Research evidence / Overview of studies for Creval
Evidence from Clinical Trials for Osteoarthritis
The primary research base for Creval was used in studies exploring the signs and symptoms of Osteoarthritis (OA). The core evidence comes from several large Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs). These studies were applied in research contexts involving fluctuating or unstable symptoms, typically comparing the medicine to a placebo (an inactive substance) and sometimes to other comparator drugs. The studies included adults diagnosed with active OA, focusing on those with discomfort in the knee or hip.
Researchers mainly monitored patient-reported outcomes describing perceived discomfort. These included standardized measures like pain intensity scales and the WOMAC index, which tracks outcomes reflecting daily functioning or activity level, such as stiffness and physical limitations. Studies report how symptoms evolved in the observed populations during the short-term treatment periods evaluated. This evidence contributes to the broader evidence landscape by characterizing symptom evolution in the observed populations.
Evidence from Clinical Trials for Adult Rheumatoid Arthritis
Research examined Creval in studies exploring how symptoms change over time for individuals with Adult Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). These research efforts primarily consisted of Randomized Controlled Trials applied in research contexts involving fluctuating or unstable symptoms. The studies included adults with active RA, and research examined outcomes related to systemic or functional imbalance.
To track how the condition evolved, studies monitored changes in patient-reported outcomes as well as specific medical measures, such as the ACR indices, which assess disease activity. Findings describe patterns observed in the studies regarding changes in swelling, joint tenderness, and overall functional status over the observation periods. This research provides insight into short-term changes in conditions characterized by fluctuating or episodic manifestations.
Evidence from Acute Pain Studies (Postoperative Pain and Dysmenorrhea)
Research for Creval also studied outcomes related to physical discomfort, including its use in conditions involving periods of heightened symptoms such as postoperative pain (e.g., following dental or orthopedic surgery) and Primary Dysmenorrhea (menstrual cramping). These studies primarily used short-term RCTs, often involving a single dose or a few days of treatment.
The main focus of this research was on outcomes describing episodic or acute changes. Studies monitored the intensity of pain, time to use of rescue medication, and whether patients needed rescue pain medication. Research highlights changes measured during the study period, indicating that Creval was studied in research exploring short-term changes in patient-reported outcomes describing perceived discomfort during these acute episodes.
Long-Term Research and Follow-up Durations
Research has explored outcomes related to physical discomfort over defined time intervals. For chronic conditions like Osteoarthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis, regulators rely on research that includes both studies focused on short-term symptom patterns and longer follow-up for comparative data. The initial, high-quality RCTs that measured changes in symptoms generally had follow-up durations that were limited to a few months.
This means that long-term effects are not fully established by the core trials. While some studies observed responses over intermediate-term periods, the durability of any observed symptomatic patterns and their evolution over years is an area where data are still emerging. Consequently, long-term outcomes are not well characterized, and research continues to contribute to the broader evidence landscape as more time passes.
Evidence in Specific Patient Populations
Most core clinical studies focused on general adult populations meeting specific, defined criteria for their condition (OA or RA). Research was evaluated in patients within certain age ranges. Evidence is limited regarding how the medicine works in very specific groups, particularly those with complex or co-existing medical conditions that were typically excluded from the primary trials.
While studies included older adults with arthritis, research primarily focuses on adults, and data for certain groups, such as those with highly active or rapidly progressing disease, remain insufficient. Evidence is also limited for pediatric patients. Research does not determine whether an individual will respond similarly to the group patterns described in the studies, especially if their health profile differs significantly from the populations studied in the RCTs.
Research Gaps and What Remains Uncertain
The overall evidence base provides insight into short-term changes in symptom intensity or variability for the studied conditions. However, evidence quality varies across studies, and several areas require further research.
- Long-term effects are not fully established, meaning the research provides limited information for long-term outcomes or how treatment affects conditions over many years.
- Subgroup findings are uncertain, as initial trials often exclude patients with certain high-risk factors or complex comorbidities, meaning the research applies only to the populations studied.
- Data for certain groups remain insufficient, particularly for understanding potential physiological strain or stress over extended periods of use in high-risk individuals.
- Comparative evidence is lacking for some of the newer therapeutic options now available.
These limitations mean that while the research describes patterns observed in the studies, it also highlights what is known—and what is still uncertain—about the evidence base for Creval.
Key Studies & References
- FDA Alert on Bextra (valdecoxib) Withdrawal and Safety Concerns (Public Health Advisory)