3 replies to this topic

[ta5]

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2020 Aug 10;21(1):531.

Increased risk of knee osteoarthritis in patients using oral N-acetylcysteine: a nationwide cohort study

Ying-Ting Yeh, Chung-Chao Liang, Chia-Ling Chang, Chung-Y Hsu, Pei-Chen Li

Background: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is known to be a progressive degenerative disorder; however, recent evidence suggests that inflammatory mediators contribute to cartilage degradation. Studies have reported that N-acetylcysteine (NAC) had a promising effect on the reduction of the synthesis of proinflammatory and structural mediators by synovial cells. Given the lack of relevant clinical trials, we conducted this study to determine the relationship between NAC use and risk of knee OA.

Methods: We designed a retrospective cohort study from 2000 to 2013. Patients who received oral NAC over 28 days within 1 year after the first prescription were defined as the case group, whereas those without NAC use were considered as candidates of the control group. We adopted 1:4 propensity-score matching by age, sex, index year, and comorbidities to obtain the control group. The primary outcome was a new diagnosis of knee OA during the follow-up period.

Results: Our study sample comprised 12,928 people who used NAC and 51,715 NAC nonusers. NAC users had a significantly higher incidence of osteoarthritis (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.42, P < .001) than did NAC nonusers. Also, in analyses stratified by age group and sex, all subgroups exhibited a significantly higher incidence of knee osteoarthritis (P < .0001) among NAC users than among NAC nonusers. The use of oral NAC was associated with nearly four-fold increased the risk of knee OA in the young age group.

Conclusions: Long-term use of oral NAC is associated with a higher risk of knee OA.

PMID: 32778089

[albedo]

Informative Ta5, thank you. Maybe not good in long term and to be used as mucolytic if your are sick, in winter times etc ... But it also emerges as a geroprotector (e.g. see LEF formulation using AI in conjunction with other compounds, quercetin or similar if I recollect well ...)

[pamojja]

Patients who received oral NAC over 28 days within 1 year after the first prescription were defined as the case group, whereas those without NAC use were considered as candidates of the control group.

 

I took 800 mg/d of NAC over 12 years. No OA or any unwanted side-effects at all. But then I supplemented very comprehensively for causing remissions in chronic diseases (PAD, COPD, NAFLD, CKD 1, Me/Cfs). And highest with 24 g/d of ascorbic acid. After all, thats ascorbic acid main function:

 

Collagen synthesis. Vitamin C is an essential coenzyme in collagen synthesis. Cofactor in the hydroxylation of lysine and proline, stimulation of gene-expression in fibroblasts; development, maturation and repair of connective tissue such as skin, bone, tendons ligaments, scar tissue, blood vessels and cartilage (anti-scurvy effect = ascorbic). Lack of ascorbic acid results in poorly formed connective tissue in the skin, joints, muscles, and bones.

 

Only once I got prescribtion NAC against a cough. I honestly wouldn't take that shit, so full of unneccessary and probably unhealthy binders and fillers for the long term.

Edited by pamojja, 19 August 2020 - 10:59 AM.

[Daniel Cooper]

I'm always somewhat skeptical of retrospective studies.  

 

If you have people taking NAC, you have to ask yourself "Did they have a reason to take NAC and would those reasons put them at a higher risk of osteoarthritis?".

 

If someone is taking NAC for some underlying health issue they might well be at a higher risk of osteoarthritis irrespective of the NAC.

 

People taking a supplement and people not taking a supplement are frequently different populations.

 

 

 

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 19 August 2020 - 01:24 PM.