An eight-week course of a dietary supplement combining hydrolyzed chicken cartilage with a rosehip peel extract did not outperform a placebo on its primary measure of knee pain, according to a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial published in Frontiers in Sports and Active Living. The study, conducted between November 2024 and May 2025 at a single investigational center in Dijon, France, enrolled physically active adults aged 30 to 65 who experienced activity-related knee discomfort but had no diagnosed osteoarthritis. While the supplement, marketed as Chondractiv Move, failed to demonstrate superiority over placebo for the primary endpoint, exploratory analyses pointed to possible benefits in a specific subgroup: postmenopausal women.
The trial randomized 144 participants, of whom 138 formed the full analysis set, to receive either four capsules daily of the active product or a maltodextrin placebo for eight weeks. Each daily dose of the active supplement delivered 1,200 milligrams of hydrolyzed chicken cartilage, supplying at least 75 milligrams of type II collagen, 45 milligrams of chondroitin sulfate and 3.6 milligrams of hyaluronic acid, together with 380 milligrams of Rosa canina extract containing 26.6 milligrams of total polyphenols. The cohort comprised 39.9 percent men, 39.1 percent premenopausal women and 21.0 percent postmenopausal women, with a mean age of 46.4 years, a mean body mass index of 24.4 kilograms per square meter, and an average of 5.6 hours of exercise per week. Running was the most commonly practiced sport, followed by fitness activities.
The primary endpoint was the change from baseline to day 56 in knee pain rated on a 0-to-10 electronic visual analog scale immediately after a standardized single-leg step-down test. In this test, participants repeatedly stepped on and off a platform set at a height equal to their shank length divided by 2.3, at a cadence of one step every three seconds, with the number of repetitions standardized at baseline to elicit a pain rating of at least 5 out of 10. Knee pain after this stress test fell significantly in both arms over the eight weeks, dropping by 2.2 points in the supplement arm and 2.4 points in the placebo arm, both with p values below 0.0001. However, the between-arm difference was negligible: a delta of minus 0.2 points with a 95 percent confidence interval spanning minus 1.1 to 0.7, and no statistical significance. The authors noted that the reductions in both arms exceeded what their sample-size assumptions had anticipated, suggesting a strong placebo effect that may have limited their ability to detect a treatment difference.
The picture changed in the exploratory subgroup analyses, which were prespecified but not separately powered. Among postmenopausal women, the reduction in step-down-test pain from baseline to day 56 tended to be greater with the supplement than with placebo: minus 3.4 versus minus 1.2 points, a delta of 2.2 points with a 95 percent confidence interval of minus 0.2 to 4.7 and a p value of 0.0712. Notably, the reduction in the placebo arm within this subgroup was not statistically significant, which the researchers interpreted as a weaker placebo response in this population, while the reduction in the supplement arm appeared larger than in any other subgroup. A trend toward an interaction between the intervention and menopausal status was observed with a p value of 0.0791.
Secondary outcomes, measured through a smartphone-based electronic patient-reported outcome application, captured pain during and within two hours after each sport session on a 0-to-100 scale, averaged over two-week blocks. Across the entire cohort, the supplement significantly reduced average pain felt during exertion compared with placebo over the supplementation period, with a p value of 0.0255, although pain levels at individual time points did not differ between the groups. In postmenopausal women, the supplement arm showed a benefit over placebo for pain after exertion, with a p value of 0.0421, a large effect size corresponding to a Cohen’s d of 0.99, and a pain level 39 percent lower than in the placebo arm. For pain during exertion in the same subgroup, the p value was 0.0568, with a Cohen’s d of 0.85 and a pain level 36 percent lower than placebo. The researchers emphasized that these subgroup findings rest on unadjusted analyses across multiple endpoints and time points, inflating the risk of false-positive results.
Knee function, assessed with the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, improved over time in both arms, with no significant between-arm difference in the global score for the full cohort or any subgroup. In postmenopausal women, however, the improvement in the global score was 2.4 times greater under the supplement than under placebo, reaching statistical significance within the supplement arm at 13.4 points but not in the placebo arm at 5.5 points, while the between-arm difference itself was not significant. Within the five dimensions of the score, the sport and recreation dimension showed a significantly larger improvement with the supplement among postmenopausal women: an increase of 21.3 points versus 3.2 points, a delta of minus 18.1 with a 95 percent confidence interval of minus 35.2 to minus 1.1, a p value of 0.0381 and a large effect size of 0.82. This dimension also showed a significant interaction between intervention and menopausal status, with a p value of 0.0230, and the mean difference exceeded the published minimal important difference for that dimension.
Intermittent daily life pain, measured with the Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain questionnaire, decreased in both arms, with the reduction in intermittent pain 38 percent greater in the supplement arm after eight weeks, though the difference did not reach statistical significance. Only the supplement arm showed a significant within-arm reduction as early as day 14. The total questionnaire score change was 22 percent higher in the supplement arm and crossed the threshold considered a minimal important change, but again without a significant between-arm difference. Health-related quality of life, measured with the SF-12 questionnaire, improved in both physical and mental component scores in both arms, with no differences between groups. Active knee flexion improved significantly by 3.0 degrees in the supplement arm after eight weeks, while the 1.6-degree change in the placebo arm was not significant, but the between-arm difference was likewise not significant.
The trial also included an exploratory ancillary subgroup of 50 volunteers who continued supplementation for up to 12 weeks. In this smaller group, the reduction in step-down-test pain was larger than in the main cohort, at minus 3.1 points in both arms, but with no between-arm difference. The impression of improvement, self-rated on a seven-point scale, was reported by 50.0 percent of supplement participants at 12 weeks versus 21.7 percent of placebo participants, a trend with a p value of 0.0958. Serum biomarkers of cartilage metabolism showed an unexpected pattern: cartilage oligomeric matrix protein, often regarded as a marker of cartilage turnover, rose significantly in the supplement arm and fell significantly in the placebo arm, with a significant between-arm difference after adjustment for baseline values. The authors hypothesized that this increase might reflect heightened cartilage remodeling activity or a short-term release of the protein after the step-down test, rather than cartilage degradation, and cautioned that blood samples were drawn 30 to 60 minutes after the test, complicating interpretation. No significant changes were seen in the cartilage synthesis marker PIIANP.
No major side effects were reported, and the supplement was well tolerated over both the 8-week and 12-week periods, with compliance above 95 percent of the intended intake. The authors concluded that the product did not demonstrate superiority over placebo for the primary endpoint, but that the exploratory findings in postmenopausal women, spanning pain during and after physical activity and the sport and recreation dimension of knee function, were clinically meaningful and warrant confirmation. They stressed that the subgroup results rely partly on trends with p values between 0.05 and 0.1, involve multiple unadjusted tests, and depend on both a stronger response in the supplement arm and a weaker response in the placebo arm among postmenopausal women. Larger-scale studies, particularly targeting women after the menopausal transition, are needed before any conclusions about the supplement’s effectiveness can be drawn. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT06714851.
Subject of Research: A randomized placebo-controlled trial of a cartilage hydrolysate and rosehip extract supplement for activity-related knee discomfort in physically active adults
Article Title: Supplementation with cartilage hydrolysate and rosehip peel extract in physically active adults: main outcomes and exploratory findings of a randomized, placebo-controlled study on knee discomfort
Article References: Noah, L., Suarez, C. G., Jacquot, A., Spreemann, R., Juhel, C., Rigaudier, F., Guillocheau, E., & Méance, S. (2026). Supplementation with cartilage hydrolysate and rosehip peel extract in physically active adults: main outcomes and exploratory findings of a randomized, placebo-controlled study on knee discomfort. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 8, Article 1873793. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2026.1873793
Image Credits: AI Generated
DOI: 10.3389/fspor.2026.1873793
Keywords: knee pain, cartilage hydrolysate, rosehip extract, randomized controlled trial, dietary supplement, collagen, chondroitin sulfate, hyaluronic acid, postmenopausal women, physical activity, placebo, joint discomfort
News Source: Ophelia Keating. (October 28, 2026). Cartilage and Rosehip Supplement Fails Primary Test but Hints at Benefit for Older Women. Scienmag.
