer, TJ; Smith, MD; Spierings, EL; Verburg, KM; West, CR, 2015)
" For safety assessment, adverse events were recorded at each clinical visit."2.79Efficacy and safety of PG201 (Layla(®)) and celecoxib in the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a double-blinded, randomized, multi-center, active drug comparative, parallel-group, non-inferiority, phase III study. ( Baek, HJ; Choi, SJ; Kang, SW; Kim, HA; Ko, HS; Lee, YJ; Park, SH; Shim, SC; Song, JS; Song, YW; Suh, CH; Tae, DN; Yoo, HG; Yoo, WH; Yoon, BY, 2014)
"Celecoxib was as effective as naproxen in reducing OA pain."2.77Response to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in African Americans with osteoarthritis of the knee. ( Bhadra Brown, P; Essex, MN; O'Connell, M, 2012)
"Celecoxib was significantly different from placebo in Study 307 (p < 0."2.76Fixed-dose combination of enteric-coated naproxen and immediate-release esomeprazole has comparable efficacy to celecoxib for knee osteoarthritis: two randomized trials. ( Fort, JG; Hochberg, MC; Hwang, C; Sostek, M; Svensson, O, 2011)
" Adverse reactions were similar among treatment groups and serious adverse events were rare for all treatments."2.75Clinical efficacy and safety of glucosamine, chondroitin sulphate, their combination, celecoxib or placebo taken to treat osteoarthritis of the knee: 2-year results from GAIT. ( Bingham, CO; Bradley, JD; Clegg, DO; Dunlop, DD; Finco, MF; Furst, DE; Harris, CL; Jackson, CG; Lane, NE; Lisse, J; Moskowitz, RW; Oddis, CV; Reda, DJ; Sawitzke, AD; Shi, H; Silver, D; Singer, NG; Williams, HJ; Wolfe, F, 2010)
"No differences in prosthesis migration, pain scores, range of motion, and subjective outcome were found after 2 years."2.74Celecoxib does not appear to affect prosthesis fixation in total knee replacement: A randomized study using radiostereometry in 50 patients. ( Aspenberg, P; Good, L; Meunier, A, 2009)
" Gastrointestinal adverse events for IDEA-033 were similar to placebo."2.73Efficacy and safety of epicutaneous ketoprofen in Transfersome (IDEA-033) versus oral celecoxib and placebo in osteoarthritis of the knee: multicentre randomised controlled trial. ( Kneer, W; Lavins, BJ; Lehnhardt, K; Mazgareanu, S; Rother, M; Seidel, EJ, 2007)
"The intensity of joint pain was assessed with a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS)."2.73Effects of nimesulide on pain and on synovial fluid concentrations of substance P, interleukin-6 and interleukin-8 in patients with knee osteoarthritis: comparison with celecoxib. ( Balzarini, P; Bianchi, M; Broggini, M; Franchi, S; Sacerdote, P, 2007)
"Celecoxib does not increase perioperative blood loss but reduces pain during the postoperative period after TKR."2.73Effects of celecoxib on blood loss, pain, and recovery of function after total knee replacement: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. ( Good, L; Lisander, B; Meunier, A, 2007)
"Rofecoxib 25 mg was significantly better than celecoxib 200 mg in relieving night pain at 6 weeks in one study; this was not confirmed in the accompanying study."2.72Rofecoxib 12.5 mg, rofecoxib 25 mg, and celecoxib 200 mg in the treatment of symptomatic osteoarthritis: results of two similarly designed studies. ( Polis, AB; Rubin, BR; Schnitzer, TJ; Smugar, SS; Tershakovec, AM; Weaver, AL, 2006)
"Celecoxib was not significantly different from placebo in this analysis (P = 0."2.72First-dose analgesic effect of the cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitor lumiracoxib in osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled comparison with celecoxib [NCT00267215]. ( Burger, KJ; Fashola, TO; Krehan, G; Maeumbaed, R; Runge, H; Schell, E; Schlüter, P; Thurston, HJ; Trechsel, U; Wittenberg, RH, 2006)
"Rofecoxib treatment, with its faster onset of OA efficacy and lower rates of related discontinuations, might provide efficacy advantages in the treatment of OA pain."2.71Pain management in osteoarthritis: a focus on onset of efficacy--a comparison of rofecoxib, celecoxib, acetaminophen, and nabumetone across four clinical trials. ( Battisti, WP; Geba, GP; Katz, NP; Kivitz, AJ; Matsumoto, AK; Polis, AB; Weaver, AL, 2004)
"Celecoxib-treated patients had significant decrease in nitrite levels (p = 0."2.71In vivo effect of celecoxib and tenoxicam on oxidant/ anti-oxidant status of patients with knee osteoarthritis. ( Ardicoglu, O; Erdogan, H; Fadillioglu, E; Gudul, H; Ozgocmen, S, 2005)
" dosing of celecoxib 200 mg q."2.71Celecoxib 200 mg q.d. is efficacious in the management of osteoarthritis of the knee or hip regardless of the time of dosing. ( Ekesbo, R; Karvonen, AL; Lyster, M; Stengaard-Pedersen, K, 2004)
"Celecoxib was more efficacious than acetaminophen in both periods in both studies; WOMAC and pain scale scores differed at p<0."2.71Patient Preference for Placebo, Acetaminophen (paracetamol) or Celecoxib Efficacy Studies (PACES): two randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, crossover clinical trials in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis. ( Fort, JG; Gibofsky, A; Koch, G; Lei, H; Mangal, B; Moskowitz, R; Pincus, T; Simon, L; Sokka, T; Wolfe, F; Zlotnick, S, 2004)
"Celecoxib treatment improved the efficiency of the locomotor mechanism significantly."2.71Celecoxib improves the efficiency of the locomotor mechanism in patients with knee osteoarthritis. A randomised, placebo, double-blind and cross-over trial. ( De Nayer, J; Detrembleur, C; van den Hecke, A, 2005)
"In a 12-month, multicenter, prospective, open-label trial, patients with OA of the knee or hip or rheumatoid arthritis received celecoxib at doses ranging from that recommended for the treatment of OA (200 mg/d) to twice the recommended daily dosage (400 mg/d)."2.70A 12-month, multicenter, prospective, open-label trial of radiographic analysis of disease progression in osteoarthritis of the knee or hip in patients receiving celecoxib. ( Burr, A; Katz, TK; Lefkowith, JB; Sharp, JT; Tindall, EA; Verburg, K; Wallemark, CB, 2002)
" The availability of 2 effective regimens provides patients and physicians with increased flexibility in the selection of an appropriate dosing regimen for celecoxib therapy."2.70Comparison of once-daily and twice-daily administration of celecoxib for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. ( Geis, GS; Hubbard, RC; Williams, GW; Yu, SS; Zhao, W, 2001)
"Diclofenac-treated patients experienced statistically significant elevations in mean hepatic transaminases and serum creatinine and reductions in haemoglobin concentration when compared to placebo, events not observed with celecoxib."2.70Celecoxib versus diclofenac in the management of osteoarthritis of the knee. ( Borenstein, D; Geis, GS; Lefkowith, JB; McKenna, F; Wallemark, C; Wendt, H, 2001)
"Celecoxib is a selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)."2.55Celecoxib for osteoarthritis. ( Marin, A; Markotic, F; Puljak, L; Tugwell, P; Utrobicic, A; Vrdoljak, D, 2017)
" For the comparison in between the two dosage regimens, 100 mg BID oral celecoxib exhibited a greater probability to be the preferred one either in terms of pain intensity or function at the last follow-up time point."2.52Comparison between 200 mg QD and 100 mg BID oral celecoxib in the treatment of knee or hip osteoarthritis. ( Gao, SG; Lei, GH; Li, H; Li, YS; Luo, W; Wei, J; Xiao, WF; Xiong, YL; Yang, T; Yang, TB; Zeng, C, 2015)
" Although no significant difference was observed among the five options with respect to the three major adverse effects (withdrawal due to adverse events, serious adverse events and the number of patients with adverse events), the additional classical meta-analysis showed that celecoxib exhibited a higher rate of gastrointestinal adverse effect comparing with the placebo group."2.52Effectiveness and safety of Glucosamine, chondroitin, the two in combination, or celecoxib in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. ( Gao, SG; Lei, GH; Li, H; Li, YS; Luo, W; Wang, YL; Wei, J; Xie, DX; Yang, T; Zeng, C, 2015)
" Nonetheless, the long-term administration of both medications might result in osteonecrosis of the knee due to repeated injections of steroids and side effects in the gastrointestinal and cardiovascular systems."1.72Dexamethasone microspheres and celecoxib microcrystals loaded into injectable gels for enhanced knee osteoarthritis therapy. ( Chen, J; Chen, W; Fang, W; Hu, Q; Li, W; Qiu, L; Yang, F; Yang, M, 2022)
"To investigate the effects of different nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs combined with platelet-rich plasma on inflammatory factor levels in patients with osteoarthritis."1.72Effects of Different Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Combined with Platelet-Rich Plasma on Inflammatory Factor Levels in Patients with Osteoarthritis. ( Cheng, Y; Huang, Y; Jiang, W; Zhang, Y, 2022)
"Outcome measures were postsurgical pain at rest and during walking, consumption of opioids for pain rescue, knee swelling and knee range of motion, and complications."1.46Methylprednisolone reduces pain and decreases knee swelling in the first 24 h after fast-track unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. ( Hansen, TB; Munk, S; Rytter, S; Stilling, M, 2017)
"Disease progression was monitored utilizing micro-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), micro-computed tomography (CT) and histology."1.40Development and reliability of a multi-modality scoring system for evaluation of disease progression in pre-clinical models of osteoarthritis: celecoxib may possess disease-modifying properties. ( Doschak, MR; Fallone, BG; Jaremko, JL; Lambert, RG; Maksymowych, WP; Panahifar, A; Tessier, AG, 2014)
"Celecoxib treatment results in a reasonable cost-effectiveness ratio for patients with OA of the knee."1.32Cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for osteoarthritis of the knee in Taiwan. ( Chen, LS; Chen, SC; Chen, WJ; Hou, SM; Lai, MS; Wang, CT; Yen, ZS, 2004)
" The drug's effect as well as adverse effects should be actively sought, and dosage alterations made in order to enhance the drug's effect."1.32Introduction to monitoring. What is what you prescribed actually doing? ( George, A; Shakib, S, 2003)

Research

Studies (150)

TimeframeStudies, this research(%)All Research%
pre-19900 (0.00)18.7374
1990's0 (0.00)18.2507
2000's49 (32.67)29.6817
2010's73 (48.67)24.3611
2020's28 (18.67)2.80

Authors

AuthorsStudies
Zhang, J1
Ge, R1
Yang, Z1
Hsia, AW1
Jbeily, EH1
Mendez, ME1
Cunningham, HC1
Biris, KK1
Bang, H1
Lee, CA1
Loots, GG1
Christiansen, BA1
Reyes-Sosa, R1
Lugo-Radillo, A1
Cruz-Santiago, L1
Garcia-Cruz, CR1
Mendoza-Cano, O1
Jiang, W1
Zhang, Y1
Huang, Y2
Cheng, Y2
Xiao, G1
Yunhao, Y1
Dongmei, L1
Fang, P1
Zhixue, Y1
Zhengwei, Z1
Ao, L1
Chenglin, T1
Fang, W1
Yang, F1
Li, W2
Hu, Q1
Chen, W1
Yang, M1
Chen, J1
Qiu, L1
Xu, H1
Zhao, C1
Guo, G1
Li, Y5
A, X1
Qiu, G1
Wang, Y1
Kang, B1
Xu, X2
Xie, J1
Xiao, L1
Wang, C2
Zhu, JC1
Zheng, ZW1
Xiong, YZ1
Ma, XF1
Gong, YC1
He, YL1
Hou, PW3
Liu, SC3
Tsay, GJ3
Chang, YS3
Huang, HC3
Tang, CH3
Chang, HH3
Veronese, N2
Ecarnot, F2
Cheleschi, S2
Fioravanti, A2
Maggi, S2
Xiang, XN2
Zhu, SY2
Song, KP2
Wang, XY2
Liu, HZ2
Yang, WJ2
Wang, H3
Zhang, C2
Yang, L3
He, C3
Endo, M1
Kawahara, S1
Sato, T1
Tokunaga, M1
Hara, T1
Mawatari, T1
Kawano, T1
Zenda, S1
Miyaji, T1
Shimokawa, M1
Sakamoto, S1
Takano, T1
Miyake, M1
Aono, H1
Nakashima, Y1
Zhou, J4
Zeng, F2
Cheng, S3
Dong, X2
Jiang, N1
Zhang, X1
Tang, C2
He, W2
Chen, Y2
Sun, N1
Zhou, Y2
Li, X1
Hu, S1
Sun, R1
Wintermark, M1
Yang, W3
Liang, F3
Li, Z3
An, M1
Ding, Y1
Qiu, Y1
Deng, Y1
Zhang, M2
Cui, S1
Dong, J2
Mu, C1
Zheng, Z1
Yang, J2
Youn, S1
Choi, JH1
Kim, C1
Kim, SM1
Choi, WS1
Zhuang, Q1
Tao, L1
Lin, J2
Jin, J1
Qian, W1
Bian, Y1
Dong, Y1
Peng, H2
Fan, Y1
Wang, W1
Feng, B1
Gao, N1
Sun, T1
Yan, S1
Shen, B1
Pei, F1
Weng, X1
Philpott, HT1
McDougall, JJ1
Chao, J1
Jing, Z1
Xuehua, B1
Peilei, Y1
Qi, G1
Huang, H2
Pan, J2
Chen, H1
Liang, G2
Zeng, L2
Liu, J3
Pan, B1
Xin, M1
Xu, G1
Pelletier, JP6
Raynauld, JP5
Dorais, M2
Bessette, L3
Dokoupilova, E1
Morin, F3
Pavelka, K2
Paiement, P3
Martel-Pelletier, J6
Xiong, W1
Gou, P1
Chen, Z1
Guo, X1
Huo, X1
Xue, Y1
Luo, M1
Liang, H1
Hou, S1
Zhao, J1
Bruyère, O2
Dardenne, N1
Donneau, AF1
Reginster, JY4
Hochberg, MC5
Carrino, JA1
Schnitzer, TJ7
Guermazi, A1
Walsh, DA1
White, A1
Nakajo, S1
Fountaine, RJ1
Hickman, A1
Pixton, G1
Viktrup, L1
Brown, MT2
West, CR2
Verburg, KM2
Moman, RN1
Hooten, WM1
Delorme, P3
Dodin, P1
Abram, F4
Puljak, L1
Marin, A1
Vrdoljak, D1
Markotic, F1
Utrobicic, A1
Tugwell, P1
Dudler, J1
Blicharski, T1
Marcus, DM1
Mineau, F1
Kardeş, S1
Herrero-Beaumont, G4
Largo, R4
Wang, J1
Reginster, JL1
Lee, YH1
Lee, M1
Yoo, J1
Kim, JG2
Kyung, HS2
Bin, SI4
Kang, SB2
Choi, CH2
Moon, YW1
Kim, YM1
Han, SB1
In, Y1
Kim, J1
Lee, BK1
Cho, S1
Timur, UT1
Caron, MMJ1
Bastiaansen-Jenniskens, YM1
Welting, TJM1
van Rhijn, LW1
van Osch, GJVM1
Emans, PJ1
Losina, E2
Usiskin, IM1
Smith, SR2
Sullivan, JK1
Smith, KC1
Hunter, DJ2
Messier, SP1
Paltiel, AD2
Katz, JN3
Dong, Z1
Jiang, H1
Jian, X1
Zhang, W1
Yu, Z1
Zhao, L1
Yu, C1
Bi, J1
Yu, X1
Jin, Y1
Smith, C1
Monteith, D1
Brown, R1
Camporeale, A1
McNearney, TA1
Deeg, MA1
Raddad, E1
Xiao, N1
de la Peña, A1
Kivitz, AJ2
Wang, F2
Gregori, D1
Giacovelli, G1
Minto, C1
Barbetta, B1
Gualtieri, F1
Azzolina, D1
Vaghi, P1
Rovati, LC1
Sakurai, Y1
Fujita, M1
Kawasaki, S1
Sanaki, T1
Yoshioka, T1
Higashino, K1
Tofukuji, S1
Yoneda, S1
Takahashi, T1
Koda, K1
Asaki, T1
Hasegawa, M1
Morioka, Y1
Yin, B1
Sheng, Y1
Wu, X1
Cai, G1
I Han, R1
Wang, G2
Jia, D1
Wang, K1
Ma, W1
Xiao, C1
Song, E1
Chen, G1
Yu, Y1
Huang, X1
Zhong, L1
van Helvoort, E1
Lafeber, F1
Mastbergen, S1
Hendriks, J1
Post, JN1
Karperien, M1
Turajane, T1
Chaweevanakorn, U1
Sungkhun, P1
Larbphiboonpong, V1
Wongbunnak, R1
Dieppe, P1
Marsden, D1
Asay, JL1
Boyer, KA2
Andriacchi, TP2
Conaghan, PG2
Dickson, J1
Bolten, W1
Cevc, G1
Rother, M2
Gong, L1
Dong, JY1
Li, ZR1
Park, YG1
Ha, CW2
Han, CD1
Kim, HC1
Jung, YB1
Lim, HC2
Gallelli, L1
Galasso, O1
Falcone, D1
Southworth, S1
Greco, M1
Ventura, V1
Romualdi, P1
Corigliano, A1
Terracciano, R1
Savino, R1
Gulletta, E1
Gasparini, G1
De Sarro, G1
Trudeau, J1
Van Inwegen, R1
Eaton, T1
Bhat, G1
Paillard, F1
Ng, D1
Tan, K1
Katz, NP2
Yoo, WH2
Yoo, HG1
Park, SH1
Baek, HJ2
Lee, YJ1
Shim, SC2
Kang, SW1
Kim, HA1
Song, JS1
Suh, CH1
Choi, SJ1
Yoon, BY1
Tae, DN1
Ko, HS1
Song, YW2
Ekman, EF1
Spierings, EL1
Greenberg, HS1
Smith, MD1
McKinlay, JB1
Trachtenberg, F1
Marceau, LD1
Fischer, MA1
Yoo, MC1
Park, YW1
Kim, SS1
Moon, KH1
Min, BW1
Cho, YJ1
Moon, SH1
Lee, SW1
Yoo, DH1
Mehta, A1
Skuban, A1
Cukrow, DM1
Vandormael, K1
Yan, L1
Panahifar, A1
Jaremko, JL1
Tessier, AG1
Lambert, RG1
Maksymowych, WP1
Fallone, BG1
Doschak, MR1
Bannuru, RR1
Schmid, CH1
Kent, DM1
Vaysbrot, EE1
Wong, JB1
McAlindon, TE1
Rytter, S1
Stilling, M1
Munk, S1
Hansen, TB1
Monfort, J1
Möller, I1
Castillo, JR1
Arden, N1
Berenbaum, F2
Blanco, FJ1
Doménech, G1
Henrotin, Y1
Pap, T1
Richette, P1
Sawitzke, A1
du Souich, P1
Onuora, S1
Meyer, R1
Zeng, C3
Wei, J3
Lei, GH3
Essex, MN3
O'Connell, MA1
Behar, R1
Bao, W1
Li, H2
Yang, T2
Gao, SG2
Li, YS2
Xiong, YL1
Xiao, WF1
Luo, W2
Yang, TB1
Hou, CF1
Wei, S1
Chen, ZH1
Li, XH1
Wang, ST1
Guo, J1
Holt, RJ1
Fort, JG4
Grahn, AY1
Kent, JD1
Bello, AE1
Collins, JE1
Solomon, DH1
Jordan, JM1
Suter, LG1
Yelin, E1
Wang, YL1
Xie, DX1
Zhang, XL1
Liu, JG1
Cai, XY1
Fan, WM1
Yun, XQ1
Ma, JZ1
Weng, XS1
Park, YB1
Han, CS1
Bae, KC1
Park, SE1
Lee, MC1
Won, YY1
Lee, DC1
Cho, SD1
Kim, CW1
Kang, JS1
Lee, JH1
Choi, ES1
Seon, JK1
Lee, WS1
Shaughnessy, AF1
Plate, A1
Beaulieu, AD1
de Brum-Fernandes, AJ1
Gordo, AC1
Walker, C1
Armada, B1
Zhou, D1
Bingham, CO5
Bird, SR1
Smugar, SS4
Tershakovec, AM4
Lesaffre, E2
Alvarez-Soria, MA3
Moreno-Rubio, J2
Calvo, E2
Santillana, J2
Egido, J2
Clegg, DO3
de Boer, TN1
Huisman, AM1
Polak, AA1
Niehoff, AG1
van Rinsum, AC1
Saris, D1
Bijlsma, JW1
Lafeber, FJ1
Mastbergen, SC1
Kivitz, A1
Fairfax, M1
Sheldon, EA1
Xiang, Q1
Jones, BA1
Gammaitoni, AR1
Gould, EM1
Meunier, A2
Aspenberg, P1
Good, L2
Taechaarpornkul, W1
Suvapan, D1
Theppanom, C1
Chanthipwaree, C1
Chirawatkul, A1
Tardio, L1
Beaulieu, A2
Choquette, D1
Haraoui, B1
DeLemos, BP1
Xiang, J1
Benson, C1
Gana, TJ1
Pascual, ML1
Rosanna, R1
Fleming, B1
Sawitzke, AD2
Shi, H2
Finco, MF1
Dunlop, DD1
Harris, CL2
Singer, NG1
Bradley, JD2
Silver, D1
Jackson, CG2
Lane, NE3
Oddis, CV2
Wolfe, F3
Lisse, J1
Furst, DE2
Reda, DJ2
Moskowitz, RW2
Williams, HJ2
Jiang, D2
Zou, J1
Huang, L2
Shi, Q1
Zhu, X1
Yang, H1
Chen, L1
Li, DQ1
Zhong, J1
Wu, XL1
Chen, Q1
Liu, SQ1
Svensson, O2
Hwang, C2
Sostek, M1
Fukai, A1
Kamekura, S1
Chikazu, D1
Nakagawa, T1
Hirata, M1
Saito, T1
Hosaka, Y1
Ikeda, T1
Nakamura, K1
Chung, UI1
Kawaguchi, H1
Lories, RJ1
Cryer, BL1
Sostek, MB1
Strand, V1
Simon, LS1
Dougados, M1
Sands, GH2
Bhadra, P2
Breazna, A1
Immitt, J1
Moore, RA1
Angst, MS1
Asay, J1
Giori, NJ1
Olsen, IC1
Kvien, TK1
Uhlig, T1
Takahashi, D1
Majima, T1
Onodera, T1
Kasahara, Y1
Inoue, M1
Irie, T1
Kasemura, T1
Wang, Z1
Wu, G1
Miao, L1
O'Connell, M1
Bhadra Brown, P1
Chopra, A1
Saluja, M1
Tillu, G1
Sarmukkaddam, S1
Venugopalan, A1
Narsimulu, G1
Handa, R1
Sumantran, V1
Raut, A1
Bichile, L1
Joshi, K1
Patwardhan, B1
Jordan, KM1
Edwards, CJ1
Arden, NK1
Tindall, EA1
Sharp, JT1
Burr, A1
Katz, TK1
Wallemark, CB1
Verburg, K1
Lefkowith, JB2
Finucane, TE1
Bianchi, M2
Broggini, M2
Shakib, S1
George, A1
Stengaard-Pedersen, K1
Ekesbo, R1
Karvonen, AL1
Lyster, M1
Tannenbaum, H1
Zacher, J1
Robinson, J1
Poor, G1
Bliddal, H1
Uebelhart, D1
Adami, S1
Navarro, F1
Lee, A1
Moore, A1
Gimona, A1
Pincus, T1
Koch, G1
Lei, H1
Mangal, B1
Sokka, T1
Moskowitz, R1
Gibofsky, A1
Simon, L1
Zlotnick, S1
Najm, WI1
Reinsch, S1
Hoehler, F1
Tobis, JS1
Harvey, PW1
Leeb, BF1
Bucsi, L1
Keszthelyi, B1
Böhmova, J1
Valesova, M1
Hawel, R1
Mayrhofer, F1
Singer, F1
Aglas, F1
Bröll, H1
Yen, ZS1
Lai, MS1
Wang, CT1
Chen, LS1
Chen, SC1
Chen, WJ1
Hou, SM1
Battisti, WP1
Weaver, AL4
Matsumoto, AK1
Polis, AB4
Geba, GP3
Detrembleur, C1
De Nayer, J1
van den Hecke, A1
Sheldon, E2
Paster, Z1
Dutta, D2
Yu, S2
Sloan, VS3
Pomonis, JD1
Boulet, JM1
Gottshall, SL1
Phillips, S1
Sellers, R1
Bunton, T1
Walker, K1
Lehmann, R1
Brzosko, M1
Kopsa, P1
Nischik, R1
Kreisse, A1
Thurston, H1
Litschig, S1
Petruschke, RA1
Ozgocmen, S1
Ardicoglu, O1
Erdogan, H1
Fadillioglu, E1
Gudul, H1
Fleischmann, R1
Maldonado-Cocco, J1
Lev-Ari, S1
Strier, L1
Kazanov, D1
Elkayam, O1
Lichtenberg, D1
Caspi, D1
Arber, N1
Wittenberg, RH1
Schell, E1
Krehan, G1
Maeumbaed, R1
Runge, H1
Schlüter, P1
Fashola, TO1
Thurston, HJ1
Burger, KJ1
Trechsel, U1
Sánchez-Pernaute, O1
Hernández, M1
Klein, MA1
O'Dell, JR1
Hooper, MM1
Weisman, MH1
Cush, JJ1
Moreland, LW1
Schumacher, HR1
Molitor, JA1
Yocum, DE1
Brandt, KD1
Luyten, FP1
Geusens, P1
Malaise, M1
De Clerck, L1
Westhovens, R1
Raeman, F1
Vander Mijnsbrugge, D1
Mathy, L1
Hauzeur, JP1
De Keyser, F1
Van den Bosch, F1
Rubin, BR2
Sebba, AI1
Ruoff, GE1
Kremer, J1
Bird, S1
Fitzgerald, BJ1
O'Brien, K1
Lavins, BJ1
Kneer, W1
Lehnhardt, K1
Seidel, EJ1
Mazgareanu, S1
Balzarini, P1
Franchi, S1
Sacerdote, P1
Lisander, B1
Manek, NJ1
Bensen, WG1
McKenna, F1
Borenstein, D1
Wendt, H1
Wallemark, C1
Geis, GS2
Williams, GW1
Hubbard, RC1
Yu, SS1
Zhao, W1
Jawad, AS1
Adler, J1
Dixon, ME1

Clinical Trials (40)

Trial Overview

TrialPhaseEnrollmentStudy TypeStart DateStatus
A Study to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of Postoperative Intravenous Parecoxib Sodium Followed by Oral Celecoxib Post Total Knee Arthroplasty in Osteoarthritis Patients[NCT02198924]Phase 4246 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-12-31Completed
An International, Multicentre, Double-blind, Randomised Study of the Effect of Diacerein vs Celecoxib on Symptoms and Structural Changes in Symptomatic Knee Osteoarthritis Patients as Assessed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging[NCT02688400]Phase 3380 participants (Actual)Interventional2016-05-31Completed
A Phase 3,Randomized,Double-blind,Placebo-controlled Study to Evaluate the Clinical Performance and Safety of an Intra-articular Solution of High and Low Molecular Weight Hyaluronic Acid (HL-01) in the Treatment of Pain in Symptomatic Knee Osteoarthritis[NCT03200288]Phase 3692 participants (Actual)Interventional2017-06-29Completed
A PHASE 3 RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, ACTIVE-CONTROLLED, MULTICENTER STUDY OF THE LONG-TERM SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF SUBCUTANEOUS ADMINISTRATION OF TANEZUMAB IN SUBJECTS WITH OSTEOARTHRITIS OF THE HIP OR KNEE[NCT02528188]Phase 33,021 participants (Actual)Interventional2015-07-21Completed
EN20-01: A 24 Week Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of CNTX-6970 in Subjects With Moderate to Severe Knee Osteoarthritis Pain.[NCT05025787]Phase 277 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2021-10-25Recruiting
Twenty-four Month Exploratory Study of the Effect of Chondroitin Sulphate on Structural Changes in Knee Osteoarthritis Patients as Assessed by MRI[NCT01354145]Phase 3194 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-06-30Completed
A Phase 2, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo and Active-Controlled Trial of LY2951742 in Patients With Mild to Moderate Osteoarthritis Pain of the Knee[NCT02192190]Phase 2268 participants (Actual)Interventional2014-07-31Terminated (stopped due to Interim assessment: Lack of efficacy)
Comparison of Commonly Used Treatment Approaches in the Treatment of Gonarthrosis: Platelet-Rich Plasma, Topical Diclofenac, and Exercise[NCT05877027]84 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2024-01-31Not yet recruiting
The Comparison of the Effectiveness of Exercise and Topical Agent Treatments in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Controlled Trial[NCT05827003]84 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2023-09-30Not yet recruiting
MEASURES OF GAIT AND SELF-REPORTED PAIN IN PATIENTS WITH OSTEOARTHRITIS OF THE KNEE: A RANDOMIZED, SINGLE-BLIND WASHOUT, DOUBLE-BLIND TREATMENT, DOUBLE DUMMY CROSS-OVER PILOT TRIAL USING PLACEBO, OXYCODONE AND CELECOXIB (A9011030)[NCT00484718]Phase 46 participants (Actual)Interventional2008-01-17Terminated (stopped due to See termination reason in detailed description.)
A Randomised, Double-blind, Placebo Controlled Study of Topical FLEXISEQ® for the Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee in Patients Contraindicated for or With Clinical Intolerance to NSAIDs[NCT02594176]600 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2015-10-31Recruiting
Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo- and Active-controlled Study of Safety and Efficacy of Two Dosages of Epicutaneously Applied Diractin® (Ketoprofen in Transfersome® Gel) for the Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee[NCT00716547]Phase 31,399 participants (Actual)Interventional2008-05-31Completed
Treatment Efficacy of 'Shinbaro Capsule' in the Treatment of Hand Osteoarthritis: Randomized, Double-blinded, Placebo-controlled, Multicenter Investigator Initiated Trial.[NCT01910116]Phase 2/Phase 3220 participants (Actual)Interventional2013-09-30Completed
EFFECTS OF NSAIDs ON CLINICAL OUTCOMES, SYNOVIAL FLUID CYTOKINE CONCENTRATION AND SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION PATHWAYS IN KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS[NCT01860833]Phase 490 participants (Actual)Interventional2010-04-30Completed
Pilot, Open Non-controled Trial to Assess the Feasibility of Implementing Objective Parameters as Primary Endpoints in a Clinical Trial With Patients Affected by Knee Osteoarthritis[NCT03421054]8 participants (Actual)Interventional2018-03-19Completed
Double Blind, Placebo Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Effects of a Nutraceutical Containing High-Molecular-Weight Hyaluronic Acid (HA) and Acetyl-11-Keto-Beta-Boswellic Acid (AKBA) in Patients Affected by Knee Osteoarthritis[NCT03612986]72 participants (Actual)Interventional2018-08-22Completed
A PHASE 3, MULTI-CENTER, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, CONTROLLED STUDY OF THE LONG-TERM ANALGESIC EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF TANEZUMAB ALONE OR IN COMBINATION WITH NON-STEROIDAL ANTI-INFLAMMATORY DRUGS (NSAIDS) VERSUS NSAIDS ALONE IN PATIENTS WITH OSTEOARTHRITIS[NCT00809354]Phase 32,720 participants (Actual)Interventional2009-02-12Terminated (stopped due to See termination reason in detailed description.)
A Phase III, 12-Week, Randomized, Active-Comparator-Controlled, Parallel-Group, Double Blind Study in Korea to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Etoricoxib 30 mg Versus Celecoxib 200 mg in Patients With Osteoarthritis[NCT01554163]Phase 3239 participants (Actual)Interventional2012-03-31Completed
The Effect of Preoperative Steroids Injection on Pain and Oedema After Total Knee Arthroplasty . A Double -Blinded Randomized Controlled Study.[NCT04084912]Phase 386 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2020-01-01Not yet recruiting
Efficacy of Steroids on Functional Outcomes After Musculoskeletal Injuries of the Hand[NCT05003596]Phase 2/Phase 360 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2021-09-01Not yet recruiting
Non-Inferiority Clinical Trial On The Efficacy And Safety Of Chondroitin Sulfate And Glucosamine Hydrochloride In Combination Versus Celecoxib In Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis[NCT01425853]Phase 4606 participants (Actual)Interventional2011-09-30Completed
Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel Group, Placebo-Controlled Multi-Center Study Evaluating the Efficacy of PN400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily (Bid) and Celecoxib Once Daily (qd) in Patients With Osteoarthritis of the Knee[NCT00665431]Phase 3610 participants (Actual)Interventional2008-04-30Completed
Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel Group, Placebo-Controlled Multi-Center Study Evaluating the Efficacy of PN400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily (Bid) and Celecoxib Once Daily (qd) in Patients With Osteoarthritis of the Knee[NCT00664560]Phase 3614 participants (Actual)Interventional2008-04-30Completed
A 24 Weeks, Multi-centers, Single Arm Phase IV Study to Evaluate the Safety of 'Shinbaro Capsule' Compared With Historical Data of 'Celebrex Capsule' in Patients With Osteoarthritis[NCT01604239]Phase 4761 participants (Actual)Interventional2012-05-31Completed
A Study of the Efficacy and Tolerability of Once Daily Celebrex (Celecoxib) and Three Times Daily Ibuprofen vs. Placebo in the Treatment of Subjects With Osteoarthritis of the Knee[NCT00630929]Phase 4388 participants (Actual)Interventional2003-01-31Completed
A 26-Week, Randomized, Placebo- and Active-Comparator-Controlled, Parallel-Group, Double-Blind, 2-Part Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Etoricoxib 30 mg Versus Celecoxib 200 mg in Patients With Osteoarthritis (Study 2)[NCT00092781]Phase 3500 participants (Actual)Interventional2004-03-01Completed
A 26-Week, Randomized, Placebo- and Active-Comparator-Controlled, Parallel-Group, Double-Blind, 2-Part Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Etoricoxib 30 mg Versus Celecoxib 200 mg in Patients With Osteoarthritis (Study 1)[NCT00092768]Phase 3500 participants (Actual)Interventional2004-03-01Completed
VeSpAR: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Vessel-Sparing Anastomotic Repair and Transecting Anastomotic Repair in Isolated Short Bulbar Urethral Strictures[NCT03572348]100 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2018-09-26Recruiting
Differential Efficacy of Guided Imagery Psychotherapy: Comparing Guided Imagery Psychotherapy and Unified Psychodynamic Protocol Therapy for Emotional Disorders in a Non-Inferiority RCT and With Regard to Differential Indication[NCT04765800]180 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2021-02-15Recruiting
Rehabilitation for Whiplash Associated Disorders; a Randomized Clinical Trial[NCT05319808]180 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2022-05-27Active, not recruiting
"Double-Blind Parallel-Group Randomized Study Of Efficacy And Safety Of Continuous Use Of Celecoxib Vs. The Usual Use Of Celecoxib In The Treatment Of Subjects With Chronic Osteoarthritis Of The Hip Or Knee Who Require an Anti-inflammatory Medication for [NCT00139776]Phase 4875 participants (Actual)Interventional2005-07-31Completed
A Double Blind Cross-over Study of the Efficacy of a Proprietary Cherry Juice Blend in Osteoarthritis of the Knee.[NCT00443092]Phase 459 participants (Actual)Interventional2007-03-31Completed
Astaxanthin Effects on Osteoarthritis Associated Pain and Inflammatory Indicators[NCT03664466]0 participants (Actual)Interventional2021-04-29Withdrawn (stopped due to Inadequate funding)
A One-week Multicenter, Multiple-dose, Randomized, Double-blind, Double-dummy, Parallel-group Comparison of the Analgesic Efficacy and Safety of Lumiracoxib (COX189), Celecoxib, and Placebo in the Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee[NCT00267215]Phase 3330 participants Interventional2000-11-30Completed
Glucosamine/Chondroitin Arthritis Intervention Trial (GAIT)[NCT00032890]Phase 31,588 participants Interventional2000-04-30Completed
Study of the Effect of Chondroitin Sulphate on Synovial Inflammation in Patients With Osteoarthritis of the Knee[NCT00604539]Phase 370 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2008-02-29Completed
Investigation of Oral Glucosamine Effects on Synovial Fluid Viscosity and Viscoelasticity in Osteoarthritis Patients[NCT01074476]20 participants (Anticipated)Interventional2015-06-30Active, not recruiting
A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Evaluation of Safety and Efficacy of Epicutaneously Applied IDEA-033 (Ketoprofen in Transfersome) in Comparison to Oral Celecoxib for the Treatment of Pain Associated With Osteoarthritis of the Knee[NCT00317733]Phase 2360 participants InterventionalCompleted
Toward Better Outcomes in Osteoarthritis (OA): Finding the Appropriate Role for Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs)[NCT00000425]Phase 3900 participants Interventional1996-07-31Completed
Arthroscopic Surgery Versus Non-surgical Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee[NCT00158431]Phase 3186 participants (Actual)Interventional1999-01-31Completed
[information is prepared from clinicaltrials.gov, extracted Sep-2024]

Trial Outcomes

Absolute Changes From Baseline in Pain Visual Analogue Scale

Absolute Changes from Baseline in Pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS): 0-10 cm; 10 = worse (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: Day 182 or early termination

Interventionscore (Mean)
Diacerein-2.34
Celecoxib-2.46

Cartilage Volume Loss From Baseline in the Lateral Compartment Using MRI

Relative cartilage volume loss from baseline in the lateral compartment of the knne using MRI (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: baseline and 728 days

Interventionpercentage of volume loss (Mean)
Diacerein-4.4
Celecoxib-4.1

Cartilage Volume Loss From Baseline in the Medial Compartment Using MRI

Relative cartilage volume loss from baseline in the medial compartment of the knee using MRI (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: baseline and 728 days

Interventionpercentage of volume loss (Mean)
Diacerein-4.8
Celecoxib-6.0

Change Form Baseline in WOMAC A Pain Subscale

"Change form baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) A pain subscale after 182 days of treatment.~WOMAC A pain subscale: 0 - 50 cm; 50 = worse" (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: baseline and 182 days

Interventioncm (Mean)
Diacerein-11.14
Celecoxib-11.82

Change From Baseline in Global Stiffness Using WOMAC Subscale

Relative Change from baseline in global stiffness using WOMAC subscale (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: baseline and 728 days

Interventionpercentage of change in WOMACStifness sc (Mean)
Diacerein-24.3
Celecoxib-38.1

Change From Baseline in Synovitis (Synovial Membrane Thickness) Using MRI

Absolute Change from baseline in synovitis (synovial membrane thickness) in the global knee using MRI (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: baseline and 728 days

Interventionmm (Mean)
Diacerein0.24
Celecoxib0.27

Change From Baseline in Visual Analogue Scale Pain (VAS-Huskisson's)

Relative change from baseline in Visual Analogue Scale pain (VAS-Huskisson's) (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: baseline and 728 days

InterventionPercentage of change in VAS score (Mean)
Diacerein-31.4
Celecoxib-37.6

Change From Baseline in WOMAC A Pain Subscale

Relative mean change from baseline in WOMAC Pain subscore (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: baseline and 728 days

Interventionpercentage of change in WOMAC Pain score (Mean)
Diacerein-26.2
Celecoxib-37.1

Consumption of Acetaminophen

Overall Daily number of tablets taken during the 6 month study (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: Day 182 or early termination

Interventiontablets (Mean)
Diacerein1.06
Celecoxib0.91

OARSI Responders

Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) Responders (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: Day 182 or early termination

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Diacerein99
Celecoxib97

Assessment of Joint Swelling, Effusion or Both

Assessment of Joint Swelling, joint Effusion or Both (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: Day 182 or early termination

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Joint SwellingJoint EffusionJoint Swelling and Effusion
Celecoxib483723
Diacerein473719

Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity

Change from baseline in global assessment of disease activity was assessed using a VAS scale (0-10cm; 10=worse) (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: Day 182 or early termination

,
Interventionscore (Mean)
Patient's Global AssessmentInvestigator's Global Assessment
Celecoxib-1.97-2.65
Diacerein-1.81-2.02

Change From Baseline in WOMAC OA Scores

"Absolute Changes from Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) after 182 days of treatment.~WOMAC scale: 0 - 240 cm; 240 = worse - Intention-To-Treat (N=370) Pain subscale: 0-50cm; 50 = worse; Stifness subscale: 0-20cm; 20 = worse; Function subscale: 0-170cm; 170 = worse Absolute changes in WOMAC scores: <0 = improvement; 0 = stable; >0 = worsening" (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: Day 182 or early termination

,
Interventionscore (Mean)
Total ScorePain ScoreStiffness ScorePhysical Function Score
Celecoxib-42.9-9.60-3.99-29.3
Diacerein-41.0-10.03-3.56-27.2

Global Assessment of Response to Therapy

Between group comparison in Patient's and Investigator's Global Assessment of Response to Therapy using a 0-10 cm disease activity VAS scale: 0 cm = very well; 10 cm = very poorly (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: Day 182 or early termination

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Patient's Global AssessementInvestigator's Global Assessment
Celecoxib3.613.35
Diacerein3.893.85

Quality of Life SF-36

Absolute Changes from Baseline in Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores from the Quality of Life questionnaire SF-36. Scale range for each component (PCS and MCS): minimum = 0, maximum = 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life. Absolute changes in each component (PCS and MCS): >0 = improvement; 0 = stable; <0 = worsening. (NCT02688400)
Timeframe: Day 182 or early termination

,
Interventionscore on a scale (Mean)
Physical Component SummaryMental Component Summary
Celecoxib4.57-0.14
Diacerein2.461.56

Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Week 16

"PGA of OA was assessed by asking a question from participants: Considering all the ways your OA in your knee or hip (index joint) affects you, how are you doing today? Participants responded on a scale ranging from 1-5, using Interactive Response Technology (IRT), where 1=very good (no symptom and no limitation of normal activities), 2= good (mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities), 3= fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities), 4= poor (severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities), and 5= very poor (very severe symptoms and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher scores indicated worsening of condition." (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 16

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-0.96
Tanezumab 5 mg-0.97
NSAID-0.94

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale at Week 16

WOMAC: Self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA. The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to OA of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as the mean of scores from 5 individual questions, which may not be a whole (integer) number, scored on a numerical rating scale (NRS). Scores for each question and WOMAC Pain subscale score on NRS ranged from 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 16

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-3.22
Tanezumab 5 mg-3.33
NSAID-3.07

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale at Week 16

WOMAC: Self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA. Physical function refers to participant's ability to move around and perform usual activities of daily living. The WOMAC physical function subscale is a 17-item questionnaire used to assess the degree of difficulty experienced due to OA in index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 17 individual questions, which may not be a whole (integer) number, scored on a NRS. Scores for each question and WOMAC physical function subscale score on NRS ranged from 0 (no difficulty) to 10 (extreme difficulty), where higher scores indicated extreme difficulty/worse physical function. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 16

Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-3.27
Tanezumab 5 mg-3.39
NSAID-3.08

Number of Days of Rescue Medication Used During Week 64

In case of inadequate pain relief, after week 16, acetaminophen/paracetamol up to 3000 mg per day up to 7 days in a week could be taken as rescue medication and use was reported weekly via diary. Number of days the participants used the rescue medication during Week 64 were summarized. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Week 64

Interventiondays (Mean)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg2.0
Tanezumab 5 mg2.3
NSAID1.7

Number of Participants Who Took Rescue Medication During Week 64

In case of inadequate pain relief, after Week 16, acetaminophen/paracetamol up to 3000 mg per day up to 7 days in a week could be taken as rescue medication and use was reported weekly via diary. Number of participants with any use of rescue medication during Week 64 were summarized. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Week 64

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg251
Tanezumab 5 mg268
NSAID215

Number of Participants Who Withdrew Due to Lack of Efficacy

Number of participants who withdrew from treatment due to lack of efficacy have been reported here. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 56

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg60
Tanezumab 5 mg63
NSAID91

Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Abnormalities With Regard to Abnormal Baseline

Primary Abnormality criteria: hemoglobin; hematocrit; RBC count < 0.8*LLN; Ery. mean corpuscular volume/ hemoglobin/ HGB concentration, erythrocytes distribution width <0.9*LLN, >1.1*ULN; platelets <0.5*LLN,>1.75*upper limit of normal (ULN); white blood cell count<0.6*LLN, >1.5*ULN; Lymphocytes, Lymphocytes/Leukocytes, Neutrophils, Neutrophils/Leukocytes <0.8*LLN, >1.2*ULN; Basophils, Eosinophils, Monocytes >1.2*ULN; total bilirubin>1.5*ULN; aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, gamma GT,LDH, alkaline phosphatase >3.0*ULN; total protein; albumin<0.8*LLN, >1.2*ULN; blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, Cholesterol, triglycerides >1.3*ULN; Urate >1.2*ULN; sodium <0.95*LLN,>1.05*ULN; potassium, chloride, calcium, magnesium, bicarbonate <0.9*LLN, >1.1*ULN; phosphate <0.8*LLN, >1.2*ULN; glucose <0.6*LLN, >1.5*ULN; Hemoglobin A1C >1.3*ULN; creatine kinase >2.0*ULN; specific gravity<1.003, >1.030; Urine erythrocytes,Leukocytes>=20; Hyaline Casts>=1. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 80

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg78
Tanezumab 5 mg61
NSAID84

Number of Participants With Laboratory Test Abnormalities With Regard to Normal Baseline

Primary Abnormality criteria: HGB, hematocrit, RBC count <0.8* lower limit of normal(LLN); Ery. mean corpuscular volume/hemoglobin/ HGB concentration, RBCs distribution width <0.9*LLN, >1.1*upper limit of normal(ULN); platelets <0.5*LLN,>1.75*ULN; Leukocytes <0.6*LLN, >1.5*ULN; Lymphocytes, Neutrophils <0.8*LLN, >1.2*ULN; Basophils,Eosinophils,Monocytes>1.2*ULN; Prothrombin time/Intl. normalized ratio>1.1*ULN; total bilirubin>1.5*ULN; aspartate aminotransferase,alanine aminotransferase,gamma GT,LDH,alkaline phosphatase >3.0*ULN; total protein; albumin<0.8*LLN, >1.2*ULN; blood urea nitrogen,creatinine,Cholesterol,triglycerides >1.3*ULN; Urate>1.2*ULN; sodium<0.95*LLN,>1.05*ULN; potassium,chloride,calcium,magnesium,bicarbonate <0.9*LLN, >1.1*ULN; phosphate<0.8*LLN, >1.2*ULN; glucose<0.6*LLN, >1.5*ULN; HGB A1C >1.3*ULN; creatine kinase>2.0*ULN, specific gravity<1.003, >1.030; pH<4.5, >8;Urine erythrocytes,Leukocytes>=20. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 80

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg109
Tanezumab 5 mg102
NSAID121

Observation Time-Adjusted Event Rate of Participants With Adjudicated Primary Composite Joint Safety Outcome

Observation time was defined as the start day of first SC study medication until either the (i) date of completion of or withdrawal from study, if a participant did not have the event, or (ii) date of the event (earliest event within each participant in the case of multiple events). Primary joint safety outcome included participants with adjudicated outcome of primary osteonecrosis, rapidly progressive OA type 1 or type 2, subchondral insufficiency fracture, or pathological fracture. Event rate was calculated as the number of events per 1000 participant-years at risk. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 80

Interventionevents per 1000 participant-years (Number)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg38.3
Tanezumab 5 mg71.5
NSAID14.8

Observation Time-Adjusted Event Rate of Participants With Adjudicated Secondary Composite Joint Safety Outcome

Observation time was defined as the start day of first SC study medication until either the (i) date of completion of or withdrawal from study, if a participant did not have the event, or (ii) date of the event (earliest event within each participant in the case of multiple events). Secondary joint safety outcome included primary osteonecrosis, rapidly progressive OA (type-2), subchondral insufficiency fracture, or pathological fracture. Event rate was calculated as the number of events per 1000 participant-years at risk. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 80

Interventionevents per 1000 participant-years (Number)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg9.7
Tanezumab 5 mg21.8
NSAID4.9

Observation Time-Adjusted Event Rate of Participants With Total Joint Replacement or Adjudicated Primary Composite Joint Safety Outcome

Observation time was defined as the start day of first SC study medication until either the (i) date of completion of or withdrawal from study, if a participant did not have the event, or (ii) date of the event (earliest event within each participant in the case of multiple events). Adjudicated primary composite joint safety outcomes included primary osteonecrosis, rapidly progressive OA type 1 or type 2, subchondral insufficiency fracture, or pathological fracture. Event rate was calculated as the number of events per 1000 participant-years at risk. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 80

Interventionevents per 1000 participant-years (Number)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg84.9
Tanezumab 5 mg132.5
NSAID36.7

Percentage of Participants With Adjudicated Primary Composite Joint Safety Outcome

Any participant with incidence of an adjudicated outcome of primary osteonecrosis, rapidly progressive osteoarthritis (OA) type 1 or type 2, subchondral insufficiency fracture, or pathological fracture. Rapidly progressive OA type 1 events were those that the Adjudication Committee considered to have significant loss of joint space width (JSW) (greater than or equal to [>=] 2 millimeters [mm]) within approximately 1 year without gross structural failure. Rapidly progressive OA type 2 events were those considered to have abnormal loss/destruction of bone including limited or total collapse of at least one subchondral surface (e.g., medial femoral condyle) that is not normally present in conventional end-stage OA. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 80

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg3.9
Tanezumab 5 mg7.1
NSAID1.5

Percentage of Participants With Adjudicated Secondary Composite Joint Safety Outcome

Any participant with incidence of an adjudicated outcome of primary osteonecrosis, rapidly progressive OA type 2, subchondral insufficiency fracture, or pathological fracture. Rapidly progressive OA type 2 events were those considered to have abnormal loss/destruction of bone including limited or total collapse of at least one subchondral surface (e.g., medial femoral condyle) that is not normally present in conventional end-stage OA. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 80

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg1.0
Tanezumab 5 mg2.2
NSAID0.5

Percentage of Participants With Total Joint Replacement or Adjudicated Primary Composite Joint Safety Outcome

Percentage of participants with total joint replacement (hip, knee or shoulder) or adjudicated primary composite joint safety outcomes were reported. Adjudicated primary composite joint safety outcomes included primary osteonecrosis, rapidly progressive OA type 1 or type 2, subchondral insufficiency fracture, or pathological fracture. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 80

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Tanezumab 2.5 mg8.6
Tanezumab 5 mg13.1
NSAID3.7

Time to Discontinuation Due to Lack of Efficacy

Time to discontinuation due to lack of efficacy was defined as the time interval from the date of first study drug administration up to the date of discontinuation of participant from treatment due to lack of efficacy. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 56

Interventiondays (Median)
Tanezumab 2.5 mgNA
Tanezumab 5 mgNA
NSAIDNA

Amount of Rescue Medication Used During Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 16

In case of inadequate pain relief, acetaminophen/paracetamol up to 3000 mg per day up to 3 days in a week could be taken as rescue medication. The total dosage of acetaminophen in milligrams used during the specified week were summarized. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, 8 and 16

,,
Interventionmilligrams (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2Week 4Week 8Week 16
NSAID3310.52814.12839.72320.0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg2880.32107.81995.61696.4
Tanezumab 5 mg2898.71946.51628.81581.6

Change From Baseline in Average Daily Minutes of Bouted (Sustained) Moderate to Vigorous Physical Activity at Weeks 16 and 56

"An average daily physical activity count was measured using actigraphy which was then sorted into three intensity thresholds: light (100 - <1,500 counts) moderate (1,500 - <6,500 counts), and vigorous (>=6,500 counts). Participants continuously wore the accelerometer (apart for water activities) in the morning until going to bed at night for 7 or 14 consecutive days while going about their usual daily activities. Participants maintained a log (electronic or written) to record when the accelerometer was put on in the morning and removed at night (or if removed for any other purpose).A bout of moderate to vigorous activity was defined as 10 or more consecutive minutes above the moderate physical activity level threshold, with allowance for interruptions of 1 or 2 minutes below the threshold." (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 16 and 56

,,
Interventionminutes (Median)
BaselineChange at Week 16Change at Week 56
NSAID0.00.00.0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg0.00.00.0
Tanezumab 5 mg0.00.0-1.4

Change From Baseline in Average Daily Minutes of Moderate to Vigorous Physical Activity at Weeks 16 and 56

An average daily physical activity count was measured using actigraphy which was then sorted into three intensity thresholds: light (100 - less than {<1500} counts moderate (1,500 - <6500 counts), and vigorous (>=6500 counts). Participants continuously wore the accelerometer (apart for water activities) in the morning until going to bed at night for 7 or 14 consecutive days while going about their usual daily activities. Participants maintained a log (electronic or written) to record when the accelerometer was put on in the morning and removed at night (or if removed for any other purpose). (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 16 and 56

,,
Interventionminutes (Median)
BaselineChange at Week 16Change at Week 56
NSAID41.9-0.17.4
Tanezumab 2.5 mg41.20.7-3.8
Tanezumab 5 mg53.1-1.62.7

Change From Baseline in Average Daily Minutes of Physical Activity at Weeks 16 and 56

Participant activity level was assessed using actigraphy. Participants continuously wore the accelerometer (apart for water activities) in the morning until going to bed at night for 7 or 14 consecutive days while going about their usual daily activities. Participants maintained a log (electronic or written) to record when the accelerometer was put on in the morning and removed at night (or if removed for any other purpose). (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 16 and 56

,,
Interventionminutes (Median)
BaselineChange at Week 16Change at Week 56
NSAID99.2-4.23.9
Tanezumab 2.5 mg97.03.9-8.9
Tanezumab 5 mg107.12.9-10.1

Change From Baseline in Average Daily Physical Activity Counts at Weeks 16 and 56

An average daily physical activity count was measured using actigraphy. Participants continuously wore the accelerometer (apart for water activities) in the morning until going to bed at night for 7 or 14 consecutive days while going about their usual daily activities. Participants maintained a log (electronic or written) to record when the accelerometer was put on in the morning and removed at night (or if removed for any other purpose). (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 16 and 56

,,
Interventionphysical activity counts (Median)
BaselineChange at Week 16Change at Week 56
NSAID744141202.94414.3
Tanezumab 2.5 mg75244-470.0-14552
Tanezumab 5 mg95911-2261-8313

Change From Baseline in Average Daily Step Count at Weeks 16 and 56

Average daily step count was measured using actigraphy. Participants continuously wore the accelerometer (apart for water activities) in the morning until going to bed at night for 7 or 14 consecutive days while going about their usual daily activities. Participants maintained a log (electronic or written) to record when the accelerometer was put on in the morning and removed at night (or if removed for any other purpose). (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 16 and 56

,,
Interventionstep count (Median)
BaselineChange at Week 16Change at Week 56
NSAID4779.0-705.7242.6
Tanezumab 2.5 mg4851.0350.9-1938
Tanezumab 5 mg5834.887.8-543.2

Change From Baseline in Average Pain Score in the Index Joint at Week 64

Participants assessed their average pain in the index hip/knee in the past 24 hours using NRS, with a scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Higher scores indicated higher pain. Data represents averages of the values reported during the 4-week interval up to and including Week 64. Change from baseline was calculated using the difference between each post-baseline weekly mean and the baseline mean score. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 64

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 64
NSAID6.76-3.24
Tanezumab 2.5 mg6.76-3.01
Tanezumab 5 mg6.77-2.81

Change From Baseline in Average Pain Score in the Index Joint at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

Participants assessed their average pain in the index hip/knee in the past 24 hours using NRS, with a scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Higher scores indicated higher pain. Data for Weeks 20 through 56 represents averages of the values reported during the 4-week interval up to and including the given week. Change from baseline was calculated using the difference between each post-baseline weekly mean and the baseline mean score. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Change at Week 1Change at Week 2Change at Week 3Change at Week 4Change at Week 6Change at Week 8Change at Week 10Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 20Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
NSAID-0.56-0.91-1.23-1.32-1.49-1.59-1.98-2.10-2.17-2.27-2.11-2.06-2.07-2.03-2.04
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-0.47-1.02-1.40-1.62-1.85-1.83-2.35-2.48-2.41-2.56-2.35-2.27-2.25-2.20-2.17
Tanezumab 5 mg-0.56-0.97-1.30-1.65-1.97-2.04-2.46-2.55-2.52-2.60-2.41-2.26-2.20-2.10-2.03

Change From Baseline in Blood Pressure (BP) at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80

Measurement of BP included sitting systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80

,,
Interventionmillimeters of mercury (mmHg) (Mean)
SBP: BaselineSBP: Change at Week 2SBP: Change at Week 4SBP: Change at Week 8SBP: Change at Week 16SBP: Change at Week 24SBP: Change at Week 32SBP: Change at Week 40SBP: Change at Week 48SBP: Change at Week 56SBP: Change at Week 64SBP: Change at Week 80DBP: BaselineDBP: Change at Week 2DBP: Change at Week 4DBP: Change at Week 8DBP: Change at Week 16DBP: Change at Week 24DBP: Change at Week 32DBP: Change at Week 40DBP: Change at Week 48DBP: Change at Week 56DBP: Change at Week 64DBP: Change at Week 80
NSAID128.8-1.2-1.8-1.8-1.3-1.7-1.7-2.3-2.2-2.2-2.8-2.379.3-1.1-1.4-1.1-1.1-1.4-1.2-1.1-1.5-1.2-1.7-1.2
Tanezumab 2.5 mg128.9-2.7-4.0-2.9-3.0-3.0-2.8-2.5-2.7-3.1-2.1-1.079.3-1.3-2.2-1.1-1.3-1.3-1.3-1.2-0.9-1.8-0.8-0.6
Tanezumab 5 mg129.3-4.2-4.9-3.8-3.7-3.1-3.3-3.8-3.0-3.4-2.1-1.379.1-2.1-2.5-1.7-1.8-1.7-1.4-2.0-1.8-1.9-0.8-0.6

Change From Baseline in Electrocardiogram (ECG) Parameters at Weeks 56 and 80

A 12-lead ECG was recorded after participants had rested for at least 5 minutes in the supine position in a quiet environment. All standard intervals (PR, QRS, QT, QTcF, QTcB, RR intervals) were collected. ECG abnormalities included: 1) QT interval, QT interval corrected using Bazett's formula (QTcB) and QT interval corrected using Fridericia's formula (QTcF): increase from baseline greater than (>) 30 millisecond (ms) or 60 ms; absolute value > 450 ms, >480 ms and > 500 ms; 2) heart rate (HR) : absolute value <=50 bpm and decrease from baseline >=20 bpm; absolute value >=120 beats per minute (bpm) and increase from baseline >=20 bpm; 3) PR interval: absolute value >=220 ms and increase from baseline >=20 ms; 4) QRS interval: absolute value >= 120 ms. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 56 and 80

,,
Interventionmilliseconds (Mean)
RR Interval: BaselineRR Interval:Change at Week 56RR Interval:Change at Week 80PR Interval: BaselinePR Interval:Change at Week 56PR Interval:Change at Week 80QRS Interval: BaselineQRS Interval:Change at Week 56QRS Interval:Change at Week 80QT Interval: BaselineQT Interval:Change at Week 56QT Interval:Change at Week 80QTCB Interval: BaselineQTCB Interval:Change at Week 56QTCB Interval:Change at Week 80QTCF Interval: BaselineQTCF Interval:Change at Week 56QTCF Interval:Change at Week 80
NSAID936.1-14.9-34.3163.91.70.694.3-0.4-0.1404.3-2.9-6.0419.70.21.7414.3-0.8-1.0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg940.5-26.3-33.6165.01.70.394.90.2-0.2405.0-3.5-6.2419.32.31.5414.20.3-1.2
Tanezumab 5 mg940.1-22.6-32.4165.90.6-0.894.60.41.0403.8-4.5-6.8418.50.50.2413.3-1.2-2.1

Change From Baseline in Heart Rate (as Assessed by ECG) at Weeks 56 and 80

Heart rate was measured at sitting position. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 56 and 80

,,
Interventionbeats per minute (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 56Change at Week 80
NSAID65.61.02.5
Tanezumab 2.5 mg65.22.02.7
Tanezumab 5 mg65.41.72.3

Change From Baseline in Heart Rate at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80

Heart rate (pulse rate) was measured at sitting position. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80

,,
Interventionbeats per minute (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56Change at Week 64Change at Week 80
NSAID70.61.11.20.10.80.81.71.41.3-0.00.50.9
Tanezumab 2.5 mg70.81.81.60.70.50.41.21.20.60.21.50.9
Tanezumab 5 mg70.52.02.00.80.50.71.61.61.00.11.50.6

Change From Baseline in Joint Space Width of the Index Hip (Kellgren-Lawrence Grade 2 or 3) at Weeks 56 and 80

Change from baseline in JSW was defined as narrowing in JSW compared to baseline in participants with Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2 or 3 over the course of the study. It was measured radiographically in the index hip in participants with OA. Kellgren-Lawrence grade system was a method of classifying the severity of hip OA using five grades i.e. 0 (no radiographic features of OA), 1 (doubtful JSN and possible osteophytic lipping), 2 (definite osteophytes and possible JSN on anteroposterior weight-bearing radiograph), 3 (multiple osteophytes, definite JSN, sclerosis, possible bony deformity), 4 (large osteophytes, marked JSN, severe sclerosis and definite bony deformity). Higher grade indicating worse hip function. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 56 and 80

,,
Interventionmillimeter (Least Squares Mean)
Change at Week 56Change at Week 80
NSAID-0.21-0.28
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-0.35-0.46
Tanezumab 5 mg-0.40-0.35

Change From Baseline in Medial or Lateral Joint Space Width of the Index Knee (Kellgren-Lawrence Grade 2 or 3) at Weeks 56 and 80

Change from baseline in JSW was defined as change in JSW compared to baseline in participants with Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2 or 3 over the course of the study. It was measured radiographically in the medial and lateral tibiofemoral of knee in participants with OA. Kellgren-Lawrence grade system was a method of classifying the severity of knee OA using five grades i.e. 0 [no radiographic features of OA], 1 [doubtful joint space narrowing (JSN) and possible osteophytic lipping], 2 [definite osteophytes and possible JSN on anteroposterior weight-bearing radiograph], 3 [multiple osteophytes, definite JSN, sclerosis, possible bony deformity], 4 [large osteophytes, marked JSN, severe sclerosis and definite bony deformity]. Higher grade indicating worse knee function. The number of participants with progression of OA in the index knee are summarized separately by the compartment of OA at baseline (medial or lateral). (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 56 and 80

,,
Interventionmillimeter (Least Squares Mean)
Change in Medial JSW at Week 56Change in Medial JSW at Week 80Change in Lateral JSW at Week 56Change in Lateral JSW at Week 80
NSAID-0.19-0.25-0.27-0.37
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-0.25-0.33-0.26-0.46
Tanezumab 5 mg-0.34-0.37-0.32-0.32

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80

NIS is a standardized instrument used to evaluate participant for signs of peripheral neuropathy. NIS is the sum of scores of 37 items, from both the left and right side, where 24 items scored from 0 (normal) to 4 (paralysis), higher score indicated higher abnormality/impairment and 13 items scored from 0 (normal), 1 (decreased) and 2 (absent), higher score indicated higher impairment. NIS possible overall score ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased impairment. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56Change at Week 64Change at Week 80
NSAID1.87-0.15-0.19-0.36-0.47-0.49-0.53-0.53-0.55-0.58-0.57-0.62
Tanezumab 2.5 mg1.85-0.22-0.16-0.27-0.27-0.32-0.37-0.35-0.37-0.35-0.32-0.35
Tanezumab 5 mg1.70-0.13-0.17-0.22-0.31-0.35-0.40-0.43-0.49-0.52-0.47-0.47

Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Week 64

"PGA of OA was assessed by asking a question from participants: Considering all the ways your OA in your knee or hip (index joint) affects you, how are you doing today? Participants responded on a scale ranging from 1-5, using IRT, where 1=very good (no symptom and no limitation of normal activities), 2= good (mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities), 3= fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities), 4= poor (severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities), and 5= very poor (very severe symptoms and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher scores indicated worsening of condition." (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 64

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 64
NSAID3.44-0.95
Tanezumab 2.5 mg3.49-0.79
Tanezumab 5 mg3.46-0.64

Change From Baseline in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

"PGA of OA was assessed by asking a question from participants: Considering all the ways your OA in your knee or hip (index joint) affects you, how are you doing today? Participants responded on a scale ranging from 1-5, using IRT, where 1=very good (no symptom and no limitation of normal activities), 2= good (mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities), 3= fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities), 4= poor (severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities), and 5= very poor (very severe symptoms and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher scores indicated worsening of condition." (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
NSAID-0.63-0.69-0.76-0.74-0.72-0.69-0.67-0.66
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-0.67-0.81-0.77-0.74-0.72-0.70-0.70-0.65
Tanezumab 5 mg-0.67-0.84-0.85-0.79-0.71-0.69-0.66-0.60

Change From Baseline in Survey of Autonomic Symptom (SAS) Scores at Weeks 24, 56 and 80

The SAS is a 12 item (11 for females) questionnaire, from which the total number of symptoms (0-12 for males and 0-11 for females) is calculated. Each positive symptom is rated from 1 (not at all) to 5 (a lot). The total impact score was the sum of all symptom rating scores, with 0 assigned where the participant did not have the particular symptom. The range for the total impact score is 0-60 for males and 0-55 for females, higher scores indicating higher impact. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, 56 and 80

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Number of symptoms reported: BaselineNumber of symptoms reported: Change at Week 24Number of symptoms reported: Change at Week 56Number of symptoms reported: Change at Week 80Total symptom impact score: BaselineTotal symptom impact score: Change at Week 24Total symptom impact score: Change at Week 56Total symptom impact score: Change at Week 80
NSAID0.490.110.220.741.130.330.820.89
Tanezumab 2.5 mg0.470.210.280.891.100.660.971.33
Tanezumab 5 mg0.530.180.330.941.230.521.211.31

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Week 64

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA of index joint (knee or hip). WOMAC pain subscale assess amount of pain experienced (score: 0 [no pain] to 10 [extreme pain], higher score = more pain), WOMAC physical function subscale assess degree of difficulty experienced (score: 0 [no difficulty] to 10 [extreme difficulty], higher score = worse physical function) and WOMAC stiffness subscale assess the amount of stiffness experienced (score: 0 [no stiffness] to 10 [extreme stiffness], higher score = higher stiffness). WOMAC average score was the mean of WOMAC pain, physical function and stiffness subscale scores and ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores indicated worse response. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 64

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 64
NSAID7.01-3.77
Tanezumab 2.5 mg7.09-3.40
Tanezumab 5 mg7.10-3.09

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA of index joint (knee or hip). WOMAC pain subscale assess amount of pain experienced (score: 0 [no pain] to 10 [extreme pain], higher score = more pain), WOMAC physical function subscale assess degree of difficulty experienced (score: 0 [no difficulty] to 10 [extreme difficulty], higher score = worse physical function) and WOMAC stiffness subscale assess the amount of stiffness experienced (score: 0 [no stiffness] to 10 [extreme stiffness], higher score = higher stiffness). WOMAC average score was the mean of WOMAC pain, physical function and stiffness subscale scores and ranges from 0 to 10, where higher scores indicated worse response. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
NSAID-1.52-1.95-2.23-3.07-2.64-2.54-2.49-2.44-2.40
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-1.73-2.28-2.44-3.26-2.74-2.65-2.57-2.56-2.45
Tanezumab 5 mg-1.61-2.34-2.71-3.41-2.88-2.69-2.58-2.48-2.38

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Week 64

"WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA in index joint (knee or hip). Participants answered a question: How much pain have you had when going up or down the stairs? Participants responded about the amount of pain they experienced when going up or down stairs by using a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain." (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 64

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 64
NSAID7.83-3.70
Tanezumab 2.5 mg7.89-3.28
Tanezumab 5 mg7.88-2.97

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

"WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA in index joint (knee or hip). Participants answered a question: How much pain have you had when going up or down the stairs? Participants responded about the amount of pain they experienced when going up or down stairs by using a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain." (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
NSAID-1.66-2.08-2.40-3.18-2.83-2.74-2.70-2.67-2.55
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-1.81-2.34-2.48-3.34-2.89-2.76-2.69-2.70-2.55
Tanezumab 5 mg-1.66-2.43-2.81-3.50-3.03-2.84-2.74-2.63-2.47

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Week 64

"WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA in index joint (knee or hip). Participants answered a question: How much pain have you had when walking on a flat surface?. Participants responded about the amount of pain they experienced when walking on a flat surface by using a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain." (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 64

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 64
NSAID6.86-3.67
Tanezumab 2.5 mg6.86-3.20
Tanezumab 5 mg6.90-2.69

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

"WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA in index joint (knee or hip). Participants answered a question: How much pain have you had when walking on a flat surface?. Participants responded about the amount of pain they experienced when walking on a flat surface by using a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain." (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
NSAID-1.46-1.91-2.22-2.95-2.60-2.52-2.48-2.42-2.39
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-1.54-2.14-2.26-3.01-2.64-2.54-2.48-2.45-2.37
Tanezumab 5 mg-1.39-2.15-2.47-3.13-2.76-2.54-2.42-2.34-2.21

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale at Week 64

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA. Stiffness was defined as a sensation of decreased ease of movement in the index joint (knee or hip). The WOMAC stiffness subscale is a 2-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of stiffness experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee or hip) during the past 48 hours. It was calculated as the mean of scores from 2 individual questions scored on NRS. Scores for each question and WOMAC stiffness subscale score on NRS ranged from 0 (no stiffness) to 10 (extreme stiffness), where higher scores indicated higher stiffness. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 64

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 64
NSAID7.09-3.66
Tanezumab 2.5 mg7.15-3.31
Tanezumab 5 mg7.20-3.04

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA. Stiffness was defined as a sensation of decreased ease of movement in the index joint (knee or hip). The WOMAC stiffness subscale is a 2-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of stiffness experienced due to OA in the index joint (knee or hip) during the past 48 hours. It was calculated as the mean of scores from 2 individual questions scored on NRS. Scores for each question and WOMAC stiffness subscale score on NRS ranged from 0 (no stiffness) to 10 (extreme stiffness), where higher scores indicated higher stiffness. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
NSAID-1.48-1.95-2.16-3.10-2.63-2.52-2.46-2.44-2.42
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-1.79-2.32-2.46-3.32-2.77-2.68-2.58-2.60-2.46
Tanezumab 5 mg-1.70-2.43-2.79-3.54-2.95-2.74-2.64-2.54-2.46

Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale at Week 64

WOMAC: Self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA. The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to OA of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as the mean of scores from 5 individual questions scored on a NRS, which may not be a whole (integer) number. Scores for each question and WOMAC Pain subscale score on NRS ranged from 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 64

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 64
NSAID6.96-3.85
Tanezumab 2.5 mg7.01-3.47
Tanezumab 5 mg7.02-3.12

Change From Baseline in WOMAC Pain Subscale at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

WOMAC: Self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA. The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to OA of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as the mean of scores from 5 individual questions scored on a NRS, which may not be a whole (integer) number. Scores for each question and WOMAC Pain subscale score on NRS ranged from 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

,,
Interventionunits on scale (Least Squares Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
NSAID-1.55-1.98-2.27-2.67-2.57-2.52-2.47-2.42
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-1.65-2.25-2.41-2.73-2.64-2.56-2.54-2.44
Tanezumab 5 mg-1.49-2.29-2.65-2.86-2.68-2.57-2.48-2.37

Change From Baseline in WOMAC Physical Function Subscale at Week 64

WOMAC: Self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA. Physical function refers to participant's ability to move around and perform usual activities of daily living. The WOMAC physical function subscale is a 17-item questionnaire used to assess the degree of difficulty experienced due to OA in index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 17 individual questions, which may not be a whole (integer) number, scored on a NRS. Scores for each question and WOMAC physical function subscale score on NRS ranged from 0 (no difficulty) to 10 (extreme difficulty), where higher scores indicated extreme difficulty/worse physical function. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 64

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 64
NSAID6.99-3.81
Tanezumab 2.5 mg7.09-3.42
Tanezumab 5 mg7.08-3.12

Change From Baseline in WOMAC Physical Function Subscale at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

WOMAC: Self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA. Physical function refers to participant's ability to move around and perform usual activities of daily living. The WOMAC physical function subscale is a 17-item questionnaire used to assess the degree of difficulty experienced due to OA in index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 17 individual questions, which may not be a whole (integer) number, scored on a NRS. Scores for each question and WOMAC physical function subscale score on NRS ranged from 0 (no difficulty) to 10 (extreme difficulty), where higher scores indicated extreme difficulty/worse physical function. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
NSAID-1.55-1.96-2.27-2.66-2.55-2.50-2.45-2.41
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-1.76-2.29-2.46-2.78-2.66-2.56-2.56-2.45
Tanezumab 5 mg-1.64-2.31-2.69-2.88-2.67-2.57-2.49-2.36

Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire for Osteoarthritis (WPAI:OA) Scores at Week 64

WPAI is 6-question participant rated questionnaire to determine the impact of OA on absenteeism, presenteeism, work productivity, and daily activity impairment for a period of 7 days prior to a visit. It yields 4 sub-scores: work time missed (absenteeism), impairment while working (presenteeism), overall work impairment (work productivity) and activity impairment (daily activity impairment). These sub-scores are expressed as an impairment percentage (range from 0 to 100), with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 64

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline: Percent Work Time MissedBaseline: Percent Impairment While WorkingBaseline: Percent Overall Work ImpairmentBaseline: Percent Activity ImpairmentChange at Week 64: Percent Work Time MissedChange at Week 64:Percent Impairment While WorkingChange at Week 64: Percent Overall Work ImpairmentChange at Week 64: Percent Activity Impairment
NSAID5.259.360.666.7-2.1-26.5-27.0-32.1
Tanezumab 2.5 mg6.160.562.168.3-1.8-24.2-24.5-28.7
Tanezumab 5 mg6.058.360.067.94.1-20.7-19.2-24.1

Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire for Osteoarthritis (WPAI:OA) Scores at Weeks 16, 24 and 56

WPAI is 6-question participant rated questionnaire to determine the impact of OA on absenteeism, presenteeism, work productivity, and daily activity impairment for a period of 7 days prior to a visit. It yields 4 sub-scores: work time missed (absenteeism), impairment while working (presenteeism), overall work impairment (work productivity) and activity impairment (daily activity impairment). These sub-scores are expressed as an impairment percentage (range from 0 to 100), with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 16, 24 and 56

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Change at Week 16: Percent Work Time MissedChange at Week 16:Percent Impairment While WorkingChange at Week 16: Percent Overall Work ImpairmentChange at Week 16: Percent Activity ImpairmentChange at Week 24: Percent Work Time MissedChange at Week 24:Percent Impairment While WorkingChange at Week 24: Percent Overall Work ImpairmentChange at Week 24: Percent Activity ImpairmentChange at Week 56: Percent Work Time MissedChange at Week 56:Percent Impairment While WorkingChange at Week 56: Percent Overall Work ImpairmentChange at Week 56: Percent Activity Impairment
NSAID-2.92-26.59-27.04-29.38-2.73-25.15-25.90-29.76-0.81-34.59-34.26-36.17
Tanezumab 2.5 mg-2.33-28.07-28.67-30.59-2.70-25.34-26.05-29.88-0.12-31.49-31.21-34.47
Tanezumab 5 mg-3.35-26.94-27.51-31.36-2.19-26.66-27.33-30.53-1.84-29.92-29.29-32.91

European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) Overall Health Utility Score/Index Value

EQ-5D-5L: standardized participant completed questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life and translates that score into an index value or utility score. EQ-5D-5L consists of two components: a health state profile and an optional VAS. EQ-5D health state profile comprises of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: 1=no problems, 2=slight problems, 3=moderate problems, 4=severe problems, and 5=extreme problems. Responses from the five domains were used to calculate a single utility index (the Overall health utility score) where values are less than or equal to (<=) 1. The Overall health utility score for a participant with no problems in all 5 items is 1 for all countries (except for Zimbabwe where it is 0.9), and is reduced where a participant reports greater levels of problems across the five dimensions. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 24, 40, 56 and 64

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineWeek 8Week 16Week 24Week 40Week 56Week 64
NSAID0.620.740.770.770.800.790.75
Tanezumab 2.5 mg0.610.740.770.760.790.780.72
Tanezumab 5 mg0.610.750.780.760.780.770.69

Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Duration Since Quitting Job Due to Osteoarthritis

OA HCRU assessed healthcare usage during the last 3 months (for Baseline and Week 80) and past 8 weeks (for Week 64). Domain evaluated was duration since quitting job due to OA. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80

,,
Interventionyears (Median)
BaselineWeek 64Week 80
NSAID2.44.01.8
Tanezumab 2.5 mg2.02.42.0
Tanezumab 5 mg1.81.82.0

Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Nights Stayed in the Hospital Due to Osteoarthritis

OA HCRU assessed healthcare usage during the last 3 months (for Baseline and Week 80) and past 8 weeks (for Week 64). Domain evaluated was number of nights stayed in the hospital due to OA. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80

Interventionnights (Median)
BaselineWeek 64
NSAID11.02.0

Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Nights Stayed in the Hospital Due to Osteoarthritis

OA HCRU assessed healthcare usage during the last 3 months (for Baseline and Week 80) and past 8 weeks (for Week 64). Domain evaluated was number of nights stayed in the hospital due to OA. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80

,
Interventionnights (Median)
BaselineWeek 64Week 80
Tanezumab 2.5 mg12.02.02.0
Tanezumab 5 mg9.02.02.0

Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Participants Hospitalized Due to Osteoarthritis

OA HCRU assessed healthcare usage during the last 3 months (for Baseline and Week 80) and past 8 weeks (for Week 64). Domain evaluated was number of participants who were hospitalized due to OA. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80

,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
BaselineWeek 64Week 80
NSAID160
Tanezumab 2.5 mg1158
Tanezumab 5 mg61112

Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Participants Who Quit Job Due to Osteoarthritis

OA HCRU assessed healthcare usage during the last 3 months (for Baseline and Week 80) and past 8 weeks (for Week 64). Domain evaluated was number of participants who quit job due to OA. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80

,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
BaselineWeek 64Week 80
NSAID65266
Tanezumab 2.5 mg472812
Tanezumab 5 mg553518

Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Participants Who Visited the Emergency Room Due to Osteoarthritis

OA HCRU assessed healthcare usage during the last 3 months (for Baseline and Week 80) and past 8 weeks (for Week 64). Domain evaluated was number of participants who visited the emergency room due to OA. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80

,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
BaselineWeek 64Week 80
NSAID1152
Tanezumab 2.5 mg15104
Tanezumab 5 mg23155

Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Visits of Services Directly Related to Osteoarthritis

OA HCRU assessed healthcare usage during the last 3 months (for Baseline and Week 80) and past 8 weeks (for Week 64). Visits of services directly related to OA evaluated were: visits to primary care physician, neurologist, rheumatologist, physician assistant or nurse practitioner, pain specialist, orthopedist, physical therapist, chiropractor, alternative medicine or therapy, podiatrist, nutritionist/dietitian, radiologist, home healthcare services and other practitioner. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80

,,
Interventionvisits (Median)
Baseline: Primary Care PhysicianBaseline: NeurologistBaseline: RheumatologistBaseline:Physician Assistant or Nurse PractitionerBaseline: Pain SpecialistBaseline: OrthopedistBaseline: Physical TherapistBaseline: ChiropractorBaseline: Alternative Medicine or TherapyBaseline: PodiatristBaseline: Nutritionist/DietitianBaseline: RadiologistBaseline: Home Healthcare ServicesBaseline: Other PractitionerWeek 64: Primary Care PhysicianWeek 64: NeurologistWeek 64: RheumatologistWeek 64: Physician Assistant Or Nurse PractitionerWeek 64: Pain SpecialistWeek 64: OrthopedistWeek 64: Physical TherapistWeek 64: ChiropractorWeek 64: Alternative Medicine or TherapyWeek 64: PodiatristWeek 64: Nutritionist/DietitianWeek 64: RadiologistWeek 64: Home Healthcare ServicesWeek 64: Other PractitionerWeek 80: Primary Care PhysicianWeek 80: NeurologistWeek 80: RheumatologistWeek 80: Physician Assistant or Nurse PractitionerWeek 80: Pain SpecialistWeek 80: OrthopedistWeek 80: Physical TherapistWeek 80: ChiropractorWeek 80: Alternative Medicine or TherapyWeek 80: PodiatristWeek 80: Nutritionist/DietitianWeek 80: RadiologistWeek 80: Home Healthcare ServicesWeek 80: Other Practitioner
NSAID1.01.02.01.01.02.03.03.02.01.01.01.03.02.01.01.01.02.01.01.03.03.02.01.01.01.05.01.01.01.01.01.01.01.03.03.02.03.01.01.01.01.0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg1.01.01.01.01.02.04.03.02.01.01.01.02.02.01.01.01.01.01.01.04.03.01.01.02.01.04.01.01.01.01.01.01.51.58.03.03.51.01.01.02.51.0
Tanezumab 5 mg1.01.02.01.02.01.03.03.02.01.01.01.01.02.01.01.01.01.01.01.04.52.02.01.01.01.04.01.01.01.01.01.02.01.05.54.51.01.01.51.04.01.0

Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Visits to the Emergency Room Due to Osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis HCRU assessed healthcare usage during the last 3 months (for Baseline and Week 80) and past 8 weeks (for Week 64). Domain evaluated was number of visits to the emergency room due to OA. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80

,,
Interventionvisits (Median)
BaselineWeek 64Week 80
NSAID1.01.01.0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg1.01.01.0
Tanezumab 5 mg1.01.03.0

Number of Days of Rescue Medication Used During Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

In case of inadequate pain relief during the treatment period, acetaminophen/paracetamol up to 3000 mg per day and up to 3 days in a week between baseline and Week 16, and 3000 mg per day and up to 7 days per week between Week 16 and 64 could be taken as rescue medication. Number of days the participants used the rescue medication during the particular study weeks were summarized. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

,,
Interventiondays (Least Squares Mean)
Week 2Week 4Week 8Week 16Week 24Week 32Week 40Week 48Week 56
NSAID2.261.861.651.391.651.781.761.741.74
Tanezumab 2.5 mg2.311.801.651.291.561.671.701.681.73
Tanezumab 5 mg2.291.701.421.251.561.661.711.761.85

Number of Participants Who Took Rescue Medication During Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

In case of inadequate pain relief, acetaminophen/paracetamol up to 3000 mg per day and up to 3 days in a week between baseline and Week 16, and 3000 mg per day and up to 7 days per week between Week 16 and 64 could be taken as rescue medication. Number of participants with any use of rescue medication during the particular study week were summarized. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Week 2Week 4Week 8Week 16Week 24Week 32Week 40Week 48Week 56
NSAID527469418352384390388389397
Tanezumab 2.5 mg567481433353372391391391391
Tanezumab 5 mg548437377330358380388393408

Number of Participants With Anti-Tanezumab Antibodies

Human serum anti-drug antibody (ADA) samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of anti-tanezumab antibodies by using a semi quantitative enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 32, 48, 56, 64 and 80

,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
BaselineWeek 8Week 16Week 32Week 48Week 56Week 64Week 80
Tanezumab 2.5 mg1161209810896826950
Tanezumab 5 mg8393838178666042

Number of Participants With Confirmed Orthostatic Hypotension

Orthostatic hypotension was defined as postural change (supine to standing) that met the following criteria: For systolic BP <=150 mmHg (mean supine): Reduction in systolic BP>=20 mmHg or reduction in diastolic BP>=10 mmHg at the 1 and/or 3 minute standing BP measurements. For systolic BP >150 mmHg (mean supine): Reduction in systolic BP>=30 mmHg or reduction in diastolic BP>=15 mmHg at the 1 and/or 3 minute standing BP measurements. If the 1 minute or 3 minute standing BP in a sequence met the orthostatic hypotension criteria, then that sequence was considered positive. If 2 of 2 or 2 of 3 sequences were positive, then orthostatic hypotension was considered confirmed. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 and 80

,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
BaselineWeek 2Week 4Week 8Week 16Week 24Week 32Week 40Week 48Week 56Week 64Week 80
NSAID122101010130
Tanezumab 2.5 mg021010212100
Tanezumab 5 mg341211212111

Number of Participants With Progression of Osteoarthritis in the Index Hip (Kellgren-Lawrence Grade 2 or 3) According to Bland and Altman Method at Weeks 56 and 80

Progression of OA according to Bland-Altman methodology as defined by a decrease in JSW >=1.96 times within-participant standard deviation of the change in JSW in the index hip. The number of participants with progression of OA in the index hip per Bland-Altman methodology are reported. Kellgren-Lawrence grade system was a method of classifying the severity of hip OA using five grades i.e. 0 (no radiographic features of OA), 1 (doubtful JSN and possible osteophytic lipping), 2 (definite osteophytes and possible JSN on anteroposterior weight-bearing radiograph), 3 (multiple osteophytes, definite JSN, sclerosis, possible bony deformity), 4 (large osteophytes, marked JSN, severe sclerosis and definite bony deformity). Higher grade indicating worse hip function. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 56 and 80

,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Week 56Week 80
NSAID33
Tanezumab 2.5 mg109
Tanezumab 5 mg109

Number of Participants With Progression of Osteoarthritis in the Index Knee (Kellgren-Lawrence Grade 2 or 3) According to Bland and Altman Method at Weeks 56 and 80

Progression of OA according to Bland-Altman as defined by a decrease JSW >=1.96 times within-participant standard deviation of change in JSW. The number of participants with progression of OA in the index knee are summarized separately by the compartment of OA at baseline (medial or lateral). Kellgren-Lawrence grade system was a method of classifying the severity of knee OA using five grades i.e. 0 [no radiographic features of OA], 1 [doubtful joint space narrowing (JSN) and possible osteophytic lipping], 2 [definite osteophytes and possible JSN on anteroposterior weight-bearing radiograph], 3 [multiple osteophytes, definite JSN, sclerosis, possible bony deformity], 4 [large osteophytes, marked JSN, severe sclerosis and definite bony deformity]. Higher grade indicating worse knee function. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 56 and 80

,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Decreased medial JSW at Week 56Decreased medial JSW at Week 80Decreased lateral JSW at Week 56Decreased lateral JSW at Week 80
NSAID201697
Tanezumab 2.5 mg332959
Tanezumab 5 mg433884

Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)

An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent were events between first dose of study drug and up to Week 80 that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pre-treatment state. AEs included both serious and non-serious AEs. Clinically significant physical examination abnormalities were reported as AEs. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 80

,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
AEsSAEs
NSAID66666
Tanezumab 2.5 mg68178
Tanezumab 5 mg744110

Number of Participants With Treatment-Related Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)

Treatment-related AE was any untoward medical occurrence attributed to study drug in a participant who received study drug. SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent were events between first dose of study drug and up to Week 80 that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pre-treatment state. Relatedness to study drug was assessed by the investigator. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 80

,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Treatment Related AEsTreatment Related SAEs
NSAID1797
Tanezumab 2.5 mg1907
Tanezumab 5 mg25020

Observation Time-Adjusted Event Rate of Participants With Individual Adjudicated Joint Safety Outcome

Observation time was defined as the start day of first SC study medication until either the (i) date of completion of or withdrawal from study, if a participant did not have the event, or (ii) date of the event (earliest event within each participant in the case of multiple events). Individual joint safety outcome included rapidly progressive OA (type-1 only), rapidly progressive OA (type-2 only), rapidly progressive OA (type-1 or type-2 combined), subchondral insufficiency fracture, primary osteonecrosis, and pathological fracture. Event rate was calculated as the number of events per 1000 participant-years at risk. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 80

,,
Interventionevents per 1000 participant-years (Number)
Rapidly Progressive OA Type 1 or 2Rapidly Progressive OA Type 1Rapidly Progressive OA Type 2Primary OsteonecrosisPathological FractureSubchondral Insufficiency Fracture
NSAID11.910.91.0003.9
Tanezumab 2.5 mg31.428.42.91.005.8
Tanezumab 5 mg63.349.113.91.006.9

Percentage of Participants Achieving Improvement of >=2 Points in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64

"PGA of OA was assessed by asking a question from participants: Considering all the ways your OA in your knee or hip affects you, how are you doing today? Participants responded on a scale ranging from 1-5, where, 1=very good (no symptom and no limitation of normal activities), 2= good (mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities), 3= fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities), 4= poor (severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities), and 5 = very poor (very severe symptoms and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher scores indicated worse condition. Percentage of participants with improvement of at least 2 points from baseline in PGA of OA were reported. Missing data was imputed using mixed BOCF/LOCF." (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64

,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 2Week 4Week 8Week 16Week 24Week 32Week 40Week 48Week 56Week 64
NSAID11.615.919.028.223.723.621.021.120.825.8
Tanezumab 2.5 mg14.621.421.929.123.423.721.722.021.021.1
Tanezumab 5 mg15.622.423.730.324.822.321.721.719.717.4

Percentage of Participants Achieving Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Reduction >=30 Percent (%), >=50%, >=70% and >=90% Response at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64

Percentage of participants with reduction in WOMAC pain intensity of >= 30%, 50%, 70% and 90% at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64 compared to baseline were classified as responders to WOMAC pain subscale and are reported here. WOMAC: Self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA. The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to OA of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as the mean of scores from 5 individual questions scored on a NRS. Scores for each question and WOMAC Pain subscale score on NRS ranged from 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Missing data was imputed using mixed BOCF/LOCF. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64

,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 2: At least 30% reductionWeek 2: At least 50% reductionWeek 2: At least 70% reductionWeek 2: At least 90% reductionWeek 4: At least 30% reductionWeek 4: At least 50% reductionWeek 4: At least 70% reductionWeek 4: At least 90% reductionWeek 8: At least 30% reductionWeek 8: At least 50% reductionWeek 8: At least 70% reductionWeek 8: At least 90% reductionWeek 16: At least 30% reductionWeek 16: At least 50% reductionWeek 16: At least 70% reductionWeek 16: At least 90% reductionWeek 24: At least 30% reductionWeek 24: At least 50% reductionWeek 24: At least 70% reductionWeek 24: At least 90% reductionWeek 32: At least 30% reductionWeek 32: At least 50% reductionWeek 32: At least 70% reductionWeek 32: At least 90% reductionWeek 40: At least 30% reductionWeek 40: At least 50% reductionWeek 40: At least 70% reductionWeek 40: At least 90% reductionWeek 48: At least 30% reductionWeek 48: At least 50% reductionWeek 48: At least 70% reductionWeek 48: At least 90% reductionWeek 56: At least 30% reductionWeek 56: At least 50% reductionWeek 56: At least 70% reductionWeek 56: At least 90% reductionWeek 64: At least 30% reductionWeek 64: At least 50% reductionWeek 64: At least 70% reductionWeek 64: At least 90% reduction
NSAID32.414.76.21.844.424.911.93.154.132.615.94.268.951.528.88.559.447.529.011.556.346.327.410.054.846.029.310.454.244.428.510.652.743.527.510.181.360.234.212.6
Tanezumab 2.5 mg34.817.87.72.450.230.414.54.355.936.819.34.771.854.928.910.359.449.330.810.356.847.431.210.355.747.230.010.854.646.229.610.353.144.328.210.173.055.431.19.6
Tanezumab 5 mg30.516.57.12.549.530.516.44.959.039.322.46.672.956.535.012.761.149.433.813.355.745.831.512.954.645.230.412.052.943.229.411.451.241.527.010.569.047.324.37.9

Percentage of Participants Achieving Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Reduction of >=30%, >=50%, >=70% and >=90% Response at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64

Percentage of participants with reduction in WOMAC physical function of >=(30%,50%,70%,90%) at Weeks 2,4,8,16,24,32,40,48,56 and 64 compared to baseline were classified as responders to WOMAC physical function subscale. WOMAC: Self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA. Physical function:Participant's ability to move around and perform usual activities of daily living. WOMAC physical function subscale17-item questionnaire used to assess the degree of difficulty experienced due to OA in index joint (knee/hip) during past 48 hours, calculated as mean of the scores from 17 individual questions scored on a NRS. Scores for each question and WOMAC physical subscale on NRS ranged from 0 (no difficulty) to 10 (extreme difficulty), where higher scores indicated extreme difficulty/worse physical function. Missing data was imputed using mixed BOCF/LOCF. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64

,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 2: At least 30% reductionWeek 2: At least 50% reductionWeek 2: At least 70% reductionWeek 2: At least 90% reductionWeek 4: At least 30% reductionWeek 4: At least 50% reductionWeek 4: At least 70% reductionWeek 4: At least 90% reductionWeek 8: At least 30% reductionWeek 8: At least 50% reductionWeek 8: At least 70% reductionWeek 8: At least 90% reductionWeek 16: At least 30% reductionWeek 16: At least 50% reductionWeek 16: At least 70% reductionWeek 16: At least 90% reductionWeek 24: At least 30% reductionWeek 24: At least 50% reductionWeek 24: At least 70% reductionWeek 24: At least 90% reductionWeek 32: At least 30% reductionWeek 32: At least 50% reductionWeek 32: At least 70% reductionWeek 32: At least 90% reductionWeek 40: At least 30% reductionWeek 40: At least 50% reductionWeek 40: At least 70% reductionWeek 40: At least 90% reductionWeek 48: At least 30% reductionWeek 48: At least 50% reductionWeek 48: At least 70% reductionWeek 48: At least 90% reductionWeek 56: At least 30% reductionWeek 56: At least 50% reductionWeek 56: At least 70% reductionWeek 56: At least 90% reductionWeek 64: At least 30% reductionWeek 64: At least 50% reductionWeek 64: At least 70% reductionWeek 64: At least 90% reduction
NSAID31.715.45.81.743.223.111.22.655.031.414.14.468.150.127.99.759.046.827.89.855.944.726.89.454.945.027.69.554.643.426.19.452.942.526.09.078.258.933.913.3
Tanezumab 2.5 mg35.820.08.32.149.031.115.54.656.036.618.75.871.653.129.910.759.549.930.411.056.747.229.711.055.545.529.510.354.545.329.110.252.044.126.99.371.452.931.49.4
Tanezumab 5 mg32.117.08.23.249.131.315.85.459.540.021.37.171.855.834.313.461.348.232.713.056.645.730.213.155.545.029.113.253.343.527.912.051.141.326.410.568.044.622.97.9

Percentage of Participants Meeting Outcome Measures in Arthritis Clinical Trials-Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Responder Index at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64

Participants were considered as OMERACT-OARSI responders: if the change (improvement) from baseline to week of interest was >=50 percent and >= 2 units in either WOMAC pain subscale or physical function subscale score; if change (improvement) from baseline to week of interest was >=20 percent and >=1 unit in at least 2 of the following: 1) WOMAC pain subscale score, 2) WOMAC physical function subscale score, 3) PGA of OA. WOMAC pain subscale assess amount of pain experienced (score: 0 [no pain] to 10 [extreme pain], higher score = more pain), WOMAC physical function subscale assess degree of difficulty experienced (score: 0 [no difficulty] to 10 [extreme difficulty], higher score = worse physical function) and PGA of OA (score: 1 [very good] to 5 [very poor], higher score = worse condition). Missing data was imputed using mixed baseline/last observation carried forward (BOCF/LOCF). (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56 and 64

,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 2Week 4Week 8Week 16Week 24Week 32Week 40Week 48Week 56Week 64
NSAID44.856.464.475.161.358.658.257.356.086.5
Tanezumab 2.5 mg46.762.667.578.262.459.258.457.456.579.2
Tanezumab 5 mg43.762.770.378.364.859.958.756.254.575.2

Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Percent Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale at Weeks 16, 24 and 56

WOMAC: Self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA. The WOMAC pain subscale is a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to OA of index joint during past 48 hours. It was calculated as the mean of scores from 5 individual questions scored on a NRS. Scores for each question and WOMAC Pain subscale score on NRS ranged from 0 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Percentage of participants with cumulative reduction (as percent) (greater than [>] 0% ; >= 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90%; = 100 %) in WOMAC pain subscale from Baseline to Weeks 16, 24 and 56 were reported, participants (%) are reported more than once in categories specified. Missing data was imputed using mixed BOCF/LOCF. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 16, 24 and 56

,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 16: >0%Week 16: >=10%Week 16: >=20%Week 16: >=30%Week 16: >=40%Week 16: >=50%Week 16: >=60%Week 16: >=70%Week 16: >=80%Week 16: >=90%Week 16: =100%Week 24: >0%Week 24: >=10%Week 24: >=20%Week 24: >=30%Week 24: >=40%Week 24: >=50%Week 24: >=60%Week 24: >=70%Week 24: >=80%Week 24: >=90%Week 24: =100%Week 56: >0%Week 56: >=10%Week 56: >=20%Week 56: >=30%Week 56: >=40%Week 56: >=50%Week 56: >=60%Week 56: >=70%Week 56: >=80%Week 56: >=90%Week 56: =100%
NSAID87.182.875.868.959.951.538.828.818.88.53.364.863.462.159.454.747.538.129.020.211.53.459.758.156.352.748.643.536.327.518.610.14.1
Tanezumab 2.5 mg89.585.078.171.863.754.940.928.919.410.34.466.764.962.259.455.249.340.730.820.610.33.960.859.155.953.148.644.337.028.218.910.14.5
Tanezumab 5 mg87.682.878.372.963.556.544.835.023.912.73.968.266.465.261.155.749.441.233.824.013.34.559.157.054.851.246.841.533.827.019.110.55.3

Percentage of Participants With Cumulative Percent Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale at Weeks 16, 24 and 56

Percentage of participants with cumulative reduction (as percent) (> 0 %; >= 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80% and 90%; =100%) in WOMAC physical function subscale from baseline to Weeks 16, 24 and 56 were reported. WOMAC:Self-administered, disease-specific questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with OA. Physical function: participant's ability to move around and perform usual activities of daily living. WOMAC physical function subscale:17-item questionnaire to assess the degree of difficulty experienced due to OA in index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours, calculated as mean of the scores from 17 individual questions scored on a NRS. Scores for each question and WOMAC Pain subscale on NRS ranged from 0 (no difficulty) to 10 (extreme difficulty), higher scores indicate extreme difficulty/worse physical function. Missing data was imputed using mixed BOCF/LOCF. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 16, 24 and 56

,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 16: >0%Week 16: >=10%Week 16: >=20%Week 16: >=30%Week 16: >=40%Week 16: >=50%Week 16: >=60%Week 16: >=70%Week 16: >=80%Week 16: >=90%Week 16: =100%Week 24: >0%Week 24: >=10%Week 24: >=20%Week 24: >=30%Week 24: >=40%Week 24: >=50%Week 24: >=60%Week 24: >=70%Week 24: >=80%Week 24: >=90%Week 24: =100%Week 56: >0%Week 56: >=10%Week 56: >=20%Week 56: >=30%Week 56: >=40%Week 56: >=50%Week 56: >=60%Week 56: >=70%Week 56: >=80%Week 56: >=90%Week 56: =100%
NSAID87.481.473.768.161.050.139.827.917.99.72.065.063.360.859.053.946.837.727.818.99.82.760.157.855.452.948.942.534.826.017.49.03.3
Tanezumab 2.5 mg90.085.078.471.663.753.141.429.920.810.72.966.765.062.659.554.949.941.330.419.911.03.061.159.356.152.048.544.136.726.917.19.32.9
Tanezumab 5 mg88.883.977.371.864.155.844.734.324.413.43.368.666.664.261.356.048.242.032.722.613.03.259.557.354.351.146.341.334.626.417.110.53.6

Percentage of Participants With Individual Adjudicated Joint Safety Outcome

Any participant with incidence of an adjudicated outcome of rapidly progressive OA (type-1 only), rapidly progressive OA (type-2 only), rapidly progressive OA (type-1 or type-2 combined), subchondral insufficiency fracture, primary osteonecrosis, and pathological fracture. Rapidly progressive OA type 1 events were those that the Adjudication Committee considered to have significant loss of JSW >=2 mm within approximately 1 year without gross structural failure. Rapidly progressive OA type 2 events were those considered to have abnormal loss/destruction of bone including limited or total collapse of at least one subchondral surface (e.g., medial femoral condyle) that is not normally present in conventional end-stage OA. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 80

,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Rapidly Progressive OA Type 1 or 2Rapidly Progressive OA type 1Rapidly Progressive OA type 2Primary OsteonecrosisPathological FractureSubchondral Insufficiency Fracture
NSAID1.21.10.1000.4
Tanezumab 2.5 mg3.22.90.30.100.6
Tanezumab 5 mg6.34.91.40.100.7

Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire Medicine Version II (TSQM v.II) Score With Effectiveness, Side Effects, Convenience, and Overall Satisfaction Responses

TSQM v.II is a self-administered 11-item validated scale that quantified participant's level of satisfaction with study medication (scored on a 7-point Likert scale [1= extremely dissatisfied, 2=very dissatisfied, 3=dissatisfied, 4=somewhat satisfied, 5=satisfied, 6=very satisfied, 7=extremely satisfied]) and dissatisfaction with side effects (3 questions scored on 5 point Likert scale [1= extremely dissatisfied, 2=very dissatisfied, 3=somewhat dissatisfied, 4=slightly dissatisfied, 5=not at all dissatisfied] and 1 question on 2 point scale [0 =No, 1=Yes]). Participants were asked to assess their level of satisfaction taking all things into account. The 11 questions of the TSQM were used to calculate the 4 endpoints of effectiveness, side Effects, convenience and global satisfaction, each scored on a 0-100 scale with 100 being the best level of satisfaction. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 16 and 56

,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Week 16: EffectivenessWeek 16: Side EffectsWeek 16: ConvenienceWeek 16: Global SatisfactionWeek 56: EffectivenessWeek 56: Side EffectsWeek 56: ConvenienceWeek 56: Global Satisfaction
NSAID61.6171.0373.7067.1367.6471.3476.1873.37
Tanezumab 2.5 mg64.2668.6175.5070.3269.7978.6278.0375.31
Tanezumab 5 mg66.2773.3275.7870.6967.9162.0077.6773.37

Health Care Resource Utilization (HCRU): Number of Participants Who Used Any Aids/Devices for Doing Things Due to Osteoarthritis

OA HCRU assessed healthcare usage during the last 3 months (for Baseline and Week 80) and past 8 weeks (for Week 64). Domain evaluated was number of participants who used any aids/devices for doing things. Aids such as walking aid, wheelchair, device or utensil for dress/bathe/eat and any other aids/devices. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 64 and 80

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Baseline: Walking Aid Use72578291Baseline: Walking Aid Use72578290Baseline: Walking Aid Use72578289Baseline: Wheelchair Use72578291Baseline: Wheelchair Use72578289Baseline: Wheelchair Use72578290Baseline: Device/Utensil to Dress Bathe Eat72578289Baseline: Device/Utensil to Dress Bathe Eat72578291Baseline: Device/Utensil to Dress Bathe Eat72578290Baseline: Other Aids Or Devices72578289Baseline: Other Aids Or Devices72578290Baseline: Other Aids Or Devices72578291Week 64: Walking Aid Use72578290Week 64: Walking Aid Use72578289Week 64: Walking Aid Use72578291Week 64: Wheelchair Use72578291Week 64: Wheelchair Use72578290Week 64: Wheelchair Use72578289Week 64: Device/Utensil to Dress Bathe Eat72578291Week 64: Device/Utensil to Dress Bathe Eat72578289Week 64: Device/Utensil to Dress Bathe Eat72578290Week 64: Other Aids Or Devices72578289Week 64: Other Aids Or Devices72578291Week 64: Other Aids Or Devices72578290Week 80: Walking Aid Use72578289Week 80: Walking Aid Use72578291Week 80: Walking Aid Use72578290Week 80: Wheelchair Use72578291Week 80: Wheelchair Use72578289Week 80: Wheelchair Use72578290Week 80: Device/Utensil to Dress Bathe Eat72578290Week 80: Device/Utensil to Dress Bathe Eat72578289Week 80: Device/Utensil to Dress Bathe Eat72578291Week 80: Other Aids Or Devices72578291Week 80: Other Aids Or Devices72578289Week 80: Other Aids Or Devices72578290
NeverRarelySometimesAlwaysOften
Tanezumab 2.5 mg852
Tanezumab 5 mg838
NSAID851
Tanezumab 5 mg18
NSAID24
Tanezumab 2.5 mg71
Tanezumab 5 mg69
NSAID75
Tanezumab 2.5 mg32
Tanezumab 5 mg43
NSAID26
Tanezumab 5 mg29
NSAID19
Tanezumab 2.5 mg992
Tanezumab 5 mg989
NSAID988
NSAID1
Tanezumab 2.5 mg970
Tanezumab 5 mg976
NSAID977
NSAID0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg7
NSAID6
Tanezumab 2.5 mg16
NSAID7
Tanezumab 2.5 mg6
NSAID5
Tanezumab 2.5 mg932
Tanezumab 5 mg935
NSAID921
NSAID9
Tanezumab 2.5 mg27
NSAID41
NSAID14
NSAID10
Tanezumab 2.5 mg662
Tanezumab 5 mg662
NSAID714
Tanezumab 2.5 mg21
Tanezumab 5 mg9
NSAID12
Tanezumab 2.5 mg48
Tanezumab 5 mg47
NSAID37
Tanezumab 2.5 mg20
Tanezumab 5 mg30
NSAID17
Tanezumab 2.5 mg22
Tanezumab 5 mg34
Tanezumab 2.5 mg765
Tanezumab 5 mg776
NSAID794
Tanezumab 2.5 mg760
Tanezumab 5 mg768
NSAID792
NSAID2
Tanezumab 2.5 mg733
Tanezumab 5 mg720
NSAID771
NSAID11
Tanezumab 2.5 mg19
Tanezumab 5 mg26
NSAID8
Tanezumab 5 mg20
Tanezumab 5 mg7
NSAID3
Tanezumab 2.5 mg373
Tanezumab 5 mg322
NSAID386
Tanezumab 2.5 mg12
Tanezumab 5 mg10
Tanezumab 2.5 mg25
Tanezumab 5 mg25
Tanezumab 2.5 mg14
Tanezumab 5 mg17
Tanezumab 2.5 mg8
Tanezumab 5 mg22
Tanezumab 2.5 mg430
Tanezumab 5 mg389
NSAID421
Tanezumab 2.5 mg0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg1
Tanezumab 5 mg1
Tanezumab 2.5 mg425
Tanezumab 5 mg383
NSAID422
Tanezumab 5 mg0
Tanezumab 5 mg6
Tanezumab 2.5 mg3
Tanezumab 5 mg5
Tanezumab 5 mg2
Tanezumab 2.5 mg416
Tanezumab 5 mg375
NSAID410
Tanezumab 2.5 mg4
NSAID4
Tanezumab 5 mg11
Tanezumab 2.5 mg5
Tanezumab 5 mg4
Tanezumab 2.5 mg2
Tanezumab 5 mg3

Number of Participants With Categorical Change From Baseline in Lower Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS) at Weeks 4, 8, 16, 24, 56 and 80

The LEAS is a self-administered scale to assess activity level in participants having total knee arthroplasty. The LEAS scale reflected four levels of lower-extremity activity (1)housebound(unable to walk or a minimal ability to walk) (2)more ordinary walking about the house (3)walking about the community (4)walking about the community as well as substantial work or exercise. It consisted of 12 questions resulting in 18-level scale that allowed participants to select a single description that most represented his or her self-perceived activity level. The final score was simply the number of the descriptor selected by the participant as being most representative of his or her activity level. The minimum possible score was 1(entirely bedbound) and the maximum possible score was 18(currently competitive athlete). Higher score indicated increased activity. Categorical changes from baseline were reported in terms of improvement (Change >0), No change and worsening (Change less than [<] 0). (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 4, 8, 16, 24, 56 and 80

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Change at Week 472578289Change at Week 472578291Change at Week 472578290Change at Week 872578290Change at Week 872578291Change at Week 872578289Change at Week 1672578290Change at Week 1672578291Change at Week 1672578289Change at Week 2472578289Change at Week 2472578290Change at Week 2472578291Change at Week 5672578289Change at Week 5672578291Change at Week 5672578290Change at Week 8072578289Change at Week 8072578290Change at Week 8072578291
ImprovementNo ChangeWorsening
Tanezumab 2.5 mg423
Tanezumab 5 mg421
NSAID411
Tanezumab 2.5 mg370
Tanezumab 5 mg394
NSAID369
Tanezumab 2.5 mg207
Tanezumab 5 mg180
NSAID214
Tanezumab 2.5 mg454
Tanezumab 5 mg443
NSAID445
Tanezumab 2.5 mg325
Tanezumab 5 mg362
NSAID348
Tanezumab 2.5 mg221
Tanezumab 5 mg190
NSAID201
Tanezumab 2.5 mg488
Tanezumab 5 mg470
NSAID477
Tanezumab 2.5 mg288
Tanezumab 5 mg312
NSAID312
Tanezumab 2.5 mg224
Tanezumab 5 mg213
NSAID205
Tanezumab 2.5 mg478
Tanezumab 5 mg458
NSAID467
Tanezumab 2.5 mg277
Tanezumab 5 mg302
NSAID291
Tanezumab 2.5 mg245
Tanezumab 5 mg235
NSAID236
Tanezumab 2.5 mg486
Tanezumab 5 mg429
NSAID461
Tanezumab 2.5 mg270
Tanezumab 5 mg314
NSAID300
Tanezumab 2.5 mg244
Tanezumab 5 mg252
NSAID233
Tanezumab 2.5 mg220
Tanezumab 5 mg196
NSAID227
Tanezumab 2.5 mg105
Tanezumab 5 mg97
NSAID125
Tanezumab 2.5 mg113
Tanezumab 5 mg115
NSAID80

Number of Participants With Responses to European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L): Anxiety/ Depression Domain

Number of participants with anxiety/ depression domain responses of EQ-5D-5L were provided. EQ-5D-5L is a standardized participant completed questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life and translates that score into an index value or utility score. EQ-5D-5L consists of two components: a health state profile and an optional visual analogue scale (VAS). EQ-5D health state profile is comprised of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: 1=no problems, 2=slight problems, 3=moderate problems, 4=severe problems, and 5=extreme problems. Higher scores indicated greater levels of problems across the five dimensions. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 24, 40, 56 and 64

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Baseline72578289Baseline72578290Baseline72578291Week 872578290Week 872578291Week 872578289Week 1672578289Week 1672578290Week 1672578291Week 2472578291Week 2472578289Week 2472578290Week 4072578289Week 4072578290Week 4072578291Week 5672578289Week 5672578290Week 5672578291Week 6472578289Week 6472578290Week 6472578291
Severely anxious or depressedExtremely anxious or depressedNot anxious or depressedSlightly anxious or depressedModerately anxious or depressed
Tanezumab 2.5 mg560
Tanezumab 5 mg570
NSAID585
Tanezumab 2.5 mg252
Tanezumab 5 mg235
NSAID236
Tanezumab 2.5 mg155
Tanezumab 5 mg151
NSAID144
Tanezumab 2.5 mg28
Tanezumab 5 mg37
NSAID26
Tanezumab 2.5 mg5
NSAID3
Tanezumab 2.5 mg693
Tanezumab 5 mg703
NSAID664
Tanezumab 2.5 mg189
Tanezumab 5 mg180
NSAID206
Tanezumab 2.5 mg64
Tanezumab 5 mg71
NSAID75
Tanezumab 2.5 mg9
Tanezumab 5 mg7
NSAID9
Tanezumab 5 mg5
Tanezumab 2.5 mg680
Tanezumab 5 mg701
NSAID701
Tanezumab 2.5 mg170
Tanezumab 5 mg147
NSAID151
Tanezumab 2.5 mg53
Tanezumab 5 mg62
NSAID53
NSAID8
Tanezumab 2.5 mg2
Tanezumab 5 mg4
NSAID2
Tanezumab 2.5 mg611
Tanezumab 5 mg606
NSAID599
Tanezumab 2.5 mg147
Tanezumab 5 mg131
Tanezumab 2.5 mg52
Tanezumab 5 mg66
NSAID58
Tanezumab 2.5 mg7
Tanezumab 5 mg10
NSAID11
Tanezumab 2.5 mg0
Tanezumab 5 mg3
NSAID1
Tanezumab 2.5 mg442
Tanezumab 5 mg429
NSAID400
Tanezumab 2.5 mg92
Tanezumab 5 mg82
NSAID107
Tanezumab 2.5 mg24
Tanezumab 5 mg35
NSAID21
Tanezumab 2.5 mg3
Tanezumab 5 mg6
NSAID7
Tanezumab 5 mg1
NSAID0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg351
Tanezumab 5 mg330
NSAID338
Tanezumab 2.5 mg88
Tanezumab 5 mg90
NSAID86
Tanezumab 2.5 mg18
Tanezumab 5 mg33
NSAID34
Tanezumab 2.5 mg1
Tanezumab 5 mg2
Tanezumab 2.5 mg308
Tanezumab 5 mg275
NSAID315
Tanezumab 2.5 mg104
Tanezumab 5 mg96
NSAID100
Tanezumab 2.5 mg29
Tanezumab 5 mg46
Tanezumab 2.5 mg8
Tanezumab 5 mg9
NSAID5

Number of Participants With Responses to European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L): Mobility Domain

Number of participants with mobility domain responses of EQ-5D-5L were provided. EQ-5D-5L is a standardized participant completed questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life and translates that score into an index value or utility score. EQ-5D-5L consists of two components: a health state profile and an optional visual analogue scale (VAS). EQ-5D health state profile is comprised of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: 1=no problems, 2=slight problems, 3=moderate problems, 4=severe problems, and 5=extreme problems. Higher scores indicated greater levels of problems across the five dimensions. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 24, 40, 56 and 64

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Baseline72578290Baseline72578289Baseline72578291Week 872578290Week 872578291Week 872578289Week 1672578289Week 1672578290Week 1672578291Week 2472578289Week 2472578290Week 2472578291Week 4072578289Week 4072578290Week 4072578291Week 5672578289Week 5672578290Week 5672578291Week 6472578289Week 6472578290Week 6472578291
Severe problem in walkingModerate problem in walkingNo problem in walkingSlight problem in walkingUnable to walk
Tanezumab 2.5 mg26
Tanezumab 5 mg20
NSAID23
Tanezumab 2.5 mg203
Tanezumab 5 mg192
NSAID194
Tanezumab 2.5 mg567
Tanezumab 5 mg579
NSAID588
Tanezumab 2.5 mg204
Tanezumab 5 mg202
Tanezumab 2.5 mg0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg223
Tanezumab 5 mg241
NSAID216
Tanezumab 2.5 mg374
Tanezumab 5 mg411
NSAID392
Tanezumab 2.5 mg318
Tanezumab 5 mg266
NSAID301
Tanezumab 2.5 mg41
Tanezumab 5 mg48
NSAID44
Tanezumab 5 mg0
NSAID3
Tanezumab 2.5 mg299
Tanezumab 5 mg319
NSAID292
Tanezumab 2.5 mg388
Tanezumab 5 mg371
NSAID412
Tanezumab 2.5 mg199
Tanezumab 5 mg196
NSAID185
Tanezumab 2.5 mg27
Tanezumab 5 mg34
NSAID26
Tanezumab 2.5 mg259
Tanezumab 5 mg261
NSAID260
Tanezumab 2.5 mg308
Tanezumab 5 mg310
NSAID337
Tanezumab 2.5 mg216
Tanezumab 5 mg200
NSAID186
Tanezumab 2.5 mg34
Tanezumab 5 mg43
NSAID29
Tanezumab 5 mg2
NSAID1
Tanezumab 2.5 mg217
Tanezumab 5 mg211
NSAID218
Tanezumab 2.5 mg215
Tanezumab 5 mg209
NSAID217
Tanezumab 2.5 mg110
Tanezumab 5 mg106
Tanezumab 5 mg27
Tanezumab 2.5 mg157
Tanezumab 5 mg147
NSAID170
Tanezumab 2.5 mg205
Tanezumab 5 mg166
NSAID189
Tanezumab 2.5 mg77
Tanezumab 5 mg120
NSAID91
Tanezumab 2.5 mg19
Tanezumab 5 mg24
NSAID9
Tanezumab 2.5 mg98
Tanezumab 5 mg66
NSAID107
Tanezumab 2.5 mg156
Tanezumab 5 mg156
NSAID205
Tanezumab 2.5 mg150
Tanezumab 5 mg151
NSAID121
Tanezumab 2.5 mg45
Tanezumab 5 mg54
NSAID21
Tanezumab 2.5 mg1
Tanezumab 5 mg1
NSAID0

Number of Participants With Responses to European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L): Pain/Discomfort Domain

Number of participants with pain/discomfort domain responses of EQ-5D-5L were provided. EQ-5D-5L is a standardized participant completed questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life and translates that score into an index value or utility score. EQ-5D-5L consists of two components: a health state profile and an optional visual analogue scale (VAS). EQ-5D health state profile is comprised of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: 1=no problems, 2=slight problems, 3=moderate problems, 4=severe problems, and 5=extreme problems. Higher scores indicated greater levels of problems across the five dimensions. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 24, 40, 56 and 64

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Baseline72578289Baseline72578290Baseline72578291Week 872578291Week 872578290Week 872578289Week 1672578290Week 1672578289Week 1672578291Week 2472578289Week 2472578290Week 2472578291Week 4072578290Week 4072578289Week 4072578291Week 5672578289Week 5672578290Week 5672578291Week 6472578289Week 6472578290Week 6472578291
Slight pain or discomfortModerate pain or discomfortSevere pain or discomfortExtreme pain or discomfortNo pain or discomfort
Tanezumab 2.5 mg6
NSAID5
Tanezumab 2.5 mg81
Tanezumab 5 mg75
NSAID86
Tanezumab 2.5 mg548
Tanezumab 5 mg574
NSAID588
Tanezumab 2.5 mg334
Tanezumab 5 mg314
NSAID295
Tanezumab 2.5 mg31
Tanezumab 5 mg28
NSAID20
Tanezumab 2.5 mg82
Tanezumab 5 mg102
NSAID83
Tanezumab 2.5 mg433
Tanezumab 5 mg465
NSAID434
Tanezumab 2.5 mg369
Tanezumab 5 mg327
NSAID365
Tanezumab 2.5 mg68
Tanezumab 5 mg68
NSAID71
NSAID3
Tanezumab 2.5 mg128
Tanezumab 5 mg163
NSAID131
Tanezumab 2.5 mg508
Tanezumab 5 mg482
NSAID515
Tanezumab 2.5 mg235
Tanezumab 5 mg225
NSAID217
Tanezumab 2.5 mg39
Tanezumab 5 mg44
NSAID46
Tanezumab 2.5 mg3
Tanezumab 5 mg6
NSAID6
Tanezumab 2.5 mg117
Tanezumab 5 mg148
NSAID130
Tanezumab 2.5 mg413
Tanezumab 5 mg384
NSAID413
Tanezumab 2.5 mg213
Tanezumab 5 mg218
NSAID215
Tanezumab 2.5 mg70
Tanezumab 5 mg62
NSAID51
Tanezumab 2.5 mg4
Tanezumab 5 mg4
NSAID4
Tanezumab 2.5 mg97
Tanezumab 5 mg122
NSAID110
Tanezumab 2.5 mg298
Tanezumab 5 mg264
NSAID308
Tanezumab 2.5 mg139
Tanezumab 5 mg130
NSAID104
Tanezumab 2.5 mg25
Tanezumab 5 mg30
NSAID13
Tanezumab 2.5 mg2
Tanezumab 5 mg7
NSAID0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg76
Tanezumab 5 mg90
NSAID85
Tanezumab 2.5 mg248
Tanezumab 5 mg211
NSAID259
Tanezumab 2.5 mg111
Tanezumab 5 mg128
NSAID103
Tanezumab 2.5 mg23
Tanezumab 5 mg26
NSAID9
Tanezumab 2.5 mg0
Tanezumab 5 mg3
Tanezumab 2.5 mg45
Tanezumab 5 mg35
NSAID62
Tanezumab 2.5 mg169
Tanezumab 5 mg115
NSAID191
Tanezumab 2.5 mg165
Tanezumab 5 mg191
NSAID171
Tanezumab 2.5 mg66
Tanezumab 5 mg76
NSAID29
Tanezumab 2.5 mg5
Tanezumab 5 mg11
NSAID1

Number of Participants With Responses to European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L): Self-Care Domain

Number of participants with self-care domain responses of EQ-5D-5L were provided. EQ-5D-5L is a standardized participant completed questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life and translates that score into an index value or utility score. EQ-5D-5L consists of two components: a health state profile and an optional visual analogue scale (VAS). EQ-5D health state profile is comprised of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: 1=no problems, 2=slight problems, 3=moderate problems, 4=severe problems, and 5=extreme problems. Higher scores indicated greater levels of problems across the five dimensions. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 24, 40, 56 and 64

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Baseline72578289Baseline72578290Baseline72578291Week 872578289Week 872578290Week 872578291Week 1672578289Week 1672578290Week 1672578291Week 2472578289Week 2472578290Week 2472578291Week 4072578289Week 4072578290Week 4072578291Week 5672578289Week 5672578290Week 5672578291Week 6472578289Week 6472578290Week 6472578291
Unable to wash or dressSlight problems washing or dressingModerate problems washing or dressingSevere problems washing or dressingNo problems washing or dressing
Tanezumab 2.5 mg251
Tanezumab 5 mg242
NSAID270
Tanezumab 2.5 mg315
Tanezumab 5 mg295
NSAID319
Tanezumab 2.5 mg361
Tanezumab 5 mg389
NSAID350
Tanezumab 2.5 mg73
Tanezumab 5 mg69
NSAID55
Tanezumab 2.5 mg551
Tanezumab 5 mg569
NSAID542
Tanezumab 2.5 mg270
Tanezumab 5 mg261
NSAID276
Tanezumab 2.5 mg126
Tanezumab 5 mg128
NSAID134
Tanezumab 2.5 mg8
Tanezumab 5 mg8
NSAID3
Tanezumab 2.5 mg1
Tanezumab 2.5 mg610
Tanezumab 5 mg597
NSAID583
Tanezumab 2.5 mg216
Tanezumab 5 mg231
NSAID246
Tanezumab 2.5 mg81
Tanezumab 5 mg87
NSAID77
Tanezumab 2.5 mg6
Tanezumab 5 mg5
NSAID9
Tanezumab 2.5 mg0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg504
Tanezumab 5 mg504
NSAID527
Tanezumab 2.5 mg214
Tanezumab 5 mg200
NSAID192
Tanezumab 2.5 mg91
Tanezumab 5 mg102
NSAID86
Tanezumab 2.5 mg7
Tanezumab 5 mg9
NSAID8
Tanezumab 5 mg1
Tanezumab 2.5 mg377
Tanezumab 5 mg359
NSAID371
Tanezumab 2.5 mg140
NSAID125
Tanezumab 5 mg54
NSAID38
Tanezumab 5 mg4
NSAID0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg305
Tanezumab 5 mg294
NSAID291
Tanezumab 2.5 mg107
Tanezumab 5 mg115
NSAID122
Tanezumab 2.5 mg42
Tanezumab 5 mg47
NSAID40
Tanezumab 2.5 mg3
Tanezumab 5 mg2
NSAID5
NSAID1
Tanezumab 2.5 mg233
Tanezumab 5 mg192
NSAID264
Tanezumab 2.5 mg142
Tanezumab 5 mg136
NSAID131
Tanezumab 2.5 mg66
Tanezumab 5 mg89
NSAID57
Tanezumab 5 mg11
NSAID2
Tanezumab 5 mg0

Number of Participants With Responses to European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L): Usual Activities Domain

Number of participants with usual activities domain responses of EQ-5D-5L were provided. EQ-5D-5L is a standardized participant completed questionnaire that measures health-related quality of life and translates that score into an index value or utility score. EQ-5D-5L consists of two components: a health state profile and an optional visual analogue scale (VAS). EQ-5D health state profile is comprised of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: 1=no problems, 2=slight problems, 3=moderate problems, 4=severe problems, and 5=extreme problems. Higher scores indicated greater levels of problems across the five dimensions. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 8, 16, 24, 40, 56 and 64

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Baseline72578290Baseline72578289Baseline72578291Week 872578289Week 872578291Week 872578290Week 1672578290Week 1672578289Week 1672578291Week 2472578289Week 2472578290Week 2472578291Week 4072578289Week 4072578290Week 4072578291Week 5672578289Week 5672578290Week 5672578291Week 6472578290Week 6472578289Week 6472578291
No problems doing usual activitiesSlight problems doing usual activitiesModerate problems doing usual activitiesSevere problems doing usual activitiesUnable to do usual activities
Tanezumab 2.5 mg22
Tanezumab 5 mg24
NSAID38
Tanezumab 5 mg218
NSAID225
Tanezumab 2.5 mg538
Tanezumab 5 mg551
NSAID561
Tanezumab 2.5 mg208
Tanezumab 5 mg201
NSAID169
Tanezumab 2.5 mg3
Tanezumab 5 mg1
Tanezumab 2.5 mg229
Tanezumab 5 mg266
NSAID221
Tanezumab 5 mg411
NSAID426
Tanezumab 2.5 mg292
Tanezumab 5 mg256
NSAID274
Tanezumab 2.5 mg33
Tanezumab 5 mg31
NSAID35
Tanezumab 2.5 mg0
NSAID0
Tanezumab 2.5 mg302
Tanezumab 5 mg333
NSAID310
Tanezumab 2.5 mg402
Tanezumab 5 mg382
NSAID408
Tanezumab 2.5 mg184
Tanezumab 5 mg182
NSAID172
Tanezumab 2.5 mg24
Tanezumab 5 mg21
NSAID24
Tanezumab 2.5 mg1
Tanezumab 5 mg2
Tanezumab 2.5 mg262
Tanezumab 5 mg290
NSAID273
Tanezumab 2.5 mg353
Tanezumab 5 mg315
NSAID344
Tanezumab 2.5 mg174
NSAID166
Tanezumab 2.5 mg27
Tanezumab 5 mg27
NSAID29
Tanezumab 2.5 mg225
Tanezumab 5 mg221
NSAID218
Tanezumab 2.5 mg239
Tanezumab 5 mg213
NSAID233
Tanezumab 2.5 mg85
Tanezumab 5 mg97
NSAID74
Tanezumab 2.5 mg12
Tanezumab 5 mg20
NSAID10
Tanezumab 2.5 mg155
Tanezumab 5 mg170
NSAID182
Tanezumab 2.5 mg211
Tanezumab 5 mg179
NSAID199
Tanezumab 2.5 mg79
Tanezumab 5 mg86
NSAID69
Tanezumab 2.5 mg13
Tanezumab 5 mg22
NSAID9
Tanezumab 2.5 mg101
Tanezumab 5 mg69
NSAID129
Tanezumab 2.5 mg173
Tanezumab 5 mg163
NSAID197
Tanezumab 2.5 mg138
Tanezumab 5 mg155
NSAID115
Tanezumab 2.5 mg37
Tanezumab 5 mg37
NSAID12
Tanezumab 5 mg4
NSAID1

Patient Reported Treatment Impact Assessment-Modified (mPRTI) Score at Weeks 16 and 56: Participant Global Preference Assessment- Overall, do You Prefer the Drug That You Received in This Study to Previous Treatment?

The mPRTI is a self-administered questionnaire containing participant global preference assessment (to assess previous treatment and preference to continue using the investigational product) and participant willingness to use drug again assessment. To assess preference to continue using the investigational product, participants responded using IRT on a 5 point Likert scale from 1-5, where, 1= yes, I definitely prefer the drug that I am receiving now, 2= I have a slight preference for the drug that I am receiving now, 3= I have no preference either way, 4= I have a slight preference for my previous treatment, 5= No, I definitely prefer my previous treatment. Higher scores indicate lesser preference to use the investigational product. Number of participants who responded for the specified question were reported. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 16 and 56

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Week 1672578291Week 1672578290Week 1672578289Week 5672578289Week 5672578291Week 5672578290
Yes, definitely prefer the study drugSlight preference for the study drugNo preference either waySlight preference for my previous treatmentNo, definitely prefer my previous treatment
Tanezumab 2.5 mg577
Tanezumab 5 mg597
NSAID531
Tanezumab 2.5 mg141
Tanezumab 5 mg169
NSAID158
Tanezumab 2.5 mg149
Tanezumab 5 mg114
NSAID164
Tanezumab 2.5 mg28
Tanezumab 5 mg34
NSAID36
Tanezumab 2.5 mg44
Tanezumab 5 mg40
NSAID47
Tanezumab 2.5 mg342
Tanezumab 5 mg323
NSAID302
Tanezumab 2.5 mg70
Tanezumab 5 mg75
NSAID89
Tanezumab 2.5 mg61
Tanezumab 5 mg65
NSAID71
Tanezumab 2.5 mg16
Tanezumab 5 mg16
NSAID13
Tanezumab 2.5 mg9
Tanezumab 5 mg8
NSAID14

Patient Reported Treatment Impact Assessment-Modified (mPRTI) Score at Weeks 16 and 56: Participant Willingness to Use Drug Again Assessment- Willing to Use the Same Drug That You Have Received in This Study for Your Osteoarthritis Pain?

The mPRTI is a self-administered questionnaire containing participant global preference assessment (to assess previous treatment and preference to continue using the investigational product) and participant willingness to use drug again assessment. To assess participant willingness to use drug again, participants responded using IRT on a 5 point likert scale from 1-5, where, 1= yes, I would definitely want to use the same drug again, 2= I might want to use the same drug again, 3= I am not sure, 4= I might not want to use the same drug again, 5= no, I definitely would not want to use the same drug again. Higher scores indicate lesser willingness to use the investigational product. Number of participants who responded for the specified question were reported. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 16 and 56

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Week 1672578289Week 1672578291Week 1672578290Week 5672578289Week 5672578290Week 5672578291
Yes, definitely want to use the same drug againMight want to use the same drug againI am not sureMight not want to use the same drug againNo:definitely wouldn't want to use same drug again
Tanezumab 2.5 mg627
Tanezumab 5 mg641
NSAID560
Tanezumab 2.5 mg138
Tanezumab 5 mg154
NSAID169
Tanezumab 2.5 mg108
Tanezumab 5 mg96
NSAID134
Tanezumab 2.5 mg19
Tanezumab 5 mg21
NSAID23
Tanezumab 2.5 mg47
Tanezumab 5 mg42
NSAID50
Tanezumab 2.5 mg352
Tanezumab 5 mg341
NSAID310
Tanezumab 2.5 mg78
Tanezumab 5 mg75
NSAID97
Tanezumab 2.5 mg54
Tanezumab 5 mg46
NSAID58
Tanezumab 2.5 mg4
Tanezumab 5 mg11
Tanezumab 2.5 mg10
Tanezumab 5 mg14
NSAID12

Patient-Reported Treatment Impact Assessment- Modified (mPRTI) Score at Weeks 16 and 56: Participant Global Preference Assessment- What is The Current or Most Recent Treatment You Were Receiving for Osteoarthritis Pain Before Enrolling?

The mPRTI is a self-administered questionnaire containing participant's global preference assessment (to assess previous treatment and preference to continue using the investigational product) and participant's willingness to use drug again assessment. To assess current or most recent treatment, participants responded for, 1=injectable prescription medicines, 2=prescription medicines taken by mouth, 3=surgery, 4=prescription medicines and surgery and 5=no treatment. Number of participants who responded for the specified question were reported. (NCT02528188)
Timeframe: Weeks 16 and 56

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Week 1672578289Week 1672578291Week 1672578290Week 5672578289Week 5672578290Week 5672578291
SurgeryPrescription medicines and surgeryInjectable prescription medicinesPrescription medicines taken by mouthNo treatment
Tanezumab 2.5 mg99
Tanezumab 5 mg98
NSAID82
Tanezumab 2.5 mg611
Tanezumab 5 mg633
NSAID647
Tanezumab 2.5 mg7
Tanezumab 5 mg7
NSAID9
Tanezumab 2.5 mg33
Tanezumab 5 mg28
NSAID27
Tanezumab 2.5 mg189
Tanezumab 5 mg188
NSAID171
Tanezumab 2.5 mg44
Tanezumab 5 mg47
NSAID40
Tanezumab 2.5 mg307
Tanezumab 5 mg296
NSAID324
Tanezumab 2.5 mg8
Tanezumab 5 mg4
NSAID2
Tanezumab 2.5 mg20
Tanezumab 5 mg18
NSAID20
Tanezumab 2.5 mg119
Tanezumab 5 mg122
NSAID103

Use of Acetaminophen

"Consumption of Acetaminophen: At each post-baseline visit, the investigator had to assess the consumption of acetaminophen, rescue analgesic authorised throughout the study, by reporting the number of caplets dispensed/retrieved since the previous visit.~Daily consumption of acetaminophen was calculated as an average." (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: 3 months (Day 91), 6 momnths (Day 182), 12 months (Day 364), 18 monts (Day 546) and 24 months (Day 728)

InterventionDaily number of caplets taken (Mean)
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)1.17
Celecoxib (Celebrex)0.94

Bone Marrow Lesions Score

"To compare the bone marrow lesions (BMLs) score in the global knee and the different sub regions at the baseline visit and the follow-up visits in subjects treated either with CHONDROITIN SULPHATE (CONDROSAN) or CELECOXIB.~The BMLs were assessed in the global knee and the different sub region of the knee (medial trochlea, plateau of the medial femoro-tibial joint, femur of the medial femoro-tibial joint, medial posterior condyle, lateral trochlea, plateau of the lateral femoro-tibial joint, femur of the lateral femoro-tibial joint, lateral posterior femur). The BMLs score was defined as a grade (between 0 and 3) in each knee sub region and summed to derive a global knee score ranging between 0 (absent) and 30 (present). Specifically, each grade was scored as follows:~Grade 0 = Absence of lesion in the sub region~Grade 1 = less than 25% of the surface~Grade 2 = 25-50% of the surface~Grade 3 = more than 50% of the surface" (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: Baseline, 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Global Knee - Visit 2 (Baseline)Global Knee - Visit 6 (Day 364)Global Knee - Visit 9 (Day 728)
Celecoxib (Celebrex)2.652.773.37
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)2.573.163.58

Cartilage Volume in the Medial Compartment

To compare the cartilage volume loss of the medial compartment at the Baseline visit and after 12 and 24 months. (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
Interventioncubic milimeters (Mean)
Visit 6 (Day 364)Visit 9 (Day 728)
Celecoxib (Celebrex)55865439
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)57935672

Cartilage Volume Loss of the Global Knee

To compare the cartilage volume loss of the global knee at the Baseline visit and after 12 and 24 months. (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
Interventioncubic milimeters (Mean)
Visit 6 (Day 364)Visit 9 (Day 728)
Celecoxib (Celebrex)1177011572
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)1221011877

Cartilage Volume Loss of the Lateral Compartment

To compare the cartilage volume loss of the lateral compartment (femoral condyle and tibial plateau) at the Baseline visit and after 12 and 24 months of treatment either with CHONDROITIN SULPHATE (CONDROSAN) 1200 mg daily or with CELECOXIB 200 mg daily. (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
Interventioncubic milimeters (Mean)
Visit 6 (Day 364)Visit 9 (Day 728)
Celecoxib (Celebrex)61966143
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)64086196

Percentage of Participants With Presence of Joint Swelling and Effusion

Study knees were evaluated at each visit for the presence or absence of swelling and effusion. (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: Baseline, 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
BaselineVisit 9 (Day 728)
Celecoxib (Celebrex)56.717.7
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)60.810.3

Percentage of Participants With the Presence of Extrusion in the Meniscus

The presence of a meniscal extrusion was assessed in each of sub regions. The absence of a severe extrusion in all the sub regions was considered as an absence (score=0) of a severe extrusion in the meniscus. The presence of a severe extrusion in at least one region of the meniscus was sufficient to consider the presence (score=1) of a severe extrusion in the meniscus. (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: Baseline, 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Visit 2 (Baseline) Medial meniscusVisit 6 (Day 364) Medial meniscusVisit 9 (Day 728) Medial meniscusVisit 2 (Baseline) Lateral meniscusVisit 6 (Day 364) Lateral meniscusVisit 9 (Day 728) Lateral meniscus
Celecoxib (Celebrex)47.453.660.33.12.93.2
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)47.453.656.16.27.28.8

Short Form (SF-36) Health Survey

"The SF-36 is composed of 35 items measuring:~8 health concepts (or dimensions), [(Physical Functioning (PF), Role Physical (RP), Bodily Pain (BP), General Health (GH), Vitality (VT), Social Functioning (SF), Role Emotional (RE) and Mental Health (MH)]~and 1 reported health transition item.~The 8 health concepts are summarized in 1 physical (PCS) and 1 mental (MCS) component summary measures. PCS is represented by physical function, role limitations-physical, pain, and general health perception. MCS is represented by vitality, social function, role limitations-emotional, and mental health. Subscale items are summed and scaled from 0-100 to give subscale scores; 0= worst health related quality of life (HRQL), 100=best HRQL. PCS and MCS summary scores are constructed as T-scores (mean =50, standard deviation=10) with no minimum or maximum score; higher scores indicate better health status." (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: Baseline, 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
InterventionScores on a scales (Median)
Visit 2 (Baseline) Physical Component SummaryVisit 6 (Day 364) Physical Component SummaryVisit 9 (Day 728) Physical Component SummaryVisit 2 (Baseline) Mental Component SummaryVisit 6 (Day 364) Mental Component SummaryVisit 9 (Day 728) Mental Component Summary
Celecoxib (Celebrex)35.741.642.252.754.056.0
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)35.439.641.851.753.252.7

Synovial Fluid Volume

To compare the synovial fluid volume of the global knee at the Baseline visit and after 24 months. (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: Baseline, 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
Interventionmililiters (Mean)
Visit 2 (Baseline)Visit 6 (Day 364)Visit 9 (Day 728)
Celecoxib (Celebrex)10.799.499.07
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)13.8310.3010.97

Synovial Membrane Thickness

"To compare the severity of synovitis score (Thickness of the Synovial Membrane in mm) in Global Knee , at the baseline visit and the follow-up visits in subjects treated either with CHONDROITIN SULPHATE (CONDROSAN) or CELECOXIB.~The severity of synovitis was evaluated through four regions of interest (ROIs) in the images of the axial T1-weighted acquisition complemented with the use of the images of the axial T2-weighted acquisition. The thickness of the synovial membrane was evaluated in the global knee and each of the ROIs and results were expressed in millimetres. The four ROIs were the proximal lateral, distal lateral, proximal medial and distal medial." (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: Baseline, 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
Interventionmilimeters (Mean)
Visit 2 (Baseline)Visit 6 (Day 364)Visit 9 (Day 728)
Celecoxib (Celebrex)0.961.071.16
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)0.991.051.19

Visual Analog Scale (VAS)

"Visual Analogue Scale: 0 No Pain 10 Maximum Pain Huskisson's VAS measures global pain intensity. Patients were asked to quantify their disease status on a 10 cm VAS as follows: Please indicate the severity of knee pain experienced during the last 48 hours by marking a (I) through the line. Left hand marker represents No pain and right hand marker represents The worst pain imaginable." (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: Baseline, 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
Interventioncentimeters (Mean)
Visit 2 (Baseline)Visit 6 (Day 364)Visit 9 (Day 728)
Celecoxib (Celebrex)5.933.022.45
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)6.243.433.12

WOMAC Function Subscale

Western Ontario & McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, from 0 No Function to 170 Maximum Function WOMAC functional limitation subscale was used to measure the functionality of the knee with pain. Seventeen items are used to assess functionality of the knee: tair use, rising from sitting, standing, bending, walking, getting in / out of a car, shopping, putting on / taking off socks, rising from bed, lying in bed, getting in / out of bath, sitting, getting on / off toilet, heavy household duties, light household duties. Each item is a 10 cm VAS with 0 and 10 cm representing no difficulty and extreme difficulty respectively. (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: Baseline, 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
Interventioncentimeters (Mean)
Visit 2 (Baseline)Visit 6 (Day 364)Visit 9 (Day 728)
Celecoxib (Celebrex)89.551.046.2
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)88.552.350.0

WOMAC Pain Subscale

Western Ontario & McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain subscale Score Range: 0 (no pain) - 50 (maximum pain) The study was designed such that the outcome of primary interest is knee pain related to OA. The measure selected to best evaluate this is an improvement in the WOMAC pain subscales. This subscale consists of 5 items which assesses the pain during walking, using stairs, in bed, sitting or lying, and standing.Each item is a 10 cm VAS with 0 and 10 cm representing no pain and extreme pain respectively. (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: Baseline, 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
Interventioncentimeters (Mean)
Visit 2 (Baseline)Visit 6 (Day 364)Visit 9 (Day 728)
Celecoxib (Celebrex)25.5113.6210.69
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)25.614.7113.51

WOMAC Stiffness Subscale

Western Ontario & McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, from 0 No Stiffness to 20 Maximum Stiffness WOMAC stiffness subscale was used to measure the stiffness of the knee with pain. Two items are used to assess stiffness grade: after first waking and later in the day.Each item is a 10 cm VAS with 0 and 10 cm representing no difficulty and extreme difficulty respectively. (NCT01354145)
Timeframe: Baseline, 12 months (Day 364) and 24 months (Day 728)

,
Interventioncentimeters (Mean)
Visit 2 (Baseline)Visit 6 (Day 364)Visit 9 (Day 728)
Celecoxib (Celebrex)11.656.605.44
Chondroitin Sulfate (Condrosan)10.766.536.15

Change From Baseline to 8 Weeks in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale

The 24-question WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index assesses osteoarthritis (OA) symptoms using pain (5 questions), stiffness (2 questions) and physical function (17 questions) subscales. The WOMAC pain subscale was calculated for each participant at each time point for analysis as the mean score (range 0-100 millimeter [mm] VAS; 0=very good and 100=very poor) of all 5 questions related to pain. Bayesian posterior adjusted mean was calculated using a Bayesian Normal Dynamic Linear Model (NDLM) dose response model with baseline and pooled investigator site included as baseline covariates. (NCT02192190)
Timeframe: Baseline, 8 Weeks

Interventionmm (Least Squares Mean)
Placebo-19.2
Celecoxib-31.3
LY2951742 5 mg + Placebo-16.4
LY2951742 50 mg + Placebo-24.2
LY2951742 120 mg + Placebo-21.8
LY2951742 300 mg + Placebo-17.7

Change From Baseline to 8 Weeks in the WOMAC Physical Function Subscale

The 24-question WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index assesses osteoarthritis symptoms using pain (5 questions), stiffness (2 questions) and physical function (17 questions) subscales. The WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index version 3.1 was administered according to the study schedule. The WOMAC physical function subscale was calculated for each participant at each time point for analysis as the mean score (range 0-100 mm VAS; 0=very good and 100=very poor) of all 17 questions related to physical function. Least Square Mean (LSM) was calculated using a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) approach with treatment, visit and the interaction of treatment and visit were fitted as fixed effects in the model and baseline and pooled investigator site as baseline covariates. (NCT02192190)
Timeframe: Baseline, 8 Weeks

Interventionmm (Least Squares Mean)
Placebo-16.5
Celecoxib-30.6
LY2951742 5 mg + Placebo-15.4
LY2951742 50 mg + Placebo-23.5
LY2951742 120 mg + Placebo-19.5
LY2951742 300 mg + Placebo-18.4

Change From Baseline to 8 Weeks in the WOMAC Stiffness Subscale

The 24-question WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index assesses osteoarthritis symptoms using pain (5 questions), stiffness (2 questions) and physical function (17 questions) subscales. The WOMAC stiffness subscale will be calculated for each participant at each time point for analysis as the mean score (range 0-100 mm VAS; 0=very good and 100=very poor) of 2 questions related to stiffness. LSM mean was calculated using a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) approach with treatment, visit and the interaction of treatment and visit were fitted as fixed effects in the model and baseline and pooled investigator site as baseline covariates. LSM mean was calculated using a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) approach with treatment, visit and the interaction of treatment and visit were fitted as fixed effects in the model and baseline and pooled investigator site as baseline covariates. (NCT02192190)
Timeframe: Baseline, 8 Weeks

Interventionmm (Least Squares Mean)
Placebo-18.5
Celecoxib-31.4
LY2951742 5 mg + Placebo-15.1
LY2951742 50 mg + Placebo-23.7
LY2951742 120 mg + Placebo-21.3
LY2951742 300 mg + Placebo-17.3

Change From Baseline to 8 Weeks in the WOMAC Total Score

The 24-question WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index assesses osteoarthritis symptoms using pain (5 questions), stiffness (2 questions) and physical function (17 questions) subscales.The WOMAC total score was calculated for each participant at each time point for analysis as the mean score (range 0-100 mm VAS; 0=very good and 100=very poor) of 24 questions. LSM mean was calculated using a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) approach with treatment, visit and the interaction of treatment and visit were fitted as fixed effects in the model and baseline and pooled investigator site as baseline covariates. LSM mean was calculated using a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) approach with treatment, visit and the interaction of treatment and visit were fitted as fixed effects in the model and baseline and pooled investigator site as baseline covariates. (NCT02192190)
Timeframe: Baseline, 8 Weeks

Interventionmm (Least Squares Mean)
Placebo-17.0
Celecoxib-31.1
LY2951742 5 mg + Placebo-15.6
LY2951742 50 mg + Placebo-23.7
LY2951742 120 mg + Placebo-20.0
LY2951742 300 mg + Placebo-18.4

Change in Baseline to 8 Weeks in Patient's Global Assessment of Osteoarthritis

"The PGA is a patient-rated instrument that measures their assessment of overall OA symptoms. It is based on the participant's response to the question Considering all the ways your osteoarthritis affects you, how are you doing today? using a 100 mm VAS (0=very good and 100=very poor). LSM mean was calculated using a mixed-effects model repeated measures (MMRM) approach with treatment, visit and the interaction of treatment and visit were fitted as fixed effects in the model and baseline and pooled investigator site as baseline covariates." (NCT02192190)
Timeframe: Baseline, 8 Weeks

Interventionmm (Least Squares Mean)
Placebo-22.5
Celecoxib-36.7
LY2951742 5 mg + Placebo-18.5
LY2951742 50 mg + Placebo-19.4
LY2951742 120 mg + Placebo-21.2
LY2951742 300 mg + Placebo-20.4

Number of Participants With a Response Rate Measured by the Outcome Measures for Rheumatology Committee and Osteoarthritis Research Society International Standing Committee for Clinical Trials Response Criteria Initiative (OMERACT-OARSI)

The responders according to OMERACT-OARSI criteria: participants with at least 50 % improvement in pain or in function scores, along with absolute improvement of 20 mm, were considered responders. Alternatively, participants were considered responders if they showed at least 20% improvement and absolute improvement of 10 mm in at least two of the following scores: pain, function and Patients Global Assessment (PGA) scores. (NCT02192190)
Timeframe: 8 Weeks

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Placebo21
Celecoxib14
LY2951742 5 mg + Placebo7
LY2951742 50 mg + Placebo15
LY2951742 120 mg + Placebo10
LY2951742 300 mg + Placebo10

AUSCAN Function Change at 12 Weeks From Baseline

"Change in AUSCAN function score at 12 weeks from baseline = Function score at 12 weeks (0-100)- Function score at baseline (0-100). AUSCAN Function score scale ranges from 0 (no functional limitation) to 100 (worst possible functional limitation).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 12 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-11
Placebo-2.9

AUSCAN Function Change at 16 Weeks From Baseline

"Change in AUSCAN function score at 16 weeks from baseline = Function score at 16 weeks (0-100)- Function score at baseline (0-100). AUSCAN Function score scale ranges from 0 (no functional limitation) to 100 (worst possible functional limitation).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 16 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-9.9
Placebo-4.8

AUSCAN Function Change at 4 Weeks From Baseline

"Change in AUSCAN function score at 4 weeks from baseline = Function score at 4 weeks (0-100)- Function score at baseline (0-100). AUSCAN Function score scale ranges from 0 (no functional limitation) to 100 (worst possible functional limitation).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Basline and 4 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-6.8
Placebo-3.7

AUSCAN Function Change at 8 Weeks From Baseline

"Change in AUSCAN function score at 8 weeks from baseline = Function score at 8 weeks (0-100)- Function score at baseline (0-100). AUSCAN Function score scale ranges from 0 (no functional limitation) to 100 (worst possible functional limitation).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 8 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-9.7
Placebo-4.8

AUSCAN Pain Change at 4 Weeks From Baseline

"Change in AUSCAN pain score at 4 weeks from baseline = Pain at 4 weeks (0-100) - Pain at baseline (0-100).~AUSCAN Pain scale ranges from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst possible pain).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 4 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-9.0
Placebo-2.2

AUSCAN Pain Score at 12 Weeks From Baseline

"Change in AUSCAN pain score at 12 weeks from baseline = Pain at 12 weeks (0-100)- Pain at baseline (0-100). AUSCAN Pain scale ranges from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst possible pain).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline, 12 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-14.6
Placebo-8.0

AUSCAN Pain Score at 16 Weeks From Baseline

"Change in AUSCAN pain score at 16 weeks from baseline = Pain at 16 weeks (0-100)- Pain at baseline (0-100). AUSCAN Pain scale ranges from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst possible pain).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 16 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-15.6
Placebo-4.4

AUSCAN Pain Score at 8 Weeks From Baseline

"Change in AUSCAN pain score at 8 weeks from baseline = Pain at 8 weeks (0-100)- Pain at baseline (0-100). AUSCAN Pain scale ranges from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst possible pain).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline, 8 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-13.4
Placebo-2.2

AUSCAN Stiffness at 12 Weeks Change From Baseline

"Change in AUSCAN stiffness score at 12 weeks from baseline = Stiffness at 12 weeks (0-100)- Stiffness at baseline (0-100). AUSCAN Stiffness scale ranges from 0 (no stiffness) to 100 (worst possible stiffness).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Basline and 12 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-14.0
Placebo-11.0

AUSCAN Stiffness at 16 Weeks Change From Baseline

"Change in AUSCAN stiffness score at 16 weeks from baseline = Stiffness at 16 weeks (0-100)- Stiffness at baseline (0-100). AUSCAN Stiffness scale ranges from 0 (no stiffness) to 100 (worst possible stiffness).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline, 16 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-10.0
Placebo-8.0

AUSCAN Stiffness at 4 Weeks Change From Baseline

"Change in AUSCAN stiffness score at 4 weeks from baseline = Stiffness at 4 weeks (0-100)- Stiffness at baseline (0-100). AUSCAN Stiffness scale ranges from 0 (no stiffness) to 100 (worst possible stiffness).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 4 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-9.0
Placebo-6.0

AUSCAN Stiffness at 8 Weeks Change From Baseline

"Change in AUSCAN stiffness score at 8 weeks from baseline = Stiffness at 8 weeks (0-100)- Stiffness at baseline (0-100). AUSCAN Stiffness scale ranges from 0 (no stiffness) to 100 (worst possible stiffness).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: baseline and 8 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-12.0
Placebo-6

Number of OMERACT-OARSI Responder

Number of patients who met OMERACT-OARSI criteria = significant clinical improvement in osteoarthritis symptom after treatment (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baselie and 16 weeks

Interventionparticipants (Number)
Shinbaro55
Placebo40

Patient Global Assessment, Change From Baseline

"Change in Patient global assessment (PGA) at 12 weeks from baseline = PGA at 12 weeks (0-100)- PGA score at baseline (0-100). GPA scale ranges from 0 (excellent condition) to 100 (worst possible worse possible condition).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 12 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-11.0
Placebo-6.0

Patient Global Assessment, Change From Baseline

"Change in Patient global assessment (PGA) at 16 weeks from baseline = PGA at 16 weeks (0-100)- PGA score at baseline (0-100). PGA scale ranges from 0 (excellent condition) to 100 (worst possible worse possible condition).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 16 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-10.0
Placebo-8.5

Patient Global Assessment, Change From Baseline

"Change in Patient global assessment (PGA) at 4 weeks from baseline = PGA at 4 weeks (0-100)- PGA score at baseline (0-100). PGA scale ranges from 0 (excellent condition) to 100 (worst possible worse possible condition).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 4 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-9.0
Placebo-3.0

Patient Global Assessment, Change From Baseline

"Change in Patient global assessment (PGA) at 8 weeks from baseline = PGA at 8 weeks (0-100)- PGA score at baseline (0-100). PGA scale ranges from 0 (excellent condition) to 100 (worst possible worse possible condition).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 8 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-10.0
Placebo-6.0

Physician Global Assessment, Change From Baseline

"Change in Physician global assessment (PhGA) at 12 weeks from baseline = PhGA at 12 weeks (0-100)- PhGA score at baseline (0-100). PhGA scale ranges from 0 (excellent condition) to 100 (worst possible worse possible condition).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 12 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-19.0
Placebo-13

Physician Global Assessment, Change From Baseline

"Change in Physician global assessment (PhGA) at 16 weeks from baseline = PhGA at 16 weeks (0-100)- PhGA score at baseline (0-100). PhGA scale ranges from 0 (excellent condition) to 100 (worst possible worse possible condition).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 16 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-12
Placebo-6.5

Physician Global Assessment, Change From Baseline

"Change in Physician global assessment (PhGA) at 4 weeks from baseline = PhGA at 4 weeks (0-100)- PhGA score at baseline (0-100). GPA scale ranges from 0 (excellent condition) to 100 (worst possible worse possible condition).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: baseline and 4 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-12
Placebo-7.0

Physician Global Assessment, Change From Baseline

"Change in Physician global assessment (PhGA) at 8 weeks from baseline = PhGA at 8 weeks (0-100)- PhGA score at baseline (0-100). PhGA scale ranges from 0 (excellent condition) to 100 (worst possible worse possible condition).~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 8 weeks

Interventionunits on a scale (Median)
Shinbaro-16.0
Placebo-11.5

Swollen Joint Count, Change From Baseline

"Change in Swollen joint count (SJC) at 12 weeks from baseline = SJC at 12 weeks - TJC at baseline..~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 12 weeks

InterventionJoints (Median)
Shinbaro0
Placebo0

Swollen Joint Count, Change From Baseline

"Change in Swollen joint count (SJC) at 16 weeks from baseline = SJC at 16 weeks - TJC at baseline..~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 16 weeks

InterventionJoints (Median)
Shinbaro0
Placebo0

Swollen Joint Count, Change From Baseline

"Change in Swollen joint count (SJC) at 4 weeks from baseline = SJC at 4 weeks - TJC at baseline..~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 4 weeks

InterventionJoints (Median)
Shinbaro0
Placebo0

Swollen Joint Count, Change From Baseline

"Change in Swollen joint count (SJC) at 8 weeks from baseline = SJC at 8 weeks - TJC at baseline..~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 8 weeks

InterventionJoints (Median)
Shinbaro0
Placebo0

Tender Joint Count, Change From Baseline

"Change in Tender joint count (TJC) at 12 weeks from baseline = TJC at 12 weeks - TJC at baseline..~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 12 weeks

Interventionjoints (Median)
Shinbaro-2.0
Placebo-1.0

Tender Joint Count, Change From Baseline

"Change in Tender joint count (TJC) at 16 weeks from baseline = TJC at 16 weeks - TJC at baseline..~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 16 weeks

Interventionjoints (Median)
Shinbaro-2.0
Placebo-1.0

Tender Joint Count, Change From Baseline

"Change in Tender joint count (TJC) at 4 weeks from baseline = TJC at 4 weeks - TJC at baseline..~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 4 weeks

Interventionjoints (Median)
Shinbaro-1
Placebo0

Tender Joint Count, Change From Baseline

"Change in Tender joint count (TJC) at 8 weeks from baseline = TJC at 8 weeks - TJC at baseline..~Negative value means improvement from baseline~Positive value means deterioration from baseline" (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 8 weeks

InterventionJoints (Median)
Shinbaro-1.0
Placebo-1.0

Acetaminophen Rescue

yes = AAP rescue use, no = no AAP rescue use (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: 12 weeks and 16 weeks

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
yesno
Placebo2104
Shinbaro4105

Acetaminophen Rescue

yes = AAP rescue use, no = no AAP rescue use (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: 4 weeks and 8 weeks

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
yesno
Placebo799
Shinbaro1099

Acetaminophen Rescue

yes = AAP rescue use, no = no AAP rescue use (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: 8 weeks and 12 weeks

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
yesno
Placebo4102
Shinbaro4105

Acetaminophen Rescue

yes = AAP rescue use, no = no AAP rescue use (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline 4 weeks

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
yesno
Placebo4102
Shinbaro7102

Number of OMERACT-OARSI Responder

Number of patients who met OMERACT-OARSI criteria = significant clinical improvement in osteoarthritis symptom after treatment (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 12 weeks

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
respondernonresponder
Placebo4363
Shinbaro6247

Number of OMERACT-OARSI Responder

Number of patients who met OMERACT-OARSI criteria = significant clinical improvement in osteoarthritis symptom after treatment (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 8 weeks

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
respondernonresponder
Placebo3868
Shinbaro5653

Number of OMERACT-OARSI Responder

Outcome Measures in Rheumatology-Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Number of patients who met OMERACT-OARSI criteria = significant clinical improvement in osteoarthritis symptom after treatment (NCT01910116)
Timeframe: Baseline and 4 weeks

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
ResponderNonresponder
Placebo3274
Shinbaro4861

Change From Baseline in Percent Impairment While Working Due to Osteoarthritis at Week 24 Assessed Using Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire- Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP): Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

The WPAI assesses work productivity and impairment. It is a 6-item questionnaire used to assess the degree to which a specified health problem affected work productivity and regular activities over the past 7 days. The questions are: Q1 = currently employed. Q2 = hours missed due to health problems. Q3 = hours missed other reasons. Q4 = hours actually worked. Q5 = degree health affected productivity while working (0-10 scale). Q6 = degree health affected regular activities (0-10 scale). Subscale scores are calculated: Percent impairment while working due to health problem: Q5/10. The computed percentage range for each sub-scale is 0-100, where higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 24

Interventionchange in percent impairment (Mean)
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-11.90
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-11.68
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-5.51
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-13.00
Naproxen 500 mg-7.35
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-17.81
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-13.01
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-9.33
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-9.63
Celecoxib 100 mg-5.81

Change From Baseline in Percent Work Time Missed Due to Osteoarthritis at Week 24 Assessed Using Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire- Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP): Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

The WPAI assesses work productivity and impairment. It is a 6-item questionnaire used to assess the degree to which a specified health problem affected work productivity and regular activities over the past 7 days. The questions (Q) are: Q1 = currently employed. Q2 = hours missed due to health problems. Q3 = hours missed other reasons. Q4 = hours actually worked. Q5 = degree health affected productivity while working (0-10 scale). Q6 = degree health affected regular activities (0-10 scale). Subscale scores are calculated: Percent work time missed due to health problem: Q2/(Q2+Q4). The computed percentage range for each sub-scale is 0-100, where higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 24

Interventionchange in percent work time missed (Mean)
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-0.88
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)0.04
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg0.63
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-0.77
Naproxen 500 mg1.11
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-2.85
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.42
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg1.51
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-1.64
Celecoxib 100 mg-0.61

Change From Baseline in the Percent Activity Impairment Due to Osteoarthritis at Week 24 Assessed Using Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire - Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP): Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

The WPAI assesses work productivity and impairment. It is a 6-item questionnaire used to assess the degree to which a specified health problem affected work productivity and regular activities over the past 7 days. The questions are: Q1 = currently employed. Q2 = hours missed due to health problems. Q3 = hours missed other reasons. Q4 = hours actually worked. Q5 = degree health affected productivity while working (0-10 scale). Q6 = degree health affected regular activities (0-10 scale). Subscale scores are calculated: Percent activity impairment due to health problem: Q6/10. The computed percentage range for each sub-scale is 0-100, where higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 24

Interventionchange in percent activity impairment (Mean)
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-12.30
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-15.51
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-13.55
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-14.96
Naproxen 500 mg-10.00
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-17.24
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-17.84
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-18.04
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-17.31
Celecoxib 100 mg-11.90

Change From Baseline in the Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to Osteoarthritis at Week 24 Assessed Using Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire- Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP): BOCF

The WPAI assesses work productivity and impairment. It is a 6-item questionnaire used to assess the degree to which a specified health problem affected work productivity and regular activities over the past 7 days. The questions are: Q1 = currently employed. Q2 = hours missed due to health problems. Q3 = hours missed other reasons. Q4 = hours actually worked. Q5 = degree health affected productivity while working (0-10 scale). Q6 = degree health affected regular activities (0-10 scale). Subscale scores are calculated: Percent overall work impairment due to health problem: Q2/(Q2+Q4)+[(1-Q2/(Q2+Q4))*(Q5/10)]. The computed percentage range for each sub-scale is 0-100, where higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 24

Interventionchange in percent work impairment (Mean)
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-5.40
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.46
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-0.75
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.35
Naproxen 500 mg2.09
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-10.17
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.22
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg1.25
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-4.30
Celecoxib 100 mg-2.29

Number of Participants Who Had Discontinued Study Due to Lack of Efficacy

(NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 56

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)23
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)23
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg22
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg15
Naproxen 500 mg40
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)19
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)21
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg15
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg18
Celecoxib 100 mg38

Number of Participants With Positive Urine or Serum Pregnancy Test

Female participants, who reported positive in urine or serum pregnancy test were reported. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 56

InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)0
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)1
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg0
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg0
Naproxen 500 mg0
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)0
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)0
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg0
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg0
Celecoxib 100 mg0

Time to Discontinuation Due to Lack of Efficacy

Time to discontinuation due to lack of efficacy was defined as the time interval from the date of study drug administration up to the date of discontinuation of participant from study due to lack of efficacy. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 56

Interventiondays (Mean)
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)319.87
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)331.69
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg394.80
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg271.89
Naproxen 500 mg306.11
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)329.79
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)314.16
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg334.84
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg324.25
Celecoxib 100 mg303.08

Amount of Rescue Medication Used

In case of inadequate pain relief for osteoarthritis, acetaminophen up to 4000 mg per day up to 3 days in a week could be taken as rescue medication. The total dosage of acetaminophen in mg used during the specified time intervals were summarized. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Weeks 1-2, 3-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16, 17-24, 25-32, 33-40, 41-48, and 49-56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionmilligram (mg) (Mean)
Weeks 1-2Weeks 3-4Weeks 5-8Weeks 9-12Weeks 13-16Weeks 17-24Weeks 25-32Weeks 33-40Weeks 41-48Weeks 49-56
Celecoxib 100 mg3455.853281.233182.453067.563269.782816.003126.263032.173101.633035.33
Naproxen 500 mg3543.993415.522991.012919.202920.392759.902792.042755.662746.293106.46
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)3834.793769.172969.343008.852938.952725.862927.442976.373033.872770.28
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)3365.463582.772875.552955.842912.142778.552824.832900.692906.702910.73
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg3250.693011.672223.152266.132486.232370.302723.262682.352618.832842.74
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg3524.273066.652396.992415.932551.212261.932289.282361.402373.662545.36
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)3132.303255.162571.992380.782450.552261.842383.272449.872521.272840.21
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)3144.663411.932846.582863.102993.632733.432823.392810.182927.312979.89
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg2910.682672.182140.442166.232244.742235.232432.812428.512408.582511.61
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg2739.962660.112131.452291.412562.942525.712548.202608.912673.482938.47

Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) at Week 12 and 24: Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

The SF-36 health survey is a self-administered questionnaire that measures each of the following 8 health domains: domain 1= general health, domain 2= physical function, domain 3= role physical, domain 4= bodily pain, domain 5= vitality, domain 6= social function, domain 7= role emotional, domain 8= mental health. Total score for each domain are scaled 0 (minimum) to 100 (maximum), where higher scores represent better health status. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 12 and 24

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
General health at baselinePhysical function at baselineRole physical at baselineBodily pain at baselineVitality at baselineSocial function at baselineRole emotional at baselineMental health at baselineChange at Week 12: General healthChange at Week 12: Physical functionChange at Week 12: Role physicalChange at Week 12: Bodily painChange at Week 12: VitalityChange at Week 12: Social functionChange at Week 12: Role emotionalChange at Week 12: Mental healthChange at Week 24: General healthChange at Week 24: Physical functionChange at Week 24: Role physicalChange at Week 24: Bodily painChange at Week 24: VitalityChange at Week 24: Social functionChange at Week 24: Role emotionalChange at Week 24: Mental health
Celecoxib 100 mg55.6932.8143.5536.9651.5264.3163.3969.084.687.487.588.012.433.334.130.673.908.007.708.722.874.072.230.00
Naproxen 500 mg57.6135.4646.0935.7250.7862.2368.4570.343.885.766.707.833.977.410.921.572.905.757.288.871.906.162.921.52
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)56.9334.7942.8635.5751.5263.6864.0771.083.379.0510.0412.504.355.363.640.364.259.3310.4610.224.006.254.950.42
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)57.4132.7443.8835.9051.2865.9766.3570.234.6612.8812.5913.085.145.255.503.282.959.507.429.633.933.210.581.48
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg58.2735.1145.6036.4753.6366.9065.0571.075.6612.9913.7116.836.478.946.823.174.2812.0010.5013.474.155.783.390.87
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg57.9233.8844.6937.6752.5764.4767.9270.405.1414.3815.3916.536.127.764.473.044.5412.3011.5413.044.526.142.162.26
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)56.2033.4342.5934.1450.5263.1963.0270.955.4612.7013.3616.747.4110.198.233.004.0710.4010.2410.695.717.635.811.33
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)56.7632.8243.2936.9151.5865.6366.0870.423.2911.689.7311.445.685.905.082.853.0810.529.4010.735.944.013.352.31
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg56.3433.4142.6534.1151.4564.5162.6868.255.1813.8415.5117.156.328.148.633.783.4611.8310.9314.022.847.066.470.94
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg60.6634.7944.5837.8053.7368.1367.7472.203.6614.2313.1314.416.475.364.910.963.779.839.5810.413.773.212.380.95

Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) at Weeks 12, 24, 40 and 56: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

The SF-36 health survey is a self-administered questionnaire that measures each of the following 8 health domains: domain 1= general health, domain 2= physical function, domain 3= role physical, domain 4= bodily pain, domain 5= vitality, domain 6= social function, domain 7= role emotional, domain 8= mental health. Total score for each domain are scaled 0 (minimum) to 100 (maximum), where higher scores represent better health status. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 12, 24, 40, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Change at Week 12: General healthChange at Week 12: Physical functionChange at Week 12: Role physicalChange at Week 12: Bodily painChange at Week 12: VitalityChange at Week 12: Social functionChange at Week 12: Role emotionalChange at Week 12: Mental healthChange at Week 24: General healthChange at Week 24: Physical functionChange at Week 24: Role physicalChange at Week 24: Bodily painChange at Week 24: VitalityChange at Week 24: Social functionChange at Week 24: Role emotionalChange at Week 24: Mental healthChange at Week 40: General healthChange at Week 40: Physical functionChange at Week 40: Role physicalChange at Week 40: Bodily painChange at Week 40: VitalitySocial function at Week 40Change at Week 40: Role emotionalChange at Week 40: Mental healthChange at Week 56: General healthChange at Week 56: Physical functionChange at Week 56: Role physicalChange at Week 56: Bodily painChange at Week 56: VitalityChange at Week 56: Social functionChange at Week 56: Role emotionalChange at Week 56: Mental health
Celecoxib 100 mg4.687.487.588.012.433.334.130.674.458.418.279.092.403.972.760.204.097.247.588.172.672.653.410.823.996.917.288.692.082.843.510.96
Naproxen 500 mg3.8835.4646.097.833.977.410.921.573.776.437.979.192.577.322.591.383.476.237.017.112.327.231.610.493.335.957.197.472.687.231.670.41
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)3.379.0510.0412.504.355.363.640.364.5910.0011.8412.004.877.095.090.303.318.7410.5310.874.406.202.990.263.418.2510.4610.324.476.103.250.18
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)4.6632.7443.8813.085.145.255.503.283.1811.359.5311.634.343.561.561.512.4510.238.7910.733.303.211.911.412.319.198.0110.213.102.951.531.42
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg5.6612.9913.7116.836.478.946.823.174.6212.9112.4514.834.506.574.581.063.4511.7812.1313.284.176.235.471.113.7511.4812.0613.364.156.675.071.25
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg5.1433.8844.6916.536.127.764.473.044.6613.7313.0314.735.487.113.102.653.8711.9610.0012.424.454.560.761.763.6911.159.0111.923.823.990.471.53
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)5.4612.7013.3616.747.4110.198.233.004.4211.2311.7412.245.958.516.731.373.749.9111.3211.455.297.436.691.223.7510.1211.2011.524.827.736.101.10
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)3.2932.8243.2911.445.685.905.082.853.9511.7011.1412.957.175.195.222.903.4010.009.6411.275.924.054.082.163.129.959.1311.585.704.534.232.28
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg5.1813.8415.5117.156.328.148.633.783.7212.9211.8415.223.097.356.831.393.2012.3212.3813.963.246.035.981.223.1012.0711.9613.533.416.236.111.47
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg3.6634.7944.5814.416.475.364.910.963.9310.8510.7111.754.422.813.630.452.8310.4910.9810.794.422.192.800.252.5910.1910.4910.384.171.651.99-0.11

Change From Baseline in Medial Minimum Joint Space Width of the Index Knee at Week 56

(NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 56

,,,,
Interventionmillimeter (mm) (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 56
NSAID3.022-0.041
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen or Celecoxib Exposure)2.850-0.213
Tanezumab 10 mg + NSAID2.982-0.172
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen or Celecoxib Exposure)2.769-0.189
Tanezumab 5 mg + NSAID3.005-0.162

Change From Baseline in Minimum Joint Space Width of the Index Hip at Week 56

(NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 56

,,,,
Interventionmillimeter (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 56
NSAID2.724-0.028
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen or Celecoxib Exposure)2.372-0.137
Tanezumab 10 mg + NSAID2.195-0.136
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen or Celecoxib Exposure)2.447-0.075
Tanezumab 5 mg + NSAID2.346-0.240

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

The Neuropathy Impairment Score is the sum of scores over all 37 items from both the left and right side. The neurological impairment score assessed strength of groups of muscles of the head and neck, upper limbs and lower limbs, deep tendon reflexes and sensation (tactile, vibration, joint position sense, and pin prick) of index fingers and great toes through neurological examination. NIS calculated scoring muscle weakness (0=normal, 1=25% weak, 2=50% weak, 3=75% week, 3.25= move against gravity, 3.5=movement gravity eliminated, 3.75= muscle flicker no movement, 4=paralysis), scoring reflexes (0=normal, 1=reduced. 2=absent), scoring sensation (0=normal, 1=decreased, 2=absent). For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg2.18-0.34-0.13-0.22-0.28-0.34-0.36-0.34-0.39-0.36-0.41
Naproxen 500 mg2.31-0.11-0.08-0.12-0.26-0.18-0.31-0.32-0.40-0.43-0.46
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)2.09-0.29-0.30-0.35-0.50-0.56-0.38-0.56-0.50-0.52-0.44
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)2.56-0.25-0.46-0.46-0.43-0.48-0.57-0.57-0.55-0.58-0.53
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg2.08-0.33-0.40-0.33-0.26-0.30-0.22-0.26-0.33-0.34-0.43
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg2.54-0.16-0.33-0.38-0.65-0.58-0.60-0.53-0.49-0.65-0.58
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)2.04-0.11-0.21-0.32-0.53-0.43-0.35-0.44-0.41-0.44-0.41
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)2.64-0.20-0.37-0.49-0.52-0.77-0.73-0.56-0.50-0.43-0.48
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg2.24-0.14-0.40-0.53-0.69-0.79-0.90-0.93-0.50-0.87-0.89
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg1.93-0.30-0.20-0.25-0.38-0.35-0.44-0.52-0.32-0.38-0.45

Change From Baseline in Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Observed Data

The Neuropathy Impairment Score is the sum of scores over all 37 items from both the left and right side. The neurological impairment score assessed strength of groups of muscles of the head and neck, upper limbs and lower limbs, deep tendon reflexes and sensation (tactile, vibration, joint position sense, and pin prick) of index fingers and great toes through neurological examination. NIS calculated scoring muscle weakness (0=normal, 1=25% weak, 2=50% weak, 3=75% week, 3.25= move against gravity, 3.5=movement gravity eliminated, 3.75= muscle flicker no movement, 4=paralysis), scoring reflexes (0=normal, 1=reduced. 2=absent), scoring sensation (0=normal, 1=decreased, 2=absent). For NIS possible overall score (combined of both left and right sides of each domain), ranged from 0 (no impairment) to 244 (maximum impairment), higher scores indicated increased/more neuropathic deficits. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg2.18-0.34-0.11-0.35-0.44-0.50-0.50-0.63-0.73-0.69-0.54
Naproxen 500 mg2.31-0.11-0.11-0.12-0.29-0.26-0.43-0.39-0.42-0.48-0.36
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)2.09-0.29-0.30-0.36-0.56-0.64-0.46-0.71-0.58-0.65-0.42
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)2.56-0.25-0.42-0.42-0.38-0.41-0.50-0.53-0.47-0.81-0.70
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg2.08-0.33-0.39-0.22-0.38-0.48-0.47-0.49-0.71-0.50-0.38
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg2.54-0.16-0.29-0.30-0.62-0.58-0.57-0.47-0.38-0.80-0.10
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)2.04-0.11-0.20-0.32-0.52-0.41-0.37-0.50-0.42-0.56-0.53
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)2.64-0.20-0.40-0.47-0.53-0.81-0.78-0.56-0.61-0.55-0.30
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg2.24-0.14-0.41-0.55-0.72-0.83-0.99-1.05-1.06-1.07-1.01
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg1.93-0.30-0.18-0.22-0.34-0.38-0.57-0.78-0.63-0.67-0.83

Change From Baseline in Percent Impairment While Working Due to Osteoarthritis at Week 24 and 56 Assessed Using Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire- Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP): Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

The WPAI assesses work productivity and impairment. It is a 6-item questionnaire used to assess the degree to which a specified health problem affected work productivity and regular activities over the past 7 days. The questions are: Q1 = currently employed. Q2 = hours missed due to health problems. Q3 = hours missed other reasons. Q4 = hours actually worked. Q5 = degree health affected productivity while working (0-10 scale). Q6 = degree health affected regular activities (0-10 scale). Subscale scores are calculated: Percent impairment while working due to health problem: Q5/10. The computed percentage range for each sub-scale is 0-100, where higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24 and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionchange in percent impairment (Mean)
Change at Week 24Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg-5.81-5.93
Naproxen 500 mg-7.35-5.31
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-13.01-12.88
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-11.68-11.88
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-9.63-4.25
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-13.00-11.33
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-17.81-16.99
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-11.90-10.30
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-9.33-8.09
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-5.51-4.08

Change From Baseline in Percent Work Time Missed Due to Osteoarthritis at Week 24 and 56 Assessed Using Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire- Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP): Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

The WPAI assesses work productivity and impairment. It is a 6-item questionnaire used to assess the degree to which a specified health problem affected work productivity and regular activities over the past 7 days. The questions are: Q1 = currently employed. Q2 = hours missed due to health problems. Q3 = hours missed other reasons. Q4 = hours actually worked. Q5 = degree health affected productivity while working (0-10 scale). Q6 = degree health affected regular activities (0-10 scale). Subscale scores are calculated: Percent work time missed due to health problem: Q2/(Q2+Q4). The computed percentage range for each sub-scale is 0-100, where higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 24 and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionchange in percent work time missed (Mean)
Change at Week 24Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg-0.61-0.82
Naproxen 500 mg1.112.26
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.42-0.46
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)0.04-0.39
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-1.64-1.64
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg0.77-0.41
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-2.85-3.06
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-0.88-1.10
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg1.511.51
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg0.631.08

Change From Baseline in the Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Week 16

"Patient global assessment of osteoarthritis was assessed by asking a question from participants: Considering all the ways your osteoarthritis in your knee or hip affects you, how are you doing today? Participants responded by using a 5-point likert scale ranging from 1=very good (asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities, 2= good (mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities), 3= fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities), 4= poor (severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities), and 5= very poor (very severe symptoms which are intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher scores indicating worse condition." (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 16

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 16
Celecoxib 100 mg3.37-0.51
Naproxen 500 mg3.38-0.53
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)3.48-0.64
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)3.41-0.63
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg3.41-0.75
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg3.39-0.72
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)3.44-0.69
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)3.39-0.54
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg3.45-0.76
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg3.39-0.61

Change From Baseline in the Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24: Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

"Patient global assessment of osteoarthritis was assessed by asking a question from participants: Considering all the ways your osteoarthritis in your knee or hip affects you, how are you doing today? Participants responded by using a 5-point likert scale ranging from 1=very good (asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities, 2= mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities, 3= fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities), 4= poor (severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities), and 5 = very poor (Very severe symptoms which are intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher scores indicating worse condition." (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 24
Celecoxib 100 mg-0.37-0.49-0.51-0.54-0.55
Naproxen 500 mg-0.39-0.43-0.45-0.46-0.49
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.33-0.75-0.69-0.75-0.59
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-0.42-0.69-0.70-0.68-0.54
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-0.26-0.75-0.79-0.83-0.74
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-0.40-0.68-0.82-0.84-0.60
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.46-0.68-0.63-0.71-0.57
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-0.45-0.60-0.58-0.60-0.58
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-0.45-0.80-0.81-0.77-0.67
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-0.50-0.74-0.69-0.69-0.50

Change From Baseline in the Patient Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

"Patient global assessment of osteoarthritis was assessed by asking a question from participants: Considering all the ways your osteoarthritis in your knee or hip affects you, how are you doing today? Participants responded by using a 5-point likert scale ranging from 1=very good (asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities, 2= mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities, 3= fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities), 4= poor (severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities), and 5 = very poor (Very severe symptoms which are intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher scores indicating worse condition." (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg-0.37-0.51-0.54-0.57-0.54-0.59-0.57-0.57-0.54-0.54
Naproxen 500 mg-0.39-0.44-0.48-0.49-0.57-0.57-0.57-0.50-0.49-0.47
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.33-0.76-0.74-0.84-0.73-0.69-0.66-0.67-0.62-0.56
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-0.42-0.72-0.77-0.79-0.74-0.68-0.66-0.60-0.60-0.55
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-0.26-0.74-0.81-0.86-0.77-0.77-0.66-0.66-0.59-0.58
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-0.40-0.72-0.86-0.91-0.79-0.69-0.68-0.56-0.48-0.46
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.46-0.70-0.68-0.77-0.76-0.66-0.63-0.61-0.53-0.51
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-0.45-0.60-0.63-0.67-0.63-0.69-0.60-0.58-0.53-0.53
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-0.45-0.78-0.81-0.81-0.80-0.73-0.73-0.59-0.63-0.61
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-0.50-0.76-0.75-0.78-0.72-0.64-0.60-0.53-0.51-0.49

Change From Baseline in the Percent Activity Impairment Due to Osteoarthritis at Week 24 and 56 Assessed Using Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire - Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP): Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

The WPAI assesses work productivity and impairment. It is a 6-item questionnaire used to assess the degree to which a specified health problem affected work productivity and regular activities over the past 7 days. The questions are: Q1 = currently employed. Q2 = hours missed due to health problems. Q3 = hours missed other reasons. Q4 = hours actually worked. Q5 = degree health affected productivity while working (0-10 scale). Q6 = degree health affected regular activities (0-10 scale). Subscale scores are calculated: Percent activity impairment due to health problem: Q6/10. The computed percentage range for each sub-scale is 0-100, where higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionchange in percent activity impairment (Mean)
Change at Week 24Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg-11.90-11.19
Naproxen 500 mg-10.00-9.32
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-17.84-15.76
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-15.51-14.77
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-17.31-15.86
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-14.96-13.20
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-17.24-15.39
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-12.30-12.12
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-18.04-18.04
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-13.55-12.19

Change From Baseline in the Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to Osteoarthritis at Week 24 and 56 Assessed Using Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire- Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP): LOCF

The WPAI assesses work productivity and impairment. It is a 6-item questionnaire used to assess the degree to which a specified health problem affected work productivity and regular activities over the past 7 days. The questions are: Q1 = currently employed. Q2 = hours missed due to health problems. Q3 = hours missed other reasons. Q4 = hours actually worked. Q5 = degree health affected productivity while working (0-10 scale). Q6 = degree health affected regular activities (0-10 scale). Subscale scores are calculated: Percent overall work impairment due to health problem: Q2/(Q2+Q4)+[(1-Q2/(Q2+Q4))*(Q5/10)]. The computed percentage range for each sub-scale is 0-100, where higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 24 and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionchange in percent work impairment (Mean)
Change at Week 24Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg-2.29-3.02
Naproxen 500 mg2.094.11
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.22-1.01
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.46-1.88
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-4.30-4.30
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.35-0.85
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-10.17-10.32
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-5.40-6.08
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg1.251.25
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-0.750.77

Change From Baseline in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Week 16

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip). The WOMAC pain subscale was a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 5 individual questions scored on a numerical rating scale (NRS) of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score was 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 16

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 16
Celecoxib 100 mg6.29-1.48
Naproxen 500 mg6.32-1.34
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)6.44-2.12
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)6.50-1.97
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg6.27-2.41
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg6.33-2.26
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)6.49-2.11
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)6.39-1.80
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg6.41-2.28
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg6.52-2.09

Change From Baseline in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24: Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip). The WOMAC pain subscale was a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 5 individual questions scored on a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score was 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 24
Celecoxib 100 mg-0.93-1.09-1.15-1.40-1.63
Naproxen 500 mg-0.90-1.14-1.13-1.23-1.32
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.74-1.78-2.01-2.20-2.04
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.00-1.87-2.08-1.95-1.82
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-0.86-2.03-2.36-2.47-2.29
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-0.89-1.98-2.18-2.34-1.95
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-1.01-1.69-1.83-2.15-1.81
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-0.96-1.68-1.68-1.86-1.65
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-1.08-2.07-2.23-2.28-2.10
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.27-2.09-2.10-2.26-1.83

Change From Baseline in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip). The WOMAC pain subscale was a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 5 individual questions scored on a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score was 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg-0.93-1.10-1.17-1.40-1.50-1.69-1.62-1.54-1.45-1.48
Naproxen 500 mg-0.90-1.15-1.17-1.32-1.44-1.54-1.62-1.44-1.40-1.36
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.74-1.73-2.07-2.32-2.23-2.25-2.14-1.99-1.93-1.72
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.00-1.92-2.20-2.14-2.19-2.12-2.08-1.94-1.93-1.86
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-0.86-2.00-2.34-2.51-2.46-2.39-2.14-2.18-2.03-2.02
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-0.89-2.05-2.36-2.56-2.56-2.33-2.33-2.12-2.08-2.03
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-1.01-1.76-1.92-2.29-2.27-2.05-2.02-1.98-1.86-1.83
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-0.96-1.66-1.76-2.04-2.00-2.04-1.94-1.90-1.86-1.84
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-1.08-2.04-2.22-2.32-2.34-2.21-2.20-1.98-2.05-1.92
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.27-2.12-2.26-2.45-2.36-2.20-2.10-1.88-1.86-1.84

Change From Baseline in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Week 16

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip).The WOMAC physical function subscale was comprised of 17-item questionnaire used to assess the degree of difficulty experienced due to osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 17 individual questions scored on a NRS of 0 (minimum difficulty) to 10 (maximum difficulty), where higher scores indicated worse physical function. Total score range for WOMAC physical function subscale score was 0 (minimum difficulty) to 10 (maximum difficulty), where higher scores indicated worse physical function. Physical function refers to participant's ability to move around and perform usual activities of daily living. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 16

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 16
Celecoxib 100 mg6.47-1.42
Naproxen 500 mg6.32-1.28
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)6.58-2.09
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)6.47-1.84
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg6.39-2.41
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg6.39-2.18
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)6.67-2.13
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)6.46-1.80
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg6.57-2.27
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg6.57-2.12

Change From Baseline in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24: Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip).The WOMAC physical function subscale was comprised of 17-item questionnaire used to assess the degree of difficulty experienced due to osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 17 individual questions scored on a NRS of 0 (minimum difficulty) to 10 (maximum difficulty), where higher scores indicated worse physical function. Total score range for WOMAC physical function subscale score was 0 (minimum difficulty) to 10 (maximum difficulty), where higher scores indicated worse physical function. Physical function refers to participant's ability to move around and perform usual activities of daily living. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 24
Celecoxib 100 mg-0.90-1.07-1.13-1.36-1.57
Naproxen 500 mg-0.90-1.01-1.07-1.23-1.30
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.95-1.78-2.00-2.13-2.00
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.13-1.79-2.01-1.87-1.76
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-1.02-2.00-2.30-2.46-2.33
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.06-2.00-2.15-2.29-1.96
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-1.18-1.73-1.89-2.23-1.92
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.10-1.71-1.62-1.85-1.66
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-1.21-1.97-2.15-2.34-2.08
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.44-2.04-2.05-2.18-1.76

Change From Baseline in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Physical Function Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip).The WOMAC physical function subscale was comprised of 17-item questionnaire used to assess the degree of difficulty experienced due to osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 17 individual questions scored on a NRS of 0 (minimum difficulty) to 10 (maximum difficulty), where higher scores indicated worse physical function. Total score range for WOMAC physical function subscale score was 0 (minimum difficulty) to 10 (maximum difficulty), where higher scores indicated worse physical function. Physical function refers to participant's ability to move around and perform usual activities of daily living. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg6.47-0.90-1.09-1.14-1.36-1.62-1.57-1.52-1.44-1.45
Naproxen 500 mg6.32-0.90-1.04-1.11-1.31-1.49-1.53-1.44-1.39-1.34
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)6.58-0.95-1.75-2.08-2.31-2.24-2.16-2.04-1.97-1.78
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)6.47-1.13-1.84-2.13-2.08-2.08-2.01-1.90-1.93-1.84
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg6.39-1.02-1.91-2.29-2.50-2.44-2.20-2.18-2.05-2.05
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg6.39-1.06-2.06-2.33-2.50-2.29-2.25-2.04-1.96-1.87
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)6.67-1.18-1.81-2.02-2.35-2.14-2.08-2.06-1.94-1.90
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)6.46-1.10-1.70-1.69-2.02-2.04-1.87-1.87-1.82-1.82
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg6.57-1.21-1.95-2.13-2.37-2.20-2.22-2.00-2.03-1.92
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg6.57-1.44-2.08-2.23-2.40-2.22-2.15-1.95-1.90-1.88

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 24: Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip). Each item is scored on a 0 to 10 NRS scale, where higher scores indicate higher pain/stiffness or worse function. WOMAC average score was calculated as the mean of 3 WOMAC subscale scores (pain, physical function and stiffness). Total score range was 0 (no response) to 10 (worse response), where higher score indicated worse response. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 24
Celecoxib 100 mg6.38-0.89-1.06-1.14-1.33-1.42-1.53
Naproxen 500 mg6.41-0.93-1.13-1.15-1.27-1.34-1.34
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)6.54-0.98-1.87-2.08-2.24-2.17-2.05
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)6.54-1.15-1.92-2.11-1.98-1.98-1.84
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg6.33-0.99-2.10-2.42-2.55-2.48-2.33
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg6.38-1.04-2.06-2.22-2.35-2.28-1.99
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)6.60-1.17-1.79-1.93-2.26-2.13-1.90
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)6.45-1.13-1.74-1.68-1.90-1.84-1.70
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg6.48-1.23-2.08-2.23-2.35-2.30-2.09
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg6.60-1.46-2.15-2.14-2.31-2.17-1.87

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Average Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip). Each item is scored on a 0 to 10 NRS scale, where higher scores indicate higher pain/stiffness or worse function. WOMAC average score was calculated as the mean of 3 WOMAC subscale scores (pain, physical function and stiffness). Total score range was 0 (no response) to 10 (worse response), where higher score indicated worse response. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg-0.89-1.07-1.16-1.33-1.45-1.58-1.53-1.49-1.40-1.42
Naproxen 500 mg-0.93-1.15-1.20-1.37-1.45-1.58-1.64-1.51-1.48-1.43
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.98-1.84-2.15-2.37-2.29-2.28-2.20-2.07-2.00-1.81
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.15-1.98-2.25-2.20-2.24-2.18-2.10-1.99-2.02-1.93
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-0.99-2.07-2.41-2.59-2.53-2.46-2.22-2.20-2.08-2.07
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.04-2.13-2.41-2.58-2.57-2.36-2.35-2.14-2.08-1.99
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-1.17-1.87-2.03-2.40-2.31-2.16-2.10-2.05-1.94-1.90
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.13-1.74-1.78-2.08-2.05-2.10-1.96-1.94-1.91-1.89
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-1.23-2.06-2.22-2.40-2.36-2.22-2.30-2.05-2.10-1.98
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.46-2.18-2.31-2.52-2.48-2.30-2.20-1.99-1.96-1.93

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 24: Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

"WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip). Participants responded about the amount of pain they experienced when going up or down stairs by answering the question: How much pain have you had when going up or down the stairs? Participants responded by using a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain." (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 24
Celecoxib 100 mg7.52-1.05-1.29-1.33-1.50-1.66-1.73
Naproxen 500 mg7.40-0.94-1.22-1.34-1.37-1.53-1.51
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)7.59-1.23-2.07-2.26-2.52-2.35-2.28
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)7.68-1.34-2.13-2.32-2.16-2.20-2.01
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg7.54-1.37-2.36-2.65-2.79-2.76-2.63
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg7.50-1.36-2.32-2.53-2.67-2.53-2.22
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)7.80-1.41-2.05-2.17-2.45-2.39-2.02
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)7.55-1.29-1.78-1.79-2.09-1.99-1.82
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg7.55-1.45-2.43-2.48-2.48-2.52-2.47
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg7.72-1.67-2.46-2.41-2.49-2.35-2.02

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Going Up or Down Stairs at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

"WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip). Participants responded about the amount of pain they experienced when going up or down stairs by answering the question: How much pain have you had when going up or down the stairs? Participants responded by using a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain." (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg-1.05-1.30-1.35-1.55-1.75-1.84-1.78-1.76-1.64-1.71
Naproxen 500 mg-0.94-1.26-1.35-1.47-1.63-1.74-1.70-1.51-1.48-1.43
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-1.23-2.05-2.37-2.69-2.53-2.57-2.50-2.28-2.24-1.98
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.34-2.20-2.48-2.40-2.47-2.38-2.28-2.21-2.17-2.08
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-1.37-2.37-2.71-2.90-2.89-2.83-2.55-2.47-2.31-2.34
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.36-2.41-2.75-2.94-2.88-2.66-2.62-2.41-2.29-2.24
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-1.41-2.14-2.27-2.64-2.62-2.35-2.27-2.31-2.20-2.16
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.29-1.80-1.90-2.29-2.23-2.26-2.12-2.06-1.99-2.00
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-1.45-2.43-2.50-2.57-2.59-2.60-2.52-2.26-2.30-2.16
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.67-2.51-2.62-2.76-2.70-2.48-2.43-2.09-2.10-2.10

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 24: Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

"WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis in index joint (knee or hip). Participants responded about the amount of pain they experienced when walking on a flat surface by answering the question: How much pain have you had when walking on a flat surface?. Participants responded by using a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain." (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 24
Celecoxib 100 mg6.10-0.86-0.95-1.11-1.35-1.38-1.55
Naproxen 500 mg6.12-0.80-1.04-1.05-1.10-1.23-1.20
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)6.30-0.68-1.64-1.84-2.02-1.91-1.88
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)6.37-1.02-1.88-1.95-1.78-1.77-1.65
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg6.14-0.86-1.93-2.26-2.25-2.22-2.06
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg6.13-0.87-1.92-2.09-2.22-2.19-1.83
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)6.28-1.04-1.49-1.67-2.04-1.94-1.63
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)6.22-1.05-1.67-1.57-1.74-1.71-1.56
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg6.21-1.01-1.88-2.11-2.20-2.08-1.96
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg6.34-1.31-1.98-1.93-2.15-1.95-1.64

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Item: Pain When Walking on a Flat Surface at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

"WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis in index joint (knee or hip). Participants responded about the amount of pain they experienced when walking on a flat surface by answering the question: How much pain have you had when walking on a flat surface?. Participants responded by using a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain." (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg-0.86-0.96-1.13-1.36-1.42-1.64-1.56-1.40-1.33-1.36
Naproxen 500 mg-0.80-1.04-1.07-1.20-1.33-1.36-1.45-1.23-1.22-1.15
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-0.68-1.59-1.85-2.08-1.98-1.97-1.80-1.75-1.64-1.42
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.02-1.92-2.09-1.98-2.00-1.94-1.80-1.78-1.72-1.64
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-0.86-1.91-2.22-2.27-2.25-2.15-1.89-1.89-1.74-1.72
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-0.87-1.99-2.26-2.41-2.44-2.15-2.12-1.77-1.78-1.73
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-1.04-1.54-1.73-2.11-2.03-1.79-1.78-1.72-1.62-1.61
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.05-1.65-1.65-1.93-1.93-1.95-1.78-1.69-1.63-1.65
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-1.01-1.84-2.06-2.20-2.11-2.04-1.96-1.73-1.79-1.67
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.31-2.01-2.08-2.32-2.20-1.98-1.91-1.69-1.68-1.68

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 24: Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip). The WOMAC stiffness subscale was a 2-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of stiffness experienced due to osteoarthritis of the index joint (knee or hip) during the past 48 hours. Stiffness was defined as a sensation of decreased ease of movement in the index joint (knee or hip). It was calculated as mean of the scores from 2 individual questions scored on NRS of 0 (no stiffness) to 10 (worst stiffness), with higher scores indicate more stiffness. Total score range for WOMAC stiffness subscale score was 0 (no stiffness) to 10 (worst stiffness), where higher scores indicated more stiffness. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
BaselineChange at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 24
Celecoxib 100 mg6.39-0.82-1.00-1.13-1.23-1.34-1.38
Naproxen 500 mg6.60-1.02-1.23-1.29-1.40-1.42-1.46
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)6.58-1.21-2.05-2.22-2.36-2.28-2.10
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)6.66-1.32-2.10-2.26-2.14-2.15-1.96
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg6.33-1.11-2.25-2.60-2.72-2.62-2.39
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg6.42-1.19-2.19-2.31-2.42-2.40-2.04
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)6.62-1.35-1.94-2.02-2.38-2.14-1.97
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)6.50-1.35-1.85-1.76-1.98-1.93-1.80
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg6.47-1.41-2.15-2.28-2.42-2.35-2.08
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg6.70-1.65-2.31-2.26-2.49-2.31-1.98

Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Stiffness Subscale Score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48 and 56: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip). The WOMAC stiffness subscale was a 2-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of stiffness experienced due to osteoarthritis in the index joint (knee or hip) during the past 48 hours. Stiffness was defined as a sensation of decreased ease of movement in the index joint (knee or hip). It was calculated as mean of the scores from 2 individual questions scored on NRS of 0 (no stiffness) to 10 (worst stiffness), with higher scores indicate more stiffness. Total score range for WOMAC stiffness subscale score was 0 (no stiffness) to 10 (worst stiffness), where higher scores indicated more stiffness. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Change at Week 2Change at Week 4Change at Week 8Change at Week 12Change at Week 16Change at Week 24Change at Week 32Change at Week 40Change at Week 48Change at Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg-0.82-1.01-1.15-1.24-1.38-1.43-1.41-1.43-1.34-1.34
Naproxen 500 mg-1.02-1.26-1.35-1.52-1.58-1.75-1.80-1.69-1.69-1.63
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-1.21-2.03-2.30-2.49-2.41-2.37-2.31-2.20-2.10-1.94
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.32-2.17-2.43-2.39-2.44-2.36-2.23-2.15-2.23-2.10
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-1.11-2.22-2.58-2.76-2.68-2.55-2.31-2.26-2.17-2.14
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.19-2.27-2.52-2.68-2.70-2.46-2.48-2.24-2.20-2.08
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)-1.35-2.04-2.15-2.55-2.35-2.28-2.18-2.10-2.01-1.97
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)-1.35-1.88-1.88-2.18-2.16-2.22-2.07-2.05-2.03-1.99
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg-1.41-2.13-2.30-2.49-2.43-2.23-2.46-2.16-2.22-2.10
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg-1.65-2.34-2.44-2.71-2.64-2.48-2.36-2.13-2.11-2.07

Number of Participants With Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) Response

Human serum ADA samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of anti--tanezumab antibodies by using a semi quantitative enzyme -linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Participants tested positive for ADA response on at least one post-baseline visit were reported. Participants with ADA titer level >=4.32 for tanezumab were considered ADA positive. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 16, 40, 24, and 56

,,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
BaselineWeek 16Week 24Week 40Week 56
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen or Celecoxib Exposure)23222
Tanezumab 10 mg + NSAID20122
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen or Celecoxib Exposure)35423
Tanezumab 5 mg + NSAID44151

Number of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score: Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip). The WOMAC pain subscale was a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 5 individual questions scored on a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score was 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Number of participants who experienced reduction (as percent) of >0% to >=100% from Baseline in WOMAC pain subscale scores at Week 16 were reported. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 16

,,,,,,,,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
>0%>=10%>=20%>=30%>=40%>=50%>=60%>=70%>=80%>=90%100%
Celecoxib 100 mg170150124100816244251375
Naproxen 500 mg172153130102815639221473
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)18216715012411489684634158
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)201184162135117947550291811
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg1941841621381231087963503211
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg2031941741541321048271452410
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)17716214212210889705131195
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)19817914812710378534329174
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg19317615113511596725636207
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg199183158139118966142311912

Number of Participants With Cumulative Reduction From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip). The WOMAC pain subscale was a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 5 individual questions scored on a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score was 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Number of participants who experienced reduction (as percent) of >0% to >=100% from Baseline in WOMAC pain subscale scores at Week 16 were reported. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 16

,,,,,,,,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
>0%>=10%>=20%>=30%>=40%>=50%>=60%>=70%>=80%>=90%100%
Celecoxib 100 mg188162134106846545251375
Naproxen 500 mg201175144112886143241673
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)20218416713712093725038178
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)2342101831501291037952301912
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg2081971731451271118063503211
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg2452292011761501199278482612
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)19717915713311797775332205
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)22820316714011486584631174
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg208188163145120100755837207
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg2332151811591321056847362114

Number of Participants With Intravenous (IV) Doses of Study Medication

Number of participants are reported based on the maximum number of IV doses of either tanezumab or placebo received. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 48

,,,,,,,,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
Number of IV Doses: 1Number of IV Doses: 2Number of IV Doses: 3Number of IV Doses: 4Number of IV Doses: 5Number of IV Doses: 6Number of IV Doses: 7
Celecoxib 100 mg22241237734444
Naproxen 500 mg35302144743346
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)30191635783442
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)36182851704441
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg21122248723841
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg44162155743147
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)25151339824141
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)32192741714550
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg22121844844333
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg36191751664546

Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)

An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment-emergent are events between first dose of study drug and up to Week 64 that were absent before treatment or that worsened relative to pre-treatment state. AEs included both serious and non-serious adverse events. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline up to Week 64

,,,,,,,,,
InterventionParticipants (Count of Participants)
AEsSAEs
Celecoxib 100 mg17221
Naproxen 500 mg19222
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)18823
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)21123
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg19334
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg20730
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)20222
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)20322
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg18526
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg20528

Percentage of Participants Who Used Rescue Medication: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

In case of inadequate pain relief for osteoarthritis, acetaminophen up to 4000 mg per day for maximum of 3 days within a week could be taken as rescue medication. Percentage of participants with any use of rescue medication during each study interval were summarized. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Weeks 1-2, 3-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16, 17-24, 25-32, 33-40, 41-48 and 49-56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Weeks 1-2Weeks 3-4Weeks 5-8Weeks 9-12Weeks 13-16Weeks 17-24Weeks 25-32Weeks 33-40Weeks 41-48Weeks 49-56
Celecoxib 100 mg63.166.067.668.470.769.174.271.572.371.5
Naproxen 500 mg63.063.069.866.269.475.870.871.971.572.6
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)64.464.461.063.962.364.367.567.567.970.0
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)59.461.763.864.262.564.664.966.366.069.1
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg62.761.164.359.359.765.666.465.265.068.1
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg63.060.758.960.357.864.563.164.164.867.6
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)70.069.469.865.167.569.871.871.471.471.5
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)60.463.066.565.865.368.166.768.169.571.2
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg60.559.262.460.562.560.963.762.963.766.8
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg56.954.755.055.460.063.260.061.863.965.4

Percentage of Participants Who Used Rescue Medication: Observed Data

In case of inadequate pain relief for osteoarthritis, acetaminophen up to 4000 mg per day for maximum of 3 days within a week could be taken as rescue medication. Percentage of participants with any use of rescue medication during each study interval were summarized. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Weeks 1-2, 3-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16, 17-24, 25-32, 33-40, 41-48 and 49-56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Weeks 1-2Weeks 3-4Weeks 5-8Weeks 9-12Weeks 13-16Weeks 17-24Weeks 25-32Weeks 33-40Weeks 41-48Weeks 49-56
Celecoxib 100 mg63.266.066.765.968.866.371.261.665.177.5
Naproxen 500 mg61.962.368.864.868.176.669.573.766.078.2
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)64.264.961.264.561.365.170.271.270.774.1
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)59.361.864.765.363.767.067.369.562.571.1
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg62.560.363.957.157.866.266.261.852.579.3
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg62.960.657.961.457.866.059.661.860.974.2
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)69.768.468.062.964.267.066.563.864.175.9
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)60.563.367.767.866.768.966.064.466.769.2
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg60.259.362.560.362.359.463.564.863.372.4
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg57.655.155.156.362.164.759.158.259.262.9

Percentage of Participants With at Least 30 Percent (%), 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score From Baseline at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24: BOCF

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis in index joint (knee or hip). The WOMAC pain subscale was a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis in index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 5 individual questions scored on a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score was 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Percentage of participants who experienced an improvement (reduction) of >=30%, >=50%, >=70%, or >=90% in the WOMAC pain subscale scores from Baseline were reported. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 2: >=30% ReductionWeek 2: >=50% ReductionWeek 2: >=70% ReductionWeek 2: >=90% ReductionWeek 4: >=30% ReductionWeek 4: >=50% ReductionWeek 4: >=70% ReductionWeek 4: >=90% ReductionWeek 8: >=30% ReductionWeek 8: >=50% ReductionWeek 8: >=70% ReductionWeek 8: >=90% ReductionWeek 12: >=30% ReductionWeek 12: >=50% ReductionWeek 12: >=70% ReductionWeek 12: >=90% ReductionWeek 16: >=30% ReductionWeek 16: >=50% ReductionWeek 16: >=70% ReductionWeek 16: >=90% ReductionWeek 24: >=30% ReductionWeek 24: >=50% ReductionWeek 24: >=70% ReductionWeek 24: >=90% Reduction
Celecoxib 100 mg24.711.05.51.631.018.47.11.030.218.89.02.736.521.69.02.439.224.39.82.741.625.911.43.9
Naproxen 500 mg22.712.85.31.129.819.56.72.529.816.78.22.134.019.57.82.836.219.97.82.536.521.311.73.5
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)22.813.86.31.241.726.011.43.945.729.916.56.752.035.819.37.948.835.018.15.946.533.518.57.1
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)26.817.18.71.445.630.012.53.149.833.816.43.846.332.816.06.347.032.817.46.344.931.717.47.3
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg26.018.58.33.150.432.719.35.555.936.223.27.158.341.723.610.654.342.524.812.653.541.323.611.8
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg24.916.17.41.847.732.317.54.249.835.121.17.754.439.323.99.854.036.524.98.446.034.421.46.0
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)28.012.67.12.439.822.413.84.344.127.213.85.148.033.519.34.748.035.020.17.542.530.315.47.5
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)28.417.55.61.140.724.611.92.143.927.713.74.245.630.214.46.344.627.415.16.040.427.714.06.7
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg30.617.37.81.249.030.216.56.351.033.718.86.353.737.620.87.152.937.622.07.847.135.321.67.5
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg35.020.46.42.952.127.515.06.849.329.618.26.453.232.118.66.849.634.315.06.844.328.216.46.4

Percentage of Participants With at Least 30%, 50%, 70% and 90% Reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale Score: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

WOMAC: self-administered, disease-specific 24-item questionnaire which assesses clinically important, participant-relevant symptoms for pain, stiffness and physical function in participants with osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip). The WOMAC pain subscale was a 5-item questionnaire used to assess the amount of pain experienced due to osteoarthritis of index joint (knee or hip) during past 48 hours. It was calculated as mean of the scores from 5 individual questions scored on a NRS of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Total score range for WOMAC pain subscale score was 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain), where higher scores indicated higher pain. Percentage of participants who experienced an improvement (reduction) of >=30 percent, >=50%, >=70%, or >=90% in the WOMAC pain subscale scores from Baseline were reported. (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 2: >=30% ReductionWeek 2: >=50% ReductionWeek 2: >=70% ReductionWeek 2: >=90% ReductionWeek 4: >=30% ReductionWeek 4: >=50% ReductionWeek 4: >=70% ReductionWeek 4: >=90% ReductionWeek 8: >=30% ReductionWeek 8: >=50% ReductionWeek 8: >=70% ReductionWeek 8: >=90% ReductionWeek 12: >=30% ReductionWeek 12: >=50% ReductionWeek 12: >=70% ReductionWeek 12: >=90% ReductionWeek 16: >=30% ReductionWeek 16: >=50% ReductionWeek 16: >=70% ReductionWeek 16: >=90% ReductionWeek 24: >=30% ReductionWeek 24: >=50% ReductionWeek 24: >=70% ReductionWeek 24: >=90% ReductionWeek 32: >=30% ReductionWeek 32: >=50% ReductionWeek 32: >=70% ReductionWeek 32: >=90% ReductionWeek 40: >=30% ReductionWeek 40: >=50% ReductionWeek 40: >=70% ReductionWeek 40: >=90% ReductionWeek 48: >=30% ReductionWeek 48: >=50% ReductionWeek 48: >=70% ReductionWeek 48: >=90% ReductionWeek 56: >=30% ReductionWeek 56: >=50% ReductionWeek 56: >=70% ReductionWeek 56: >=90% Reduction
Celecoxib 100 mg24.711.05.51.631.018.47.11.031.018.89.02.737.622.09.02.441.625.59.82.745.527.811.43.943.128.212.52.441.629.011.42.442.027.111.82.741.627.512.52.4
Naproxen 500 mg22.712.85.31.130.520.26.72.531.217.78.52.136.921.38.52.839.721.68.52.542.925.213.14.344.327.312.15.042.225.59.23.240.423.411.03.940.422.79.93.2
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)22.813.86.31.241.726.011.43.948.830.717.37.157.137.820.98.753.936.619.76.753.935.420.57.951.636.221.79.150.831.120.55.949.231.918.95.546.528.716.54.7
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)26.817.18.71.446.330.712.53.151.935.216.74.250.935.516.46.652.335.918.16.653.036.218.57.752.333.817.87.050.931.717.45.651.630.716.05.950.228.915.35.2
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg26.018.58.33.150.432.719.35.556.737.023.67.560.242.924.011.057.143.724.812.657.943.324.011.853.539.422.012.653.939.021.79.451.237.020.59.452.037.820.58.7
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg24.916.17.41.849.833.717.94.655.138.922.88.460.743.526.010.561.841.827.49.155.840.724.67.456.542.522.18.452.638.219.35.651.936.518.96.752.636.117.96.3
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)28.012.67.12.441.323.614.24.746.528.714.65.952.836.620.55.152.438.220.97.949.234.316.57.949.635.419.37.949.234.317.77.548.430.716.15.946.929.914.25.1
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)28.417.55.61.141.124.611.92.146.329.114.44.249.832.615.46.349.130.216.16.049.534.016.87.449.530.218.25.649.531.916.15.348.830.917.25.647.730.216.56.0
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg30.617.37.81.249.830.616.96.352.934.519.26.357.339.221.67.156.939.222.77.852.537.622.77.852.539.221.610.649.833.319.68.650.233.720.47.547.831.818.47.5
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg35.020.46.42.953.227.915.06.853.931.419.36.459.334.319.67.156.837.516.87.554.333.219.67.553.633.916.15.451.830.415.74.651.430.415.44.651.428.616.14.6

Percentage of Participants With Improvement of At Least 2 Points in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24: Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

"Patient global assessment of osteoarthritis was assessed by asking a question from participants: Considering all the ways your osteoarthritis in your knee or hip affects you, how are you doing today? Participants responded by using a 5-point likert scale ranging from 1=very good (asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities, 2= mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities, 3= fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities), 4= poor (severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities), and 5 = very poor (Very severe symptoms which are intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher scores indicating worse condition. Improvement signifies a decrease of at least 2 points on the 5-point scale relative to baseline value. Percentage of participants who showed an improvement of >=2 points on scale were reported." (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 2Week 4Week 8Week 12Week 16Week 24
Celecoxib 100 mg6.310.611.812.213.413.0
Naproxen 500 mg6.410.69.212.710.614.1
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)9.418.516.517.715.412.6
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)10.113.518.417.419.118.1
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg5.914.617.422.118.220.9
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg10.915.119.325.322.518.6
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)11.319.115.617.218.413.3
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)9.910.214.115.514.817.6
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg12.518.819.620.820.018.8
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg8.217.518.218.216.412.1

Percentage of Participants With Improvement of Atleast 2 Points in Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) of Osteoarthritis at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

"Patient global assessment of osteoarthritis was assessed by asking a question from participants: Considering all the ways your osteoarthritis in your knee or hip affects you, how are you doing today? Participants responded by using a 5-point likert scale ranging from 1=very good (asymptomatic and no limitation of normal activities, 2= mild symptoms and no limitation of normal activities, 3= fair (moderate symptoms and limitation of some normal activities), 4= poor (severe symptoms and inability to carry out most normal activities), and 5 = very poor (Very severe symptoms which are intolerable and inability to carry out all normal activities). Higher scores indicating worse condition. Improvement signifies a decrease of at least 2 points on the 5-point scale relative to baseline value. Percentage of participants who showed an improvement of >=2 points on scale were reported." (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 2Week 4Week 8Week 12Week 16Week 24Week 32Week 40Week 48Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg6.311.013.013.414.615.015.015.414.615.0
Naproxen 500 mg6.410.69.913.812.016.315.514.114.513.4
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)9.418.918.520.918.115.416.515.014.611.8
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)10.114.220.520.822.622.218.817.416.715.3
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg5.914.618.223.319.422.520.220.617.417.8
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg10.916.120.727.024.221.423.218.916.115.8
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)11.320.317.219.121.116.819.118.417.214.8
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)9.910.615.116.916.520.114.414.814.414.4
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg12.518.819.621.620.820.419.218.418.818.4
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg8.217.919.320.418.915.416.413.912.913.6

Percentage of Participants With Outcome Measures in Rheumatology - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Response: Baseline Observation Carried Forward (BOCF)

Participants were considered as OMERACT-OARSI responder: if the improvement from baseline to week of interest was greater than or equal to (>=) 50 percent and >=2 units in WOMAC pain subscale or WOMAC physical function subscale score, or at least 2 of the following 3 being true: improvement from baseline to week of interest was >=20 percent and >=1 unit in 1) WOMAC pain subscale score, 2) WOMAC physical function subscale score, 3) PGA of osteoarthritis. WOMAC pain subscale assess amount of pain experienced (score: 0 [no pain] to 10 [worst possible pain], higher score = more pain), WOMAC physical function subscale assess degree of difficulty experienced (score: 0 [minimum difficulty] to 10 [maximum difficulty], higher score = worse physical function) and PGA of osteoarthritis (score: 1 [very good] to 5 [very poor], higher score = worse condition). (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 2Week 4Week 8Week 12Week 16Week 24
Celecoxib 100 mg32.441.042.645.347.349.2
Naproxen 500 mg31.839.739.042.945.241.1
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)33.955.557.559.155.953.5
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)35.557.658.956.153.050.9
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg33.157.565.065.763.459.4
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg36.154.558.361.160.151.0
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)39.651.653.956.655.149.8
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)40.453.049.554.052.348.1
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg39.557.459.462.159.854.7
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg43.260.760.461.456.851.4

Percentage of Participants With Outcome Measures in Rheumatology - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) Response: Last Observation Carried Forward (LOCF)

Participants were considered as OMERACT-OARSI responder: if the improvement from baseline to week of interest was >=50 percent and >=2 units in WOMAC pain subscale or WOMAC physical function subscale score, or at least 2 of the following 3 being true: improvement from baseline to week of interest was >=20 percent and >=1 unit in 1) WOMAC pain subscale score, 2) WOMAC physical function subscale score, 3) PGA of osteoarthritis. WOMAC pain subscale assess amount of pain experienced (score: 0 [no pain] to 10 [worst possible pain], higher score = more pain), WOMAC physical function subscale assess degree of difficulty experienced (score: 0 [minimum difficulty] to 10 [maximum difficulty], higher score = worse physical function) and PGA of osteoarthritis (score: 1 [very good] to 5 [very poor], higher score = worse condition). (NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 56

,,,,,,,,,
Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Week 2Week 4Week 8Week 12Week 16Week 24Week 32Week 40Week 48Week 56
Celecoxib 100 mg32.441.843.847.751.255.153.149.249.249.2
Naproxen 500 mg31.841.041.046.649.548.452.350.949.550.5
Tanezumab 10 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)33.955.961.465.062.263.456.356.355.953.5
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen Exposure)35.559.062.261.859.760.157.656.357.654.9
Tanezumab 10 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg33.157.966.568.166.564.260.662.258.359.4
Tanezumab 10 mg + Naproxen 500 mg36.157.664.268.469.162.263.259.058.058.0
Tanezumab 5 mg (Celecoxib Exposure)39.653.156.360.960.558.657.458.257.456.6
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen Exposure)40.453.753.360.459.360.460.757.958.257.2
Tanezumab 5 mg + Celecoxib 100 mg39.557.861.365.664.160.562.557.458.257.0
Tanezumab 5 mg + Naproxen 500 mg43.262.565.768.265.763.261.458.957.957.5

Plasma Trough (Pre-dose) Concentration of Tanezumab

(NCT00809354)
Timeframe: Predose on Day 1, Weeks 16, 24, 40, and 56

,,,
Interventionnanogram/milliliter (Mean)
Day 1Week 16Week 24Week 40Week 56
Tanezumab 10 mg (Naproxen or Celecoxib Exposure)164.068556.854545.672523.214385.733
Tanezumab 10 mg + NSAID96.4720723.316538.756527.108377.231
Tanezumab 5 mg (Naproxen or Celecoxib Exposure)48.4570222.779250.813231.840168.673
Tanezumab 5 mg + NSAID102.398255.246271.632263.049138.159

Time-Weighted Mean Change From Baseline in the Investigator Global Assessment of Disease Status

Study investigators were asked to rate the global assessment of participant disease status on a Likert scale from 0 to 4, with 0 = very well, 1 = good, 2 = fair, 3 = poor and 4 = very poor. The calculation of the time-weighted average was done by taking the time between adjacent observations divided by the time from the randomization visit to the last observation in the period of interest, and using it as the weight for computation of the average. (NCT01554163)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 2, Week 6, Week 12

InterventionScore on a Scale (Least Squares Mean)
Etoricoxib 30 mg-1.71
Celecoxib 200 mg-1.62

Time-Weighted Mean Change From Baseline in the Participant Global Assessment of Disease Status

"The Participant Global Assessmet of Disease was a one item questionnaire that asked participants to answer the following question, Considering all the ways your arthritis affects you, mark (X) on the scale for how well you are doing. The questionnaire employed a 0-100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) to record participant responses, with 0 representing the best possible assessment and 100 representing the worst possible assessment. The calculation of the time-weighted average was done by taking the time between adjacent observations divided by the time from the randomization visit to the last observation in the period of interest, and using it as the weight for computation of the average." (NCT01554163)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 2, Week 6, Week 12

InterventionScore on a Scale (Least Squares Mean)
Etoricoxib 30 mg-24.71
Celecoxib 200 mg-23.61

Time-Weighted Mean Change From Baseline in the WOMAC Physical Function Subscale

The WOMAC osteoarthritis scale consists of 24 items in 3 subscales: pain, stiffness, and physical function. The physical function subscale rates participant pain during stair use, rising from sitting, standing, bending, walking, getting in/out of a car, shopping, putting on/taking off socks, rising from bed, lying in bed, getting in/out of the bath, sitting, getting on/off the toilet, heavy household duties, and light household duties using a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0-100mm where 0 is the best possible level of functioning and 100 is the highest level of functioning. The physical function subscale was calculated as the average of the responses to the 17 questions related to functional status. The calculation of the time-weighted average was done by taking the time between adjacent observations divided by the time from the randomization visit to the last observation in the period of interest, and using it as the weight for computation of the average. (NCT01554163)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 2, Week 6, Week 12

InterventionScore on a Scale (Least Squares Mean)
Etoricoxib 30 mg-17.78
Celecoxib 200 mg-16.46

Time-Weighted Mean Change From Baseline in the WOMAC Stiffness Subscale

The WOMAC osteoarthritis scale consists of 24 items in 3 subscales: pain, stiffness, and physical function. The stiffness subscale rates stiffness after first waking and later in the day using a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0-100mm where 0 is the best possible level of stiffness and 100 is the highest level of stiffness. The stiffness subscale is calculated as the average of the responses to the 2 questions related to stiffness. The calculation of the time-weighted average was done by taking the time between adjacent observations divided by the time from the randomization visit to the last observation in the period of interest, and using it as the weight for computation of the average. (NCT01554163)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 2, Week 6, Week 12

InterventionScore on a Scale (Least Squares Mean)
Etoricoxib 30 mg-18.41
Celecoxib 200 mg-17.55

Time-Weighted Mean Change From Baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale

The WOMAC osteoarthritis scale consists of 24 items in 3 subscales: pain, stiffness, and physical function. The pain subscale rates participant pain during walking, using stairs, in bed, sitting or lying, and standing using a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0-100mm where 0 is the best possible level of pain and 100 is the highest level of pain. The pain subscale is calculated as the average of the responses to the 5 questions related to pain. The calculation of the time-weighted average was done by taking the time between adjacent observations divided by the time from the randomization visit to the last observation in the period of interest, and using it as the weight for computation of the average. (NCT01554163)
Timeframe: Baseline, Week 2, Week 6, Week 12

InterventionScore on a Scale (Least Squares Mean)
Etoricoxib 30 mg-21.40
Celecoxib 200 mg-19.76

Time-Weighted Mean Response in the Participant Global Assessment of Response to Therapy

Participants were asked to rate their global assessment of response to therapy on a Likert scale from 0 to 4, with 0 = excellent, 1 = good, 2 = fair, 3 = poor, 4 = none. The calculation of the time-weighted average was done by taking the time between adjacent observations divided by the time from the randomization visit to the last observation in the period of interest, and using it as the weight for computation of the average. (NCT01554163)
Timeframe: Week 2, Week 6, Week 12

InterventionScore on a Scale (Least Squares Mean)
Etoricoxib 30 mg1.48
Celecoxib 200 mg1.56

Time-Weighted Mean Response on the Investigator Global Assessment of Response to Therapy

Study investigators were asked to rate the global assessment of participant response to therapy on a Likert scale from 0 to 4, with 0 = excellent, 1 = good, 2 = fair, 3 = poor, 4 = none. The calculation of the time-weighted average was done by taking the time between adjacent observations divided by the time from the randomization visit to the last observation in the period of interest, and using it as the weight for computation of the average. (NCT01554163)
Timeframe: Week 6, Week 12

InterventionScore on a Scale (Least Squares Mean)
Etoricoxib 30 mg1.39
Celecoxib 200 mg1.49

Consumption of Rescue Medication

"Use of rescue medication as number of paracetamol tablets 500 mg since the last visit. The tablet count was reconciled with the patient diary.~Total Number of pills per month" (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

Interventiondaily tablets consumed/month (Mean)
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)31.0
Celecoxib29.0

Number of Participants With at Least One Adverse Events

The safety evaluation was done in the set of randomized patients who took at least one dose of the medication (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

Interventionnumber of participants (Number)
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)155
Celecoxib151

Percentage of Participants With Response as Defined by Outcome Variables for Osteoarthritis Clinical Trials - Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI)

"The OARSI Standing Committee for Clinical Trials Response Criteria Initiative and the OMERACT committee, in concert with the international rheumatology community, has led to the development of a uniform core set of outcome measures for OA. One of the objectives was to propose a set of criteria for measurement based on multiple domains to present the results of changes after treatment in symptomatic parameters as a single variable for clinical trials.~To be considered as responder patients should met one the following criteria:~High improvement in pain or in function ≥ 50% and absolute change ≥ 20 or~Improvement in at least 2 of the 3 following:~Pain ≥ 20% and absolute change ≥ 10~Function ≥ 20% and absolute change ≥ 10~Patient's global assessment ≥ 20% and absolute change ≥ 10" (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)79.7
Celecoxib79.2

Percentage of Presence of Joint Effusion

Study knees were evaluated at each visit for the presence or absence of swelling and/or effusion. (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)4.1
Celecoxib3.8

Percentage of Presence of Joint Swelling

Study knees were evaluated at each visit for the presence or absence of swelling and/or effusion. (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

Interventionpercentage of participants (Number)
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)5.9
Celecoxib4.5

WOMAC Pain Subscale

Western Ontario & McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain subscale Score Range: 0 (no pain) - 500 (maximum pain) The study was designed such that the outcome of primary interest is knee pain related to OA. The measure selected to best evaluate this is an improvement in the WOMAC pain subscales. This subscale consists of 5 items which assesses the pain during walking, using stairs, in bed, sitting or lying, and standing. (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)185.79
Celecoxib184.67

Health Status According to EuroQoL

"EuroQoL-5D was a standardized instrument for use as a measure of health outcome that provides a simple descriptive profile and a single index value for health status. It was assessed at all of the study visits.~The EQ-5D-3L essentially consists of 2 pages - the EQ-5D descriptive system (page 2) and the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ VAS) (page 3). The EQ-5D-3L descriptive system comprises the following 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 3 levels: no problems, some problems, extreme problems. Total scale range for each dimension reported is 1 to 3.~The EQ VAS records the respondent's self-rated health on a vertical, visual analogue scale where the endpoints are labelled 'Best imaginable health state' and 'Worst imaginable health state'. This information can be used as a quantitative measure of health outcome as judged by the individual respondents.~Total scale range for VAS dimension reported is 0 to 100." (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

,
Interventionpoints (Mean)
Mobility BaselineMobility 180 DaysSelf-care BaselineSelf-care 180 daysUsual activities BaselineUsual activities 180 daysPain Discomfort BaselinePain Discomfort 180 daysAnxiety depression baselineAnxiety depression 180 daysVAS BaselineVAS 180 days
Celecoxib1.841.461.441.211.791.422.271.861.601.3452.48870.219
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)1.841.521.391.191.781.422.251.841.701.4354.54569.080

Huskisson's VAS

"Visual Analogue Scale: 0 No Pain 100 Maximum Pain Huskisson's VAS measures global pain intensity. Patients were asked to quantify their disease status on a 100 mm VAS as follows: Please indicate the severity of knee pain experienced during the last 48 hours by marking a (I) through the line. Left hand marker represents No pain and right hand marker represents The worst pain imaginable." (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline180 days
Celecoxib73.4737.64
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)72.7937.86

Number of Adverse Events Defined by Relationship With Treatment

The safety evaluation was done in the set of randomized patients who took at least one dose of the medication (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

,
Interventionnumber of events (Number)
Treatment-related AEs: DefinitiveTreatment-related AEs: PossiblyTreatment-related AEs: ProbablyTreatment-related AEs: Non-appraisableTreatment-related AEs: unlikely or unrelated
Celecoxib103812190
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)34325084

Patient's and Investigator's Global Assessment of Response to Therapy

"The investigator were asked to evaluated the patient's response to therapy of the index knee by marking a (I) a VAS scale with range 0 mm (best) and 100 mm (worst) as follows: Left hand marker Excellent-Best possible anticipated response, considering the severity and stage of the disease, right hand marker None-no response, absence of drug effect." (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
PGA Therapy BaselinePGA Therapy 180 daysIGA Therapy BaselineIGA Therapy 180 days
Celecoxib45.936.0442.2533.83
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)54.5936.8551.434.72

Patient's Global Assessment (PGA) and Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) of Disease Activity

"Patients were asked to quantify their disease status on a VAS scale with range 0 mm (best) and 100 mm (worst) as follows: Considering all the ways your arthritis of the knee affects you, mark (I) on the scale how well you are doing. Left hand marker Very Well, Right hand marked Very Poor." (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
PGA Activity BaselinePGA Activity 180 daysIGA Activity BaselineIGA Activity 180 daus
Celecoxib69.4136.8863.2833.40
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)69.1138.3563.235.33

WOMAC Function Subscale

Western Ontario & McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, from 0 No Function to 1700 Maximum Function WOMAC functional limitation subscale was used to measure the functionality of the knee with pain. Seventeen items are used to assess functionality of the knee: tair use, rising from sitting, standing, bending, walking, getting in / out of a car, shopping, putting on / taking off socks, rising from bed, lying in bed, getting in / out of bath, sitting, getting on / off toilet, heavy household duties, light household duties. (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline180 days
Celecoxib1111.60595.78
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)1131.40616.96

WOMAC Stiffness Subscale

Western Ontario & McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, from 0 No Stiffness to 200 Maximum Stiffness WOMAC stiffness subscale was used to measure the stiffness of the knee with pain. Two items are used to assess stiffness grade: after first waking and later in the day. (NCT01425853)
Timeframe: 6 months

,
Interventionunits on a scale (Mean)
Baseline180 days
Celecoxib129.4865.78
Chondroitin Sulfate/ Glucosamine Hydrochloride (Droglican)130.1569.06

Antacid Tablet Use

Tablet pill count (NCT00665431)
Timeframe: 12 weeks

InterventionTablets per subject (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)13.4
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)20.9
(Placebo Twice Daily)27.3

Change in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) Subscore From Baseline

PGA questionnaire. The patient global assessment (PGA) question asks about how the subject is doing considering his/her arthritis and is measured by a visual analog scale (VAS); 0 mm (very poor) 100 mm (excellent). The outcome measures a change from baseline PGA in mm. (NCT00665431)
Timeframe: 12 Weeks

Interventionmm (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)27.7
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)26.4
(Placebo Twice Daily)22.4

Change in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) Subscore From Baseline

PGA questionnaire. The patient global assessment (PGA) question asks about how the subject is doing considering his/her arthritis and is measured by a visual analog scale (VAS); 0 mm (very poor) 100 mm (excellent). The outcome measures a change from baseline PGA in mm. (NCT00665431)
Timeframe: Week 6

Interventionmm (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)25.9
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)24.4
(Placebo Twice Daily)22.3

Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Function Questionnaire Subscore From Baseline

"WOMAC function questionnaire (VAS). The 17 questions about function all use visual analog scale (VAS) of 100 mm; 0 mm being no pain and 100 mm being extreme pain. The outcome measures a change in WOMAC pain from baseline (in mm).~The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) is a self-administered, patient-reported health status questionnaire that is designed to capture elements of pain, stiffness and physical disability in patients with OA of the knee and/or hip joints. The index consists of 24 questions (5 questions about pain, 2 on stiffness and 17 about physical function)." (NCT00665431)
Timeframe: 12 Weeks

Interventionmm (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)-38.7
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)-37.7
(Placebo Twice Daily)-30.9

Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Function Questionnaire Subscore From Baseline

"WOMAC function questionnaire (VAS). The 17 questions about function all use visual analog scale (VAS) of 100 mm; 0 mm being no pain and 100 mm being extreme pain. The outcome measures a change in WOMAC pain from baseline (in mm).~The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) is a self-administered, patient-reported health status questionnaire that is designed to capture elements of pain, stiffness and physical disability in patients with OA of the knee and/or hip joints. The index consists of 24 questions (5 questions about pain, 2 on stiffness and 17 about physical function)." (NCT00665431)
Timeframe: Week 6

Interventionmm (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)-38.5
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)-34.6
(Placebo Twice Daily)-29.0

Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Pain Questionnaire Subscore From Baseline

"Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) pain questionnaire has 5 questions on pain all use visual analog scale (VAS) of 100 mm, with 0 mm being no pain and 100 mm being extreme pain. The outcome measures a change in WOMAC pain at 12 weeks from baseline (in mm). WOMAC is a self-administered, patient-reported health status questionnaire designed to capture elements of pain, stiffness and physical disability in patients with OA of the knee and/or hip joints. It consists of 24 questions (5 questions about pain, 2 on stiffness and 17 about physical function)." (NCT00665431)
Timeframe: Baseline and 12 Weeks

Interventionmm (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)-44.1
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)-43.6
(Placebo Twice Daily)-37.3

Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Pain Questionnaire Subscore From Baseline

"Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) pain questionnaire has 5 questions on pain all use visual analog scale (VAS) of 100 mm, with 0 mm being no pain and 100 mm being extreme pain. The outcome measures a change in WOMAC pain at 6 weeks from baseline (in mm). WOMAC is a self-administered, patient-reported health status questionnaire designed to capture elements of pain, stiffness and physical disability in patients with OA of the knee and/or hip joints. It consists of 24 questions (5 questions about pain, 2 on stiffness and 17 about physical function)." (NCT00665431)
Timeframe: Week 6

Interventionmm (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)-44.3
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)-39.6
(Placebo Twice Daily)-33.9

Mean Change From Baseline in American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire (APS-POQ)Total Interference Caused by Pain.

For APS-POQ score is the change from Baseline scores calculated for each subject through Day 7. Scale 0 through 70, where 0=no pain interference and 70=complete interference. (NCT00665431)
Timeframe: Baseline and Day 7

InterventionUnits on a scale (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)-18.8
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)-16.6
(Placebo Twice Daily)-11.6

Modified Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment (mSODA)

Change from Baseline in the Modified Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment (mSODA) average daily pain intensity converted total score at Week 12. The mSODA instruments consists of 6 questions about abdominal discomfort during the past 24 hours, with a converted score of 2 through 47. Lower score equals less pain. (NCT00665431)
Timeframe: 12 weeks

InterventionScores on a scale (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)-4.5
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)-3.3
(Placebo Twice Daily)-3.5

Number of Participants Reporting Pre-specified Non-steroidal Antiinflammatory Drug-associated Upper Gastrointestinal (UGI) Symptoms

Number of participants reporting pre-specified non-steroidal antiinflammatory drug-associated (NSAID) upper gastrointestinal (UGI) symptoms. Pre-specified NSAID-associated UGI symptoms include adverse events such as dyspepsia, abdominal pain or discomfort, nausea, vomiting. (NCT00665431)
Timeframe: daily during 12 weeks

Interventionparticipants (Number)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)46
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)53
(Placebo Twice Daily)25

Percent of Days With no Heartburn (Heartburn Resolution)

During 12 weeks, daily heartburn question with ratings none, mild, moderate, or severe. Percent of days with Heartburn resolution (heartburn is none). (NCT00665431)
Timeframe: 12 weeks

Interventionpercent days (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)78.4
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)72.1
(Placebo Twice Daily)71.1

The Number of Subjects Who Discontinued From the Study Due to Any Pre-specified Non-steroidal Antiinflammatory Drug-associated Upper Gastrointestinal Adverse Event

The number of subjects who discontinued from the study due to any pre-specified non-steroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID)-associated upper gastrointestinal (UGI) adverse event (as classified by MedDRA). Pre-specified NSAID-associated UGI symptoms include adverse events such as dyspepsia, abdominal pain or discomfort, nausea, vomiting. (NCT00665431)
Timeframe: daily during 12 weeks

Interventionparticipants (Number)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)2
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)9
(Placebo Twice Daily)3

American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire (APS-POQ)Total Interference Caused by Pain.

Mean change from Baseline scores calculated for each subject through Day 7. Scale 0 through 70, where 0=no pain interference and 70=complete interference. (NCT00664560)
Timeframe: Baseline and Day 7

InterventionUnits on a scale (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)-17.8
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)-17.7
(Placebo Twice Daily)-12.8

Antacid Tablet Use

Tablet pill count (NCT00664560)
Timeframe: 12 weeks

InterventionTablets per subject (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)9.3
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)13.9
(Placebo Twice Daily)15.4

Change in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) Subscore From Baseline

PGA questionnaire. The patient global assessment (PGA) question asks about how the subject is doing considering his/her arthritis and is measured by a visual analog scale (VAS); 0 mm (very poor) 100 mm (excellent). The outcome measures a change from baseline PGA in mm. (NCT00664560)
Timeframe: 12 weeks

Interventionmm (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)21.5
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)22.4
(Placebo Twice Daily)12.4

Change in Patient Global Assessment (PGA) Subscore From Baseline

PGA questionnaire. The patient global assessment (PGA) question asks about how the subject is doing considering his/her arthritis and is measured by a visual analog scale (VAS); 0 mm (very poor) 100 mm (excellent). The outcome measures a change from baseline PGA in mm. (NCT00664560)
Timeframe: Week 6

Interventionmm (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)22.6
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)20.7
(Placebo Twice Daily)14.7

Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Function Questionnaire Subscore From Baseline

"WOMAC function questionnaire (VAS). The 17 questions about function all use visual analog scale (VAS) of 100 mm; 0 mm being no pain and 100 mm being extreme pain. The outcome measures a change in WOMAC pain from baseline (in mm).~The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) is a self-administered, patient-reported health status questionnaire that is designed to capture elements of pain, stiffness and physical disability in patients with OA of the knee and/or hip joints. The index consists of 24 questions (5 questions about pain, 2 on stiffness and 17 about physical function)." (NCT00664560)
Timeframe: 12 weeks

Interventionmm (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)-37.5
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)-36.0
(Placebo Twice Daily)-28.9

Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Function Questionnaire Subscore From Baseline

"WOMAC function questionnaire (VAS). The 17 questions about function all use visual analog scale (VAS) of 100 mm; 0 mm being no pain and 100 mm being extreme pain. The outcome measures a change in WOMAC pain from baseline (in mm).~The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) is a self-administered, patient-reported health status questionnaire that is designed to capture elements of pain, stiffness and physical disability in patients with OA of the knee and/or hip joints. The index consists of 24 questions (5 questions about pain, 2 on stiffness and 17 about physical function)." (NCT00664560)
Timeframe: Week 6

Interventionmm (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)-35.3
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)-33.9
(Placebo Twice Daily)-27.3

Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Pain Questionnaire Subscore From Baseline

"Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) pain questionnaire has 5 questions on pain all use visual analog scale (VAS) of 100 mm, with 0 mm being no pain and 100 mm being extreme pain. The outcome measures a change in WOMAC pain at 12 weeks from baseline (in mm). WOMAC is a self-administered, patient-reported health status questionnaire designed to capture elements of pain, stiffness and physical disability in patients with OA of the knee and/or hip joints. It consists of 24 questions (5 questions about pain, 2 on stiffness and 17 about physical function)." (NCT00664560)
Timeframe: Baseline and 12 weeks

Interventionmm (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)-43.4
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)-41.1
(Placebo Twice Daily)-34.0

Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Pain Questionnaire Subscore From Baseline

"Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) pain questionnaire has 5 questions on pain all use visual analog scale (VAS) of 100 mm, with 0 mm being no pain and 100 mm being extreme pain. The outcome measures a change in WOMAC pain at 6 weeks from baseline (in mm). WOMAC is a self-administered, patient-reported health status questionnaire designed to capture elements of pain, stiffness and physical disability in patients with OA of the knee and/or hip joints. It consists of 24 questions (5 questions about pain, 2 on stiffness and 17 about physical function)." (NCT00664560)
Timeframe: Week 6

Interventionmm (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)-40.9
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)-39.4
(Placebo Twice Daily)-30.7

Modified Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment (mSODA)

Change from Baseline in the Modified Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment (mSODA) average daily pain intensity converted total score at Week 12. The mSODA instruments consists of 6 questions about abdominal discomfort during the past 24 hours, with a converted score of 2 through 47. Lower score equals less pain. (NCT00664560)
Timeframe: Baseline to 12 weeks

InterventionScores on a scale (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)-3.5
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)-4.8
(Placebo Twice Daily)-4.0

Number of Participants Reporting Pre-specified Non-steroidal Antiinflammatory Drug-associated Upper Gastrointestinal (UGI) Symptoms

Number of participants reporting pre-specified non-steroidal antiinflammatory drug-associated (NSAID) upper gastrointestinal (UGI) symptoms. Pre-specified NSAID-associated UGI symptoms include adverse events such as dyspepsia, abdominal pain or discomfort, nausea, vomiting. (NCT00664560)
Timeframe: daily during 12 weeks

Interventionparticipants (Number)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)41
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)41
(Placebo Twice Daily)24

Percent of Days With no Heartburn (Heartburn Resolution)

During 12 weeks, daily heartburn question with ratings none, mild, moderate, or severe. Percent of days with Heartburn resolution (heartburn is none). (NCT00664560)
Timeframe: 12 weeks

Interventionpercent days (Mean)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)83.9
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)75.8
(Placebo Twice Daily)68.5

The Number of Subjects Who Discontinued From the Study Due to Any Pre-specified Non-steroidal Antiinflammatory Drug-associated Upper Gastrointestinal Adverse Event

The number of subjects who discontinued from the study due to any pre-specified non-steroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID)-associated upper gastrointestinal (UGI) adverse event (as classified by MedDRA). Pre-specified NSAID-associated UGI symptoms include adverse events such as dyspepsia, abdominal pain or discomfort, nausea, vomiting. (NCT00664560)
Timeframe: daily during 12 weeks

Interventionparticipants (Number)
(PN 400 (VIMOVO) Twice Daily)3
(Celebrex 200 mg Once Daily)4
(Placebo Twice Daily)3

Days on Flare Medication

Number of days on flare medication per month per subject calculated as number of days on flare medication divided by the number of days on study medication in Period III (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III (22 weeks)

Interventiondays on medication per month per subject (Mean)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use6.589
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use9.793

Number of Flare Events Per Time of Exposure to Study Medication

Number of flare events per month during Period III (calculated as number of flares divided by number of months participant was enrolled during Period III). Flare was determined using pre-defined criteria, using an interactive voice response system. (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III (22 weeks)

Interventionflare events per month (Mean)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use0.54
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use0.93

Proportion of Days Free From Osteoarthritis (OA) Flare

Number of days subject was free from OA flare divided by number of days on study medication in Period III. Flare was determined using pre-defined criteria, using an interactive voice response system. (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III (22 weeks)

Interventionproportion of days free from OA flare (Mean)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use0.77
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use0.67

Proportion of Days in Osteoarthritis (OA) Flare

Number of days subject was in OA flare divided by number of days on study medication in Period III. Subjects may have more than one flare. Flare was determined using pre-defined criteria, using an interactive voice response system. (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III (22 weeks)

Interventionproportion of days in OA flare (Mean)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use0.23
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use0.33

Proportion of Days on Rescue Medication

Days on rescue medication divided by number of days on study medication in Period III (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III (22 weeks)

Interventionproportion of days (Mean)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use0.044
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use0.069

Time to Occurrence of First Osteoarthritis (OA) Flare

Time from first dose of double blind medication (start of Period III) to occurrence of first OA flare. Flare was determined using pre-defined criteria, using an interactive voice response system (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III (22 weeks)

Interventiondays (Median)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use16.0
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use8.0

Total Rescue Medication Taken (Mean)

Total amount of rescue medication (acetaminophen in milligrams [mg]) taken per month per participant (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III (22 weeks)

Interventionmg taken per month per participant (Mean)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use1566
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use2428

Area Under the Curve (AUCs) of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Scores

WOMAC assesses subject responses to 24 components regarding subscales of pain, stiffness and physical function (score range: 0=none to 4= extreme). Total score is sum of the 3 subscale scores. Scores analyzed as area under the curve (AUC) of participant's WOMAC scores from each assessment in Period III. (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III (22 weeks)

,
Interventionscores on a scale * weeks (Mean)
Total WOMAC scoreWOMAC pain subscaleWOMAC stiffness subscaleWOMAC physical function subscale
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use604.9119.254.5431.4
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use693.6138.462.1493.6

Arthritis Pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)

Participant rated intensity of osteoarthritis pain on categorical scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain). Scores analyzed as area under the curve (AUC) of participant's scores from each assessment in Period III. (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III

,
Interventionscores on a scale * weeks (Least Squares Mean)
Week 4 (n=415 cont; n=414 inter)Week 8 (n=401 cont; n=395 inter)Week 12 (n=383 cont; n=363 inter)Week 16 (n=373 cont; n=339 inter)Week 20 (n=362; n=323 inter)Week 24 (n=350 cont; n=403 inter)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use81.7148.8212.6272.7335.9378.1
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use90.5167.0234.3297.6361.1403.9

Change in Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale - All Assessments

Subject assessment on 7 sleep associated categories. Raw scores are transformed to a 0-100 scale. Higher score indicates more of the outcome (e.g. more snoring, more adequate sleep). Score at end of Period III minus score at start of Period III. (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III

,
Interventionscores on a scale (Mean)
Sleep disturbance (n=415 cont; n=410 inter)Snoring (n=415 cont; n=412 inter)Awaken short of breath (n=417 cont; n=411 inter)Quantity of sleep (n=417 cont; n=413 inter)Sleep adequacy (n=416 cont; n=413 inter)Somnolence (n=416 cont; n=413 inter)Sleep problems index I (n=416 cont; n=410 inter)Sleep problems index II (n=413 cont; n=408 inter)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use0.50.91.9-0.10.11.40.90.7
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use-1.40.71.1-0.1-1.30.60.5-0.1

Change in the Quality of Life Short Form-12v2 (SF-12v2) Scale Scores - All Assessments

SF-12v2 is a 12 item health survey covering 7 topics. Raw scores are transformed to a 0 to 100 scale. Higher scores indicate better state of health. Score at end of Period III minus score at start of Period III. (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III

,
Interventionscores on a scale (Mean)
Physical function (n=417 cont; n=413 inter)Role physical (n=416 cont; n=412 inter)Bodily pain (n=417 cont; n=414 inter)General health (n=417 cont; n=414 inter)Vitality (n=416 cont; n=414 inter)Social functioning (n=416 cont; n=414 inter)Role emotional (n=417 cont; n=413 inter)Mental health (n=416 cont; n=413 inter)Physical component summary(n=416 cont;n=411 inter)Mental component summary (n=416 cont;n=411 inter)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use1.83.53.8-0.30.3-1.9-0.7-0.99.0-3.1
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use-3.2-1.1-0.3-0.8-3.5-3.5-2.1-1.3-5.2-10.5

Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Scores

Score at end of Period III minus score at start of Period III. WOMAC assesses subject responses to 24 components regarding subscales of pain, stiffness and physical function (score range: 0=none to 4= extreme). Total score is sum of the 3 subscale scores. Negative change indicates improvement. (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III (22 weeks)

,
Interventionscores on a scale (Least Squares Mean)
Total WOMAC scoreWOMAC pain subscaleWOMAC stiffness subscaleWOMAC physical function subscale
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use1.600.370.121.13
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use4.991.180.403.43

Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale - Number of Participants With Optimal, Mixed and Not Optimal Sleep

Transformed score scale: 1=optimal; 0=not optimal; mixed = both optimal and non-optimal sleep during Period III (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Optimal (all scores are 1)Mixed (scores are both 1 and 0)Not optimal (all scores are 0)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use139166115
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use123165132

Patient's Global Assessment of Arthritis

"Participant's response to question Considering all the ways the osteoarthritis in your hip or knee affects you, how are you doing today? on scale from 1 (very good) to 5 (very poor). Scores analyzed as area under the curve (AUC) of participant's scores from each assessment in Period III." (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III

,
Interventionscores on a scale * weeks (Least Squares Mean)
Week 4 (n=415 cont; n=414 inter)Week 8 (n=401 cont; n=395 inter)Week 12 (n=383 cont; n=363 inter)Week 16 (n=373 cont; n=339 inter)Week 20 (n=362 cont; n=323 inter)Week 24 (n=350 cont; n=309 inter)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use67.9126.0182.8236.3292.4329.2
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use71.7133.2188.7241.2293.8328.9

Physician's Global Assessment of Arthritis at Final Visit

Physician assessed each participant's disease symptoms on a categorical scale from 1 (very good) to 5 (very poor). (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: Period III (22 weeks)

,
Interventionparticipants (Number)
Grade 1 (very good)Grade 2 (good)Grade 3 (fair)Grade 4 (poor)Grade 5 (very poor)
Celecoxib 200mg Continuous Use6824291232
Celecoxib 200mg Intermittent Use39244113272

Serious Adverse Events in Open Label run-in Period

Serious adverse events occuring during the 2 week run-in period (Period II) when all participants were dosed with celecoxib 200 mg daily (NCT00139776)
Timeframe: 2 weeks prior to double blind dosing

Interventionparticipants (Number)
AnaemiaVitreous haemorrhage
Celecoxib 200mg Open Label11

Reviews

12 reviews available for celecoxib and Osteoarthritis, Knee

ArticleYear
Possible synergic action of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and glucosamine sulfate for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a scoping review.
    BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2022, Dec-12, Volume: 23, Issue:1

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Glucosamine; Humans; Observational Studies as To

2022
Possible synergic action of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and glucosamine sulfate for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a scoping review.
    BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2022, Dec-12, Volume: 23, Issue:1

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Glucosamine; Humans; Observational Studies as To

2022
Possible synergic action of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and glucosamine sulfate for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a scoping review.
    BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2022, Dec-12, Volume: 23, Issue:1

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Glucosamine; Humans; Observational Studies as To

2022
Possible synergic action of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and glucosamine sulfate for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a scoping review.
    BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2022, Dec-12, Volume: 23, Issue:1

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Glucosamine; Humans; Observational Studies as To

2022
Meta-analysis Comparing Celecoxib with Diclofenac Sodium in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis.
    Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.), 2021, 02-23, Volume: 22, Issue:2

    Topics: Celecoxib; Diclofenac; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pain; Treatment Outcome

2021
Celecoxib for osteoarthritis.
    The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017, 05-22, Volume: 5

    Topics: Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Diclofenac; Female; Humans; Male; Middle

2017
Association of Pharmacological Treatments With Long-term Pain Control in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
    JAMA, 2018, 12-25, Volume: 320, Issue:24

    Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Aged; Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Bone Density Con

2018
Association of Pharmacological Treatments With Long-term Pain Control in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
    JAMA, 2018, 12-25, Volume: 320, Issue:24

    Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Aged; Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Bone Density Con

2018
Association of Pharmacological Treatments With Long-term Pain Control in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
    JAMA, 2018, 12-25, Volume: 320, Issue:24

    Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Aged; Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Bone Density Con

2018
Association of Pharmacological Treatments With Long-term Pain Control in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
    JAMA, 2018, 12-25, Volume: 320, Issue:24

    Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Aged; Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Bone Density Con

2018
Comparative effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
    Annals of internal medicine, 2015, Jan-06, Volume: 162, Issue:1

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Ster

2015
Comparative effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
    Annals of internal medicine, 2015, Jan-06, Volume: 162, Issue:1

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Ster

2015
Comparative effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
    Annals of internal medicine, 2015, Jan-06, Volume: 162, Issue:1

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Ster

2015
Comparative effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
    Annals of internal medicine, 2015, Jan-06, Volume: 162, Issue:1

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Ster

2015
Comparison between 200 mg QD and 100 mg BID oral celecoxib in the treatment of knee or hip osteoarthritis.
    Scientific reports, 2015, May-27, Volume: 5

    Topics: Administration, Oral; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Databases, Factual; Dosage Forms; Gast

2015
Effectiveness and safety of Glucosamine, chondroitin, the two in combination, or celecoxib in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee.
    Scientific reports, 2015, Nov-18, Volume: 5

    Topics: Arthralgia; Celecoxib; Chondroitin; Drug Therapy, Combination; Glucosamine; Humans; Odds Ratio; Oste

2015
Responder analysis and correlation of outcome measures: pooled results from two identical studies comparing etoricoxib, celecoxib, and placebo in osteoarthritis.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2008, Volume: 16, Issue:11

    Topics: Aged; Analysis of Variance; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Female; Health Status

2008
Responder analysis and correlation of outcome measures: pooled results from two identical studies comparing etoricoxib, celecoxib, and placebo in osteoarthritis.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2008, Volume: 16, Issue:11

    Topics: Aged; Analysis of Variance; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Female; Health Status

2008
Responder analysis and correlation of outcome measures: pooled results from two identical studies comparing etoricoxib, celecoxib, and placebo in osteoarthritis.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2008, Volume: 16, Issue:11

    Topics: Aged; Analysis of Variance; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Female; Health Status

2008
Responder analysis and correlation of outcome measures: pooled results from two identical studies comparing etoricoxib, celecoxib, and placebo in osteoarthritis.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2008, Volume: 16, Issue:11

    Topics: Aged; Analysis of Variance; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Female; Health Status

2008
Early response to COX-2 inhibitors as a predictor of overall response in osteoarthritis: pooled results from two identical trials comparing etoricoxib, celecoxib and placebo.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2009, Volume: 48, Issue:9

    Topics: Aged; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Epidemiologic Methods; Etoricoxib; Female; Humans; Mal

2009
Early response to COX-2 inhibitors as a predictor of overall response in osteoarthritis: pooled results from two identical trials comparing etoricoxib, celecoxib and placebo.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2009, Volume: 48, Issue:9

    Topics: Aged; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Epidemiologic Methods; Etoricoxib; Female; Humans; Mal

2009
Early response to COX-2 inhibitors as a predictor of overall response in osteoarthritis: pooled results from two identical trials comparing etoricoxib, celecoxib and placebo.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2009, Volume: 48, Issue:9

    Topics: Aged; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Epidemiologic Methods; Etoricoxib; Female; Humans; Mal

2009
Early response to COX-2 inhibitors as a predictor of overall response in osteoarthritis: pooled results from two identical trials comparing etoricoxib, celecoxib and placebo.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2009, Volume: 48, Issue:9

    Topics: Aged; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Epidemiologic Methods; Etoricoxib; Female; Humans; Mal

2009
Allergic vasculitis associated with celecoxib.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2002, Volume: 41, Issue:12

    Topics: Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Drug Eruptions;

2002
Osteoarthritis: current concepts in diagnosis and management.
    American family physician, 2000, Mar-15, Volume: 61, Issue:6

    Topics: Algorithms; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Diagnosis

2000
Osteoarthritis: current concepts in diagnosis and management.
    American family physician, 2000, Mar-15, Volume: 61, Issue:6

    Topics: Algorithms; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Diagnosis

2000
Osteoarthritis: current concepts in diagnosis and management.
    American family physician, 2000, Mar-15, Volume: 61, Issue:6

    Topics: Algorithms; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Diagnosis

2000
Osteoarthritis: current concepts in diagnosis and management.
    American family physician, 2000, Mar-15, Volume: 61, Issue:6

    Topics: Algorithms; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Diagnosis

2000
Antiinflammatory and analgesic efficacy of COX-2 specific inhibition: from investigational trials to clinical experience.
    The Journal of rheumatology. Supplement, 2000, Volume: 60

    Topics: Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Clinical T

2000

Trials

83 trials available for celecoxib and Osteoarthritis, Knee

ArticleYear
Effect of celecoxib combined with glucosamine hydrochloride in promoting the functional recovery and decreasing the inflammatory factor levels in patients with knee osteoarthritis.
    Pakistan journal of pharmaceutical sciences, 2021, Volume: 34, Issue:3(Special)

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Blood Sedimentation; C-Reactive Protein; Celecoxib; Female;

2021
Clinical comparison of platelet-rich plasma injection and daily celecoxib administration in the treatment of early knee osteoarthritis: A randomized clinical trial.
    Journal of applied biomedicine, 2020, Volume: 18, Issue:2-3

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Humans; Hyaluronic Acid; Osteoarthritis, Knee; P

2020
The Effectiveness of Tuina in Relieving Pain, Negative Emotions, and Disability in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
    Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.), 2023, 03-01, Volume: 24, Issue:3

    Topics: Adult; Celecoxib; China; Chronic Pain; Emotions; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Treatment Outcome

2023
Pulsed electromagnetic fields for the management of knee osteoarthritis: multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial protocol.
    BMJ open, 2022, 09-07, Volume: 12, Issue:9

    Topics: Celecoxib; Electromagnetic Fields; Humans; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pain;

2022
Pulsed electromagnetic fields for the management of knee osteoarthritis: multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial protocol.
    BMJ open, 2022, 09-07, Volume: 12, Issue:9

    Topics: Celecoxib; Electromagnetic Fields; Humans; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pain;

2022
Pulsed electromagnetic fields for the management of knee osteoarthritis: multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial protocol.
    BMJ open, 2022, 09-07, Volume: 12, Issue:9

    Topics: Celecoxib; Electromagnetic Fields; Humans; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pain;

2022
Pulsed electromagnetic fields for the management of knee osteoarthritis: multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial protocol.
    BMJ open, 2022, 09-07, Volume: 12, Issue:9

    Topics: Celecoxib; Electromagnetic Fields; Humans; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pain;

2022
Protocol for the RETHINK study: a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, non-inferiority clinical trial comparing acetaminophen and NSAIDs for treatment of chronic pain in elderly patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and knee.
    BMJ open, 2023, 02-10, Volume: 13, Issue:2

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Activities of Daily Living; Aged; Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal

2023
Modulation effects of different treatments on periaqueductal gray resting state functional connectivity in knee osteoarthritis knee pain patients.
    CNS neuroscience & therapeutics, 2023, Volume: 29, Issue:7

    Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Capsules; Celecoxib; Humans; Magnetic

2023
Oxycodone-acetaminophen versus celecoxib for postoperative pain in knee osteoarthritis patients after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, controlled study.
    Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2023, Volume: 143, Issue:11

    Topics: Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Celecoxib; Double-Blind Method; Hum

2023
Efficacy and safety of diacerein and celecoxib combination therapy for knee osteoarthritis: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled prospective study.
    Medicine, 2023, Sep-29, Volume: 102, Issue:39

    Topics: Anthraquinones; Celecoxib; Combined Modality Therapy; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Osteoarthritis, K

2023
Postoperative intravenous parecoxib sodium followed by oral celecoxib post total knee arthroplasty in osteoarthritis patients (PIPFORCE): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.
    BMJ open, 2020, 01-09, Volume: 10, Issue:1

    Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Administration, Oral; Aged; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Celecoxib;

2020
Effect of Systematic Exercise Rehabilitation on Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
    Cartilage, 2021, Volume: 13, Issue:1_suppl

    Topics: Aged; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Humans; Middle Aged; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Quality of

2021
An international, multicentre, double-blind, randomized study (DISSCO): effect of diacerein vs celecoxib on symptoms in knee osteoarthritis.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2020, 12-01, Volume: 59, Issue:12

    Topics: Anthraquinones; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthralgia; Celecoxib; Double-Blind Method;

2020
Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Subcutaneous Tanezumab Versus Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs for Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Trial.
    Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.), 2021, Volume: 73, Issue:7

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antibodies, Blo

2021
Bone curvature changes can predict the impact of treatment on cartilage volume loss in knee osteoarthritis: data from a 2-year clinical trial.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2017, 06-01, Volume: 56, Issue:6

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Bone Diseases; Cartilage Diseases; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfate

2017
Pharmaceutical-grade Chondroitin sulfate is as effective as celecoxib and superior to placebo in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: the ChONdroitin versus CElecoxib versus Placebo Trial (CONCEPT).
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2017, Volume: 76, Issue:9

    Topics: Aged; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method; Female; Hum

2017
Levels of serum biomarkers from a two-year multicentre trial are associated with treatment response on knee osteoarthritis cartilage loss as assessed by magnetic resonance imaging: an exploratory study.
    Arthritis research & therapy, 2017, 07-20, Volume: 19, Issue:1

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Biomarkers; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inh

2017
Efficacy and safety of adalimumab by intra-articular injection for moderate to severe knee osteoarthritis: An open-label randomized controlled trial.
    The Journal of international medical research, 2018, Volume: 46, Issue:1

    Topics: Adalimumab; Aged; Antirheumatic Agents; Celecoxib; Diclofenac; Female; Humans; Hyaluronic Acid; Ibup

2018
A Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Polmacoxib Compared with Celecoxib and Placebo for Patients with Osteoarthritis.
    Clinics in orthopedic surgery, 2017, Volume: 9, Issue:4

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method; Female;

2017
Pharmaceutical-grade chondroitin sulfate in the management of knee osteoarthritis.
    Expert opinion on pharmacotherapy, 2018, Volume: 19, Issue:4

    Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administratio

2018
Clinical therapeutic effect and safety of celecoxib in treating knee osteoarthritis.
    Pakistan journal of pharmaceutical sciences, 2018, Volume: 31, Issue:4(Special)

    Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Blood Sedimentation; Celecoxib; Diclofenac; Drug Ther

2018
CGRP blockade by galcanezumab was not associated with reductions in signs and symptoms of knee osteoarthritis in a randomized clinical trial.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2018, Volume: 26, Issue:12

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide; Celecoxib; Dose-Res

2018
Preoperative celecoxib analgesia is more efficient and equally tolerated compared to postoperative celecoxib analgesia in knee osteoarthritis patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: A randomized, controlled study.
    Medicine, 2018, Volume: 97, Issue:51

    Topics: Aged; Analgesia, Patient-Controlled; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthroplasty, Replacem

2018
Cerebral mechanism of celecoxib for treating knee pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled parallel trial.
    Trials, 2019, Jan-16, Volume: 20, Issue:1

    Topics: Adult; Arthralgia; Brain; Brain Mapping; Celecoxib; China; Chronic Pain; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors

2019
Clinical efficacy of celecoxib for osteoarthritis and bone anchor assisted knee extensor reconstruction.
    Pakistan journal of pharmaceutical sciences, 2019, Volume: 32, Issue:1(Special)

    Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthralgia; Celecoxib; Female; Humans; M

2019
Repeatability of gait analysis for measuring knee osteoarthritis pain in patients with severe chronic pain.
    Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society, 2013, Volume: 31, Issue:7

    Topics: Aged; Analgesics, Opioid; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthralgia; Biomechanical Phenome

2013
A multicentre, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of topical ketoprofen in Transfersome gel (IDEA-033) with ketoprofen-free vehicle (TDT 064) and oral celecoxib for knee pain associated with osteoarthritis.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2013, Volume: 52, Issue:7

    Topics: Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Age

2013
A multicentre, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of topical ketoprofen in Transfersome gel (IDEA-033) with ketoprofen-free vehicle (TDT 064) and oral celecoxib for knee pain associated with osteoarthritis.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2013, Volume: 52, Issue:7

    Topics: Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Age

2013
A multicentre, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of topical ketoprofen in Transfersome gel (IDEA-033) with ketoprofen-free vehicle (TDT 064) and oral celecoxib for knee pain associated with osteoarthritis.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2013, Volume: 52, Issue:7

    Topics: Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Age

2013
A multicentre, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of topical ketoprofen in Transfersome gel (IDEA-033) with ketoprofen-free vehicle (TDT 064) and oral celecoxib for knee pain associated with osteoarthritis.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2013, Volume: 52, Issue:7

    Topics: Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Age

2013
Effects of combined application of muscle relaxants and celecoxib administration after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) on early recovery: a randomized, double-blind, controlled study.
    The Journal of arthroplasty, 2013, Volume: 28, Issue:8

    Topics: Aged; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method;

2013
A prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparative study on the safety and efficacy of Celecoxib and GCSB-5, dried extracts of six herbs, for the treatment of osteoarthritis of knee joint.
    Journal of ethnopharmacology, 2013, Oct-07, Volume: 149, Issue:3

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Oste

2013
The effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on clinical outcomes, synovial fluid cytokine concentration and signal transduction pathways in knee osteoarthritis. A randomized open label trial.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2013, Volume: 21, Issue:9

    Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibi

2013
Assessment of pain and activity using an electronic pain diary and actigraphy device in a randomized, placebo-controlled crossover trial of celecoxib in osteoarthritis of the knee.
    Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain, 2015, Volume: 15, Issue:3

    Topics: Actigraphy; Adult; Aged; Celecoxib; Cross-Over Studies; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Me

2015
Assessment of pain and activity using an electronic pain diary and actigraphy device in a randomized, placebo-controlled crossover trial of celecoxib in osteoarthritis of the knee.
    Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain, 2015, Volume: 15, Issue:3

    Topics: Actigraphy; Adult; Aged; Celecoxib; Cross-Over Studies; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Me

2015
Assessment of pain and activity using an electronic pain diary and actigraphy device in a randomized, placebo-controlled crossover trial of celecoxib in osteoarthritis of the knee.
    Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain, 2015, Volume: 15, Issue:3

    Topics: Actigraphy; Adult; Aged; Celecoxib; Cross-Over Studies; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Me

2015
Assessment of pain and activity using an electronic pain diary and actigraphy device in a randomized, placebo-controlled crossover trial of celecoxib in osteoarthritis of the knee.
    Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain, 2015, Volume: 15, Issue:3

    Topics: Actigraphy; Adult; Aged; Celecoxib; Cross-Over Studies; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Me

2015
Efficacy and safety of PG201 (Layla(®)) and celecoxib in the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a double-blinded, randomized, multi-center, active drug comparative, parallel-group, non-inferiority, phase III study.
    Rheumatology international, 2014, Volume: 34, Issue:10

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method; Drug Ad

2014
Efficacy and safety of tanezumab monotherapy or combined with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of knee or hip osteoarthritis pain.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2015, Volume: 74, Issue:6

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Hum

2015
Etoricoxib in the treatment of Korean patients with osteoarthritis in a double-blind, randomized controlled trial.
    Current medical research and opinion, 2014, Volume: 30, Issue:12

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method; Etoricoxib; Female; Humans

2014
Combined chondroitin sulfate and glucosamine for painful knee osteoarthritis: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial versus celecoxib.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2016, Volume: 75, Issue:1

    Topics: Aged; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method; Drug Combin

2016
Efficacy and safety of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in Asian patients with knee osteoarthritis: summary of a randomized, placebo-controlled study.
    International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2016, Volume: 19, Issue:3

    Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Asian; Celecoxib; Disability Evalu

2016
Onset and durability of pain relief in knee osteoarthritis: Pooled results from two placebo trials of naproxen/esomeprazole combination and celecoxib.
    The Physician and sportsmedicine, 2015, Volume: 43, Issue:3

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method

2015
Onset and durability of pain relief in knee osteoarthritis: Pooled results from two placebo trials of naproxen/esomeprazole combination and celecoxib.
    The Physician and sportsmedicine, 2015, Volume: 43, Issue:3

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method

2015
Onset and durability of pain relief in knee osteoarthritis: Pooled results from two placebo trials of naproxen/esomeprazole combination and celecoxib.
    The Physician and sportsmedicine, 2015, Volume: 43, Issue:3

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method

2015
Onset and durability of pain relief in knee osteoarthritis: Pooled results from two placebo trials of naproxen/esomeprazole combination and celecoxib.
    The Physician and sportsmedicine, 2015, Volume: 43, Issue:3

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method

2015
Efficacy and Safety of Zhuanggu Joint Capsules in Combination with Celecoxib in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Multi-center, Randomized, Double-blind, Double-dummy, and Parallel Controlled Trial.
    Chinese medical journal, 2016, Apr-20, Volume: 129, Issue:8

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Celecoxib; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Male; Middle

2016
Gastrointestinal safety and efficacy of long-term GCSB-5 use in patients with osteoarthritis: A 24-week, multicenter study.
    Journal of ethnopharmacology, 2016, Aug-02, Volume: 189

    Topics: Aged; Antirheumatic Agents; Celecoxib; Female; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Humans; Incidence; Male; M

2016
[Not Available].
    Praxis, 2016, Volume: 105, Issue:17

    Topics: Aged; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Administration Schedul

2016
Chondroitin sulfate efficacy versus celecoxib on knee osteoarthritis structural changes using magnetic resonance imaging: a 2-year multicentre exploratory study.
    Arthritis research & therapy, 2016, 11-03, Volume: 18, Issue:1

    Topics: Aged; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Bli

2016
Efficacy of celecoxib versus ibuprofen for the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: A randomized double-blind, non-inferiority trial.
    The Journal of international medical research, 2017, Volume: 45, Issue:1

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; C

2017
Long-term NSAID treatment directly decreases COX-2 and mPGES-1 production in the articular cartilage of patients with osteoarthritis.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2008, Volume: 16, Issue:12

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Chondrocytes; Cyclooxygena

2008
Potential effects of chondroitin sulfate on joint swelling: a GAIT report.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2008, Volume: 16 Suppl 3

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Femal

2008
The chondroprotective effect of selective COX-2 inhibition in osteoarthritis: ex vivo evaluation of human cartilage tissue after in vivo treatment.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2009, Volume: 17, Issue:4

    Topics: Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Cartilage, Articular

2009
Comparison of the effectiveness and tolerability of lidocaine patch 5% versus celecoxib for osteoarthritis-related knee pain: post hoc analysis of a 12 week, prospective, randomized, active-controlled, open-label, parallel-group trial in adults.
    Clinical therapeutics, 2008, Volume: 30, Issue:12

    Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Administration, Oral; Adult; Aged; Anesthetics, Local; Arthralgia; Celeco

2008
Celecoxib does not appear to affect prosthesis fixation in total knee replacement: A randomized study using radiostereometry in 50 patients.
    Acta orthopaedica, 2009, Volume: 80, Issue:1

    Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthroplasty

2009
Comparison of the effectiveness of six and two acupuncture point regimens in osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomised trial.
    Acupuncture in medicine : journal of the British Medical Acupuncture Society, 2009, Volume: 27, Issue:1

    Topics: Acupuncture Points; Celecoxib; Electroacupuncture; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pyrazoles; Sulfonam

2009
Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and prostaglandin E(2) modulate the synthesis of osteoprotegerin and RANKL in the cartilage of patients with severe knee osteoarthritis.
    Arthritis and rheumatism, 2010, Volume: 62, Issue:2

    Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cells, Cultured; Chondr

2010
Tramadol hydrochloride extended-release once-daily in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee and/or hip: a double-blind, randomized, dose-ranging trial.
    American journal of therapeutics, 2011, Volume: 18, Issue:3

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Analgesics, Opioid; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Delayed-Action Preparations

2011
Clinical efficacy and safety of glucosamine, chondroitin sulphate, their combination, celecoxib or placebo taken to treat osteoarthritis of the knee: 2-year results from GAIT.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2010, Volume: 69, Issue:8

    Topics: Aged; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Dietary Supplements; Drug Combin

2010
Fixed-dose combination of enteric-coated naproxen and immediate-release esomeprazole has comparable efficacy to celecoxib for knee osteoarthritis: two randomized trials.
    Current medical research and opinion, 2011, Volume: 27, Issue:6

    Topics: Celecoxib; Double-Blind Method; Drug Combinations; Esomeprazole; Humans; Naproxen; Osteoarthritis, K

2011
Fixed-dose combination of enteric-coated naproxen and immediate-release esomeprazole has comparable efficacy to celecoxib for knee osteoarthritis: two randomized trials.
    Current medical research and opinion, 2011, Volume: 27, Issue:6

    Topics: Celecoxib; Double-Blind Method; Drug Combinations; Esomeprazole; Humans; Naproxen; Osteoarthritis, K

2011
Fixed-dose combination of enteric-coated naproxen and immediate-release esomeprazole has comparable efficacy to celecoxib for knee osteoarthritis: two randomized trials.
    Current medical research and opinion, 2011, Volume: 27, Issue:6

    Topics: Celecoxib; Double-Blind Method; Drug Combinations; Esomeprazole; Humans; Naproxen; Osteoarthritis, K

2011
Fixed-dose combination of enteric-coated naproxen and immediate-release esomeprazole has comparable efficacy to celecoxib for knee osteoarthritis: two randomized trials.
    Current medical research and opinion, 2011, Volume: 27, Issue:6

    Topics: Celecoxib; Double-Blind Method; Drug Combinations; Esomeprazole; Humans; Naproxen; Osteoarthritis, K

2011
A fixed-dose combination of naproxen and esomeprazole magnesium has comparable upper gastrointestinal tolerability to celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: results from two randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trials.
    Annals of medicine, 2011, Volume: 43, Issue:8

    Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Celecoxib; Cycl

2011
Treatment of osteoarthritis with continuous versus intermittent celecoxib.
    The Journal of rheumatology, 2011, Volume: 38, Issue:12

    Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double-Blind Met

2011
Sensitivity of gait parameters to the effects of anti-inflammatory and opioid treatments in knee osteoarthritis patients.
    Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society, 2012, Volume: 30, Issue:7

    Topics: Aged; Analgesics, Opioid; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthralgia; Celecoxib; Cross-Over

2012
Efficacy and tolerability of celecoxib versus naproxen in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial.
    The Journal of international medical research, 2012, Volume: 40, Issue:4

    Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Double

2012
Celecoxib does not affect the release of hyaluronic acid in end stage osteoarthritic joints.
    Modern rheumatology, 2013, Volume: 23, Issue:5

    Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Diclofenac; F

2013
Response to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in African Americans with osteoarthritis of the knee.
    The Journal of international medical research, 2012, Volume: 40, Issue:6

    Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Black or African American; Celecox

2012
Ayurvedic medicine offers a good alternative to glucosamine and celecoxib in the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a randomized, double-blind, controlled equivalence drug trial.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2013, Volume: 52, Issue:8

    Topics: Aged; Analysis of Variance; Celecoxib; Confidence Intervals; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Dose-Respo

2013
A 12-month, multicenter, prospective, open-label trial of radiographic analysis of disease progression in osteoarthritis of the knee or hip in patients receiving celecoxib.
    Clinical therapeutics, 2002, Volume: 24, Issue:12

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Disease Progress

2002
A randomised, double-blind, clinical trial comparing the efficacy of nimesulide, celecoxib and rofecoxib in osteoarthritis of the knee.
    Drugs, 2003, Volume: 63 Suppl 1

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Analysis of Variance; Celecoxib; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Knee; Lactones; M

2003
Celecoxib 200 mg q.d. is efficacious in the management of osteoarthritis of the knee or hip regardless of the time of dosing.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2004, Volume: 43, Issue:5

    Topics: Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Dose-Response R

2004
Lumiracoxib is effective in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a 13 week, randomised, double blind study versus placebo and celecoxib.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2004, Volume: 63, Issue:11

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2

2004
Patient Preference for Placebo, Acetaminophen (paracetamol) or Celecoxib Efficacy Studies (PACES): two randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, crossover clinical trials in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2004, Volume: 63, Issue:8

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antirheumatic Agents; Celecoxib; Cross

2004
Patient Preference for Placebo, Acetaminophen (paracetamol) or Celecoxib Efficacy Studies (PACES): two randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, crossover clinical trials in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2004, Volume: 63, Issue:8

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antirheumatic Agents; Celecoxib; Cross

2004
Patient Preference for Placebo, Acetaminophen (paracetamol) or Celecoxib Efficacy Studies (PACES): two randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, crossover clinical trials in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2004, Volume: 63, Issue:8

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antirheumatic Agents; Celecoxib; Cross

2004
Patient Preference for Placebo, Acetaminophen (paracetamol) or Celecoxib Efficacy Studies (PACES): two randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, crossover clinical trials in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2004, Volume: 63, Issue:8

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antirheumatic Agents; Celecoxib; Cross

2004
S-adenosyl methionine (SAMe) versus celecoxib for the treatment of osteoarthritis symptoms: a double-blind cross-over trial. [ISRCTN36233495].
    BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2004, Feb-26, Volume: 5

    Topics: Adult; Affect; Analgesics; Celecoxib; Cross-Over Studies; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Double-Blind Me

2004
[Treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee joint. Efficacy and tolerance to acemetacin slow release in comparison to celecoxib].
    Der Orthopade, 2004, Volume: 33, Issue:9

    Topics: Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Confidence Intervals; Data Interpretation

2004
Pain management in osteoarthritis: a focus on onset of efficacy--a comparison of rofecoxib, celecoxib, acetaminophen, and nabumetone across four clinical trials.
    The journal of pain, 2004, Volume: 5, Issue:9

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthralgia; Butano

2004
Celecoxib improves the efficiency of the locomotor mechanism in patients with knee osteoarthritis. A randomised, placebo, double-blind and cross-over trial.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2005, Volume: 13, Issue:3

    Topics: Aged; Anthropometry; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cross-Over Studies; Cycloox

2005
Efficacy and tolerability of lumiracoxib in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a 13-week, randomized, double-blind comparison with celecoxib and placebo.
    Clinical therapeutics, 2005, Volume: 27, Issue:1

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Cyclooxyge

2005
Efficacy and tolerability of lumiracoxib 100 mg once daily in knee osteoarthritis: a 13-week, randomized, double-blind study vs. placebo and celecoxib.
    Current medical research and opinion, 2005, Volume: 21, Issue:4

    Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Administration, Oral; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Celecoxib; Cycloox

2005
Efficacy of rofecoxib, celecoxib, and acetaminophen in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. A combined analysis of the VACT studies.
    The Journal of rheumatology, 2005, Volume: 32, Issue:6

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Adult; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Dose-Response

2005
In vivo effect of celecoxib and tenoxicam on oxidant/ anti-oxidant status of patients with knee osteoarthritis.
    Annals of clinical and laboratory science, 2005,Spring, Volume: 35, Issue:2

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 1; Cyclooxygenase 2; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Cyclooxygen

2005
Lumiracoxib is effective in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a prospective randomized 13-week study versus placebo and celecoxib.
    Clinical rheumatology, 2006, Volume: 25, Issue:1

    Topics: Administration, Oral; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antirheumatic Agents; Celecoxib; C

2006
First-dose analgesic effect of the cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitor lumiracoxib in osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled comparison with celecoxib [NCT00267215].
    Arthritis research & therapy, 2006, Volume: 8, Issue:2

    Topics: Aged; Analgesics; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Diclofenac; Double-Blind Method; Drug Admi

2006
Long term NSAID treatment inhibits COX-2 synthesis in the knee synovial membrane of patients with osteoarthritis: differential proinflammatory cytokine profile between celecoxib and aceclofenac.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2006, Volume: 65, Issue:8

    Topics: Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antigens, CD; Antigens, Differentiation, Myelomonocyt

2006
Glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and the two in combination for painful knee osteoarthritis.
    The New England journal of medicine, 2006, Feb-23, Volume: 354, Issue:8

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Drug

2006
Glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and the two in combination for painful knee osteoarthritis.
    The New England journal of medicine, 2006, Feb-23, Volume: 354, Issue:8

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Drug

2006
Glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and the two in combination for painful knee osteoarthritis.
    The New England journal of medicine, 2006, Feb-23, Volume: 354, Issue:8

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Drug

2006
Glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and the two in combination for painful knee osteoarthritis.
    The New England journal of medicine, 2006, Feb-23, Volume: 354, Issue:8

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Drug

2006
Glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and the two in combination for painful knee osteoarthritis.
    The New England journal of medicine, 2006, Feb-23, Volume: 354, Issue:8

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Drug

2006
Glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and the two in combination for painful knee osteoarthritis.
    The New England journal of medicine, 2006, Feb-23, Volume: 354, Issue:8

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Drug

2006
Glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and the two in combination for painful knee osteoarthritis.
    The New England journal of medicine, 2006, Feb-23, Volume: 354, Issue:8

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Drug

2006
Glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and the two in combination for painful knee osteoarthritis.
    The New England journal of medicine, 2006, Feb-23, Volume: 354, Issue:8

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Drug

2006
Glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and the two in combination for painful knee osteoarthritis.
    The New England journal of medicine, 2006, Feb-23, Volume: 354, Issue:8

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Drug

2006
A prospective randomised multicentre study comparing continuous and intermittent treatment with celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2007, Volume: 66, Issue:1

    Topics: Aged; Analysis of Variance; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chemotherapy, Adjuva

2007
Rofecoxib 12.5 mg, rofecoxib 25 mg, and celecoxib 200 mg in the treatment of symptomatic osteoarthritis: results of two similarly designed studies.
    Current medical research and opinion, 2006, Volume: 22, Issue:7

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Celecoxib; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Lactones; Male; Midd

2006
Efficacy and safety of etoricoxib 30 mg and celecoxib 200 mg in the treatment of osteoarthritis in two identically designed, randomized, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority studies.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2007, Volume: 46, Issue:3

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Blood Pressure; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 In

2007
Efficacy and safety of etoricoxib 30 mg and celecoxib 200 mg in the treatment of osteoarthritis in two identically designed, randomized, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority studies.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2007, Volume: 46, Issue:3

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Blood Pressure; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 In

2007
Efficacy and safety of etoricoxib 30 mg and celecoxib 200 mg in the treatment of osteoarthritis in two identically designed, randomized, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority studies.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2007, Volume: 46, Issue:3

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Blood Pressure; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 In

2007
Efficacy and safety of etoricoxib 30 mg and celecoxib 200 mg in the treatment of osteoarthritis in two identically designed, randomized, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority studies.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2007, Volume: 46, Issue:3

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Blood Pressure; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 In

2007
Efficacy and safety of epicutaneous ketoprofen in Transfersome (IDEA-033) versus oral celecoxib and placebo in osteoarthritis of the knee: multicentre randomised controlled trial.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2007, Volume: 66, Issue:9

    Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Administration, Oral; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Cele

2007
Effects of nimesulide on pain and on synovial fluid concentrations of substance P, interleukin-6 and interleukin-8 in patients with knee osteoarthritis: comparison with celecoxib.
    International journal of clinical practice, 2007, Volume: 61, Issue:8

    Topics: Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthralgia; Celecoxib; Double-Blind Method; Female; H

2007
Effects of celecoxib on blood loss, pain, and recovery of function after total knee replacement: a randomized placebo-controlled trial.
    Acta orthopaedica, 2007, Volume: 78, Issue:5

    Topics: Aged; Analgesics, Opioid; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee;

2007
Celecoxib versus diclofenac in the management of osteoarthritis of the knee.
    Scandinavian journal of rheumatology, 2001, Volume: 30, Issue:1

    Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alanine Transaminase; Aspartate Aminotra

2001
Comparison of once-daily and twice-daily administration of celecoxib for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee.
    Clinical therapeutics, 2001, Volume: 23, Issue:2

    Topics: Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration S

2001
Efficacy of rofecoxib, celecoxib, and acetaminophen in osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized trial.
    JAMA, 2002, Jan-02, Volume: 287, Issue:1

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; C

2002

Other Studies

55 other studies available for celecoxib and Osteoarthritis, Knee

ArticleYear
Post-traumatic osteoarthritis progression is diminished by early mechanical unloading and anti-inflammatory treatment in mice.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2021, Volume: 29, Issue:12

    Topics: Animals; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Cathepsins; C

2021
Effects of Different Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Combined with Platelet-Rich Plasma on Inflammatory Factor Levels in Patients with Osteoarthritis.
    Journal of healthcare engineering, 2022, Volume: 2022

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Diclofenac; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Platel

2022
Effect of manipulation on cartilage in rats with knee osteoarthritis based on the Rho-associated protein kinase/LIM kinase 1/Cofilin signaling pathways.
    Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan, 2022, Volume: 42, Issue:2

    Topics: Actin Depolymerizing Factors; Animals; Cartilage; Celecoxib; Eosine Yellowish-(YS); Hematoxylin; Hum

2022
Dexamethasone microspheres and celecoxib microcrystals loaded into injectable gels for enhanced knee osteoarthritis therapy.
    International journal of pharmaceutics, 2022, Jun-25, Volume: 622

    Topics: Animals; Celecoxib; Dexamethasone; Gels; Inflammation; Injections, Intra-Articular; Microspheres; Os

2022
[Effects of acupotomy on partial movement gait and serum tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-1β in patients with knee osteoarthritis].
    Zhongguo gu shang = China journal of orthopaedics and traumatology, 2022, Sep-25, Volume: 35, Issue:9

    Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Female; Gait; Humans;

2022
High-dose Tiger-Gian formula protects the knee joint from surgically induced osteoarthritis in rats.
    International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2023, Volume: 26, Issue:2

    Topics: Animals; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Cytokines; Disease Models, Animal; Knee Joint; Male; Osteo

2023
High-dose Tiger-Gian formula protects the knee joint from surgically induced osteoarthritis in rats.
    International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2023, Volume: 26, Issue:2

    Topics: Animals; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Cytokines; Disease Models, Animal; Knee Joint; Male; Osteo

2023
High-dose Tiger-Gian formula protects the knee joint from surgically induced osteoarthritis in rats.
    International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2023, Volume: 26, Issue:2

    Topics: Animals; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Cytokines; Disease Models, Animal; Knee Joint; Male; Osteo

2023
High-dose Tiger-Gian formula protects the knee joint from surgically induced osteoarthritis in rats.
    International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2023, Volume: 26, Issue:2

    Topics: Animals; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Cytokines; Disease Models, Animal; Knee Joint; Male; Osteo

2023
High-dose Tiger-Gian formula protects the knee joint from surgically induced osteoarthritis in rats.
    International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2023, Volume: 26, Issue:2

    Topics: Animals; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Cytokines; Disease Models, Animal; Knee Joint; Male; Osteo

2023
High-dose Tiger-Gian formula protects the knee joint from surgically induced osteoarthritis in rats.
    International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2023, Volume: 26, Issue:2

    Topics: Animals; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Cytokines; Disease Models, Animal; Knee Joint; Male; Osteo

2023
High-dose Tiger-Gian formula protects the knee joint from surgically induced osteoarthritis in rats.
    International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2023, Volume: 26, Issue:2

    Topics: Animals; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Cytokines; Disease Models, Animal; Knee Joint; Male; Osteo

2023
High-dose Tiger-Gian formula protects the knee joint from surgically induced osteoarthritis in rats.
    International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2023, Volume: 26, Issue:2

    Topics: Animals; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Cytokines; Disease Models, Animal; Knee Joint; Male; Osteo

2023
High-dose Tiger-Gian formula protects the knee joint from surgically induced osteoarthritis in rats.
    International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2023, Volume: 26, Issue:2

    Topics: Animals; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Cytokines; Disease Models, Animal; Knee Joint; Male; Osteo

2023
Investigation of the Therapeutic Effect and Mechanism of Holographic Meridian Scraping Therapy on Knee Osteoarthritis.
    Alternative therapies in health and medicine, 2023, Volume: 29, Issue:7

    Topics: Celecoxib; Humans; Meridians; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Tumor Ne

2023
Combatting joint pain and inflammation by dual inhibition of monoacylglycerol lipase and cyclooxygenase-2 in a rat model of osteoarthritis.
    Arthritis research & therapy, 2020, 01-14, Volume: 22, Issue:1

    Topics: Animals; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Arthralgia; Benzodioxoles; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors

2020
Celecoxib vs diclofenac sodium in patients with knee osteoarthritis: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis.
    Medicine, 2020, Volume: 99, Issue:15

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Blood Sedimentation; C-Reactive Protein; Celecoxib; Diclofe

2020
The cardiovascular risk of celecoxib for knee osteoarthritis: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Medicine, 2020, Volume: 99, Issue:18

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Cardiovascular Diseases; Celecoxib; Humans; Meta-Analysis a

2020
Clinical effect of intramuscular calcitonin compared with oral celecoxib in the treatment of knee bone marrow lesions: a retrospective study.
    Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2020, Jun-23, Volume: 15, Issue:1

    Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Bone Density Conservation Agent

2020
Responder Profile to Pharmaceutical-Grade Chondroitin Sulfate: An Analysis of the CONCEPT Trial.
    Advances in therapy, 2020, Volume: 37, Issue:11

    Topics: Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pharmaceutical P

2020
Letter to the Editor Regarding a Recent Article: Meta-Analysis Comparing Celecoxib with Diclofenac Sodium in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis.
    Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.), 2022, 03-02, Volume: 23, Issue:3

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Diclofenac; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee

2022
Chondroitin sulfate for knee osteoarthritis.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2018, Volume: 77, Issue:6

    Topics: Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Glucosamine; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pharmaceutical Preparati

2018
Comment on CONCEPT by Reginster
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2018, Volume: 77, Issue:2

    Topics: Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Data Analysis; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pharmaceutical Prepara

2018
Osteoarthritis: Chondroitin sulfate - CONCEPT clear, uncertainties unchanged.
    Nature reviews. Rheumatology, 2017, Volume: 13, Issue:10

    Topics: Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pharmaceutical Preparations

2017
CONCEPT provides robust evidence that chondroitin sulfate is superior to placebo and similar to celecoxib in the symptomatic management of osteoarthritis.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2018, Volume: 77, Issue:2

    Topics: Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Glucosamine; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pharmaceutical Preparati

2018
Chondroitin sulfate is superior to placebo in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2018, Volume: 77, Issue:8

    Topics: Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Double-Blind Method; Glucosamine; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pha

2018
Differentiation between various Chondroitin sulfate formulations in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2018, Volume: 77, Issue:8

    Topics: Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Glucosamine; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pharmaceutical Preparati

2018
Celecoxib-mediated reduction of prostanoid release in Hoffa's fat pad from donors with cartilage pathology results in an attenuated inflammatory phenotype.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2018, Volume: 26, Issue:5

    Topics: Adipose Tissue; Adult; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Female; Humans; Inf

2018
Cost-effectiveness of generic celecoxib in knee osteoarthritis for average-risk patients: a model-based evaluation.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2018, Volume: 26, Issue:5

    Topics: Aged; Celecoxib; Computer Simulation; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Drug Costs; Drugs, Generic; Female; Hum

2018
Change of miRNA expression profiles in patients with knee osteoarthritis before and after celecoxib treatment.
    Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2019, Volume: 33, Issue:1

    Topics: Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Female; Gene Expression Profiling; Humans;

2019
Contribution of synovial macrophages to rat advanced osteoarthritis pain resistant to cyclooxygenase inhibitors.
    Pain, 2019, Volume: 160, Issue:4

    Topics: Animals; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Cytokines; Dinoprostone; Disease

2019
The Expressions of Dickkopf-Related Protein 1 and Frizzled-Related Protein Are Negatively Correlated to Local Inflammation and Osteoarthritis Severity.
    Cartilage, 2021, Volume: 12, Issue:4

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cross-Sectional Studies; Dinoprostone; Humans; Inflammation; Intracellular Signaling Pept

2021
Cost-utility analysis and economic burden of knee osteoarthritis treatment: the analysis from the real clinical practice.
    Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet, 2012, Volume: 95 Suppl 10

    Topics: Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cost of Illness; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Cy

2012
Managing arthritis: the need to think about whole systems.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2013, Volume: 52, Issue:8

    Topics: Celecoxib; Female; Glucosamine; Humans; Male; Medicine, Ayurvedic; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Plant Extra

2013
Effects of patient medication requests on physician prescribing behavior: results of a factorial experiment.
    Medical care, 2014, Volume: 52, Issue:4

    Topics: Aged; Celecoxib; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Narcotics; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Oxycodone; Pati

2014
Development and reliability of a multi-modality scoring system for evaluation of disease progression in pre-clinical models of osteoarthritis: celecoxib may possess disease-modifying properties.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2014, Volume: 22, Issue:10

    Topics: Animals; Anterior Cruciate Ligament; Bone Cysts; Bone Marrow Diseases; Cartilage, Articular; Celecox

2014
Methylprednisolone reduces pain and decreases knee swelling in the first 24 h after fast-track unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
    Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2017, Volume: 25, Issue:1

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Amines; Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Arthroplasty,

2017
Methylprednisolone reduces pain and decreases knee swelling in the first 24 h after fast-track unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
    Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2017, Volume: 25, Issue:1

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Amines; Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Arthroplasty,

2017
Methylprednisolone reduces pain and decreases knee swelling in the first 24 h after fast-track unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
    Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2017, Volume: 25, Issue:1

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Amines; Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Arthroplasty,

2017
Methylprednisolone reduces pain and decreases knee swelling in the first 24 h after fast-track unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
    Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2017, Volume: 25, Issue:1

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Amines; Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Arthroplasty,

2017
Clinical trials: Glucosamine-chondroitin combo improves knee OA pain.
    Nature reviews. Rheumatology, 2015, Volume: 11, Issue:3

    Topics: Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Edema; Female; Glucosamine; Humans; Ma

2015
Does MOVES move the needle?
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2015, Volume: 74, Issue:5

    Topics: Celecoxib; Chondroitin; Drug Therapy, Combination; Glucosamine; Humans; Multicenter Studies as Topic

2015
Is chondroitin sulfate plus glucosamine superior to placebo in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis?
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2015, Volume: 74, Issue:5

    Topics: Celecoxib; Chondroitin; Drug Therapy, Combination; Glucosamine; Humans; Multicenter Studies as Topic

2015
[Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis by Tendons of Minimally Invasive Therapy Combined Drug Ther- apy: a Clinical Observation of Sixty Cases].
    Zhongguo Zhong xi yi jie he za zhi Zhongguo Zhongxiyi jiehe zazhi = Chinese journal of integrated traditional and Western medicine, 2015, Volume: 35, Issue:6

    Topics: Celecoxib; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Knee Joint; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pain; Pain Measureme

2015
Cost-effectiveness of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis in older patients with multiple comorbidities.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2016, Volume: 24, Issue:3

    Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Analgesics, Opioid; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Com

2016
Chondroitin/Glucosamine Equal to Celecoxib for Knee Osteoarthritis.
    American family physician, 2016, Jun-15, Volume: 93, Issue:12

    Topics: Arthralgia; Celecoxib; Chondroitin; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Drug Combinations; Education, Medic

2016
Use and misuse of the p-value.
    Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases, 2008, Volume: 66, Issue:2

    Topics: Biomedical Research; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Hip;

2008
Superiority, equivalence, and non-inferiority trials.
    Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases, 2008, Volume: 66, Issue:2

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Osteoarthritis, Hip

2008
Superiority, equivalence, and non-inferiority trials.
    Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases, 2008, Volume: 66, Issue:2

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Osteoarthritis, Hip

2008
Superiority, equivalence, and non-inferiority trials.
    Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases, 2008, Volume: 66, Issue:2

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Osteoarthritis, Hip

2008
Superiority, equivalence, and non-inferiority trials.
    Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases, 2008, Volume: 66, Issue:2

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Osteoarthritis, Hip

2008
Superiority, equivalence, and non-inferiority trials.
    Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases, 2008, Volume: 66, Issue:2

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Osteoarthritis, Hip

2008
Superiority, equivalence, and non-inferiority trials.
    Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases, 2008, Volume: 66, Issue:2

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Osteoarthritis, Hip

2008
Superiority, equivalence, and non-inferiority trials.
    Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases, 2008, Volume: 66, Issue:2

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Osteoarthritis, Hip

2008
Superiority, equivalence, and non-inferiority trials.
    Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases, 2008, Volume: 66, Issue:2

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Osteoarthritis, Hip

2008
Superiority, equivalence, and non-inferiority trials.
    Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases, 2008, Volume: 66, Issue:2

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Etoricoxib; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Osteoarthritis, Hip

2008
The NIH Glucosamine/Chondroitin Arthritis Intervention Trial (GAIT).
    Journal of pain & palliative care pharmacotherapy, 2008, Volume: 22, Issue:1

    Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulf

2008
An open-label pilot study evaluating by magnetic resonance imaging the potential for a disease-modifying effect of celecoxib compared to a modelized historical control cohort in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.
    Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism, 2010, Volume: 40, Issue:3

    Topics: Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Cohort Studies; Cycl

2010
Efficacy of intra-articular injection of celecoxib in a rabbit model of osteoarthritis.
    International journal of molecular sciences, 2010, Oct-21, Volume: 11, Issue:10

    Topics: Animals; Cartilage; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Drug Evaluation, Preclinical; Hyaluronic

2010
IL-17RA aptamer-mediated repression of IL-6 inhibits synovium inflammation in a murine model of osteoarthritis.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2011, Volume: 19, Issue:6

    Topics: Animals; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Disease Models, Animal; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent A

2011
Lack of a chondroprotective effect of cyclooxygenase 2 inhibition in a surgically induced model of osteoarthritis in mice.
    Arthritis and rheumatism, 2012, Volume: 64, Issue:1

    Topics: Administration, Oral; Animals; Arthritis, Experimental; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Cartilage,

2012
Changing the outcome of osteoarthritis: still a challenge for cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors.
    Arthritis and rheumatism, 2012, Volume: 64, Issue:1

    Topics: Animals; Arthritis, Experimental; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Female; Humans; Male; Oste

2012
Pragmatic decisions over nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug treatment in osteoarthritis--continuous versus intermittent.
    The Journal of rheumatology, 2011, Volume: 38, Issue:12

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Female; Humans; Male; Osteoarthritis, Hip; Osteoarthritis, K

2011
Consequences of handling missing data for treatment response in osteoarthritis: a simulation study.
    Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2012, Volume: 20, Issue:8

    Topics: Bias; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulfates; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Data Interpretation, Statistical

2012
Intra-articular delivery of liposomal celecoxib-hyaluronate combination for the treatment of osteoarthritis in rabbit model.
    International journal of pharmaceutics, 2013, Jan-30, Volume: 441, Issue:1-2

    Topics: Animals; Arthritis, Experimental; Cartilage, Articular; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Gels

2013
Pain management in patients with osteoarthritis.
    JAMA, 2003, Jul-02, Volume: 290, Issue:1

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; C

2003
Introduction to monitoring. What is what you prescribed actually doing?
    Australian family physician, 2003, Volume: 32, Issue:10

    Topics: Acetaminophen; Aged; Aspirin; Australia; Celecoxib; Drug Interactions; Drug Therapy, Combination; Fa

2003
[Homeopathy suppresses COX- and LOX activity. Soft therapy for arthrosis ills].
    MMW Fortschritte der Medizin, 2004, Jan-29, Volume: 146, Issue:5

    Topics: Arthritis; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method; Formularies, Homeopathic as To

2004
Cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for osteoarthritis of the knee in Taiwan.
    The Journal of rheumatology, 2004, Volume: 31, Issue:9

    Topics: Adjuvants, Immunologic; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Cost-Benefit Analysis; F

2004
Development and pharmacological characterization of a rat model of osteoarthritis pain.
    Pain, 2005, Volume: 114, Issue:3

    Topics: Alkylating Agents; Analgesics, Opioid; Animals; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Disease Models

2005
Curcumin synergistically potentiates the growth-inhibitory and pro-apoptotic effects of celecoxib in osteoarthritis synovial adherent cells.
    Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2006, Volume: 45, Issue:2

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antioxidants; Apoptosis; Celecoxib; Cell Adhesion; Cell Div

2006
Glucosamine & chondroitin use questioned in mild cases. Drug combo benefits moderate-to-severe knee osteoarthritis, but not so with lesser cases.
    Health news (Waltham, Mass.), 2006, Volume: 12, Issue:3

    Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chondroitin; Dietary Supplements; Glucosamine; H

2006
EULAR recommendations for the management of knee osteoarthritis.
    Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2001, Volume: 60, Issue:5

    Topics: Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Humans; Lactones; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Practice Guidelines as

2001
Arthritis: what it is, why you get it and how to stop the pain.
    Newsweek, 2001, Sep-03, Volume: 138, Issue:10

    Topics: Age Factors; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthroplasty, Replacement; Celecoxib; Cyclooxy

2001