Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Comparing bedinvetmab and meloxicam for dog arthritis pain management
By Innes, John F et al.·Published in Frontiers in veterinary science·2025·Movement Referrals: Independent Veterinary Specialists, United Kingdom·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: A randomised, parallel-group clinical trial comparing bedinvetmab to meloxicam for the management of canine osteoarthritis.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of dogs with osteoarthritis were treated with either bedinvetmab (Librela), an injection given once a month, or meloxicam, a daily oral pain medication, to see which worked better for their joint pain. Both treatments helped reduce pain, but bedinvetmab had fewer side effects, with only four dogs experiencing issues compared to 17 in the meloxicam group. More dogs in the bedinvetmab group completed the study, suggesting it may be a better option for long-term pain management. Overall, both treatments were effective, but bedinvetmab showed a slight edge in safety.
People also search for: dog osteoarthritis treatment · bedinvetmab for dogs · meloxicam side effects in dogs
Abstract
Bedinvetmab (Librela), a fully canine anti-nerve growth factor monoclonal antibody, was compared to the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) meloxicam in dogs for the management of osteoarthritis-related pain in a randomised, open-label, multicentre, parallel-group study. Subjects were recruited from general practices as client-owned dogs with appendicular osteoarthritis. Dogs were block randomised 1:1 to either daily oral meloxicam or bedinvetmab, administered subcutaneously once a month. The primary endpoint for efficacy was the change from baseline in the Canine Orthopaedic Index (COI) score. Linear mixed-effects models were used for statistical analysis conducted on a per-protocol and intent-to-treat basis. We hypothesised that bedinvetmab would demonstrate superior efficacy and safety compared to meloxicam; the number needed to harm (NNH) for meloxicam, relative to bedinvetmab, was calculated. Of the 190 screened dogs, 101 were randomised (bedinvetmab 52; meloxicam 49). Overall, both treatment groups showed a significant reduction in COI scores relative to baseline ( < 0.001). The bedinvetmab group experienced a larger mean reduction in COI scores, but this was not statistically significant. A significant effect of the visit was observed, with later visits showing a significantly greater reduction in COI compared to Visit 2 ( < 0.001). The bedinvetmab group reported four (AEs), whilst the meloxicam group reported 17, with nine of those being gastrointestinal system disorders. Additionally, more dogs in the bedinvetmab group completed the study ( = 44) compared to those in the meloxicam group ( = 33). This is the first study to compare bedinvetmab to an NSAID for the management of osteoarthritis-related pain in dogs. The results suggest that both products are equally effective in managing OA pain, with efficacy improving over time for both treatments. Bedinvetmab was associated with fewer AEs. These data will aid clinicians and pet owners in choosing analgesic options for dogs with osteoarthritis.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40196808/