Biomedical subjects

Robin Christensen

Publications and source records attributed to Robin Christensen.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Timing of OMERACT core domain measurement in gout clinical trials: a systematic review of randomised trials.

AIMS: The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) initiative has endorsed core domain sets for gout trials. The aims of this study were to evaluate the time points and frequencies at which the gout core domains are measured in existing gout urate-lowering therapy and gout flare trials, and whether all collected measurements were reported. METHODS: Urate-lowering therapy (n = 29) and gout flare randomised clinical trials (n = 14) from 2005 were identified from a prior systematic review of core domain reporting. Data were extracted for the time points and frequencies at which each core domain was measured, as well as whether all collected measurements were reported. RESULTS: In urate-lowering therapy trials, the core domains were measured at seven different frequencies. Serum urate and gout flares were most commonly measured monthly, and tophus burden was most commonly measured three monthly. Reporting of all collected measurements varied, from 24/29 (83%) trials for serum urate to 0/2 (0%) trials for activity limitation. In gout flare trials, core domains were measured at nine different frequencies. Pain, joint tenderness and joint swelling were most commonly measured monthly. Reporting of all collected measurements varied, from 13/14 (93%) trials for pain to 3/8 (37.5%) trials for joint tenderness. CONCLUSION: In both urate-lowering therapy and gout flare trials, there is substantial variability in when the core domains are measured, and reporting of collected measurements is inconsistent. This work provides the foundation for a consensus process to establish standardised time points and frequencies for measuring the OMERACT-endorsed gout core domains.

Gout↗

PubMed2026

Effect of an oral complementary medicine combination for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Many individuals use complementary medicine therapies for osteoarthritis, despite limited scientific supporting evidence. These therapies have demonstrated anti-inflammatory, antioxidative, and chondroprotective effects via different molecular pathways, suggesting potential therapeutic benefits. This trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel oral complementary medicine combination in adults with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis at 12 weeks. DESIGN: The 12-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled ATLAS trial was conducted in Australia from July 2024 to April 2025 (ACTRN12623000380695). Eligible participants were aged ≥40 years with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis and radiographic Kellgren-Lawrence grade ≥2. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive the complementary medicine combination, comprising a total daily dose of Boswellia serrata extract 250 mg, pine bark extract 100 mg, methylsulfonylmethane 1500 mg, curcumin 500 mg, and piperine 5 mg, or placebo. The primary outcome was the 12-week change in knee pain (0-100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS)). A 95% confidence interval excluding differences >18 mm between groups was interpreted as the absence of a clinically meaningful difference. Harms were monitored weekly. RESULTS: Eighty-four participants were recruited (mean [SD], age 63.7 [8.0] years, BMI 29.0 [5.5] kg/m2), and 57% were female. At 12-weeks, both groups (intention-to-treat population: complementary medicine, n=42; placebo, n=41) showed a decrease in VAS pain (least squares means: complementary medicine 20.1 mm vs placebo 20.3 mm), however with no difference between groups: 0.16 mm (95% CI -6.81 to 7.12). The safety profile of experiencing any AE was similar between groups (risk difference, -3.4% [95% CI -24.8-17.9%]); and most adverse events were mild or moderate. Four participants experienced serious adverse events, unrelated to the treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The complementary medicine combination was not superior to placebo for improving pain over 12 weeks, and the evidence does not support the use of this combination to treat people with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Complication rates of 16- and 18-gauge needles for native kidney biopsies: a systematic review and proportional meta-analysis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated complication rates and diagnostic yield reported in studies of adult native kidney biopsy using 16-gauge (16 G) or 18-gauge (18 G) needles. We included randomized trials and cohort studies of real-time ultrasound-guided biopsies, including case series. MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched through October 2024. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using Joanna Briggs Institute tools. Random-effects meta-analyses estimated pooled proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and univariable random-effects meta-regression explored study-level associations with major complications, transfusion, or gross hematuria. We screened 4,499 titles and abstracts and reviewed 319 full-text articles; 62 studies comprising 68 biopsy series were included. The pooled major complication rate in studies using 16 G needles was 1.83% (95% CI: 1.20-2.79) and 1.29% (95% CI: 0.78-2.13) in studies using 18 G needles, with no statistically significant difference. Mean glomerular yield was 18.8 with 16 G and 17.5 with 18 G needles. In study-level meta-regression, studies with higher prevalence of acute kidney injury, lower mean estimated glomerular filtration rate, or lower mean hemoglobin reported higher pooled complication rates. Most studies were single-arm cohorts; between-needle differences therefore reflect indirect study-level contrasts. Interpretation is limited by retrospective design and heterogeneity across studies. Overall, studies using both needle sizes reported low complication rates and similar diagnostic yield, although definitions and reporting varied. Direct comparative studies are needed to determine whether meaningful differences exist.

Humans↗