Puja P. Khanna

2012 American College of Rheumatology Guidelines for Management of Gout. Part 1: Systematic Nonpharmacologic and Pharmacologic Therapeutic Approaches to Hyperuricemia

DINESH KHANNA, JOHN D. FITZGERALD, PUJA P. KHANNA, SANGMEE BAE, MANJIT K. SINGH, TUHINA NEOGI, MICHAEL H. PILLINGER, JOAN MERILL, SUSAN LEE, SHRADDHA PRAKASH, MARIAN KALDAS, MANEESH GOGIA, FERNANDO PEREZ-RUIZ, WILL TAYLOR, FREDERIC LIOTE, HYON CHOI, JASVINDER A. SINGH, NICOLA DALBETH, SANFORD KAPLAN, VANDANA NIYYAR, DANIELLE JONES, STEVEN A. YAROWS, BLAKE ROESSLER, GAIL KERR, CHARLES KING, GERALD LEVY, DANIEL E. FURST, N. LAWRENCE EDWARDS, BRIAN MANDELL, H. RALPH SCHUMACHER, MARK ROBBINS, NEIL WENGER, AND ROBERT TERKELTAUB

2012 American College of Rheumatology guidelines for management of gout. Part 2: Therapy and antiinflammatory prophylaxis of acute gouty arthritis

In response to a request for proposal from the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), our group was charged with developing non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic guidelines for treatments in gout that are safe and effective, i.e., with acceptable risk-benefit ratio. These guidelines for the management and anti-inflammatory prophylaxis of acute attacks of gouty arthritis complements our manuscript on guidelines to treat hyperuricemia in patients with evidence of gout (or gouty arthritis) (1). Gout is the most common cause of inflammatory arthritis in adults in the USA. Clinical manifestations in joints and bursa are superimposed on top of local deposition of monosodium urate crystals. Acute gout characteristically presents as self-limited, attack of synovitis (also called “gout flares”). Acute gout attacks account for a major component of the reported decreased health-related quality of life in patients with gout (2, 3). Acute gout attacks can be debilitating and are associated with decreased work productivity (4, 5). Urate lowering therapy (ULT) is a cornerstone in the management of gout, and, when effective in lowering serum urate (SUA), is associated with decreased risk of acute gouty attacks (6). However, during the initial phase of ULT, there is an early increase in acute gout attacks, which has been hypothesized due to remodeling of articular urate crystal deposits as a result of rapid and substantial lowering of ambient urate concentrations (7). Acute gout attacks attributable to the initiation of ULT may contribute to non-adherence in long-term gout treatment, as reported in recent studies (8). In order to systematically evaluate a broad spectrum of acute gouty arthritis, we generated multifaceted case scenarios to elucidate decision making based primarily on clinical and laboratory test-based data that can be obtained in a gout patient by both non-specialist and specialist health care providers in an office practice setting. This effort was not intended to create a novel classification system of gout, or new gout diagnostic criteria, as such endeavors are beyond the scope of this work. Prior gout recommendations and guidelines, at the independent (i.e, non pharmaceutical industry-sponsored) national or multinational rheumatology society level, have been published by EULAR (9, 10), the Dutch College of General Practitioners (11), and the British Society for Rheumatology (BSR)(12). The ACR requested new guidelines, in view of the increasing prevalence of gout (13), the clinical complexity of management of gouty arthritis imposed by co-morbidities common in gout patients (14), and increasing numbers of treatment options via clinical development of agents(15–17). The ACR charged us to develop these guidelines to be useful for both rheumatologists and other health care providers on an international level. As such, this process and resultant recommendations, involved a diverse and international panel of experts. In this manuscript, we concentrate on 2 of the 4 gout domains that the ACR requested for evaluation of pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic management approaches: (i) analgesic and anti-inflammatory management of acute attacks of gouty arthritis, and (ii) pharmacologic anti-inflammatory prophylaxis of acute attacks of gouty arthritis. Part I of the guidelines focused on systematic non-pharmacologic measures (patient education, diet and lifestyle choices, identification and management of co-morbidities) that impact on hyperuricemia, and made recommendations on pharmacologic ULT in a broad range of case scenarios of patients with disease activity manifested by acute and chronic forms of gouty arthritis, including chronic tophaceous gouty arthropathy(1). Each individual and specific statement is designated as a “recommendation”, in order to reflect the non-prescriptive nature of decision making for the hypothetical clinical scenarios. So that the voting panel could focus on gout treatment decisions, a number of key assumptions were made, as described in Part I of the guidelines (1). Importantly, each proposed recommendation assumed that correct diagnoses of gout and acute gouty arthritis attacks had been made for the voting scenario in question. For treatment purposes, it was also assumed that treating clinicians were competent, and considered underlying medical comorbidities (including diabetes, gastrointestinal disease, hypertension, and hepatic, cardiac, and renal disease), and potential drug toxicities and drug-drug interactions, when making both treatment choicesand dosing decisions on chosen pharmacologic interventions. The RAND/UCLA methodology used here emphasizes level of evidence, safety, and quality of therapy, and excludes analyses of societal cost of health care. As such, the ACR gout guidelines are designed to reflect best practice, supported either by level of evidence or consensus-based decision-making. These guidelines cannot substitute for individualized, direct assessment of the patient, coupled with clinical decision making by a competent health care practitioner. The motivation, financial circumstances, and preferences of the gout patient also need to be considered in clinical practice, and it is incumbent on the treating clinician to weigh the issues not addressed by this methodology, such as treatment costs, when making management decisions. Last, the guidelines for gout management presented herein were not designed to determine eligibility for health care cost coverage by third party payers.

Tophi and frequent gout flares are associated with impairments to quality of life, productivity, and increased healthcare resource use: Results from a cross-sectional survey

BackgroundThe prevalence of gout is increasing, and most research on the associated burden has focused on serum urate (sUA) levels. The present study quantifies the impact of the presence of tophi and frequency of acute gout attacks on health-related quality of life (HRQOL), productivity, and healthcare resource utilization.MethodsPatients with self-reported gout (n = 620; 338 in US and 282 across France, Germany, and UK) were contacted based on inclusion in the 2010 US and EU National Health and Wellness Surveys (Kantar Health) and the Lightspeed Research ailment panel. Respondents were categorized into mutually-exclusive groups based on number of gout flares experienced in the past 12 months (0/don’t recall, 1–2, 3, 4–5, 6+), current presence of tophi (none, 1+, or not sure), and sUA level awareness (yes, no). HRQOL (SF-12v2), healthcare provider visits in the last 6 months, and work productivity and activity impairment (WPAI) were compared across groups.ResultsMost patients were males, mean age of 61 years, who reported experiencing at least one acute gout flare in the past 12 months, and 12.3% (n = 76) reported presence of tophi. Among the 27.7% (n = 172) of patients who were aware of their sUA levels, higher sUA was associated with more flares and tophi. Decreased HRQOL was associated with more frequent flares and presence of tophi. In multivariable models predicting outcomes based on presence of tophi and number of flares, both flares (≥4) and tophi (≥1) were associated with HRQOL decrements on physical and mental component summary scores and health utilities (all p < 0.05), after adjustment for age, gender, and time since diagnosis. Flares were also associated with greater activity impairment.ConclusionsImpairments associated with gout flares and presence of tophi, across patients in the US and EU, underscore the importance of effective management of this potentially curable condition.

Patient-reported Outcomes in Chronic Gout: A Report from OMERACT 10

Objective. To summarize the endorsement of measures of patient-reported outcome (PRO) domains in chronic gout at the 2010 Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Meeting (OMERACT 10). Methods. During the OMERACT 10 gout workshop, validation data were presented for key PRO domains including pain [pain by visual analog scale (VAS)], patient global (patient global VAS), activity limitation [Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI)], and a disease-specific measure, the Gout Assessment Questionnaire version 2.0 (GAQ v2.0). Data were presented on all 3 aspects of the OMERACT filters of truth, discrimination, and feasibility. One PRO, health-related quality of life measurement with the Medical Outcomes Study Short-form 36 (SF-36), was previously endorsed at OMERACT 9. Results. One measure for each of the 3 PRO of pain, patient global, and activity limitation was endorsed by > 70% of the OMERACT delegates to have appropriate validation data. Specifically, pain measurement by VAS was endorsed by 85%, patient global assessment by VAS by 73%, and activity limitation by HAQ-DI by 71%. GAQ v2.0 received 30% vote and was not endorsed due to several concerns including low internal consistency and lack of familiarity with the measure. More validation studies are needed for this measure. Conclusion. With the endorsement of one measure each for pain, patient global, SF-36, and activity limitation, all 4 PRO for chronic gout have been endorsed. Future validation studies are needed for the disease-specific measure, GAQ v2.0. Validation for PRO for acute gout will be the focus of the next validation exercise for the OMERACT gout group.

The Minimally Important Difference for the Fatigue Visual Analog Scale in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Followed in an Academic Clinical Practice

Objective To estimate the minimally important difference (MID) for a fatigue visual analog scale (VAS) using patient-reported anchors (fatigue, pain, and overall health). Methods Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA; n = 307) had 2 clinic visits at a median of 5.9 months apart. They completed a fatigue VAS (0–10 scale) and the retrospective anchor items, “How would you describe your overall fatigue/pain/overall health since the last visit?” with response options: Much worsened, Somewhat worsened, Same, Somewhat better, or Much better. The fatigue anchor was used for primary analysis and the pain/overall health anchors for sensitivity analyses. The minimally changed group was defined by those reporting they were somewhat better or somewhat worsened. Results The mean [standard deviation (SD)] age was 59.4 (13.2) years, disease duration was 14.1 (11.5) years, and 83% of patients were women. The baseline mean (SD) Health Assessment Questionnaire–Disability Index score was 0.84 (0.75). The baseline fatigue VAS score was 4.2 (2.9) and at followup was 4.3 (2.8) [mean change of −0.07 (2.5); p = not significant]. The fatigue change score (0–10 scale) for Somewhat better and Somewhat worsened for the fatigue anchor averaged −1.12 and 1.26, respectively. Using the pain anchor, the fatigue change score for Somewhat better and Somewhat worsened averaged −0.87 and 1.13; and using the global anchor, the fatigue change score for Somewhat better and Somewhat worsened averaged −0.82 and 1.17, respectively. Effect size estimates using 3 anchors were small for the Somewhat better (range 0.27–0.39) and Somewhat worsened (0.40–0.44) groups, but larger than for the no-change group (0.03–0.08). Conclusion The MID for fatigue VAS is between −0.82 for −1.12 for improvement and is 1.13 to 1.26 for worsening on a 0–10 scale in a large RA clinical practice, and is similar to that seen in RA clinical trials. This information can aid in interpreting fatigue VAS in day-to-day care in clinical practice

Long-term therapy for chronic gout results in clinically important improvements in the health-related quality of life: short form-36 is responsive to change in chronic gout

OBJECTIVE Short Form-36 (SF-36) is a validated outcome measure to assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with gout. We assessed responsiveness to change of SF-36 in patients with gout. METHODS SF-36 was administered at baseline and at yearly intervals. We assessed the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) at the first and second year. We also assessed the responsiveness to change (effect size) and interpreted it based on Cohens criteria. We modelled the improvement (defined as ≥MCID) in SF-36 scales and summary scores. Covariates included age, presence of tophi, comorbidities, baseline joint involvement, baseline serum urate, change in serum urate and the number of flares from baseline to 12 months. RESULTS Of 99 subjects, 96 were male, mean age was 57.1 years, disease duration was 8.2 years and 40.4% had tophi. Ninety-two patients were treated with urate-lowering therapy (ULT) and daily colchicine, and seven were only on colchicine. Baseline mean serum urate level was 8.9 mg/dl and mean number of flares was 4.7 over last year. ULTs were associated with reduction in serum uric acid and number of flares (P < 0.001 for both) over 12 months. Therapy was associated with 22-70% of the patients achieving MCID in SF-36 scores at 12 months. Effect size estimates ranged from negligible to large (SF-36 mental component summary 0.08-bodily pain 1.09). Reduction in flares independently predicted improvements in three SF-36 physical scales (P = 0.001-0.06). Improvement in SF-36 scores was maintained at 2 years. CONCLUSION In our real-life observational cohort, chronic urate lowering therapy and colchicine was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in HRQOL at 1 year and then maintained at 2 years. SF-36, especially physical domains and physical component summary, are responsive to change in gout.

Development of the NIH Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Gastrointestinal Symptom Scales

OBJECTIVES:The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) is a standardized set of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) that cover physical, mental, and social health. The aim of this study was to develop the NIH PROMIS gastrointestinal (GI) symptom measures.METHODS:We first conducted a systematic literature review to develop a broad conceptual model of GI symptoms. We complemented the review with 12 focus groups including 102 GI patients. We developed PROMIS items based on the literature and input from the focus groups followed by cognitive debriefing in 28 patients. We administered the items to diverse GI patients (irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), systemic sclerosis (SSc), and other common GI disorders) and a census-based US general population (GP) control sample. We created scales based on confirmatory factor analyses and item response theory modeling, and evaluated the scales for reliability and validity.RESULTS:A total of 102 items were developed and administered to 865 patients with GI conditions and 1,177 GP participants. Factor analyses provided support for eight scales: gastroesophageal reflux (13 items), disrupted swallowing (7 items), diarrhea (5 items), bowel incontinence/soilage (4 items), nausea and vomiting (4 items), constipation (9 items), belly pain (6 items), and gas/bloat/flatulence (12 items). The scales correlated significantly with both generic and disease-targeted legacy instruments, and demonstrate evidence of reliability.CONCLUSIONS:Using the NIH PROMIS framework, we developed eight GI symptom scales that can now be used for clinical care and research across the full range of GI disorders.

Lesinurad in combination with allopurinol: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients with gout with inadequate response to standard of care (the multinational CLEAR 2 study)

Objectives Determine the efficacy and safety of daily lesinurad (200 or 400 mg orally) added to allopurinol in patients with serum uric acid (sUA) above target in a 12-month, randomised, phase III trial. Methods Patients on allopurinol ≥300 mg (≥200 mg in moderate renal impairment) had sUA level of ≥6.5 mg/dL (≥387 µmol/L) at screening and two or more gout flares in the prior year. Primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving sUA level of <6.0 mg/dL (<357 µmol/L) (month 6). Key secondary end points were mean gout flare rate requiring treatment (months 7 through 12) and proportions of patients with complete resolution of one or more target tophi (month 12). Safety assessments included adverse events and laboratory data. Results Patients (n=610) were predominantly male, with mean (±SD) age 51.2±10.90 years, gout duration 11.5±9.26 years and baseline sUA of 6.9±1.2 mg/dL (410±71 µmol/L). Lesinurad at 200 and 400 mg doses, added to allopurinol, significantly increased proportions of patients achieving sUA target versus allopurinol-alone therapy by month 6 (55.4%, 66.5% and 23.3%, respectively, p<0.0001 both lesinurad+allopurinol groups). In key secondary end points, there were no statistically significant treatment-group differences favouring lesinurad. Lesinurad was generally well tolerated; the 200 mg dose had a safety profile comparable with allopurinol-alone therapy. Renal-related adverse events occurred in 5.9% of lesinurad 200 mg+allopurinol, 15.0% of lesinurad 400 mg+allopurinol and 4.9% of allopurinol-alone groups, with serum creatinine elevation of ≥1.5× baseline in 5.9%, 15.0% and 3.4%, respectively. Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 4.4% of lesinurad 200 mg+allopurinol, in 9.5% of lesinurad 400 mg+allopurinol and in 3.9% of allopurinol-alone groups, respectively. Conclusion Lesinurad added to allopurinol demonstrated superior sUA lowering versus allopurinol-alone therapy and lesinurad 200 mg was generally well tolerated in patients with gout warranting additional therapy. Trial registration number NCT01493531.

Feasibility and Construct Validity of PROMIS and “Legacy” Instruments in an Academic Scleroderma Clinic

OBJECTIVE The National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) roadmap initiative is a cooperative group program of research designed to develop, evaluate, and standardize item banks to measure patient-reported outcomes relevant across medical conditions. The objective of the current study was to assess feasibility and evaluation of the construct validity of PROMIS item banks versus legacy measures in an observational study in systemic sclerosis (SSc). We hypothesized that the PROMIS item banks can be administered in a clinical setting if there is adequate staff support without disrupting the flow of clinic. METHODS Patients with SSc in a single academic center completed computerized adaptive test (CAT) administered PROMIS item banks during the clinic visit and legacy measures (using paper and pencil). The construct validity of PROMIS items was evaluated by examining correlations with corresponding legacy measures using multitrait-multimethod analysis. RESULTS Participants consisted of 143 SSc patients with an average age of 51.5 years; 71% were female and 68% were white. The average number of items completed for each CAT-administered item bank ranged from 5 to 8 (69 CAT items per patient), and the average time to complete each CAT-administered item bank ranged from 48 seconds to 1.9 minutes per patient (average time = 11.9 minutes/per patient for 11 banks). All correlations between PROMIS domains and respective legacy measures were large and in the hypothesized direction (ranged from 0.61 to 0.82). CONCLUSION Our study supports the construct validity of the CAT-administered PROMIS item banks and shows that they can be administered successfully in a clinic with support staff. Future studies should assess the feasibility of PROMIS item banks in a busy clinical practice.

Treatment of acute gout: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE Acute gout is traditionally treated with NSAIDs, corticosteroids, and colchicine; however, subjects have multiple comorbidities that limit the use of some conventional therapies. We systematically reviewed the published data on the pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic agents used for the treatment of acute gouty arthritis. METHODS A systematic search was performed using PubMed and Cochrane database through May 2013. We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included NSAIDs, corticosteroids, colchicine, adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), interleukin-1 (IL-1) inhibitors, topical ice, or herbal supplements. RESULTS Thirty articles were selected for systematic review. The results show that NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors are effective agents for the treatment of acute gout attacks. Systemic corticosteroids have similar efficacy to therapeutic doses of NSAIDs, with studies supporting oral and intramuscular use. ACTH is suggested to be efficacious in acute gout. Oral colchicine demonstrated to be effective, with low-dose colchicine demonstrating a comparable tolerability profile as placebo and a significantly lower side effect profile to high-dose colchicine. The IL-1β inhibitory antibody, canakinumab, was effective for the treatment of acute attacks in subjects refractory to and in those with contraindications to NSAIDs and/or colchicine. However, rilonacept was demonstrated to be not as effective, and there are no RCTs for the use of anakinra. CONCLUSION NSAIDs, COX-2 selective inhibitors, corticosteroids, colchicine, ACTH, and canakinumab have evidence to suggest efficacy in treatment of acute gout.