Clinical Drug Investigation

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 15–23 | Cite as

Short-Term Treatment of Painful Osteoarthritis of the Knee with Oral Enzymes

A Randomised, Double-Blind Study versus Diclofenac
  • Gert Klein
  • W. Kullich
Clinical Use


Objective: To compare the short-term efficacy and tolerability of an oral enzyme therapy with the NSAID diclofenac in patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee (gonarthritis).

Methods: In a double-blind clinical trial, 73 patients with painful gonarthritis were randomised to receive 3 weeks of treatment with an oral enzyme preparation (Phlogenzym®) containing bromelain, trypsin and rutin (n = 36), or the NSAID diclofenac (n = 37). Efficacy was primarily evaluated using the Lequesne index (measuring pain and function of the affected knee). Other investigations included assessment of pain symptoms using a visual analogue scale (VAS), global assessment of efficacy and tolerability (by both patients and one physician), and various laboratory parameters. Patients were evaluated at baseline, at weekly intervals throughout the 3-week treatment period, and at 7 weeks (i.e. 4 weeks after discontinuing therapy).

Results: The Lequesne index improved continuously in both groups: from 13.56 at baseline to 3.10 after 3 weeks (end of therapy) to 2.05 at 7 weeks (follow-up) in the enzyme group, and from 14.04 to 3.50 to 2.24, respectively, in the diclofenac group. Statistical evaluation showed the treatment groups to be equivalent; the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval of the Mann-Whitney estimator was above 0.44 (the limit for equivalence) at all time points. Global assessment of efficacy and tolerability of the drugs was ‘very good’ or ‘good’ for the majority patients.

Conclusions: Short-term evaluation indicates that oral enzymes may be considered an effective and safe alternative to NSAIDs such as diclofenac in the treatment of painful gonarthritis.


Good Tolerability Profile Enzyme Group Painful Osteoarthritis Lequesne Index Oral Enzyme 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Supported by grants from MUCOS Pharma, Germany.


  1. 1.
    Altaian RD. Kriterien für die Klassifizierung der klinischen Arthrose. EULAR Bull 1992; 3: 81–3Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hochberg MC, Altman RD, Brandt KD, et al. Guidelines for the medical management of osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1995; 38: 1541–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fries JF, Williams CA, Bloch DA. The relative toxicity of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs. Arthritis Rheum 1991; 34: 1353–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tamblyn R, Berkson L, Dauphinee WD, et al. Unnecessary prescribing of NSAIDs and the management of NSAID-related gastropathy in medical practice. Ann Intern Med 1997; 127: 429–38PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ament PW, Childers RS. Prophylaxis and treatment of NSAID-induced gastropathy. Am Fam Physician 1997; 4: 1323–6Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bagge E, Traub M, Crotty M, et al. Are rheumatoid arthritis patients more willing to accept non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug treatment risks than osteoarthritis patients? Br J Rheumatol 1997; 36: 470–2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mohammed S, Croom DW. Gastropathy due to celecoxib, a cyclo-oxygenase-2-inhibitor. N Engl J Med 1999; 340: 2005–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hawkey C, Kahan A, Steinbrück K, et al. Gastrointestinal tolerability of meloxicam compared to diclofenac in osteoarthritis patients. International MELISSA Study Group. Meloxicam Large-Scale International Study Safety Assessment. Br J Rheumatol 1998; 37: 937–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Klein G, Kullich W, Brugger A. Phlogenzym in der Behandlung der Periarthropathia humeroscapularis tendopathica simplex. Arzt Praxis 1997; 51: 879–85Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miehlke K. Rheumabehandlung mit Enzymen ist mehr als nur antiphlogistische Therapie. In: Medizinische Enzym-Forschungsgesellschaft e.V. Systemische Enzymtherapie, 15th working symposium, Munich, Germany. Gräfelfing: Forum Medizin Verlag, 1991Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Singer F, Oberleitner H. Ein Beitrag zur medikamentösen Therapie der aktivierten Arthrose. Zur Effektivität eines Enzymgemisches versus Diclofenac. Wien Med Wochen-schr 1996; 3: 55–8Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vogler W. Der Stellenwert der Enzymtherapie bei entzündlich-rheumatischen Erkrankungen. Medizinische Woche Baden-Baden 1990. Natur-und Ganzheitsmedizin 1991; 1 (Suppl.): 23–7Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Emancipator SN, Chintalacharuvu SR, Urankar Nagy N, et al. Effects of oral enzymes in collagen II induced arthritis in mice. Int J Immunother 1997; 13: 67–74Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Desser L, Rehberger A, Paukovits W. Proteolytic enzymes and amylase induce cytokine production in human peripheral blood mononuclear cells in vitro. Cancer Biother 1994; 9: 253–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lehmann VP. Immunomodulation by proteolytic enzymes. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1996; 11: 953–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Subba Rao C, Nagy NU, Emancipator SN. Phlogenzym® protease therapy ameliorates injury in experimental autoimmune arthritis induced by collagen II. B Lymphocytes and Autoimmunity. International Conference; 1996 May 22; Prague, Czech Republic: The New York Academy of ScienceGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Steffen C, Menzel J. Grundlagenuntersuchungen zur Enzymtherapie bei Immunkomplexkrankheiten. Wien Klin Wochenschr 1985; 97: 376–85PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ernst E. Orale Therapie mit proteolytischen Enzymen: Effekte auf hämorheologische Parameter. Perfusion 1994; 12:440–1Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Guggenbichler JP. Einfluβ hydrolytischer Enzyme auf Thrombusbildung und Thrombolyse. Med Welt 1988; 39: 277–80Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hale LP, Haynes BF. Bromelain treatment of human T cells removes CD44, CD45RA, E2/MIC2, CD6, CD7, CD8 and Leu 8/LAM1 surface molecules and markedly enhances CD2-mediated T cell activation. Am Assoc Immunol 1992; 149:3809–16Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    KleefR, DeloheryTM, Bovbjerg DH. Selective modulation of cell adhesion molecules on lymphocytes by bromelain protease 5. Pathobiology 1996; 64: 339–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Munzig E, Eckert K, Harrach T, et al. Bromelain protease F9 reduces the CD44 mediated adhesion of human peripheral blood lymphocytes to human umbilical vein endothelial cells. FEBS Lett 1994; 351: 215–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mojcik C, Shevach EM. Adhesion molecules. Arthritis Rheum 1997; 40: 991–1004PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kleine MW Einführung in die systemische Enzymtherapie. In: Wrba H, Kleine MW, Miehlke K, et al., editors. Systemische Enzymtherapie. Munich: MMV Medizin Verlag, 1996: 18–27Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Seifert J, Siebrecht D, Lange JP, et al. The quantitative absorption of orally administered proteins and histological evidence of enzymes in the wound. In: Gardner MLG, Steffens KJ, editors. Absorption of orally administered enzymes. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1995: 29–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lequesne M. Clinical features, diagnostic criteria, functional assessments and radiological classification of osteoarthritis (excluding the spine). Rheumatology 1982; 7: 1–10Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lequesne MG, Mery C, Samson M, et al. Indexes of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip and the knee. Scand J Rheumatol 1987; 65: 85–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lequesne M. Klinische und röntgenologische Verlaufsbeobachtung bei Hüft-und Kniearthrosen. Methoden und Ergebnisse. Z Rheumatol 1994; 53: 243–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Scott PJ, Huskisson EC. Graphic representation of pain. Pain 1976; 2: 175–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fassbender HG, Zwick J. Neue Forschungsergebnisse auf dem Gebiet der Osteoarthrose. Wien Med Wochenschr 1995; 145: 96–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Baskin WN, Ivey KJ. Aspirin-induced ultrastructural changes in human gastric mucosa: correlation with potential difference. Ann Intern Med 1976; 85: 299–303PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Miller DR. Treatment of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug induced gastropathy. Clin Pharm 1992; 11: 690–704PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Shallcross TM, Heatley RV Effect of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs on dyspeptic symptoms. BMJ 1990; 300: 368–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Soll AH, Weinstein WM, Kurata J, et al. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and peptic ulcer disease. Ann Intern Med 1991; 114:307–19PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Clinch D, Banerjee AK, Ostick G. Absence of abdominal pain in elderly patients with peptic ulcer. Age Ageing 1984; 13: 120–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Singh G, Ramey DR, Morfeld D, et al. Gastrointestinal tract complications of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug treatment in rheumatoid arthritis. A prospective observational cohort study. Arch Intern Med 1996; 156: 1530–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jobanputra P, Nuki G. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Rheumatology 1994; 6: 433–9Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bloom BS. Direct medical costs of disease and gastrointestinal side effects during treatment for arthritis. Am J Med 1988; 84Suppl. 2A: 20–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Greene JM, Winickoff RN. Cost-conscious prescribing of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for adults with arthritis. Arch Intern Med 1992; 152: 1995–2002PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Miehlke K. Enzyme minimieren Risiken der Rheumatherapie. In: Medizinische Enzym-Forschungs-gesellschaft e.V. Systemische Enzymtherapie, 10th working symposium Frankfurt, Germany. Gräfelfing: Forum Medizin Verlag, 1990Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Reinbold H, Maehder K. Die biologische Alternative in der Therapie entzündlicher rheumatischer Erkrankungen. Z Allgemeinmed 1981; 57: 2397–402Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wörschhauser S. Konservative Therapie der Sportverletzungen. Enzympräparate für Therapie und Prophylaxe. Allgemeinmedizin 1990; 19: 173–7Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kullich W, Pöllmann G, Zmerekar Ch, et al. Stellenwert der Bestimmung von Pepsinogen I im Serum als Screening-methode zur Früherkennung gastroduodenaler Läsionen und als Verlaufskontrolle unter der Therapie mit nicht-steroidalen Antirheumatika. Z Rheumatol 1991; 50:39–45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kullich W, Wallner H, Klein G. Die Bestimmung von Serumpepsinogen I und II zur Beurteilung der gastro-duodenalen Verträglichkeit von S (+)-Ibuprofen. Wien Klin Wochenschr 1994; 106/7: 208–11Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Veale DJ, Maple C. Cell adhesion molecules in rheumatoid arthritis. Drugs Aging 1996; 9: 87–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Maheu E, Mazières B, Valat J-P, et al. Symptomatic efficacy of avocado/soybean unsaponifiables in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee and hip. Arthritis Rheum 1998; 41:81–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Steffen C, Menzel J. Enzymabbau von Immunkomplexen. Z Rheumatol 1983; 42: 249–55PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Innerfield I, Luongo F. Analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects of orally given streptokinase. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1963; 113:465–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Bodi T. The effects of oral bromelains on tissue permeability to antibiotics and pain response to bradykinin: double blind studies on human subjects. Clin Med 1966; 73:61–5Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Prado JL. Proteolytic enzymes as kininogenases. In: Erdös EG, Wilde AF, editors. Bradykinin, kallidin and kalli-krein. Berlin: Springer, 1970Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Murachi T, Miyake T. Action of stem bromelain on bovine bradykininogen II and bradykinin. Physiol Chem Phys 1970; 2: 97–104Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Mineshita S, Nagai Y. Hydrolysis of bradykinin by stem bromelain. Jpn J Pharmacol 1977; 27: 170–2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Farmer SG, editor. The kinin system. London: Academic Press, 1997Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gert Klein
    • 1
    • 2
  • W. Kullich
    • 2
  1. 1.Rehabilitation Center for Rheumatic and Cardiovascular DiseasesSaalfeldenAustria
  2. 2.Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Rehabilitation of Internal DiseasesSaalfeldenAustria

Personalised recommendations