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
Back to article page