Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2017; 30(05): 318-323
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-17-02-0020
Original Research
Schattauer GmbH

Efficacy of an oral nutraceutical for the treatment of canine osteo arthritis

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled prospective clinical trial
Ruth M. Scott
1   College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, USA
,
Richard Evans
2   Waukesha, WI, USA
,
Michael G. Conzemius
1   College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, USA
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received: 05 February 2017

Accepted: 19 April 2017

Publication Date:
23 December 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objectives: To assess the safety and efficacy of an orally administered nutraceutical (Glu/ CS+; + for additional ingredient) for the treatment of clinical osteoarthritis (OA) in dogs.

Methods: In this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial, client-owned dogs with clinical signs of OA in one or more joints were assigned to a Glu/CS+ (n = 30) or placebo (n = 30) group. Dogs were administered Glu/CS+ or placebo orally and wore an activity monitor (AM) continuously throughout a 97 day study period. Prior to the initiation of the treatment, seven days of baseline activity was collected. On days –7, 30, 60 and 90 of the study, owners completed a patient assessment form (Canine Brief Pain Inventory). Data between groups were compared.

Results: No serious adverse events were reported. No difference was found between groups when evaluating daily activity counts during the seven-day pre-treatment period and the 90-day treatment period. Owner assessment (pain interference and pain severity scores) improved over the 90-day treatment period for both groups, however no difference was found between treatment groups. Conclusions: Treatment with oral Glu/CS+ for a 90 day treatment period when compared to placebo treatment did not result in a significant increase in activity counts in dogs with clinical OA. However, owner assessment scores similarly improved throughout the study period for dogs in both groups, suggesting a caregiver placebo effect in this outcome measure.

Supplementary material for this article is available at https://doi.org/10.3415/VCOT-17-02-0020

Keywords

Dogs - osteoarthritis - glucosamine - activity monitor - chondroitin

 

  • References

  • 1 Aragon CL, Hofmeister EH, Budsberg SC. Systematic review of clinical trials of treatments for osteoarthritis in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2007; 230: 514-521.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Sanderson RO, Beata C, Flipo RM. et al. Systematic review of the management of canine osteoarthritis. Vet Rec 2009; 164: 418-424.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Johnston SA. Osteoarthritis. Joint anatomy, physiology and pathobiology. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1997; 27: 699-723.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Johnston SA, Budsberg SC. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids for the management of canine osteoarthritis. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1997; 27: 841-862.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Khan SA, McLean MK. Toxicology of frequently encountered nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in dogs and cats. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2012; 42: 289-306.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Veterinary Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDS) [homepage on internet] 2016. [cited 2016 May 4]. Available from. http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/ProductSafetyInformation/ucm055434.htm
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Beale BS. Use of nutraceuticals and chondroprotectants in osteoarthritic dogs and cats. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2004; 34: 271-289.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Johnston SA, McLaughlin RM, Budsberg SC. Nonsurgical management of osteoarthritis in dogs. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2008; 38: 1449-1470.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Comblain F, Serisier S, Barthelemy N. Review of dietary supplements for the management of osteoarthritis in dogs in studies from 2004 to 2014. J Vet Pharmacol Therap 2016; 39: 1-15.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 McCarthy G, O’Donovan J, Jones B. et al. Randomised double-blind, positive-controlled trial to assess the efficacy of glucosamine/chondroitin sulfate for the treatment of dogs with osteoarthritis. Vet J 2007; 174: 54-61.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Moreau M, Dupuis J, Bonneau NH. et al. Clinical evaluation of a nutraceutical, carprofen and meloxicam for the treatment of dogs with osteoarthritis. Vet Rec 2003; 152: 323-329.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Gupta RC, Canerdy TD, Lindley J. et al. Comparative therapeutic efficacy and safety of type-II collagen (uc-II), glucosamine and chondroitin in arthritic dogs: Pain evaluation by ground reaction force plate. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr 2012; 96: 770-777.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 D’Altilio M, Peal A, Alvey M. et al. Therapeutic efficacy and safety of undenatured type II collagen singly or in combination with glucosamine and chondrotitin in arthritic dogs. Toxicol Mech Methods 2007; 17: 189-196.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Bhathal A, Spryszak M. Louizos. et al. Glucosamine and chondroitin in canines for osteoarthritis: A review. Open Vet J 2017; 7: 36-49.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Vandeweerd JM, Coisnon C, Clegg P. et al. Systematic review of efficacy of nutraceuticals to alleviate clinical signs of osteoarthritis. J Vet Intern Med 2012; 26: 448-456.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Wandel S, Jüni P, Tendal B. et al. Effects of glucosamine, chondroitin, or placebo in patients with osteoarthritis of hip or knee: network meta-analysis. BMJ 2010; 341: c4675.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Singh JA, Noorbaloochi S, MacDonald R. Chondroitin for osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 1: CD005614.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Belshaw Z, Asher L, Dean RS. Systematic review of outcome measures reported in clinical canine osteoarthritis research. Vet Surg 2016; 45: 480-487.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Conzemius MG, Hill CM, Sammarco JL. et al. Correlation between subjective and objective measures used to determine severity of postoperative pain in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1997; 210: 1619-1622.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Brown DC, Boston RC, Farrar JT. Use of an activity monitor to detect response to treatment in dogs with osteoarthritis. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2010; 237: 66-70.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Brown DC, Michel KE, Love M. et al. Evaluation of the effect of signalment and body conformation on activity monitoring in companion dogs. Am J Vet Res 2010; 71: 322-325.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Dow C, Michel KE, Love M. et al. Evaluation of optimal sampling interval for activity monitoring in companion dogs. Am J Vet Res 2009; 70: 444-448.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Brown DC, Boston RC, Coyne JC. et al. Ability of the canine brief pain inventory to detect response to treatment in dogs with osteoarthritis. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2008; 233: 1278-1283.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Brown DC, Boston RC, Farrar JT. Comparison of force plate gait analysis and owner assessment of pain using the Canine Brief Pain Inventory in dogs with osteoarthritis. J Vet Intern Med 2013; 27: 22-30.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Hansen BD, Lascelles BD, Keene BW. et al. Evaluation of an accelerometer for at-home monitoring of spontaneous activity in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2007; 68: 468-475.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Martin KW, Olsen AM, Duncan CG. et al. The method of attachment influences accelerometer-based activity data in dogs. BMC 2017; 13: 48.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Olsen AM, Evans RB, Duerr FM. Evaluation of accelerometer inter-device variability and collar placement in dogs. Veterinary Evidence, 1(2). Doi. http://dx.doi.org/10.18849/ve.v1i2.40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Maxwell LK, Regier P, Achanta S. Comparison of glucosamine absorption after administration of oral liquid, chewable, and tablet formulations to dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2016; 52: 90-94.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Wenz W, Hornung C, Cramer C. et al. Effect of glucosamine sulfate on osteoarthritis in the cruciate-deficient canine model of osteoarthritis. Cartilage 2017; 8: 173-179.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Adebowale A. Du Jianpin, Liang Z. et al. The bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of glucosamine hydrochloride and low molecular weight chondroitin sulfate after single and multiple doses to Beagle dogs. Biopharm Drug Dispos 2002; 23: 217-225.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Johnson KA, Hulse DA, Hart RC. et al. Effects of an orally administered mixture of chondroitin sulfate, glucosamine hydrochloride and manganese ascorbate on synovial fluid chondroitin sulfate 3B3 and 7D4 epitope in a canine cruciate ligament transection model of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2001; 9: 14-21.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Lascelles BD, Knazovicky D, Case B. et al. A canine-specific anti-nerve growth factor antibody alleviates pain and improves mobility and function in dogs with degenerative joint disease-associated pain. BMC Vet Res 2015; 11: 101.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Conzemius MG, Evans RB. Caregiver placebo effect for dogs with lameness from osteoarthritis. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2012; 241: 1314-1319.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Michel KE, Brown DC. Determination and application of cut points for accelerometer-based activity counts of activities with differing intensity in pet dogs. Am J Vet Res 2011; 72: 866-870.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar