Trial reportEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2025
Effects of orally administered cetylated fatty acids on symptoms and functional capacity in patients with knee osteoarthritis: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Trial report in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThe development and implementation of new treatments for knee osteoarthritis in routine practice remains an unmet need. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of a Cetylated Fatty Acids (CFA)-based dietary supplement in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), a prevalent and difficult-to-treat condition. SUBJECTS/
methods60 patients (mean age: 66.0 ± 7.7 years, 85% female) with grade 3-4 knee osteoarthritis and a pain intensity of > 4 cm on the visual analog scale (VAS) were enrolled and randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 1.5 g of oral CFA or a placebo for 60 days. The primary outcome was the change in pain intensity (VAS), secondary outcomes included changes in range of motion (ROM), in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and the safety profile of the food supplement.
resultsAfter 60 days of CFA assumption, the mean reduction in pain intensity (VAS) was -1.7 cm (95% CI [-2.0, -1.4]), showing a statistically significant difference compared to placebo (-0.6 cm, 95% CI [-1.0, -0.2]; p < 0.005). The mean decrease in the WOMAC total score was also greater in the CFA group (-19.5 vs. -15.8), although the placebo-corrected effect was not statistically significant (-3.7, 95% CI [-8.3, 0.8]; p = 0.108). Observed improvements in flexion (3.8° [95% CI: 2.6, 5.0]) and external rotation (2.9° [95% CI: 2.1, 3.8]) were both statistically significant in favor of CFA (p ≤ 0.001) compared to placebo. Differences in extension and internal rotation were negligible. The safety profile of the investigational product resulted favorable, considering that only 4 out of 30 patients reported mild adverse events, and none withdrawn from the study due to adverse events.
conclusionIn patients with knee osteoarthritis, incorporating a CFA oral supplement into the treatment regimen provides superior efficacy in pain relief and range of motion improvement compared to placebo, while maintaining a favorable safety profile.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.