Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent form of arthritis, a significant cause of disability in the U.S. With an aging population and the rise in obesity rates, the prevalence of knee OA is expected to climb, significantly reducing quality of life (QOL) for those suffering from this debilitating condition. Current national efforts to reduce analgesic utilization highlight the critical need for safe, effective, and accessible alternatives for pain relief. Low-carbohydrate diets (LCDs) reduce inflammation and pain independent of weight loss, indicating that diet interventions offer a non-pharmacological complementary treatment. However, differences exist in metabolism that are rarely addressed in diet intervention studies. Thus, it is important to assess the potential of different diets in a broad population of chronic pain sufferers to determine the potential of diets to reduce knee OA pain. We have shown that a LCD was associated with reduced evoked knee OA pain, daily pain and oxidative stress when compared to either a USDA diet or a diet-as-usual control. Both experimental diets reduced weight to a similar degree, arguing that diet quality was likely the key factor in pain reduction, as opposed to weight loss. However, previous studies comparing diets have utilized diet prescriptions with less control for adherence to the diets. To overcome this obstacle, and in line with our recent work, we will provide all snacks and meals during the diet intervention to increase adherence and retention in the study, allowing for better control over diet interventions and consistency of foods within each study group. We will recruit adults with knee OA (N=200) to complete our two-phase protocol. Phase 1 will involve a 1-week diet run-up that will allow for quantification of pain measures, psychosocial variables (socioeconomic status, nutritional knowledge, proximity to grocery stores, food insecurity), and diet quality to provide a baseline for comparison. Phase 2 will be a 6-week randomized diet intervention (LCD or USDA diet) in which both groups will be provided with all meals at the direction of study personnel and input from participants. Evoked pain tasks, measures of pain disability, severity, catastrophizing, and interference will be assessed every 3 weeks in addition to QOL measures, mood, and depression. Physiological variables will be assessed through blood draws (inflammatory profile) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans (DXA; body composition, visceral fat) at the end of Phases 1 and 2. This will be the first study to examine the efficacy of these diets to reduce knee OA pain with an emphasis on interactions with biopsychosocial variables. Changes in all pain measures following Phase 2 will be assessed with respect to published measures of clinically-meaningful differences in pain and disability, as well as for statistical significance. The central hypothesis is that the LCD will improve pain and QOL in participants with knee OA more than the USDA diet, but that both will be beneficial. Specific Aim 1: To investigate the efficacy of the diets to reduce pain and improve QOL. Hypothesis 1: The LCD group will show significantly greater reductions in: a) self-reported pain (>1.7 in pain intensity) and, b) evoked pain (>30%) when compared to the USDA diet. Hypothesis 2: The LCD group will show greater improvements in: a) QOL, b) mood, and c) self-reported improvement (>50% participants reporting "much improved" or "very much improved"). Hypothesis 3 (secondary): Both diets will result in improved pain disability, severity, catastrophizing and pain related fear; the LCD will outperform the USDA diet. Specific Aim 2: To explore individual differences in diet and baseline measures. Hypothesis 1: Baseline diet quality will be negatively associated with baseline pain sensitivity Hypothesis 2: Those reporting greater a) food insecurity and/ or b) proximity to grocery stores will report poorer-quality diets. Specific Aim 3: To determine whether physiological variables contribute to diet effects or lack thereof. Hypothesis 1: Baseline physiological measures (inflammatory profile) will predict: a) pain sensitivity, and b) reductions in pain. Hypothesis 2: Change in physiological measures (inflammatory profile, adiposity, leptin) will be related to: a) change in pain measures, b) change in QOL, c) self-reported improvement and, d) mood.
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Healthy volunteers are participants who do not have a disease or condition, or related conditions or symptoms |
No |
Study Type
An interventional clinical study is where participants are assigned to receive one or more interventions (or no intervention) so that researchers can evaluate the effects of the interventions on biomedical or health-related outcomes. An observational clinical study is where participants identified as belonging to study groups are assessed for biomedical or health outcomes. Searching Both is inclusive of interventional and observational studies. |
Interventional |
Eligible Ages | 40 Years - 75 Years |
Gender | All |
Trial ID:
This trial id was obtained from ClinicalTrials.gov, a service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, providing information on publicly and privately supported clinical studies of human participants with locations in all 50 States and in 196 countries. |
NCT05785884 |
Phase
Phase 1: Studies that emphasize safety and how the drug is metabolized and excreted in humans. Phase 2: Studies that gather preliminary data on effectiveness (whether the drug works in people who have a certain disease or condition) and additional safety data. Phase 3: Studies that gather more information about safety and effectiveness by studying different populations and different dosages and by using the drug in combination with other drugs. Phase 4: Studies occurring after FDA has approved a drug for marketing, efficacy, or optimal use. |
N/A |
Lead Sponsor
The sponsor is the organization or person who oversees the clinical study and is responsible for analyzing the study data. |
University of Alabama at Birmingham |
Principal Investigator
The person who is responsible for the scientific and technical direction of the entire clinical study. |
Robert E Sorge, PhD |
Principal Investigator Affiliation | University of Alabama at Birmingham |
Agency Class
Category of organization(s) involved as sponsor (and collaborator) supporting the trial. |
Other |
Overall Status | Recruiting |
Countries | United States |
Conditions
The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. |
Knee Osteoarthritis |
If you are interested in learning more about this trial, find the trial site nearest to your location and contact the site coordinator via email or phone. We also strongly recommend that you consult with your healthcare provider about the trials that may interest you and refer to our terms of service below.