Document Server@UHasselt >
Research >
Research publications >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/4076

Title: A prospective randomised multicentre study comparing continuous and intermittent treatment with celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip
Authors: Luyten, F. P.
Malaise, M.
De Clerck, L.
Westhovens, R.
Raeman, F.
Vander Mijnsbrugge, D.
Mathy, L.
Hauzeur, J. P.
De Keyser, F.
Van den Bosch, F.
Issue Date: 2007
Citation: ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES, 66(1). p. 99-106
Abstract: Objective: To compare the effects of continuous and intermittent celecoxib treatment in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis in flare. Methods: In this 24-week, prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients were randomly assigned to receive continuous (n = 62) or intermittent (n = 61) treatment with celecoxib 200 mg once daily. The primary efficacy end point was the area under the curve (AUC) of the change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) total scores between baseline and week 24 divided by the time interval. Secondary end points included the percentage of days with intake of the flare drug, the AUC of the change in the WOMAC total scores, the mean change from baseline in the WOMAC scores, and the patient's and physician's global assessment of osteoarthritis. Results: There were no significant differences between patients randomised to continuous or intermittent treatment in the primary end point or most of the secondary end points, although a consistent trend supporting continuous treatment was observed. The percentage of days with intake of the flare drug was significantly lower (p = 0.031) in the group receiving continuous versus intermittent celecoxib. Both treatment regimens were well tolerated. Conclusion: The results of this pilot study indicate a potential clinical difference between continuous and intermittent treatment with celecoxib, and may be useful in designing future trials. A larger trial on both efficacy and safety outcomes is required for conclusive evidence in favour of either continuous or intermittent treatment.
Notes: Katholieke Univ Leuven Hosp, Dept Rheumatol, B-3000 Louvain, Belgium. Univ Hasselt, Biomed Res Ctr, Diepenbeek, Belgium. Univ Hosp Liege, Dept Rheumatol, Liege, Belgium. Univ Antwerp Hosp, Dept Rheumatol, Antwerp, Belgium. Jan Palfijn Hosp, ZNA, Dept Rheumatol, Antwerp, Belgium. Elisabeth Hosp Sijsele Damme, Dept Rheumatol, Sijsele Damme, Belgium.Luyten, FP, Katholieke Univ Leuven Hosp, Dept Rheumatol, Herestr 49, B-3000 Louvain, Belgium.frank.luyten@uz.kuleuven.ac.be
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/4076
DOI: 10.1136/ard.2006.052308
ISI #: 000242935300019
ISSN: 0003-4967
Category: A1
Type: Journal Contribution
Validation: ecoom, 2008
Appears in Collections: Research publications

Files in This Item:

There are no files associated with this item.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.