Skip to main content

Table 5 Stratified analysis for change in total WOMAC score based on baseline COMP levels

From: Efficacy and tolerability of an undenatured type II collagen supplement in modulating knee osteoarthritis symptoms: a multicenter randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

COMP (ng/mL)

Analytical method

Type of analysis

Time point (Days)

Placebo (n = 27)

GC (n = 28)

UC-II (n = 27)

p value (95 % CI)

Overalla

GC vs PBO

UC-II vs PBO

UC-II vs GC

≥285

ANCOVA

mITT

180

−368 ± 41.7

−396 ± 40.9

−574 ± 41.6

0.002

0.88 (−168 to 112)

0.002b (−347 to −65)

0.009c (−317 to −38)

MMRM

mITT

180

−351 ± 44.1

−398 ± 41.1

−540 ± 44.2

0.006

0.71 (−188 to 94)

0.006b (−330 to −48)

0.048c (−282 to −1)

iAUCd

ITT

1 to 180

−1351 ± 212

−1582 ± 204

−2384 ± 207

0.003

0.72 (−934 to 473)

0.002b (−1741 to −325)

0.02c (−1498 to −107)

    

(n = 26)

(n = 29)

(n = 26)

    

<285

ANCOVA

mITT

180

−463 ± 38.8

−508 ± 36.6

−526 ± 38.7

0.48

0.67 (−173 to 82)

0.49 (−195 to 68)

0.94 (−145 to 109)

MMRM

mITT

180

−442 ± 38.2

−493 ± 37.3

−521 ± 38.1

0.34

0.60 (−178 to 76)

0.32 (−208 to 50)

0.86 (−155 to 100)

iAUCe

ITT

1 to 180

−1626 ± 185

−1908 ± 178

−1902 ± 185

0.49

0.52 (−896 to 333)

0.55 (−902 to 350)

0.99 (−607 to 618)

  1. Values presented as Mean ± SE
  2. aOverall p value was obtained by comparing the mean changes among the three groups using ANCOVA
  3. bSignificant difference between the UC-II and the placebo groups using Tukey-Kramer test
  4. cSignificant difference between the UC-II and the GC groups using Tukey-Kramer test
  5. dNumber of subjects used for analyses, 27, placebo; 29, GC; 28, UC-II
  6. eNumber of subjects used for analyses, 27, placebo; 29, GC; 27, UC-II