Glucosamine Forte - Clinical Trials

Glucosamine Forte - Clinical Trials:

There are numerous European studies showing a clear benefit of Glucosamine supplements for relief of joint pain and stiffness associated with osteoarthritis.  (1,2)

Recent meta-analyses of the studies have supported the beneficial role of glucosamine supplements as a safe and effective approach to treating osteoarthritis. In general 1-3 months of glucosamine supplementation seems to be at least as effective as analgetic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), like acetaminophen and ibuprofen, in reducing the joint pain of osteoarthritis, but has no significant adverse effects.
A multi-central, randomized, controlled clinical trial of glucosamine hydrochloride comparing glucosamine sulfate for the treatment of osteoarthritis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of glucosamine hydrochloride for the treatment of osteoarthritis. One hundred and forty-three patients suffering from knee or hip osteoarthritis were randomized into study (glucosamine hydrochloride) or control (glucosamine sulfate) group. Patients in study group orally took glucosamine hydrochloride 2 times daily for 6 weeks, each time 1 capsule, and those in control group took glucosamine sulfate 3 times daily for 6 weeks also, each time 2 capsules. RESULTS: The symptomatic improvement of joint pain at walking, at rest and stiffness after 6 week treatment with glucosamine hydrochloride was better than those with glucosamine sulfate. The results had significant difference (P < 0.05). Total effective rates of patients with glucosamine hydrochloride was 75.4% and 60.6% with glucosamine sulfate. The results suggested both glucosamine had the considerable efficacy in the treatment of osteoarthritis. No severe adverse events (SAE) was observed. (3)

Clinical trial to determine the effectiveness of glucosamine versus ibuprofen has showed the benefits of glucosamine. Patients were separated into two groups and administered either 1500 mg of glucosamine or 1200 mg of ibuprofen. The patients who received the Glucosamine treatment reported less pain than those taking ibuprofen, as well as better mobility and less swelling. Those taking the glucosamine also reported less adverse side effects than those taking ibuprofen. (4)

The randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical study of 212 patients with knee osteoarthritis showed a greater decrease in pain in the group taking 1200 mg of glucosamine in comparison with placebo group. (5)

Chondroitin sulfate has been shown, in numerous double-blind trials, to relieve symptoms and possibly slow the progression of, or reverse, osteoarthritis.  (6)
Two recent meta-analyses indicate that chondroitin sulfate may be useful in the treatment of osteoarthritis.

In all, there were 13 studies (six involving glucosamine and seven involving chondroitin sulfate).
All 13 studies found positive results in hip or knee osteoarthritis. The authors of the meta-analysis judged a trial positive if there was 25% or more improvement in the treatment group compared with placebo. 


In clinical trial devil’s claw was found to reduce pain associated with osteoarthritis as effectively as the slow-acting analgesic/cartilage-protective drug.  In a double-blind, randomized, multicentre clinical study, the efficacy and tolerance of a herbal medicine product, Harpadol (6 capsules/day, each containing 435 mg of powdered cryoground powder Harpagophytum procumbens), was compared with diacerhein 100 mg/day in the treatment, for 4 months, of 122 patients suffering from osteoarthritis of the knee and hip. Assessments of pain and functional disability were made on a 10 cm horizontal visual analogue scale; severity of osteoarthritis was evaluated by Lequesne’s index. Spontaneous pain showed a significant improvement during the course of the study and there was no difference in the efficacy of the two treatments. Similarly, there was a progressive and significant reduction in the Lequesne functional index and no statistical difference was found between Harpadol and diacerhein. At completion of the study, patients taking Harpadol were using significantly less NSAIDs and antalgic drugs. The frequency of adverse events was significantly lower in the Harpadol group. The most frequent event reported was diarrhea, occurring in 8.1% and 26.7% of Harpadol and diacerhein patients respectively. The global tolerance assessment by patients at the end of treatment favoured Harpadol. The results of this study demonstrate that Harpadol is comparable in efficacy and superior in safety to diacerhein. (7)

The dried aqueous extract of Harpagophytum procumbens (Pedaliaceae) and its main iridoid glycoside, harpagoside, have been evaluated for anti-inflammatory and analgesic effects in mice and rats, in order to validate or invalidate the involvement of this compound in such properties. This extract exerted significant and dose-dependent anti-inflammatory and analgesic effects, from the dose 100 mg of dried secondary roots/kg, the first being obtained on an acute inflammatory process (carrageenan-induced edema test in rats) and the second being obtained against a chemical stimulus (writhing test in mice). Harpagoside does not appear to be involved in anti-inflammatory properties, since this iridoid glycoside did not protect against carrageenan inflammatory effects when it was used at 5 and 10 mg/kg; 5 mg corresponding to the quantity contained in 400 mg of dried secondary roots. The main iridoid glycoside of H. procumbens appears to be implicated in the peripheral analgesic properties of this species, but other compounds have to be involved, since the dose of 10 mg/kg exerted a significant protective effect. The absence of the activity of H. procumbens after an acid treatment (0.1 N hydrochloric acid), stomach, suggests the use of a suitable galenic preparation in order to protect the active principles from the action of the acid released in the stomach. (8)