Safety and efficacy of S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe) for osteoarthritis

,

Original Research

Safety and efficacy of S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe) for osteoarthritis

J Fam Pract. 2002 May;51(5):425-430

By

Karen L. Soeken, PhD

A meta-analysis

PDF Download

References

1. Gaster B. S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe) for treatment of depression. Altern Med Alert 1999;2:133-5.

2. Stramentinoli G. Pharmacologic aspects of S-adenosylmethionine. Am J Med 1987;83(suppl 5A):35-42.

3. DiPadova C. S-adenosylmethionine in the treatment of osteoarthritis: review of the clinical studies. Am J Med 1987;83(suppl 5A):60-5.

4. Leeb BF, Schweitzer H, Montag K, Smolen JS. A meta-analysis of chondroitin sulfate in the treatment of osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol 2000;27:205-11.

5. McAlindon TE, LaValley MP, Gulin JP, Felson DT. Glucosamine and chondroitin for treatment of osteoarthritis: a systematic quality assessment and meta-analysis. JAMA 2000;28:1469-75.

6. Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C. Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ 1994;309:1286-91.

7. Jadad AR, Carrol D, Moore A, McQuay H. Developing a database of published reports of randomized controlled trials in pain research. Pain 1996;66:239-46.

8. Journal Citation Report Science Edition, Institute for Scientific Information, 1998.

9. Jadad AR, Carrol D, Moore A, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996;17:1-12.

10. Hedges LV. Estimation of effect size from a series of independent experiments. Psychol Bull 1982;92:490-9.

11. Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR, Sheldon TA, Song J. Methods for meta-analysis in medical research. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2000.

12. Hedges LV, Olkin I. Statistical methods for meta-analysis. New York: Academic Press, 1985.

13. Rosenthal R. Meta-analytic procedures for social research (rev ed). Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications, 1991.

14. Glesser LJ, Olkin I. Stochastically dependent effect sizes. In: Cooper H, Hedges LV, eds. The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1994;339-56.

15. Begg CB. Publication bias. In: Cooper H, Hedges LV, eds. The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1994;399-409.

16. Bradley JD, Flusser D, Katz BP, et al. A randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trial of intravenous loading with S-adenosyl-methionine (SAM) followed by oral SAM therapy in patients with knee osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol 1994;21:905-11.

17. Capretto C, Cremona C, Canaparo L. A double-blind controlled study of S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe) v.ibuprofen in gonarthrosis, coxarthrosis and spondylarthrosis. Clin Trials J 1985;22:15-2-43.

18. Caroli A. Studio in doppio cieco SAMe (capsule) - Aspirina nell’osteoartrosi. G Clin Med 1980;61:844-57.

19. Caruso I, Pietrogrande V. Italian double-blind multicenter study comparing S-adenosylmethionine, naproxen, and placebo in the treatment of degenerative joint disease. Am J Med 1987;83(suppl 5A):66-71.

20. Ceccato S, Cucinotta D, Carapezzi C, Ferretti G, Passeri M. Stuio clinico in doppio cieco sull’effetto terapeutico della SAMe e del-l’ibuprofen nella patologia degenerativa articolare. G Clin Med 1980;61:148-62.

21. Cucinotta D, Mancini M, Ceccato S, Castino E. Studio clinico controllato sull’attivita della SAMe somministrata per via orale nella patologia degenerative osteo-articolare. G Clin Med 1980;61:553-65.

22. Maccagno A, DiGiorgio EE, Caston OL, Sagasta CL. Double-blind controlled clinical trial of oral S-adenosylmethionine versus piroxicam in knee osteoarthritis. Am J Med 1987;83 (suppl 5A):72-7.

23. Marcolongo R, Giordano N, Colombo B, et al. Double-blind multicentre study of the activity of S-adenosyl-methionine in hip and knee osteoarthritis. Curr Ther Res 1985;37:82-94.

24. Müller-Fassbender H. Double-blind clinical trial of S-adenosylme-thionine vesus ibuprofen in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Am J Med 1987;83 (suppl 5A):81-3.

25. Pellegrini P. La S-adenosil-metionina (SAMe) nell’osteoartrosi studio in doppio cieco crossover per via orale. G Clin Med 1980;61:616-27.

26. Vetter G. Double-blind comparative clinical trial with S-adenosyl-methionine and indomethacin in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Am J Med 1987;83 (suppl 5A):78-80.

27. Glorioso S, Todesco S, Mazzi A, et al. Double-blind multicentre study of the activity of S-adenosylmethionine in hip and knee osteoarthritis. Int J Clin Pharm Res 1985;1:39-49.

28. Polli E, Cortellaro M, Parrini L, Tessari L, Ligniere GC. Aspetti farmacologici e clinici della solfo-adenosil-metionina (SAMe) nella artropatia degnerativa primaria (osteoartrosi). Min Med 1975;66:4443-59.

29. Bach GL, Gmeiner G. Wochen-doppelblindstudie mit ademetionin (Gumbaral(r)) bei gonarthrose zur ermittlung der äquivalenz intravenöser und oraler dosen. In: Bach GL, Muller-Fassbender H, editors. Arthrose-workshop uber Gumbaral(r) (Ademetionin). Frankfurt am Main:Verlag GmbH. 1986;23-30.

30. Ceccato S, Cucinotta D, Carapezzi C, Passeri M. Indagine clinica aperta e comparativa sull’impiego della SAMe e del ketoprofen nell’osteoartrosi. Progr Med 1979;35:177-91.

31. Berger R, Nowak H. A new medication approach to the treatment of osteoarthritis: report of an open phase IV study with ademethionine (Gumbaral(r)). Am J Med 1987;83(suppl 5A):84-8.

32. Konig B. A long-term (two years) clinical trial with S-adenosylmethionine for the treatment of osteoarthritis. Am J Med 1987;83(suppl 5A):89-94.

33. Domljan Z, Vrhovac B, Dürrigl T, Pu_ar I. A double-blind trial of ademetionine vs naproxen in activated gonarthritis. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol 1989;27:329-33.

34. Montrone F, Fumagalli M, Sarzi Puttini P, et al. Double-blind study of S-adenosyl-methionine versus placebo in hip and knee arthrosis [letter]. Clin Rheumatol 1985;4:484-5.

35. Mitchell D. The SAMe solution. New York: Warner Books, Inc., 1999.

36. ConsumerLab.com. Product review: SAMe. [http://www.consumerlab.com]. Accessed March 11, 2002.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the efficacy of S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe), a dietary supplement now available in the United States, compared with that of placebo or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA).

STUDY DESIGN: This was a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES: We identified randomized controlled trials of SAMe versus placebo or NSAIDS for the treatment of OA through computerized database searches and reference lists.

OUTCOMES MEASURED: The outcomes considered were pain, functional limitation, and adverse effects.

RESULTS: Eleven studies that met the inclusion criteria were weighted on the basis of precision and were combined for each outcome variable. When compared with placebo, SAMe is more effective in reducing functional limitation in patients with OA (effect size [ES] = .31; 95% confidence interval [CI], .098 - .519), but not in reducing pain (ES = .22; 95% CI, -.247 to .693). This result, however, is based on only 2 studies. SAMe seems to be comparable with NSAIDs (pain: ES = .12; 95% CI, -.029 to .273; functional limitation: ES = .025; 95% CI, -.127 to .176). However, those treated with SAMe were less likely to report adverse effects than those receiving NSAIDs.

CONCLUSIONS: SAMe appears to be as effective as NSAIDs in reducing pain and improving functional limitation in patients with OA without the adverse effects often associated with NSAID therapies.

KEY POINTS FOR CLINICIANS

S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe) is as effective as NSAIDs in offering pain relief and improving functional limitation with less risk of side effects.
When compared with placebo, SAMe improved functional limitations of osteoarthritis, but there was no improvement in pain.
The tolerability of SAMe was similar to that of placebo and greater than that of NSAIDs.

One alternative therapy for osteoarthritis (OA) is Sadenosylmethionine (SAMe), a naturally occurring sulphur-containing physiologic compound synthesized from amino acid L-methionine and adenosine triphosphate (ATP).^1,2 Although scientists are not certain how it works to control pain, SAMe plays a key role in 3 major pathways: transmethylation, transsulfuration, and aminopropylation.² SAMe was introduced in the United States in 1999 as a dietary supplement to promote joint health, mobility, and joint comfort. On the basis of a 1987 review of 12 clinical studies involving more than 20,000 patients, SAMe has been touted as “the prototype of a new class of safe drugs for the treatment of osteoarthritis.”³ However, the majority of the patients in those studies (97%) were enrolled in a single open field trial.

Although systematic reviews have demonstrated the benefit of other alternative strategies for OA, such as glucosamine and chondroitin,^4,5 there has been no systematic review of SAMe for OA. Because individual studies of SAMe vary in their sample sizes and report conflicting results, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of SAMe for OA as compared with that of placebo or NSAIDs. We also examined whether study quality, drug dosage, or length of treatment is associated with the effect, and we identified needs for future research.

Methods

Literature search and data sources

We conducted computerized searches using the term “arthritis” and all synonyms for SAMe: “S-Adenosylmethionine,” “Ademetionine,” “S-adenosyl-L-methionine,” “Adenosyl-l-methionine,” “Samyr,” “Gumbaral,” “Sammy,” and “SAM-e.” Results were then combined into the optimally sensitive search strategy for retrieving all clinical trials.^6,7 All languages were included. Our database search included MEDLINE (1966- September 2000), EMBASE (1987-2000), CAMPAIN (Complementary and Alternative Medicine and Pain), Science Citation Index, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, The Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field Registry, National Institutes of Health Office of Dietary Supplements Database, and Micromedix. We also hand searched the 3 journals with the highest impact factors for rheumatology (Arthritis and Rheumatism, British Journal of Rheumatology, and Journal of Rheumatology, 1985-1999),⁸ English-language journals from which we had already retrieved articles, and complementary medicine journals (inception to 1999). In addition, we examined bibliographies from retrieved articles, books, and Web sites related to SAMe and contacted manufacturers of SAMe for previously unidentified research studies.

Inclusion criteria

Criteria for inclusion were established a priori. Studies had to include a sample of patients with a diagnosis of OA; be a randomized controlled trial; compare SAMe with placebo or NSAID; and report data for at least 1 of the outcome variables: pain, functional limitation, and adverse effects. Two raters independently screened studies to determine whether they met the inclusion criteria and agreed in their assessments.

Quality assessment and data extraction

Two raters independently rated study quality of the English studies using the 5-point Jadad scale⁹ that assesses random allocation, double-blinding, and the reporting of withdrawals and dropouts. An additional rating item concerned concealed allocation. Only 1 of the 2 raters assessed the quality of the 4 non-English articles. Two reviewers also independently extracted descriptive information and outcomes that reflected pain, functional impairment, and adverse effects. Any differences in ratings and data extraction were discussed and a consensus was reached.