Equity of travel to access surgery and radiation therapy for lung cancer in New Zealand.

PURPOSE: Centralisation of lung cancer treatment can improve outcomes, but may result in differential access to care for those who do not reside within treatment centres. METHODS: We used national-level cancer registration and health care access data and used Geographic Information Systems (GIS) methods to determine the distance and time to access first relevant surgery and first radiation therapy among all New Zealanders diagnosed with lung cancer (2007-2019; N = 27,869), and compared these outcomes between ethnic groups. We also explored the likelihood of being treated at a high-, medium-, or low-volume hospital. Analysis involved both descriptive and adjusted logistic regression modelling. RESULTS: We found that Maori tend to need to travel further (with longer travel times) to access both surgery (median travel distance: Maori 57 km, European 34 km) and radiation therapy (Maori 75 km, European 35 km) than Europeans. Maori have greater odds of living more than 200 km away from both surgery (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.83, 95% CI 1.49-2.25) and radiation therapy (aOR 1.41, 95% CI 1.25-1.60). CONCLUSIONS: Centralisation of care may often improve treatment outcomes, but it also makes accessing treatment even more difficult for populations who are more likely to live rurally and in deprivation, such as Maori.

Access to and Timeliness of Lung Cancer Surgery, Radiation Therapy, and Systemic Therapy in New Zealand: A Universal Health Care Context.

PURPOSE: Lung cancer is the biggest cancer killer of indigenous peoples worldwide, including Maori people in New Zealand. There is some evidence of disparities in access to lung cancer treatment between Maori and non-Maori patients, but an examination of the depth and breadth of these disparities is needed. Here, we use national-level data to examine disparities in access to surgery, radiation therapy and systemic therapy between Maori and European patients, as well as timing of treatment relative to diagnosis. METHODS: We included all lung cancer registrations across New Zealand from 2007 to 2019 (N = 27,869) and compared access with treatment and the timing of treatment using national-level inpatient, outpatient, and pharmaceutical records. RESULTS: Maori patients with lung cancer appeared less likely to access surgery than European patients (Maori, 14%; European, 20%; adjusted odds ratio [adj OR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.73 to 0.92]), including curative surgery (Maori, 10%; European, 16%; adj OR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.84]). These differences were only partially explained by stage and comorbidity. There were no differences in access to radiation therapy or systemic therapy once adjusted for confounding by age. Although it appeared that there was a longer time from diagnosis to radiation therapy for Maori patients compared with European patients, this difference was small and requires further investigation. CONCLUSION: Our observation of differences in surgery rates between Maori and European patients with lung cancer who were not explained by stage of disease, tumor type, or comorbidity suggests that Maori patients who may be good candidates for surgery are missing out on this treatment to a greater extent than their European counterparts.

Oral paclitaxel and encequidar in patients with breast cancer: a pharmacokinetic, safety, and antitumor activity study.

Background: Paclitaxel is widely used for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, it has a low oral bioavailability due to gut extrusion caused by P-glycoprotein (P-gp). Oral paclitaxel (oPAC) may be more convenient, less resource-intensive, and more tolerable than its intravenous form. Encequidar (E) is a first-in-class, minimally absorbed, gut-specific oral P-gp inhibitor that facilitates the oral absorption of paclitaxel. Objectives: To investigate the pharmacokinetics (PK), overall response rate (ORR), and safety of weekly oral paclitaxel with encequidar (oPAC + E) in patients with advanced breast cancer. Design: This is a multicenter, single-arm, open-label study in six medical centers in Taiwan. Methods: Patients with advanced breast cancer were administered 205 mg/m2 oPAC and 12.9 mg E for 3 consecutive days weekly for up to 16 weeks. Plasma samples were collected at weeks 1 and 4. PK, ORR, and safety were evaluated. Results: In all, 28 patients were enrolled; 27 had MBC; 23 had prior chemotherapy; and 14 had ⩾2 lines of prior chemotherapy. PK were evaluable in 25 patients. Plasma paclitaxel area under the curve (AUC)(0-52 h) at week 1 (3419 ± 1475 ng h/ml) and week 4 (3224 ± 1150 ng h/ml) were equivalent. Best overall response in 28 evaluable patients was partial response (PR) in 11 (39.3%), 13 (46.4%) stable disease (SD), and 1 (3.6%) with progressive disease (PD). No patient achieved complete response (CR). The clinical benefit rate (CR + PR + SD) was 85.7%. Major adverse events among the 28 treated patients were grade 3 neutropenia (25%), grade 4 neutropenia (18%), with febrile neutropenia in 4%, and grade 3 diarrhea (4%). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Grade 2 peripheral neuropathy occurred in 1 (4%) patient and grade 3 peripheral neuropathy in 1 (4%) patient. Conclusions: oPAC + E produced a consistent therapeutic plasma paclitaxel exposure during treatment. There was a high rate of radiologically assessed clinical benefit, and a low rate of neurotoxicity which may provide advantages over IV paclitaxel. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03165955.

Did new treatments contribute to a decrease in melanoma deaths?

Melanoma is one of the most common cancers diagnosed in New Zealand, and New Zealand has one of the highest rates of melanoma incidence and mortality in the world. Monitoring by Environmental Health Intelligence NZ (EHINZ) has found a recent sharp decline in melanoma mortality rates in New Zealand. Since 2014 and 2015 (with 376 and 378 melanoma deaths, respectively), melanoma deaths have declined to 362 deaths in 2016, 308 deaths in 2017, and 296 deaths in 2018. We believe that two new PD-1 inhibitor drug treatments introduced in New Zealand in 2016-nivolumab (Opdivo, BMS) and pembrolizumab (Keytruda, MSD)-may have contributed to this decrease in melanoma mortality. Other factors are unlikely to have had such a major effect, with the drop unlikely due to random variation, and no major changes in melanoma registrations or melanoma thickness at diagnosis over the past decade. While our monitoring of the time trend is descriptive only, and cannot attribute causality, it does suggest a recent decrease in melanoma mortality rates at the population level. These national-level statistics reflect both what might be expected in the New Zealand situation with the introduction of PD-1 inhibitor treatments, based on clinical trials, and what oncologists are seeing at an individual level. Further studies could investigate this observational finding, to confirm whether PD-1 inhibitor drug treatments are having an impact on melanoma mortality and survival rates in New Zealand.

Population pharmacokinetics for oral paclitaxel in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors.

Oraxol consists of an oral dosage form of the chemotherapeutic agent paclitaxel administered with a novel P-glycoprotein inhibitor encequidar methanesulfonate monohydrate (formerly named HM30181A), which allows oral treatment of cancers that would otherwise be treated with intravenous paclitaxel. Here we describe the population pharmacokinetics (popPK) analyses for oral paclitaxel in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors to characterize pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles and quantify sources of PK variability. The best fit popPK model for oral paclitaxel, based on data from seven clinical studies (197 patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors), involves a linear two-compartment structural model containing first-order absorption with a short lag time and first-order elimination as well as a log additive error. In this popPK model, lower population estimates of central volume for Asian patients versus Caucasian patients did not translate into clinical meaningful differences in oral paclitaxel exposure. Age, sex, body weight or surface area, mild hepatic impairment, and mild to moderate renal impairment had no clinically meaningful effects on the systemic exposure of oral paclitaxel. Simulations were performed on clinical therapeutic dose (oral paclitaxel 205 mg/m2 once daily ×3 days per week) to predict exposure of oral paclitaxel and to support treatment benefits observed in a pivotal phase III trial.

Risk factors and prognostic implications of diagnosis of cancer within 30 days after an emergency hospital admission (emergency presentation): an International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Greater understanding of international cancer survival differences is needed. We aimed to identify predictors and consequences of cancer diagnosis through emergency presentation in different international jurisdictions in six high-income countries. METHODS: Using a federated analysis model, in this cross-sectional population-based study, we analysed cancer registration and linked hospital admissions data from 14 jurisdictions in six countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, New Zealand, Norway, and the UK), including patients with primary diagnosis of invasive oesophageal, stomach, colon, rectal, liver, pancreatic, lung, or ovarian cancer during study periods from Jan 1, 2012, to Dec 31, 2017. Data were collected on cancer site, age group, sex, year of diagnosis, and stage at diagnosis. Emergency presentation was defined as diagnosis of cancer within 30 days after an emergency hospital admission. Using logistic regression, we examined variables associated with emergency presentation and associations between emergency presentation and short-term mortality. We meta-analysed estimates across jurisdictions and explored jurisdiction-level associations between cancer survival and the percentage of patients diagnosed as emergencies. FINDINGS: In 857 068 patients across 14 jurisdictions, considering all of the eight cancer sites together, the percentage of diagnoses through emergency presentation ranged from 24·0% (9165 of 38 212 patients) to 42·5% (12 238 of 28 794 patients). There was consistently large variation in the percentage of emergency presentations by cancer site across jurisdictions. Pancreatic cancer diagnoses had the highest percentage of emergency presentations on average overall (46·1% [30 972 of 67 173 patients]), with the jurisdictional range being 34·1% (1083 of 3172 patients) to 60·4% (1317 of 2182 patients). Rectal cancer had the lowest percentage of emergency presentations on average overall (12·1% [10 051 of 83 325 patients]), with a jurisdictional range of 9·1% (403 of 4438 patients) to 19·8% (643 of 3247 patients). Across the jurisdictions, older age (ie, 75-84 years and 85 years or older, compared with younger patients) and advanced stage at diagnosis compared with non-advanced stage were consistently associated with increased emergency presentation risk, with the percentage of emergency presentations being highest in the oldest age group (85 years or older) for 110 (98%) of 112 jurisdiction-cancer site strata, and in the most advanced (distant spread) stage category for 98 (97%) of 101 jurisdiction-cancer site strata with available information. Across the jurisdictions, and despite heterogeneity in association size (I2=93%), emergency presenters consistently had substantially greater risk of 12-month mortality than non-emergency presenters (odds ratio >1·9 for 112 [100%] of 112 jurisdiction-cancer site strata, with the minimum lower bound of the related 95% CIs being 1·26). There were negative associations between jurisdiction-level percentage of emergency presentations and jurisdiction-level 1-year survival for colon, stomach, lung, liver, pancreatic, and ovarian cancer, with a 10% increase in percentage of emergency presentations in a jurisdiction being associated with a decrease in 1-year net survival of between 2·5% (95% CI 0·28-4·7) and 7·0% (1·2-13·0). INTERPRETATION: Internationally, notable proportions of patients with cancer are diagnosed through emergency presentation. Specific types of cancer, older age, and advanced stage at diagnosis are consistently associated with an increased risk of emergency presentation, which strongly predicts worse prognosis and probably contributes to international differences in cancer survival. Monitoring emergency presentations, and identifying and acting on contributing behavioural and health-care factors, is a global priority for cancer control. FUNDING: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; Cancer Council Victoria; Cancer Institute New South Wales; Cancer Research UK; Danish Cancer Society; National Cancer Registry Ireland; The Cancer Society of New Zealand; National Health Service England; Norwegian Cancer Society; Public Health Agency Northern Ireland, on behalf of the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry; the Scottish Government; Western Australia Department of Health; and Wales Cancer Network.

Effect of Pulsed Low-Intensity Ultrasonography on Symptom Relief and Tibiofemoral Articular Cartilage Thickness Among Veterans Affairs Enrollees With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a major cause of disability in the US, with no approved treatments to slow progression, but animal models suggest that pulsed low-intensity ultrasonography (PLIUS) may promote cartilage growth. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of PLIUS in providing symptom reduction and decreased loss of tibiofemoral cartilage thickness in patients with knee OA. Design, Setting, and Participants: A phase 2A, sham-controlled, parallel, double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted at 2 Veterans Affairs hospitals in Salt Lake City, Utah, and San Diego, California, from May 22, 2015, to January 31, 2019. Data were analyzed from June 27, 2020, to October 20, 2020. Participants recruited through the US Department of Veterans Affairs (N = 132) with clinical and radiographic evidence of early knee OA were randomly assigned to receive PLIUS or a sham device, self-administered for 20 minutes daily over the medial compartment of the knee. All enrollees participated in a 4-week prerandomization sham run-in period, followed by a 48-week treatment period. Randomization was stratified by study site and Kellgren-Lawrence grades 1 (n = 15), 2 (n = 51), and 3 (n = 66). Intervention: Participants either received 48 weeks of PLIUS or sham ultrasonography. Main Outcomes and Measures: The trial incorporated 2 coprimary outcomes: symptomatic improvement assessed by Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials-Osteoarthritis Research Society International Responder Criteria (ie, met if either >50% improvement in pain and function with at least a 20% absolute improvement of at least 2 of the following 3 factors: improvement by at least 20% [pain, function, and patient global assessment] with at least a 10-mm absolute improvement), and cartilage preservation assessed as change in central medial femoral condyle cartilage thickness by magnetic resonance imaging. Intention-to-treat analysis was used. Results: The mean (SD) participant age was 63.6 (10.7) years and 119 were men (90.2%). The mean (SD) duration of OA symptoms was 13.4 (12.3) years. In the PLIUS group, 70.4% (95% CI, 58.2%-82.6%) of the participants experienced symptomatic improvement, compared with 67.3% (95% CI, 54.9%-79.7%) of participants in the sham group (P = .84); there was no statistically significant difference in response rates between the treatment groups, and the between-group rate difference of 3.1% (95% CI, -14.3% to 20.5%) did not meet the predefined 10% threshold for clinically significant symptomatic improvement from application of PLIUS. At 48 weeks of treatment, central medial femoral condyle cartilage thickness decreased by a mean (SD) of 73.8 (168.1) µm in the PLIUS group and by 42.2 (297.0) µm in the sham group. This 48-week mean change between the 2 groups did not reach statistical significance (P = .44), and the between-group 48-week difference of -31.7 µm (95% CI, -129.0 µm to 65.7 µm) did not meet the predefined threshold. There were 99 nonserious adverse events in the PLIUS group and 89 in the sham group during the trial. No serious adverse events were deemed related to the study device. Conclusions and Relevance: PLIUS, as implemented in this study, demonstrated neither symptomatic benefit nor a decrease in loss of tibiofemoral cartilage thickness in knee OA. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02034409.

Oral paclitaxel with encequidar compared to intravenous paclitaxel in patients with advanced cancer: A randomised crossover pharmacokinetic study.

AIMS: Paclitaxel is a widely used anti-neoplastic agent but has low oral bioavailability due to gut extrusion by P-glycoprotein (P-gp). Oral paclitaxel could be more convenient, less resource intensive, and more tolerable than intravenous administration. Encequidar (HM30181A) is a novel, minimally absorbed gut-specific P-gp inhibitor. We tested whether administration of oral paclitaxel with encequidar (oPac+E) achieved comparable AUC to intravenous paclitaxel (IVP) 80 mg/m2 . METHODS: We conducted a multi-centre randomised crossover study with two treatment periods. Patients (pts) with advanced cancer received either oral paclitaxel 615 mg/m2 divided over 3 days and encequidar 15 mg orally 1 hour prior, followed by IVP 80 mg/m2 , or the reverse sequence. PK blood samples were taken up to Day 9 for oPac+E and Day 5 for IVP. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were enrolled; 35 completed both treatment periods. AUC0-∞ was 5033.5 ± 1401.1 ng.h/mL for oPac+E and 5595.9 ± 1264.1 ng.h/mL with IVP. The geometric mean ratio (GMR) for AUC was 89.50% (90% CI 83.89-95.50). Mean absolute bioavailability of oPac+E was 12% (CV% = 23%). PK parameters did not change meaningfully after 4 weeks administration of oPac+E in an extension study. G3 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in seven (18%) pts with oPac+E and two (5%) with IVP. Seventy-five per cent of patients preferred oPac+E over IVP. CONCLUSIONS: GMR for AUC was within the predefined acceptable range of 80-125% for demonstrating equivalence. oPac+E is tolerable and there is no evidence of P-gp induction with repeat administration. With further study, oPac+E could be an alternative to IVP.

Analyzing the costs of developing and operating an integrated health-system specialty pharmacy: The case of a centralized insurance navigation process for specialty clinic patients.

PURPOSE: Direct and indirect costs related to the growth of specialty pharmacy services and the insurance navigation process for specialty clinic patients are discussed, and development and implementation of a pharmacy-driven and system-wide prior authorization (PA) processing center within a health system are described. SUMMARY: Expensive specialty drugs require PA. Due to the concentration of specialists, health systems with multiple specialties experience higher PA burden and resulting care delays. Although clinic staff typically handle PA requests, health-system specialty pharmacies are well positioned to support patients, clinic staff, and physicians by assuming responsibility for the PA process entirely. University of Utah Health established its Pharmacy Ambulatory Clinical Care Center (PAC3) to centralize PA processing for selected specialty and primary care clinics within the health system. In fiscal year 2019, the PAC3 team (10 pharmacy technician and 1.5 pharmacist full-time equivalents) completed over 13,000 PAs. The pharmacy labor cost increase was significant; however, the benefits gained from increased services, quality, and financial strength surpassed all costs associated with the implementation and maintenance of the pharmacy operation. Other tangible benefits included decreased delays in therapy initiation, increased patient satisfaction, increased clinic visits, and increased staff and provider satisfaction and engagement. CONCLUSION: Increased PA requests associated with specialty drugs have placed considerable stress and staff burden on specialty clinics within health systems. However, development and implementation of an efficient PA processing infrastructure within a health-system specialty pharmacy may reduce the burden, increase financial strength, and improve the patient experience.

Breast milk paclitaxel excretion following intravenous chemotherapy-a case report.

Breast cancer can be diagnosed during pregnancy and in the peri-partum period, and the potential exposure of a foetus or neonate to chemotherapy is of concern to mothers and clinicians. Paclitaxel is a commonly used agent in breast cancer, but little is known about its excretion in breast milk. Breastfeeding during chemotherapy has been traditionally cautioned against due to the risk of neonatal exposure to chemotherapy agents, however, data are limited. We measured serum and breast milk concentrations of paclitaxel in a 33-year-old woman with an early breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy and treated with weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2. We found breast milk paclitaxel levels drop below the minimum quantifiable dose at 72 h following chemotherapy, with a relative infant dose of 0.091%. Breast milk excretion of paclitaxel following a dose of 80 mg/m2 is negligible at 72 h, and this may be a safe time to recommence breastfeeding following exposure.

Dose-intense capecitabine, oxaliplatin and bevacizumab as first line treatment for metastatic, unresectable colorectal cancer: a multi-centre phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Dose intense chemotherapy may improve efficacy with acceptable toxicity. A phase II study was conducted to determine the feasibility of a dose-intense two weekly schedule of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: 49 patients with previously untreated mCRC were recruited. Nineteen received capecitabine (1750 mg/m(2) oral BD days 1-7)oxaliplatin (85 mg/m(2)i.v. day 1) and bevacizumab (5 mg/kg i.v. day 1) using a 14-day cycle (C1750). Following toxicity concerns capecitabine was reduced to 1500 mg/m2oral BD (C1500) and 30 further patients recruited. RESULTS: Over 80% of patients received at least 75% of planned chemotherapy doses over the first two cycles. At C1750 Grade 3 or higher toxicity occurred in 74% (95% CI 49% to 91%) and on C1500 in 70% (95% CI 51% to 85%). The median progression-free survival was 6.9 months (95% CI 4.7 to 8.7) for C1750 dose and 8.9 months (95% CI 4.1 to 12.4) for C1500. 3 treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Dose intense capecitabine and oxaliplatin with bevacizumab does not show additional efficacy and has potentially significant toxicity. Its use outside of clinical trials is not recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN41540878.

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.

BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a major cause of pain and functional limitation in older adults, yet longer-term studies of medical treatment of OA are limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of glucosamine and chondroitin sulphate (CS), alone or in combination, as well as celecoxib and placebo on painful knee OA over 2 years. METHODS: A 24-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, conducted at nine sites in the US ancillary to the Glucosamine/chondroitin Arthritis Intervention Trial, enrolled 662 patients with knee OA who satisfied radiographic criteria (Kellgren/Lawrence grade 2 or 3 changes and baseline joint space width of at least 2 mm). This subset continued to receive their randomised treatment: glucosamine 500 mg three times daily, CS 400 mg three times daily, the combination of glucosamine and CS, celecoxib 200 mg daily, or placebo over 24 months. The primary outcome was a 20% reduction in Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain over 24 months. Secondary outcomes included an Outcome Measures in Rheumatology/Osteoarthritis Research Society International response and change from baseline in WOMAC pain and function. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, the odds of achieving a 20% reduction in WOMAC pain were celecoxib: 1.21, glucosamine: 1.16, combination glucosamine/CS: 0.83 and CS alone: 0.69, and were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Over 2 years, no treatment achieved a clinically important difference in WOMAC pain or function as compared with placebo. However, glucosamine and celecoxib showed beneficial but not significant trends. Adverse reactions were similar among treatment groups and serious adverse events were rare for all treatments.

The effect of glucosamine and/or chondroitin sulfate on the progression of knee osteoarthritis: a report from the glucosamine/chondroitin arthritis intervention trial.

OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee causes significant morbidity and current medical treatment is limited to symptom relief, while therapies able to slow structural damage remain elusive. This study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate (CS), alone or in combination, as well as celecoxib and placebo on progressive loss of joint space width (JSW) in patients with knee OA. METHODS: A 24-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, conducted at 9 sites in the United States as part of the Glucosamine/Chondroitin Arthritis Intervention Trial (GAIT), enrolled 572 patients with knee OA who satisfied radiographic criteria (Kellgren/Lawrence [K/L] grade 2 or grade 3 changes and JSW of at least 2 mm at baseline). Patients with primarily lateral compartment narrowing at any time point were excluded. Patients who had been randomized to 1 of the 5 groups in the GAIT continued to receive glucosamine 500 mg 3 times daily, CS 400 mg 3 times daily, the combination of glucosamine and CS, celecoxib 200 mg daily, or placebo over 24 months. The minimum medial tibiofemoral JSW was measured at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months. The primary outcome measure was the mean change in JSW from baseline. RESULTS: The mean JSW loss at 2 years in knees with OA in the placebo group, adjusted for design and clinical factors, was 0.166 mm. No statistically significant difference in mean JSW loss was observed in any treatment group compared with the placebo group. Treatment effects on K/L grade 2 knees, but not on K/L grade 3 knees, showed a trend toward improvement relative to the placebo group. The power of the study was diminished by the limited sample size, variance of JSW measurement, and a smaller than expected loss in JSW. CONCLUSION: At 2 years, no treatment achieved a predefined threshold of clinically important difference in JSW loss as compared with placebo. However, knees with K/L grade 2 radiographic OA appeared to have the greatest potential for modification by these treatments.

Glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate, and the two in combination for painful knee osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate are used to treat osteoarthritis. The multicenter, double-blind, placebo- and celecoxib-controlled Glucosamine/chondroitin Arthritis Intervention Trial (GAIT) evaluated their efficacy and safety as a treatment for knee pain from osteoarthritis. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1583 patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis to receive 1500 mg of glucosamine daily, 1200 mg of chondroitin sulfate daily, both glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate, 200 mg of celecoxib daily, or placebo for 24 weeks. Up to 4000 mg of acetaminophen daily was allowed as rescue analgesia. Assignment was stratified according to the severity of knee pain (mild [N=1229] vs. moderate to severe [N=354]). The primary outcome measure was a 20 percent decrease in knee pain from baseline to week 24. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 59 years, and 64 percent were women. Overall, glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate were not significantly better than placebo in reducing knee pain by 20 percent. As compared with the rate of response to placebo (60.1 percent), the rate of response to glucosamine was 3.9 percentage points higher (P=0.30), the rate of response to chondroitin sulfate was 5.3 percentage points higher (P=0.17), and the rate of response to combined treatment was 6.5 percentage points higher (P=0.09). The rate of response in the celecoxib control group was 10.0 percentage points higher than that in the placebo control group (P=0.008). For patients with moderate-to-severe pain at baseline, the rate of response was significantly higher with combined therapy than with placebo (79.2 percent vs. 54.3 percent, P=0.002). Adverse events were mild, infrequent, and evenly distributed among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate alone or in combination did not reduce pain effectively in the overall group of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Exploratory analyses suggest that the combination of glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate may be effective in the subgroup of patients with moderate-to-severe knee pain. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00032890.).

Etanercept added to background methotrexate therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: continued observations.

OBJECTIVE: To observe the long-term safety and efficacy of combination therapy with etanercept and methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to determine whether the addition of etanercept allowed reductions in methotrexate or corticosteroid dosages while maintaining a clinical response. METHODS: Patients with RA who received methotrexate plus etanercept in a previous randomized, placebo-controlled trial were offered the opportunity to enroll in an open-label extension study for further evaluation of treatment with etanercept and methotrexate. RESULTS: Seventy-nine of the 89 patients in the original blinded study enrolled in the extension study, and 65 of these patients continue in the study. Patients have received etanercept therapy for up to 47 months (median 44 months). The types and rate of adverse events noted during the extension trial were similar to those observed in the controlled trial. At the 3-year assessment, 77% of the 57 patients available for evaluation met American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) criteria for improvement in RA, 47% met the ACR50 criteria, and 23% met the ACR70 criteria. Of the 36 patients assessed at 3 years in the extension study, 30 (83%) were able to decrease their dosages of corticosteroids, and 20 (56%) were able to discontinue corticosteroid therapy. At 3 years, the dosage of methotrexate was decreased in 41 of 66 patients (62%), and methotrexate therapy was discontinued in 19 patients (29%). CONCLUSION: In this observational continuation study, the addition of etanercept to background methotrexate provided sustained clinical benefit over a median period of 44 months. With etanercept therapy, there were trends toward dosage reduction or discontinuation of methotrexate and corticosteroids, without apparent worsening of ACR response rates. Compared with the controlled trial, no increases in the rate of adverse events were observed.