Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15345500›Full record

Trial reportAnnals of the rheumatic diseases2005

A randomised, placebo controlled, comparative trial of the gastrointestinal safety and efficacy of AZD3582 versus naproxen in osteoarthritis.

L S Lohmander, D McKeith, O Svensson, M Malmenäs, L Bolin, A Kalla, G Genti, J Szechinski, C Ramos-Remus, STAR Multinational Study Group

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 105 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Exploiting the 2-(1,3,4,9-tetrahydropyrano[3,4-Journal of medicinal chemistry · 2025
    Article
  6. The Triple Crown: NO, CO, and HPharmacology & therapeutics · 2023
    Review
  7. Can Medical Cannabis Therapies be Cost-Effective in the Non-Surgical Management of Chronic Knee Pain?Clinical medicine insights. Arthritis and musculoskeletal disorders · 2021
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Protective Effects ofEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020
    Article
  12. Review
  13. The dichotomous role of HBiochemical pharmacology · 2018
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Treatment strategies for osteoarthritis patients with pain and hypertension.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2010
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Role of nitric oxide in the gastrointestinal tract.Arthritis research & therapy · 2008
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.

L S LohmanderDepartment of Orthopaedics, Lund University, SE-221 85 Lund, Sweden. Stefan.Lohmander@ort.lu.se
D McKeith
O Svensson
M Malmenäs
L Bolin
A Kalla
G Genti
J Szechinski
C Ramos-Remus
STAR Multinational Study Group
AstraZeneca (Sweden) · SEGroote Schuur Hospital · ZAJahn Ferenc Dél-Pesti Kórház és Rendelőintézet · HULund University · SENetwork Rail · GBUniversidad Enrique Díaz de León · MXWroclaw Medical University · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the gastrointestinal safety and efficacy of the COX inhibiting nitric oxide donator AZD3582 in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis.

methods970 patients were randomised (7:7:2) to AZD3582 750 mg twice daily, naproxen 500 mg twice daily, or placebo twice daily in a double blind study. The primary end point was the six week incidence of endoscopic gastroduodenal ulcers (diameter > or =3 mm). Overall damage measured on the Lanza scale was a secondary end point. Safety and tolerability assessments included endoscopic upper gastrointestinal erosions and the gastrointestinal symptom rating scale (GSRS). Efficacy was primarily assessed by WOMAC.

resultsThe incidence of ulcers with AZD3582 was 9.7% and with naproxen 13.7% (p = 0.07, NS), v 0% on placebo. The incidence of Lanza scores >2 was higher with naproxen (43.7%) than with AZD3582 (32.2%) (p<0.001). Compared with baseline, significantly fewer ulcers and erosions developed in stomach and stomach/duodenum combined, and fewer erosions developed in stomach, duodenum, and both combined on AZD3582 than on naproxen. GSRS reflux and abdominal pain subscale scores were lower for AZD3582 than for naproxen but there was no difference for indigestion, constipation, and diarrhoea. AZD3582 was as effective as naproxen at improving WOMAC scores. Both agents were well tolerated, with no significant effects on blood pressure.

conclusionsAt doses with similar efficacy in relieving osteoarthritis symptoms, the primary end point of six week endoscopic gastroduodenal ulcer incidence was not significantly different between AZD3582 and naproxen. Most secondary endoscopic gastrointestinal end points favoured AZD3582.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalBlood PressureCyclooxygenase InhibitorsDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNaphthalenesNaproxenOsteoarthritis, HipOsteoarthritis, KneePeptic UlcerQuality of LifeAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalCyclooxygenase InhibitorsNaphthalenesNaproxennaproxen-n-butyl nitrate

Identifiers

PMID15345500
PMCPMC1755403
OpenAlexW2107125692

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.