A prospective, randomized, pragmatic, health outcomes trial evaluating the incorporation of hylan G-F 20 into the treatment paradigm for patients with knee osteoarthritis (Part 1 of 2): clinical results.

OBJECTIVE First, to assess the clinical effectiveness of hylan G-F 20 in an appropriate care treatment regimen (as defined by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1995 guidelines) as measured by validated disease-specific outcomes and health-related quality of life endpoints for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. Second, to utilize the measures of effectiveness and costs in an economic evaluation (see accompanying manuscript). DESIGN A total of 255 patients with OA of the knee were enrolled by rheumatologists or orthopedic surgeons into a prospective, randomized, open-label, 1-year, multi-centred trial, conducted in Canada. Patients were randomized to 'Appropriate care with hylan G-F 20' (AC+H) or 'Appropriate care without hylan G-F 20' (AC). Data were collected at clinic visits (baseline, 12 months) and by telephone (1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 months). RESULTS The AC+H group was superior to the AC group for all primary (% reduction in mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain scale: 38% vs 13%,P =0.0001) and secondary effectiveness outcome measures. These differences were all statistically significant and exceeded the 20% difference between groups set a priori by the investigators as the minimum clinically important difference. Health-related quality of life improvements in the AC+H group were statistically superior for the WOMAC pain, stiffness and physical function (all P< 0.0001), the SF-36 aggregate physical component (P< 0.0001) and the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) overall health utility score (P< 0.0001). Safety (adverse events and patient global assessments of side effects) differences favoured the AC+H group. CONCLUSION The data presented here indicate that the provision to patients with knee OA of viscosupplementation with hylan G-F 20 within an appropriate care treatment regimen provides benefits in the knee, overall health and health related quality of life at reduced levels of co-therapy and systemic adverse reactions.

[1]  G. Singh,et al.  NSAID induced gastrointestinal complications: the ARAMIS perspective--1997. Arthritis, Rheumatism, and Aging Medical Information System. , 1998, The Journal of rheumatology. Supplement.

[2]  Carol A. Trujillo,et al.  The MOS 36-Item Short Form Health Survey: reliability, validity, and preliminary findings in schizophrenic outpatients. , 1998, Medical care.

[3]  T O Jefferson,et al.  Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ , 1996, BMJ.

[4]  P Tugwell,et al.  Criteria for clinically important changes in outcomes: development, scoring and evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis patient and trial profiles. OMERACT Committee. , 1993, The Journal of rheumatology.

[5]  M. Gold,et al.  Panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. , 1996, Medical care.

[6]  Thomas J. Schnitzer,et al.  Recommendations for the medical management of osteoarthritis of the hip and knee: 2000 update , 2000 .

[7]  C. Helmick,et al.  Arthritis and other rheumatic conditions: who is affected now, who will be affected later? National Arthritis Data Workgroup. , 1995, Arthritis care and research : the official journal of the Arthritis Health Professions Association.

[8]  D. Rubin,et al.  Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. , 1989 .

[9]  G. Slama,et al.  PHT7: THE FRENCH HEALTH UTILITIES INDEX MARK 3 , 2000 .

[10]  R H Brook,et al.  Costs attributable to osteoarthritis. , 1998, The Journal of rheumatology.

[11]  A. Laupacis,et al.  Costs of elective total hip arthroplasty during the first year. Cemented versus noncemented. , 1994, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[12]  B. O'brien,et al.  A tale of two (or more) cities: geographic transferability of pharmacoeconomic data. , 1997, The American journal of managed care.

[13]  A S Detsky,et al.  How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. , 1992, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[14]  Milton C. Weinstein,et al.  Recommendations for Reporting Cost-effectiveness Analyses , 1996 .

[15]  M C Weinstein,et al.  Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 1996, JAMA.

[16]  A Osteo-Artrite do Joelho (Osteo-Arthritis of the Knee) , 1958 .

[17]  J. Kellgren,et al.  Osteo-arthrosis and Disk Degeneration in an Urban Population * , 1958, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[18]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) , 1992 .

[19]  E. Balazs,et al.  Viscosupplementation: a new concept in the treatment of osteoarthritis. , 1993, The Journal of rheumatology. Supplement.

[20]  T. Schnitzer,et al.  Guidelines for the medical management of osteoarthritis. Part II. Osteoarthritis of the knee. American College of Rheumatology. , 1995, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[21]  H. Sintonen,et al.  Comparison of Finnish and U.S.-based Visual Analog Scale Valuations of the EQ-5D Measure , 2000, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[22]  C. Goldsmith,et al.  Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. , 1988, The Journal of rheumatology.

[23]  E. Yelin,et al.  The economic impact of the rheumatic diseases in the United States. , 1989, The Journal of rheumatology.

[24]  M. Cross,et al.  Outcomes after hip or knee replacement surgery for osteoarthritis , 1999, The Medical journal of Australia.

[25]  N. Bellamy,et al.  A comparative study of telephone versus onsite completion of the WOMAC 3.0 osteoarthritis index. , 2002, The Journal of rheumatology.

[26]  M. Drummond,et al.  Cost-effectiveness league tables: more harm than good? , 1993, Social science & medicine.

[27]  W. Olszynski,et al.  Viscosupplementation with hylan for the treatment of osteoarthritis: findings from clinical practice in Canada. , 1996, The Journal of rheumatology.

[28]  K. Brøsen,et al.  CYP2C19 genotype does not represent a genetic predisposition in idiopathic systemic lupus erythematosus , 1999, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[29]  D Menon,et al.  Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment. , 1992, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[30]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 1996, JAMA.

[31]  C. Bell,et al.  A Comprehensive League Table of Cost-Utility Ratios and a Sub-table of "Panel-worthy" Studies , 2000, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[32]  C. Bombardier,et al.  Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of new treatments: efficacy versus effectiveness studies? , 1999, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[33]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of games and economic behavior , 1945, 100 Years of Math Milestones.

[34]  M. Hochberg,et al.  A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of pharmacological therapy in osteoarthritis of the knee, with an emphasis on trial methodology. , 1997, Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism.

[35]  D. Felson The epidemiology of knee osteoarthritis: results from the Framingham Osteoarthritis Study. , 1990, Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism.

[36]  T. Schnitzer,et al.  Guidelines for the medical management of osteoarthritis. Part II. Osteoarthritis of the knee. American College of Rheumatology. , 1995, Arthritis and rheumatism.