Table 3

OMERACT-OARSI and MCII

CS n=199Celecoxib n=199Placebo n=205CS vs placebo χ2 p valueCelecoxib vs placebo χ2 p value
VAS–MCII 20 mm, n (%)
 Day 30—Yes (%) 94 (47) 99 (50) 93 (45)0.7060.378
 Day 91—Yes (%)126 (63)128 (64)125 (61)0.6280.487
 Day 182—Yes (%)136 (68)137 (69)125 (61)0.1220.098
PASS, n (%)
 Day 30—Yes (%) 62 (31) 80 (40) 65 (32)0.9050.075
 Day 91—Yes (%) 93 (47)108 (54) 91 (44)0.6360.047
 Day 182—Yes (%)113 (57)118 (59)101 (49)0.1300.043
VAS–MCII 40%, n (%)
 Day 30—Yes (%) 59 (30) 78 (39) 64 (31)0.7310.093
 Day 91—Yes (%)105 (53)103 (52)102 (50)0.5450.687
 Day 182—Yes (%)127 (64)116 (58)106 (52)0.0140.184
VAS–MCII 50%, n (%)
 Day 30—Yes (%) 43 (22) 50 (25) 49 (24)0.5820.775
 Day 91—Yes (%) 86 (43) 83 (42) 77 (38)0.2470.394
 Day 182—Yes (%)115 (58)103 (52) 83 (40)0.0050.023
LI–MCII 40%, n (%)
 Day 30—Yes (%) 34 (17) 45 (23) 27 (13)0.2720.013
 Day 91—Yes (%) 71 (36) 67 (34) 56 (27)0.0700.165
 Day 182—Yes (%) 94 (47) 90 (45) 72 (35)0.0130.038
LI–MCII 50%, n (%)
 Day 30—Yes (%) 18 (9) 27 (14) 13 (6)0.3070.015
 Day 91—Yes (%) 52 (26) 44 (22) 34 (17)0.0190.159
 Day 182—Yes (%) 74 (37) 70 (35) 56 (27)0.0340.088
OMERACT-OARSI—scenario F, n (%)
 Day 30—Yes (%) 82 (41) 89 (45) 82 (40)0.8050.337
 Day 91—Yes (%)118 (59)119 (60)110 (54)0.2530.213
 Day 182—Yes (%)132 (66)133 (67)113 (55)0.0210.016
  • If we use the ITT2 population the results for MCII (20 mm) reported in the text of the publication are not correct (the comparisons vs placebo are not statistically significant, see table above).

  • ITT, intention-to-treat; LI, Lequesne Index; MCII, Minimal-Clinically Important Improvement; PASS, Patient-Acceptable Symptoms State; VAS, Visual Analogue Scale.