RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 A prospective randomised multicentre study comparing continuous and intermittent treatment with celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip JF Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases JO Ann Rheum Dis FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and European League Against Rheumatism SP 99 OP 106 DO 10.1136/ard.2006.052308 VO 66 IS 1 A1 F P Luyten A1 P Geusens A1 M Malaise A1 L De Clerck A1 R Westhovens A1 F Raeman A1 D Vander Mijnsbrugge A1 L Mathy A1 J P Hauzeur A1 F De Keyser A1 F Van den Bosch YR 2007 UL http://ard.bmj.com/content/66/1/99.abstract AB Objective: To compare the effects of continuous and intermittent celecoxib treatment in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis in flare. Methods: In this 24-week, prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients were randomly assigned to receive continuous (n = 62) or intermittent (n = 61) treatment with celecoxib 200 mg once daily. The primary efficacy end point was the area under the curve (AUC) of the change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) total scores between baseline and week 24 divided by the time interval. Secondary end points included the percentage of days with intake of the flare drug, the AUC of the change in the WOMAC total scores, the mean change from baseline in the WOMAC scores, and the patient’s and physician’s global assessment of osteoarthritis. Results: There were no significant differences between patients randomised to continuous or intermittent treatment in the primary end point or most of the secondary end points, although a consistent trend supporting continuous treatment was observed. The percentage of days with intake of the flare drug was significantly lower (p = 0.031) in the group receiving continuous versus intermittent celecoxib. Both treatment regimens were well tolerated. Conclusion: The results of this pilot study indicate a potential clinical difference between continuous and intermittent treatment with celecoxib, and may be useful in designing future trials. A larger trial on both efficacy and safety outcomes is required for conclusive evidence in favour of either continuous or intermittent treatment.