Search

BACKGROUND The primary objective of this study was to determine the effect of single versus multiple rounds of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) in delaying the need for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients with knee OA, and if additional benefits were seen when used in conjunction with other multimodal treatment options. METHODS This study was a retrospective claims analysis of a large commercial database containing more than 100 million patients with continuous coverage from October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2015. Time to TKA for patients who received one course of Euflexxa (IA-BioHA) were compared to patients who received two or more courses of IA-BioHA and patients who received no IA-HA. Assessment of multimodal treatment effects was done between the following groups: IA-BioHA injections alone, IA-BioHA and bracing, IA-BioHA and corticosteroid injection, and IA-BioHA with both corticosteroids and bracing. RESULTS A total of 26,727 patients were included in the analysis of treatment courses, and 31,034 in the analysis of multimodal treatment combinations. The use of IA-BioHA demonstrated a delay of TKA that was prolonged with repeated courses of treatment (1.411 years, interquartile range [IQR]: 1.44). The greatest delay to TKA was observed for the patients who had received all three treatment options (1.5 years, IQR: 1.52) in the multimodal analysis. CONCLUSIONS These results confirm that treatment of knee OA should consider the use of multimodal therapy instead of focusing on individual treatment options. Additionally, the use of repeated courses of IA-BioHA should be considered for prolonged benefit for patients with symptomatic knee OA.

Mathew Nicholls,1 Faizan Niazi,2 Winnie W Nelson,2 Edmund Lau,3 Steven M Kurtz,4 Kevin L Ong4 1Virginia Mason Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA; 2Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc, Parsippany, NJ, USA; 3Exponent, Inc, Menlo Park, CA, USA; 4Exponent, Inc, Philadelphia, PA, USACorrespondence: Kevin L Ong, Exponent, Inc, Philadelphia, PA, USA, Tel +1 215 594-8800, Email kong@exponent.comBackground: Limiting access to intra-articular knee injections, including hyaluronic acid (HA), has been advocated as a cost-containment measure in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. The association between presurgical injections and post-surgical complications such as early periprosthetic joint infection and revision remained to be investigated. This study evaluated pre- and post-surgical costs and rates of post-surgical complications in knee arthroplasty (KA) patients with or without prior HA use.Methods: Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Claims Data (IBM MarketScan Research Databases) from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2018 were used to identify unilateral KA patients. Those who completed a course of bio-fermentation derived HA (Bio-HA) as the first-line HA therapy comprised of the test group (n = 4091), while the control group did not use HA prior to KA (n = 118,659). Using multivariable regression with propensity score (PS) weighting, overall healthcare costs, readmission rates, and revision rates were assessed at six months following KA.Results: Healthcare costs following KA were significantly lower for the Bio-HA group ($10,021 ± $22,796) than No HA group ($12,724 ± $32,966; PS p < 0.001). Bio-HA patients had lower readmission rates (8.9% vs 14.0%; PS p < 0.001) and inpatient costs per readmitted patient ($43,846 ± $50,648 vs $50,533 ± $66,150; PS p = 0.005). There were no differences in revision rate for any reason (Bio-HA: 0.78% vs No HA: 0.67%; PS p = 0.361) and with PJI (Bio-HA: 0.42% vs No HA: 0.33%; PS p = 0.192). Costs in the six months up to and including the KA were similar for both groups (Bio-HA: $49,759 ± $40,363 vs No HA: $50,532 ± $43,183; PS p = 0.293).Conclusion: Bio-HA use prior to knee arthroplasty did not appear to increase overall healthcare costs in the six months before and after surgery. Allowing access to HA injections provides a non-surgical therapeutic option without increasing cost or risk of post-surgical complications.Keywords: bio-fermentation derived hyaluronic acid, healthcare costs, intra-articular hyaluronic acid, knee arthroplasty, readmissions

Introduction Evidence has demonstrated greater benefit of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) within earlier stages of knee osteoarthritis (OA) rather than waiting for patients to have progressed to later stages of disease progression. High molecular weight (HMW) HA has also been shown to be more effective than low molecular weight (LMW) HA products in mild to moderate knee OA, providing an important distinction to make within the class of IA-HA therapies. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating patients with knee OA with HMW HA compared to LMW and conservative treatment, while taking into account disease stage. Methods Decision analytic models were created for early/moderate, as well as late stage knee OA. Models for late stage knee OA were created by assuming a range of response rates to IA-HA treatments from 10% to 50%. These models included conservative treatment using physical therapy/exercise, braces/orthosis, and medications such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and analgesics. The models compared the cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained for these treatments to the use of either LMW or HMW HA. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for each treatment in relation to HMW HA. Results When evaluating treatment in early to moderate knee OA, HMW HA was dominant over LMW HA and physical therapy/exercise, as it was less expensive and provided greater benefit. HMW HA was cost-effective versus braces/orthosis and NSAID/analgesic medications based on a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000. In the model of 50% response rate to IA-HA for late stage OA, HMW HA remained cost-effective in comparison to physical therapy/exercise and braces/orthosis at a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000; but not NSAID/analgesic medications. In the worst-case scenario of a 10% responder rate to IA-HA, HMW HA was no longer cost-effective in any circumstance. Conclusion IA-HA, particularly HMW formulations, demonstrate cost-effectiveness when compared to conservative treatment options and LMW HA in patients with early/mid stage knee OA. The cost-effectiveness of HMW HA in patients with later stage knee OA was not as apparent, particularly because of the uncertainty in the proportion of patients with late stage OA who have a meaningful improvement after receiving IA-HA. This cost-effectiveness finding supports the use of IA-HA in patients with early and moderate knee OA, as the benefits of IA-HA are apparent within the patient population with mild to moderate knee OA. The findings of this study suggest that there is a potential cost savings benefit as a result of utilizing HMW HA in earlier stages of knee OA as opposed to later stages. Funding Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. Electronic Supplementary Material The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-019-01142-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BACKGROUND Multiple interventions may be used to treat symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA), but concerns have been raised about safety and efficacy of some therapies. Clinical trials have shown that hyaluronic acid (HA) can provide pain relief up to six months and possibly out to 12 months, while real world data has shown that pain medication and intra-articular corticosteroid (CS) injection utilization are reduced within six months after HA. OBJECTIVE To examine changes in prescription pain medication and CS utilization during 1 year after multimodal therapy that included high molecular weight, bio-fermentation derived HA (Bio-HA) use for knee OA. METHODS Commercial and Medicare Supplemental claims data (IBM MarketScan Research Databases) (January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2018) was used to identify unilateral Bio-HA patients using multimodal therapy (any combination of CS injection, opioids, and non-opioid pain medication). Monthly therapy utilization was compared in the 12 months after Bio-HA therapy initiation to the four-month intra-multimodal period. RESULTS A total of 13,999 patients underwent Bio-HA therapy with concurrent multimodal therapy. Number of filled opioid prescriptions decreased from 2913.0/month to 2861.5/month after Bio-HA, with a reduction in mean monthly prescriptions from 0.60 to 0.43 per user (p

BACKGROUND: Several nonoperative options have been recommended for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA), with varying degrees of evidence. Adhering to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons clinical practice guidelines has been suggested to decrease direct treatment costs by 45% in the year before knee arthroplasty, but this does not consider the cost of the entire episode of care, including the cost of surgery and postsurgery care. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the total treatment costs after a diagnosis of knee OA, as well as the proportion of arthroplasty interventions as part of the total knee OA–related costs, and whether the total costs differed for patients who received intra-articular hyaluronic acid and/or had knee arthroplasty. METHODS: We identified patients newly diagnosed with knee OA using the 5% Medicare data sample from January 2010 to December 2015. Patients were excluded if they were aged

Aim: We studied changes in opioid prescriptions and corticosteroid injection use for knee osteoarthritis patients before and after intra-articular hyaluronic acid (HA) use and opioid prescriptions before and after knee arthroplasty (KA). Materials & methods: A total of 1,017,578 knee osteoarthritis members were ascertained from a commercial claims database (Health Intelligence Company LLC, IL, USA) using ICD9/ICD10 diagnosis codes. Results: Eighty two percent of HA patients did not fill opioid prescriptions postinjection, with 54% of opioid users discontinuing fills. Two-thirds of KA patients filled opioid prescriptions within 6 months postsurgery, with 78% of opioid users continuing fills and 62% of nonusers initiating use. Conclusion: Alternative therapies, such as HA, that reduce opioid use may alleviate opioid addiction risks for KA patients who use opioids in the pre- and postoperative periods.

Background: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a surgical treatment for patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) that no longer experience symptom relief from non-operative or pharmacologic treatments. Non-operative KOA management aims to address patient symptoms and improve function, as well as forestall or mitigate the large costs associated with TKA. The primary objective of this study was to examine the relationship between intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) treatment and delaying TKA in patients with KOA compared to patients not receiving IA-HA, as well as to identify differences in KOA-related costs incurred among patients who received or did not receive IA-HA. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of an administrative claims database from October 1st, 2010 through September 30th, 2015. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was conducted to determine the TKA-free survival of patients who received IA-HA, stratified by the number of injection courses received versus those who did not receive any IA-HA. Median KOA-related costs per year were calculated for 2 comparisons: (1) patients who received IA-HA versus patients who did not receive IA-HA, among patients who eventually had TKA, and (2) patients who received IA-HA versus patients who did not receive IA-HA, among patients who did not have TKA. Results: A total of 744 734 patients were included in the analysis. A delay to TKA was observed after IA-HA treatment for patients treated with IA-HA compared to those who did not receive IA-HA. At 1 year, the TKA-free survival was 85.8% (95% CI: 85.6%-86.0%) for patients who received IA-HA and 74.1% (95% CI: 74.0%-74.3%) for those who did not receive IA-HA. At 2 years, the TKA free survival was 70.8% (70.5%-71.1%) and 63.7% (63.5%-63.9%) in the 2 groups, respectively. Patients treated with multiple courses of IA-HA demonstrated an incremental increase in delay to TKA with more courses of IA-HA, suggesting that the risk of TKA over the study time period is reduced with additional IA-HA courses. The hazard ratio for the need of TKA was 0.85 (95% CI 0.84-0.86) for a single course and 0.27 (95% CI 0.25-0.28) for ⩾5 courses, both compared to the no IA-HA group. In patients that eventually had TKA, the median KOA-related costs were lower among those who received IA-HA before their TKA ($860.24, 95% CI: 446.65-1722.20), compared to those who did not receive IA-HA ($2659.49, 95% CI: 891.04-7480.38). For patients who did not have TKA, the median and interquartile range (IQR) KOA-related costs per year were similar for patients who received IA-HA compared with those who did not. Conclusion: These results demonstrate that within a large cohort of KOA patients, individuals who received multiple courses of IA-HA had a progressively greater delay to TKA compared to patients who did not receive IA-HA treatment. Also, for patients who progressed to TKA, IA-HA treatment was associated with a large reduction in KOA-related healthcare costs. Based on these results, multiple, repeat courses of IA-HA may be beneficial in substantially delaying TKA in KOA patients, as well as minimizing KOA-related healthcare costs.

BACKGROUND: Several nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatments are available for the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA)-related pain and for improving functionality; however, clinical guideline recommendations vary on their use. OBJECTIVE: To compare the treatment patterns in a real-world setting versus the guideline recommendations for the treatment of newly diagnosed patients with knee OA. METHODS: This retrospective analysis used data from the electronic health records of the Geisinger Health System between January 1, 2010, and December 2018 to identify adults with newly diagnosed knee OA who had not received previous therapy with intra-articular corticosteroids, opioids, intra-articular hyaluronic acid, or prescription nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Eligible patients were evaluated for the mutually exclusive treatment categories after diagnosis, including prescription NSAIDs, intra-articular corticosteroids, intra-articular hyaluronic acid (specifically an intra-articular bioengineered hyaluronic acid), opioids, physical therapy, bracing, and total knee arthroplasty. These 7 treatment categories were evaluated for utilization patterns in the real-world setting. RESULTS: A total of 8776 patients with a new diagnosis of knee OA were identified; 88.2% of them received 1 of the 7 evaluated treatments. The most frequently prescribed first treatment was intra-articular corticosteroids (26%), followed by opioids (17.6%), and intra-articular bioengineered hyaluronic acid (14.9%). The most often prescribed second treatment was opioids (15.8%), followed by physical therapy (14%), NSAIDs (11.8%), and intra-articular bioengineered hyaluronic acid (9.6%). Of note, 22.9% of the patients received only 1 evaluated therapy during the study period and did not receive a second treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world treatment patterns in patients with newly diagnosed knee OA indicate that prescribers are using the spectrum of the available therapies that, at times, are different from the current treatment guideline recommendations.

Introduction Hyaluronic acid (HA) is a commonly prescribed intra-articular (IA) therapy for knee osteoarthritis (OA). While a single series of IA-HA has been well studied, the efficacy and safety of repeated courses of IA-HA injection therapy in knee OA patients have not been evaluated as frequently. Methods A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed databases. The primary outcome measure was knee pain reduction after each treatment course and/or last reported follow-up visit. Secondary outcomes were treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). Results A total of 17 articles (7 RCTs and 10 cohort studies) met the pre-defined inclusion criteria. Of the RCTs, six were double-blind with two trials including open label extension studies, and one was single-blind. Studies ranged from investigating a single reinjection cycle to four repeat injection cycles. Eleven studies evaluated one reinjection, five studies evaluated ≥2 repeated courses of IA-HA, and one study allowed either one or two repeated courses. All studies reported pain reduction from baseline in the IA-HA treatment group throughout the initial treatment cycle, and either sustained or further reduced pain throughout the repeated courses of treatment. The study with the longest follow-up repeated IA-HA injection every 6 months for 25 months. Pain decreased after the first course and continued to decrease until the end of the study, with an approximate 55% reduction in pain compared to baseline. Common AEs were joint swelling and arthralgia; there were no reported SAEs. All repeated courses were well tolerated, and the number of documented AEs and SAEs was similar to the primary injection regimens. Conclusion Repeated courses of IA-HA injections are an effective and safe treatment for knee OA. Repeat courses were demonstrated to maintain or further improve pain reduction while introducing no increased safety risk.

Additional file 1: Table 1. ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes for knee OA.

Introduction Knee osteoarthritis is one of the leading causes of disability in the world. Intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) is a treatment modality that provides a minimally invasive treatment option for the management of osteoarthritis-related symptoms. This study examined the current and potential economic impact of using a biologically derived, high molecular weight hyaluronic acid preparation (Euflexxa) on the US population for the management of knee osteoarthritis. Methods A model was developed to estimate the total number of patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis in the US in 2015, distributed by Kellgren–Lawrence (K–L) grade, and the number of people living with total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The potential utility of Euflexxa was applied to this model population to determine the current and potential impact of the treatment as the total number of quality adjusted life years (QALY) saved within the US population. Results There are approximately 12 million people currently suffering from symptomatic knee osteoarthritis in the US, and approximately 5 million living with TKA. It was estimated that, with a target treatment group of K–L grades 2–3, there are approximately 4 million patients eligible for treatment with a high molecular weight intra-articular hyaluronic acid injection. With current use, it is estimated that Euflexxa can save 36,730 QALY/year among the US population, and has the potential to save an additional 369,181 QALY/year if used by all eligible patients. Conclusions This study demonstrates that more widely used, biologically derived, high molecular weight IA-HAs, such as Euflexxa, have the potential to save a substantial number of QALYs among the US population with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. Funding: Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Background Few nonoperative treatment options for knee osteoarthritis (OA) are available, but there is ongoing debate about the effectiveness of intra-articular (IA) hyaluronic acid (HA) injections. We investigated whether the formulation of IA HA, or its combined use with IA corticosteroid (CS), may be contributing to some of the reported variation in clinical outcomes. Methods The 5% Part B Medicare data (2005-2012) were used to identify knee OA patients who underwent knee arthroplasty (KA). The time from diagnosis of OA to KA was compared between patients with (HA) and without (no HA) IA HA use, using quantile regression with propensity score adjustment. These were further stratified by type of IA HA. Patient factors associated with time to KA were also assessed using Cox regression. Results The "HA" cohort was associated with a longer time to KA of 8.7 months (95% confidence interval: 8.3-9.1 months; P P Conclusion In a large cohort of elderly patients undergoing KA, there was a significant longer time from diagnosis of OA to KA in those receiving IA HA. It is unclear if the extended time may lead to less KA utilization.

Introduction The Kellgren–Lawrence (K–L) grade is the most commonly used measure of radiographic disease severity in knee osteoarthritis (OA). Studies suggest that intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) should only be considered in cases of early stage knee OA. The purpose of this review was to determine if trials administering IA-HA in early-moderate knee OA patients demonstrated greater pain relief than studies that also included patients with end-stage disease. Methods We conducted a systematic search of the literature to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing IA-HA with saline injections and that diagnosed disease severity using the K–L grade criteria. The primary outcome was mean change in pain from baseline at 4–13 weeks and 22–27 weeks. Safety was evaluated on the total number of participants experiencing a treatment-related adverse event (AE). Results Twenty RCTs were included. In the early-moderate OA subgroup, the mean change in pain scores was statistically significant favoring IA-HA from baseline to 4–13 weeks [SMD = − 0.30, 95% CI − 0.44 to − 0.15, p

ObjectiveOsteoarthritis (OA) is one of the leading causes of disability in the adult population. Common nonoperative treatment options include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), intra-articular corticosteroids, and intra-articular injections of hyaluronic acid (HA). HA is found intrinsically within the knee joint providing viscoelastic properties to the synovial fluid. HA therapy provides anti-inflammatory relief through a number of different pathways, including the suppression of pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review to summarize the published literature on the anti-inflammatory properties of hyaluronic acid in osteoarthritis. Included articles were categorized based on the primary anti-inflammatory responses described within them, by the immediate cell surface receptor protein assessed within the article, or based on the primary theme of the article. Key findings aimed to describe the macromolecules and inflammatory-mediated responses associated with the cell transmembrane receptors.ResultsForty-eight articles were included in this systematic review that focused on the general anti-inflammatory effects of HA in knee OA, mediated through receptor-binding relationships with cluster determinant 44 (CD44), toll-like receptor 2 (TLR-2) and 4 (TLR-4), intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1), and layilin (LAYN) cell surface receptors. Higher molecular weight HA (HMWHA) promotes anti-inflammatory responses, whereas short HA oligosaccharides produce inflammatory reactions.ConclusionsIntra-articular HA is a viable therapeutic option in treating knee OA and suppressing inflammatory responses. HMWHA is effective in suppressing the key macromolecules that elicit the inflammatory response by short HA oligosaccharides.

Introduction This study aims to compare the properties of currently available intra-articular hyaluronate (IA-HA) products widely available in the USA to those of healthy knee synovial fluid with respect to their bulk rheological properties. We hypothesize that products would have differing rheological properties, with some more closely resembling the properties and physiological aspects of healthy joint fluid HA. Methods We obtained reported HA product molecular weights, as well as measurements of the presence of cross-linking, zero shear rate viscosity, shear thinning ratio, and crossover frequency for the following IA-HA products available in the USA: Euflexxa®, Orthovisc®, Supartz®, Monovisc®, Synvisc®, Synvisc-One®, Gel-One®, and Hyalgan®. Results Differences were seen between the study products across all of the investigated parameters. Hyalgan, Supartz, Orthovisc, and Euflexxa had a linear chain structure, while Synvisc, Synvisc-One, and Monovisc were cross-linked in structure. Molecular weight, shear rates, and crossover frequencies ranged widely across tested products, with values ranging from below to above those reported for healthy knee synovial fluid HA. When compared to healthy knee parameter values reported within the current literature, observed parameters for Euflexxa and Orthovisc were typically seen to be the most similar to healthy knee synovial fluid. When comparing Euflexxa and Orthovisc directly, Euflexxa was more often similar to the properties of healthy knee synovial fluid with respect to the observed parameters of molecular structure, shear rates, and crossover frequency. Conclusion Available IA-HA products vary with respect to molecular weight, presence of cross-linking, shear rate dependency of viscosity, and crossover frequency. Since IA-HA treatment for osteoarthritis aims to restore synovial fluid back to original HA property characteristics, using HA supplements resembling healthy synovial fluid is a logical approach. Our findings demonstrate that Euflexxa is the most similar to healthy synovial fluid with respect to molecular structure, shear rates, and crossover frequency. Funding Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Objective: The inconsistent results within the current literature regarding the efficacy of intra-articular-hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA) have been suggested to be due to intrinsic differences between individual HA products. The purpose of this investigation is to define the rheological differences between currently available HA products in the United States at the time of this study for the treatment of knee OA, which will help elaborate on the appropriateness of classifying HA products as a class opposed to as individual agents. Methods: The rheological parameters for Euflexxa, Orthovisc, Supartz, Monovisc, Synvisc, Synvisc-One, Gel-One, and Hyalgan were obtained with a TA AR 2000 EX Rheometer with a cone-plate geometry (40-mm plate diameter and a 2° cone angle) at room temperature. Results: The bulk rheological parameters of the different products suggest molecular structures traversing the range of dilute solution (Hyalgan, Supartz), semidilute solution (Euflexxa, Orthovisc), entangled solutions (Monovisc, Synvisc, Synvisc-One), and even gel-like (Gel-One) behavior. Conclusions: Due to the differences in rheological properties between IA-HA products, the universal assessment of these products as a class may not be appropriate. Instead, it may be more appropriate to assess each product individually. Future research should aim to link these differences in rheological properties to the differences in clinical efficacy seen across these IA-HA products.

Hyaluronic acid (HA) has been a treatment modality for patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) for many years now. Since HA was first introduced for the treatment of painful knee OA, much has been elucidated regarding both the etiology of this disease and the mechanisms by which HA may mitigate joint pain and tissue destruction. The objectives of this article are to (1) describe the etiology and pathophysiology of OA including both what is known about the genetics and biochemistry, (2) describe the role of HA on disease progression, (3) detail the antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory actions of HA in OA, and (4) present evidence of disease-modifying effects of HA in the preservation and restoration of the extracellular matrix. These data support that HA is not only just a simple device used for viscosupplementation but also a biologically active molecule that can affect the physiology of articular cartilage.

Literature Search Strategy. (DOCX 15 kb)

Funnel plot analysis of studies investigating efficacy of IA-HA injections closest to 3-months. (DOCX 18 kb)

Funnel plot analysis of studies investigating efficacy of IA-HA injections closest to 6-months. (DOCX 19 kb)

Introduction Intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) injections are a treatment for knee osteoarthritis (OA), although current literature provides mixed results with regard to their efficacy. We will review a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and subsequent extension trial in order to identify factors that are associated with outcomes in patients with knee OA who received IA-HA. Methods We used data recorded by the FLEXX trial and extension trial for secondary analysis of potential prognostic factors. Linear regression was used to examine the predictors of outcomes at 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. Results Sixty percent of all patients presented with a Kellgren Lawrence (K-L) grade 3. Patients with high baseline outcome scores and a K-L grade 3 demonstrated less response than individuals within an earlier stage of knee OA, although results for both K-L grade 2 and K-L grade 3 patients still showed benefit. Those with more severe radiographic change K-L grade 3 often had a better response with the second series of IA-HA injections. Significantly greater positive response in all outcomes was demonstrated for the patient subgroup classified as K-L grade 2, when compared with K-L grade 3 patients. Conclusions The results demonstrate that IA-HA for knee OA was of greater benefit in those with less severe radiographic changes. However, those with more severe radiographic change often had a better response with the second course of IA-HA. Similar analyses are required in order to determine if these results are unique to Euflexxa, or if these results are consistent with other available IA-HA agents.

Background Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the leading causes of disability within the adult population. Current treatment options for OA of the knee include intra-articular (IA) hyaluronic acid (HA), a molecule found intrinsically within the knee joint that provides viscoelastic properties to the synovial fluid. A variety of mechanisms in which HA is thought to combat knee OA are reported in the current basic literature. Methods We conducted a comprehensive literature search to identify currently available primary non-clinical basic science articles focussing on the mechanism of action of IA-HA treatment. Included articles were assessed and categorized based on the mechanism of action described within them. The key findings and conclusions from each included article were obtained and analyzed in aggregate with studies of the same categorical assignment. Results Chondroprotection was the most frequent mechanism reported within the included articles, followed by proteoglycan and glycosaminoglycan synthesis, anti-inflammatory, mechanical, subchondral, and analgesic actions. HA-cluster of differentiation 44 (CD44) receptor binding was the most frequently reported biological cause of the mechanisms presented. High molecular weight HA was seen to be superior to lower molecular weight HA products. HA derived through a biological fermentation process is also described as having favorable safety outcomes over avian-derived HA products. Conclusions The non-clinical basic science literature provides evidence for numerous mechanisms in which HA acts on joint structures and function. These actions provide support for the purported clinical benefit of IA-HA in OA of the knee. Future research should not only focus on the pain relief provided by IA-HA treatment, but the disease modification properties that this treatment modality possesses as well.

Introduction This study aims to describe the perceptions of orthopedic surgeons on the efficacy of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA), the influence of IA-HA product characteristics on its efficacy, and to identify patterns and factors related to the use of IA-HA. Additionally, this study examines factors that influence IA-HA brand selection, focusing on Euflexxa¯ (1% sodium hyaluronate). Methods We developed survey questions by reviewing the current literature and consulting with experts on the use of IA-HA in the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA). The survey included questions on demographics, previous experience with knee OA treatment, opinions on different treatment methods, and where information regarding treatments is obtained. Additionally, questions specific to opinions regarding IA-HA and the reasoning behind these opinions were asked. Results A total of 117 orthopedic surgeons and physicians completed the survey. IA-HA is most frequently prescribed to patients with early-stage (82%) or mid-stage (82.8%) OA, while fewer orthopedic surgeons and physicians use IA-HA for patients with late-stage OA (57.4%). Respondents were generally uncertain of the effects that intrinsic characteristics, such as molecular weight, cross-linking, and production process, had on patient outcomes. Respondents typically use their own clinical experience and results as a deciding factor in utilizing IA-HA treatment, as well as in choosing an IA-HA brand. Conclusion Uncertainty regarding the efficacy of IA-HA treatments is likely due to inconsistency within clinical guidelines and the current literature. Additional research investigating the efficacy of IA-HA treatment and how product characteristics affect outcome and safety is required to provide clarity to the controversy surrounding IA-HA treatment for knee OA.

ObjectivesHyaluronic acid and corticosteroids are common intra-articular (IA) therapies widely used for the management of mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis (OA). Many trials evaluating the efficacy of IA administered therapies commonly use IA saline injections as a placebo comparator arm. Using a systematic review and meta-analysis, our objective was to assess the clinical benefit associated with use of IA saline in trials of IA therapies in the treatment of patients with painful knee OA.MethodsMEDLINE and Embase databases were searched for articles published up to and including August 14th, 2014. Two reviewers assessed the eligibility of potential reports and the risk of bias of included trials. We analyzed short (≤3 months) and long-term (6–12 months) pain reduction of the saline arm of included trials using standardized mean differences (SMDs; estimated assuming a null effect in a comparator group) that were combined and weighted using a random effects model. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were tabulated and presented using descriptive statistics.ResultsFrom 40 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) eligible for inclusion only 38 provided sufficient data to be included in the meta-analysis. Based on data with moderate inconsistency IA saline was found to significantly improve short-term knee pain in 32 studies involving 1705 patients (SMD = −0.68; 95% CI: −0.78 to −0.57; P < 0.001; I2 = 50%). Long-term knee pain was significantly decreased following IA injection with saline in 19 studies involving 1445 patients (SMD = −0.61; 95% CI: −0.76 to −0.45; P < 0.001) with a substantial degree of inconsistency (I2 = 74%). Overall, 29 of the included trials reported on adverse events, none of which found any serious treatment-related AEs following IA injection with saline.ConclusionsPain relief observed with IA saline should prompt health care providers to consider the additional effectiveness of current IA treatments that use saline comparators in clinical studies, and challenges of identifying IA saline injection as a “placebo.”

Introduction Osteoarthritis (OA), as one of the leading causes of disability, decreases the quality of life for those suffering from the disease and creates a substantial financial burden. Intra-articular hyaluronic acid (HA) can provide relief from the symptoms of OA and multiple HA products are prescribed. The purpose of this study is to examine the single payer cost-effectiveness of various HA products in the treatment of knee OA. Methods A single payer economic evaluation was conducted comparing Synvisc® (Sanofi, USA), Durolane® (Bioventus, USA), Hyalgan® (Fidia Pharma Inc., USA), Supartz™ (Bioventus, USA), and Euflexxa® (Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc., USA). Utility scores for HA products were obtained by extracting Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index pain, stiffness and function from randomized controlled trials and converting them to health utilities index mark 3 scores. The cost of a treatment included the cost of the HA injection, cost of a knee injection procedure and cost of a doctor’s visit for each required injection. Cost–utility in 2015 USD per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) saved was calculated for each HA product, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated to compare the effectiveness of HA products to one another and to conventional care. Results When compared to conventional care, all investigated HA products were cost-effective, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY gained. The HA product Euflexxa had the most favorable cost–utility ratio ($5785.52/QALY) when compared to all other HA brands. Conclusion The present study showed several HA products to be cost-effective in comparison to conventional care, with Euflexxa having the most favorable cost/QALY gained ratio compared to the other HA products. Funding Ferring Pharmaceutics Inc. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-016-0331-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Osteoarthritis (OA), as one of the leading causes of disability, decreases the quality of life for those suffering from the disease and creates a substantial financial burden. Intra-articular hyaluronic acid (HA) can provide relief from the symptoms of OA and multiple HA products are prescribed. The purpose of this study is to examine the single payer cost-effectiveness of various HA products in the treatment of knee OA.A single payer economic evaluation was conducted comparing Synvisc(®) (Sanofi, USA), Durolane(®) (Bioventus, USA), Hyalgan(®) (Fidia Pharma Inc., USA), Supartz™ (Bioventus, USA), and Euflexxa(®) (Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc., USA). Utility scores for HA products were obtained by extracting Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index pain, stiffness and function from randomized controlled trials and converting them to health utilities index mark 3 scores. The cost of a treatment included the cost of the HA injection, cost of a knee injection procedure and cost of a doctor's visit for each required injection. Cost-utility in 2015 USD per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) saved was calculated for each HA product, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated to compare the effectiveness of HA products to one another and to conventional care.When compared to conventional care, all investigated HA products were cost-effective, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY gained. The HA product Euflexxa had the most favorable cost-utility ratio ($5785.52/QALY) when compared to all other HA brands.The present study showed several HA products to be cost-effective in comparison to conventional care, with Euflexxa having the most favorable cost/QALY gained ratio compared to the other HA products.Ferring Pharmaceutics Inc.