RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 The BRoccoli In Osteoarthritis (BRIO study) - A randomised controlled feasibility trial to examine the potential protective effect of broccoli bioactives, (specifically sulforaphane), on osteoarthritis
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.06.20.24309233
DO 10.1101/2024.06.20.24309233
A1 Davidson, Rose K
A1 Watts, Laura
A1 Beasy, Gemma
A1 Saha, Shikha
A1 Kroon, Paul
A1 Cassidy, Aedin
A1 Clark, Allan
A1 Fraser, William
A1 Mcnamara, Iain
A1 Kingsbury, Sarah R
A1 Conaghan, Philip G
A1 Clark, Ian M
A1 Macgregor, Alex
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/21/2024.06.20.24309233.abstract
AB Objective The Broccoli in Osteoarthritis (BRIO Study) was conducted to determine whether dietary sulforaphane (SFN), consumed as broccoli, improves pain and/or physical function in participants with knee osteoarthritis (OA). This was a proof of principle study to test the feasibility of the trial to optimise the design of an appropriately powered study.Design Two-centre, double-blind, two-arm parallel, randomised placebo-controlled, dietary intervention feasibility trial. Patients with radiographic knee osteoarthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence score 2-3), with pain of at least 4 on a scale of 0-10 were recruited. The intervention was a high glucoraphanin broccoli, (source of SFN), or a matched placebo (no SFN) soup. Pain and measures of physical function were measured at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks.Results The mean WOMAC pain score (scale 0 - 20) was decreased by 4.2 (95% CI: 1.03,7.38) following intervention, Similar patterns of improvement were observed for other pain and function outcome measures. Study data, sample collections and intervention adherence were 100% compliant except where COVID restrictions applied. Acceptability for randomisation was 100% and acceptability for the intervention was 92%. There were three related adverse events, two of which were expected.Conclusions High glucosinolate broccoli soup is a novel approach to managing OA that is widely accessible and can be used on a large scale. This study shows that it is an acceptable way of delivering dietary bioactives and has potential for therapeutic benefit. The primary outcome of pain improved in the intervention group compared to the placebo and the confidence interval encompassed the minimal clinically important difference. The data provide justification for proceeding to a large scale, appropriately powered intervention trial.Competing Interest StatementDisclosure of interest: Rose Davidson: None declared, Laura Watts: None declared, Gemma Beasy: None declared, Shikha Saha: None declared, Paul Kroon: None declared, Aedin Cassidy: None declared, Allan Clark: None declared, William Fraser Speakers bureau: Roche, Incstar/Diasorin, IDS, Sanofi, Siemens, Menarini, Abbott, Entera Bio, NPS pharmaceuticals and Alexis, Consultant of: Roche, Incstar/Diasorin, IDS, Sanofi, Siemens, Menarini, Abbott, Entera Bio, NPS pharmaceuticals and Alexis, Grant/research support from: Roche, Incstar/Diasorin, IDS, Sanofi, Siemens, Menarini, Abbott, Entera Bio, NPS pharmaceuticals and Alexis., Iain McNamara: None declared, Sarah Kingsbury: None declared, Philip G Conaghan Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Biosplice, BMS, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Genascence, GSK, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Stryker, and UCB, Ian Clark: None declared, Alex MacGregor: None declaredClinical TrialISRCTN 11629849, CPMS 40910, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03878368Funding StatementThis work was supported by grants from Versus Arthritis (Ref: 21772) and Action Arthritis.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of NHS Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales (HCRW) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. Ethical approval for the study was granted by East of England - Cambridge East Research Ethics Committee (ref 19/EE/0007), IRAS: 250371. All patients gave their full informed and written consent to participate in the study. All patient data was anonymised.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors