Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Gout: HELP
Articles by William J. Taylor
Based on 66 articles published since 2010
(Why 66 articles?)
||||

Between 2010 and 2020, W. Taylor wrote the following 66 articles about Gout.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
Pages: 1 · 2 · 3
1 Guideline 2012 American College of Rheumatology guidelines for management of gout. Part 2: therapy and antiinflammatory prophylaxis of acute gouty arthritis. 2012

Khanna, Dinesh / Khanna, Puja P / Fitzgerald, John D / Singh, Manjit K / Bae, Sangmee / Neogi, Tuhina / Pillinger, Michael H / Merill, Joan / Lee, Susan / Prakash, Shraddha / Kaldas, Marian / Gogia, Maneesh / Perez-Ruiz, Fernando / Taylor, Will / Lioté, Frédéric / Choi, Hyon / Singh, Jasvinder A / Dalbeth, Nicola / Kaplan, Sanford / Niyyar, Vandana / Jones, Danielle / Yarows, Steven A / Roessler, Blake / Kerr, Gail / King, Charles / Levy, Gerald / Furst, Daniel E / Edwards, N Lawrence / Mandell, Brian / Schumacher, H Ralph / Robbins, Mark / Wenger, Neil / Terkeltaub, Robert / Anonymous2340738. ·University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. ·Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) · Pubmed #23024029.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

2 Guideline 2012 American College of Rheumatology guidelines for management of gout. Part 1: systematic nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic therapeutic approaches to hyperuricemia. 2012

Khanna, Dinesh / Fitzgerald, John D / Khanna, Puja P / Bae, Sangmee / Singh, Manjit K / Neogi, Tuhina / Pillinger, Michael H / Merill, Joan / Lee, Susan / Prakash, Shraddha / Kaldas, Marian / Gogia, Maneesh / Perez-Ruiz, Fernando / Taylor, Will / Lioté, Frédéric / Choi, Hyon / Singh, Jasvinder A / Dalbeth, Nicola / Kaplan, Sanford / Niyyar, Vandana / Jones, Danielle / Yarows, Steven A / Roessler, Blake / Kerr, Gail / King, Charles / Levy, Gerald / Furst, Daniel E / Edwards, N Lawrence / Mandell, Brian / Schumacher, H Ralph / Robbins, Mark / Wenger, Neil / Terkeltaub, Robert / Anonymous2330738. ·University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. ·Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) · Pubmed #23024028.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

3 Review Weight loss for overweight and obese individuals with gout: a systematic review of longitudinal studies. 2017

Nielsen, Sabrina M / Bartels, Else M / Henriksen, Marius / Wæhrens, Eva E / Gudbergsen, Henrik / Bliddal, Henning / Astrup, Arne / Knop, Filip K / Carmona, Loreto / Taylor, William J / Singh, Jasvinder A / Perez-Ruiz, Fernando / Kristensen, Lars E / Christensen, Robin. ·The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. · Department of Physical and Occupational Therapy, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark. · The Research Initiative for Activity Studies and Occupational Therapy, General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. · Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, Faculty of Science, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. · Center for Diabetes Research, Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Hellerup, Denmark. · Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. · NNF Center for Basic Metabolic Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. · Institutode Salud Musculoesquelética, Madrid, Spain. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. · Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, & Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Birmingham, Alabama, USA. · Rheumatology Division, Hospital de Cruces, Baracaldo, Spain. ·Ann Rheum Dis · Pubmed #28866649.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: Weight loss is commonly recommended for gout, but the magnitude of the effect has not been evaluated in a systematic review. The aim of this systematic review was to determine benefits and harms associated with weight loss in overweight and obese patients with gout. METHODS: We searched six databases for longitudinal studies, reporting the effect of weight loss in overweight/obese gout patients. Risk of bias was assessed using the tool Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. RESULTS: From 3991 potentially eligible studies, 10 were included (including one randomised trial). Interventions included diet with/without physical activity, bariatric surgery, diuretics, metformin or no intervention. Mean weight losses ranged from 3 kg to 34 kg. Clinical heterogeneity in study characteristics precluded meta-analysis. The effect on serum uric acid (sUA) ranged from -168 to 30 μmol/L, and 0%-60% patients achieving sUA target (<360 μmol/L). Six out of eight studies (75%) showed beneficial effects on gout attacks. Two studies indicated dose-response relationship for sUA, achieving sUA target and gout attacks. At short term, temporary increased sUA and gout attacks tended to occur after bariatric surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence is in favour of weight loss for overweight/obese gout patients, with low, moderate and low quality of evidence for effects on sUA, achieving sUA target and gout attacks, respectively. At short term, unfavourable effects may occur. Since the current evidence consists of a few studies (mostly observational) of low methodological quality, there is an urgent need to initiate rigorous prospective studies (preferably randomised controlled trials). SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42016037937.

4 Review Gout Classification Criteria: Update and Implications. 2016

Vargas-Santos, Ana Beatriz / Taylor, William J / Neogi, Tuhina. ·Clinical Epidemiology Research and Training Unit, Boston University School of Medicine, X building, Suite 200, 650 Albany Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago Wellington, PO Box 7343, Wellington, New Zealand. · Clinical Epidemiology Research and Training Unit, Boston University School of Medicine, X building, Suite 200, 650 Albany Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. tneogi@bu.edu. ·Curr Rheumatol Rep · Pubmed #27342957.

ABSTRACT: Gout is the most common inflammatory arthritis, with a rising prevalence and incidence worldwide. There has been a resurgence in gout research, fueled, in part, by a number of advances in pharmacologic therapy for gout. The conduct of clinical trials and other observational research in gout requires a standardized and validated means of assembling well-defined groups of patients with gout for such research purposes. Recently, an international collaborative effort that involved a data-driven process with state-of-the art methodology supported by the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism led to publication of new gout classification criteria.

5 Review Imaging as a potential outcome measure in gout studies: A systematic literature review. 2016

Durcan, Laura / Grainger, Rebecca / Keen, Helen I / Taylor, William J / Dalbeth, Nicola. ·Department of Rheumatology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland; Department of Rheumatology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 1830 East Monument St, Baltimore, MD 21287. Electronic address: ldurcan1@jhmi.edu. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. · University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. · Division of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. ·Semin Arthritis Rheum · Pubmed #26522139.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: Despite major progress in the imaging of gout, it is unclear which domains these techniques can evaluate and whether imaging modalities have the potential to provide valid outcome measures. The aim of this study was to assess the use of imaging instruments in gout according to the Outcomes in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT) filter to inform the development of imaging as an outcome measure. METHODS: A systematic literature search of imaging modalities for gout was undertaken. Articles were assessed by two reviewers to identify imaging domains and summarize information according to the OMERACT filter. RESULTS: The search identified 78 articles (one abstract). Modalities included were conventional radiography (CR) (16 articles), ultrasound (US) (29), conventional computed tomography (CT) (11), dual energy computed tomography (DECT) (20), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (16). Three domains were identified as follows: urate deposition, joint damage, and inflammation. Although sufficient data were available to assess feasibility, validity, and reliability, comprehensive assessment of discrimination was not possible due to the paucity of prospective imaging studies. CR is widely accessible, inexpensive with a validated damage scoring system. US and MRI offer radiation-free methods of evaluating urate deposition, damage and inflammation, but may be limited by accessibility. DECT provides excellent definition of urate deposition and bone damage, but has restricted availability and requires radiation. CONCLUSIONS: Imaging methods can detect urate deposition, damage, and inflammation in gout. More than one modality may be required depending on the domains and therapeutic agent of interest. No single imaging method currently fulfils all aspects of the OMERACT filter for any domain.

6 Review Imaging as an Outcome Measure in Gout Studies: Report from the OMERACT Gout Working Group. 2015

Grainger, Rebecca / Dalbeth, Nicola / Keen, Helen / Durcan, Laura / Lawrence Edwards, N / Perez-Ruiz, Fernando / Diaz-Torne, Cesar / Singh, Jasvinder A / Khanna, Dinesh / Simon, Lee S / Taylor, William J. ·From the Department of Medicine, University of Otago Wellington, Wellington; Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, New Zealand; Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland; School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia; Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA; Rheumatology Division, Hospital Universitario Cruces and BioCruces Health Research Institute, Vizcaya; Division of Rheumatology, Hospital de la Santa Creu I Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; SDG LLC, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.R. Grainger, PhD, FRACP, Senior Lecturer, Rheumatologist, Department of Medicine, University of Otago Wellington; N. Dalbeth, MD, FRACP, Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, University of Auckland; L. Durcan, Rheumatology Fellow, MD, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital; H. Keen, PhD, Associate Professor, School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia; N.L. Edwards, MD, Professor of Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Florida; F. Perez-Ruiz, MD, Professor, Rheumatology Division, Hospital Universitario Cruces and BioCruces Health Research Institute; C. Diaz-Torne, PhD, Associate Professor and Rheumatologist; J.A. Singh, MBBS, MPH, Associate Professor of Medicine; Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University of Alabama at Birmingham; D. Khanna, MD, MSc, Associate Professor of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, University of Michigan; L.S. Simon, MD, Principal Advisor, SDG LLC; W.J. Taylor, PhD, FRACP, Associate Professor and Rheumatologist, Department of Medicine, University of Otago Wellington. ·J Rheumatol · Pubmed #25641895.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: The gout working group at the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) 12 meeting in 2014 aimed to determine which imaging modalities show the most promise for use as measurement instruments for outcomes in studies of people with chronic gout and to identify the key foci for future research about the performance of these imaging techniques with respect to the OMERACT filter 2.0. METHODS: During the gout session, a systematic literature review of the data addressing imaging modalities including plain radiography (XR), conventional computed tomography (CT), dual-energy computed tomography (DECT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and ultrasound (US) and the fulfillment of the OMERACT filter 2.0 was presented. RESULTS: The working group identified 3 relevant domains for imaging in gout studies: urate deposition (tophus burden), joint inflammation, and structural joint damage. CONCLUSION: The working group prioritized gaps in the data and identified a research agenda.

7 Review Imaging modalities for the classification of gout: systematic literature review and meta-analysis. 2015

Ogdie, Alexis / Taylor, William J / Weatherall, Mark / Fransen, Jaap / Jansen, Tim L / Neogi, Tuhina / Schumacher, H Ralph / Dalbeth, Nicola. ·Division of Rheumatology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. · Department of Rheumatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. · Sections of Epidemiology and Rheumatology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. ·Ann Rheum Dis · Pubmed #24915980.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Although there has been major progress in gout imaging, no gout classification criteria currently include advanced imaging techniques. OBJECTIVE: To examine the usefulness of imaging modalities in the classification of gout when compared to monosodium urate (MSU) crystal confirmation as the gold standard, in order to inform development of new gout classification criteria. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the published literature concerning the diagnostic performance of plain film radiography, MRI, ultrasound (US), conventional CT and dual energy CT (DECT). Only studies with MSU crystal confirmation as the gold standard were included. When more than one study examined the same imaging feature, the data were pooled and summary test characteristics were calculated. RESULTS: 11 studies (9 manuscripts and 2 meeting abstracts) satisfied the inclusion criteria. All were set in secondary care, with mean gout disease duration of at least 7 years. Three features were examined in more than one study: the double contour sign (DCS) on US, tophus on US, and MSU crystal deposition on DECT. The pooled (95% CI) sensitivity and specificity of US DCS were 0.83 (0.72 to 0.91) and 0.76 (0.68 to 0.83), respectively; of US tophus, were 0.65 (0.34 to 0.87) and 0.80 (0.38 to 0.96), respectively; and of DECT, were 0.87 (0.79 to 0.93) and 0.84 (0.75 to 0.90), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: US and DECT show promise for gout classification but the few studies to date have mostly been in patients with longstanding, established disease. The contribution of imaging over clinical features for gout classification criteria requires further examination.

8 Review The emerging role of biotechnological drugs in the treatment of gout. 2014

Cavagna, L / Taylor, W J. ·Division of Rheumatology, University and IRCCS Policlinico S.Matteo Foundation, Viale Golgi 2, 27100 Pavia, Italy. · Rehabilitation Teaching and Research Unit, Department of Medicine, University of Otago Wellington 6242, New Zealand. ·Biomed Res Int · Pubmed #24839602.

ABSTRACT: One of the most important therapeutic advances obtained in the field of rheumatology is the availability of the so-called bio(techno)logical drugs, which have deeply changed treatment perspectives in diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis. According to the steadily increasing attention on gout, due to well-established prognostic and epidemiology implications, in the last 5 years, the same change of perspective has been observed also for this disease. In fact, several bio(techno)logical agents have been investigated both for the management of the articular gout symptoms, targeting mainly interleukin-1 β , as well as urate-lowering therapies such as recombinant uricases. Among the IL-1 β inhibitors, the majority of studies involve drugs such as anakinra, canakinumab, and rilonacept, but other compounds are under development. Moreover, other potential targets have been suggested, as, for example, the TNF alpha and IL-6, even if data obtained are less robust than those of IL-1 β inhibitors. Regarding urate-lowering therapies, the recombinant uricases pegloticase and rasburicase clearly showed their effectiveness in gout patients. Also in this case, new compounds are under development. The aim of this review is to focus on the various aspects of different bio(techno)logical drugs in gouty patients.

9 Review Outcome measures in acute gout: a systematic literature review. 2014

Dalbeth, Nicola / Zhong, Cathy S / Grainger, Rebecca / Khanna, Dinesh / Khanna, Puja P / Singh, Jasvinder A / McQueen, Fiona M / Taylor, William J. ·From the Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland; Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand; Division of Rheumatology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; and Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA. ·J Rheumatol · Pubmed #24334652.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: Five core domains have been endorsed by Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) for acute gout: pain, joint swelling, joint tenderness, patient global assessment, and activity limitation. We evaluated instruments for these domains according to the OMERACT filter: truth, feasibility, and discrimination. METHODS: A systematic search strategy for instruments used to measure the acute gout core domains was formulated. For each method, articles were assessed by 2 reviewers to summarize information according to the specific components of the OMERACT filter. RESULTS: Seventy-seven articles and abstracts met the inclusion criteria. Pain was most frequently reported (76 studies, 20 instruments). The pain instruments used most often were 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) and 5-point Likert scale. Both methods have high feasibility, face and content validity, and within- and between-group discrimination. Four-point Likert scales assessing index joint swelling and tenderness have been used in numerous acute gout studies; these instruments are feasible, with high face and content validity, and show within- and between-group discrimination. Five-point Patient Global Assessment of Response to Treatment (PGART) scales are feasible and valid, and show within- and between-group discrimination. Measures of activity limitations were infrequently reported, and insufficient data were available to make definite assessments of the instruments for this domain. CONCLUSION: Many different instruments have been used to assess the acute gout core domains. Pain VAS and 5-point Likert scales, 4-point Likert scales of index joint swelling and tenderness and 5-point PGART instruments meet the criteria for the OMERACT filter.

10 Review New classification criteria for gout: a framework for progress. 2013

Dalbeth, Nicola / Fransen, Jaap / Jansen, Tim L / Neogi, Tuhina / Schumacher, H Ralph / Taylor, William J. ·Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, 85 Park Road, Grafton, Auckland, New Zealand. n.dalbeth@auckland.ac.nz. ·Rheumatology (Oxford) · Pubmed #23611919.

ABSTRACT: The definitive classification or diagnosis of gout normally relies upon the identification of MSU crystals in SF or from tophi. Where microscopic examination of SF is not available or is impractical, the best approach may differ depending upon the context. For many types of research, clinical classification criteria are necessary. The increasing prevalence of gout, advances in therapeutics and the development of international research collaborations to understand the impact, mechanisms and optimal treatment of this condition emphasize the need for accurate and uniform classification criteria for gout. Five clinical classification criteria for gout currently exist. However, none of the currently available criteria has been adequately validated. An international project is currently under way to develop new validated gout classification criteria. These criteria will be an essential step forward to advance the research agenda in the modern era of gout management.

11 Review Systematic review of the prevalence of gout and hyperuricaemia in Australia. 2012

Robinson, P C / Taylor, W J / Merriman, T R. ·University of Queensland Diamantina Institute Department of Rheumatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia University of Otago, Wellington Wellington Regional Rheumatology Unit, Hutt Valley District Health Board, Lower Hutt Department of Biochemistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. ·Intern Med J · Pubmed #24020339.

ABSTRACT: AIMS: Gout is a growing health problem worldwide especially in affluent countries, such as Australia. Gout and hyperuricaemia are associated with the metabolic syndrome, diabetes mellitus, obesity and hypertension. More importantly, Australia has a growing prevalence of these important health problems. The aim of this study was to systematically review published information regarding the prevalence of gout and hyperuricaemia in Australia. METHODS: A systematic search was undertaken of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases, as well as relevant websites for journal articles and reports relating to the prevalence of hyperuricaemia and gout in Australia. RESULTS: Twenty-five journal articles and five reports were included in the review. Data collected in a standardised way show gout increased in prevalence from 0.5% population prevalence to 1.7% population prevalence from 1968 to 1995/1996. There has been a significant rise in the prevalence of gout in the Australian Aboriginal population from 0% in 1965 to 9.7% in men and 2.9% in women in 2002. Consistent with the rise in gout prevalence, serum uric acid in blood donors has increased from 1959 to 1980 (17% in 30- to 40-year-old men). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of gout and hyperuricaemia in Australia is high in relation to comparable countries and is increasing. The prevalence of gout in elderly male Australians is second only to New Zealand, which has the highest reported rate in the world. Further research on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander gout and hyperuricaemia is required as a result of the lack of contemporary data.

12 Review Gout measures: Gout Assessment Questionnaire (GAQ, GAQ2.0), and physical measurement of tophi. 2011

Taylor, William J. ·University of Otago, Wellington, and Hutt Valley District Health Board, Lower Hutt, New Zealand. will.taylor@otago.ac.nz ·Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) · Pubmed #22588771.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

13 Review Methods of tophus assessment in clinical trials of chronic gout: a systematic literature review and pictorial reference guide. 2011

Dalbeth, Nicola / Schauer, Cameron / Macdonald, Patricia / Perez-Ruiz, Fernando / Schumacher, H Ralph / Hamburger, Steve / Choi, Hyon K / McQueen, Fiona M / Doyle, Anthony / Taylor, William J. ·Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, 85 Park Road, Grafton, Auckland, New Zealand. n.dalbeth@auckland.ac.nz ·Ann Rheum Dis · Pubmed #21216814.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To identify methods of tophus measurement for gout studies, summarise the properties of these methods and compile a detailed pictorial reference guide to demonstrate the methods. METHODS: A systematic search strategy for methods of tophus measurement was formulated. For each method, papers were assessed by two reviewers to summarise information according to the specific components of the Outcomes Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) filter: feasibility, truth and discrimination. Detailed images were obtained to construct the reference guide. RESULTS: Eight methods of tophus measurement were identified: counting the total number of tophi, physical measurement using tape measure, physical measurement using Vernier callipers, digital photography, ultrasonography (US), MRI, CT and dual energy CT. Feasibility aspects of the methods are well documented. Physical measurement techniques are more feasible than advanced imaging methods, but do not allow for assessment of intra-articular tophi or for data storage and central reading. The truth aspect of the filter has been documented for many methods, particularly Vernier callipers, US, MRI and CT. Reliability of most methods has been reported as very good or excellent. Sensitivity to change has been reported for all methods except MRI and CT. CONCLUSION: A variety of methods of tophus assessment have been described for use in clinical trials of chronic gout. Physical measurement techniques (particularly the Vernier calliper method) and US measurement of tophus size appear to meet most aspects of the OMERACT filter.

14 Review Serum urate as a soluble biomarker in chronic gout-evidence that serum urate fulfills the OMERACT validation criteria for soluble biomarkers. 2011

Stamp, Lisa K / Zhu, Xiaoyu / Dalbeth, Nicola / Jordan, Sarah / Edwards, N Lawrence / Taylor, William. ·Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand. lisa.stamp@cdhb.govt.nz ·Semin Arthritis Rheum · Pubmed #21056459.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: To determine whether serum urate (SU) fulfills the Outcome measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) soluble biomarker criteria. METHODS: The OMERACT soluble biomarker criteria were adapted for use in chronic gout. Potential outcome measures for use in chronic gout were identified. The literature was reviewed to determine which of the potential outcome measures were appropriate and whether there was evidence within the current literature to fulfill the OMERACT biomarker criteria. RESULTS: The assay for measurement of SU is reliable, internationally standardized, and readily accessible for use in clinical practice. The effects of sources of variability, including age, sex, ethnicity, circadian rhythms, body mass index, renal/hepatic function, and fasting, are well documented. Tophus regression was identified as appropriate structural outcome measure; however, given that not all patients have clinically apparent tophi, the number of gout flares is also identified as a key outcome measure. CONCLUSIONS: Serum urate fulfills all the OMERACT biomarker criteria with the exception of its effects on outcome measures. Further analysis of existing and new data sets to determine whether a reduction in SU predicts a reduction in gout flares, the number/size of tophi, and patient reported outcomes using validated measures for these outcomes are required.

15 Article Development of a prediction model for inpatient gout flares in people with comorbid gout. 2020

Jatuworapruk, Kanon / Grainger, Rebecca / Dalbeth, Nicola / Taylor, William J. ·Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand kanon@tu.ac.th. · Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University, Pathumthani, Thailand. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. · Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. ·Ann Rheum Dis · Pubmed #31811060.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: Hospitalisation is a risk factor for flares in people with gout. However, the predictors of inpatient gout flare are not well understood. The aim of this study was to develop a prediction model for inpatient gout flare among people with comorbid gout. METHODS: We used data from a retrospective cohort of hospitalised patients with comorbid gout from Wellington, Aotearoa/New Zealand, in 2017 calendar year. For the development of a prediction model, we took three approaches: (A) a clinical knowledge-driven model, (B) a statistics-driven model and (C) a decision tree model. The final model was chosen based on practicality and performance, then validated using bootstrap procedure. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 625 hospitalised patients with comorbid gout, 87 of whom experienced inpatient gout flare. Model A yielded 9 predictors of inpatient gout flare, while model B and C produced 15 and 5, respectively. Model A was chosen for its simplicity and superior C-statistics (0.82) and calibration slope (0.93). The final nine-item set of predictors were pre-admission urate >0.36 mmol/L, tophus, no pre-admission urate-lowering therapy (ULT), no pre-admission gout prophylaxis, acute kidney injury, surgery, initiation or increase of gout prophylaxis, adjustment of ULT and diuretics prior to flare. Bootstrap validation of the final model showed adequate C-statistics and calibration slope (0.80 and 0.78, respectively). CONCLUSION: We propose a set of nine predictors of inpatient flare for people with comorbid gout. The predictors are simple, practical and are supported by existing clinical knowledge.

16 Article How flare prevention outcomes are reported in gout studies: A systematic review and content analysis of randomized controlled trials. 2020

Stewart, Sarah / Tallon, Amy / Taylor, William J / Gaffo, Angelo / Dalbeth, Nicola. ·Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand. Electronic address: sarah.stewart@auckland.ac.nz. · Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, PO Box 7343, Wellington South 6242, New Zealand. · School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2nd Ave South, Birmingham, AL 35294, United States of America. ·Semin Arthritis Rheum · Pubmed #31796212.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: There are many potential ways that gout flares could be reported in clinical trials. The aim of this study was to describe the methods used to measure and report gout flare prevention outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted. Articles published between 2008 and 2018 were included if they were RCTs or articles reporting on analyses of RCT data (i.e. open label extension studies) and reported the impact of an intervention on the prevention of flares in people with gout. The modified-Jadad scale was used to assess study quality. Methods used to measure and report gout flare outcomes were extracted and synthesised separately for studies of anti-inflammatory prophylaxis and urate lowering/other long term therapy. RESULTS: A total of 38 articles were included, with 10 reporting outcomes for anti-inflammatory prophylaxis and 28 for urate lowering/other long term therapies. The overall quality score of all articles was good. There was marked heterogeneity across trials in gout flare definitions, data capture methods, reporting methods and time periods used to report flares. Anti-inflammatory prophylaxis studies used multiple methods to report gout flare outcomes (mean (SD) 4.3 (2.5) methods/article), while the majority of urate lowering/other long term therapy studies used a single method to report gout flare outcomes. The most common reporting method in anti-inflammatory prophylaxis studies was the mean number of gout flares per patient (n = =9 articles), and in urate lowering/other long term therapy studies was the proportion of patients with at least one gout flare (n = =22 articles). Only studies of anti-inflammatory prophylaxis therapy reported flare duration or pain during flare. CONCLUSION: There is wide variation in methods used to measure and report gout flare prevention outcomes in long-term RCTs. These findings highlight the need for standardized methods for studies in which gout flare prevention is an outcome of interest.

17 Article Gout, Hyperuricaemia and Crystal-Associated Disease Network (G-CAN) consensus statement regarding labels and definitions of disease states of gout. 2019

Bursill, David / Taylor, William J / Terkeltaub, Robert / Abhishek, Abhishek / So, Alexander K / Vargas-Santos, Ana Beatriz / Gaffo, Angelo Lino / Rosenthal, Ann / Tausche, Anne-Kathrin / Reginato, Anthony / Manger, Bernhard / Sciré, Carlo / Pineda, Carlos / van Durme, Caroline / Lin, Ching-Tsai / Yin, Congcong / Albert, Daniel Arthur / Biernat-Kaluza, Edyta / Roddy, Edward / Pascual, Eliseo / Becce, Fabio / Perez-Ruiz, Fernando / Sivera, Francisca / Lioté, Frédéric / Schett, Georg / Nuki, George / Filippou, Georgios / McCarthy, Geraldine / da Rocha Castelar Pinheiro, Geraldo / Ea, Hang-Korng / Tupinambá, Helena De Almeida / Yamanaka, Hisashi / Choi, Hyon K / Mackay, James / ODell, James R / Vázquez Mellado, Janitzia / Singh, Jasvinder A / Fitzgerald, John D / Jacobsson, Lennart T H / Joosten, Leo / Harrold, Leslie R / Stamp, Lisa / Andrés, Mariano / Gutierrez, Marwin / Kuwabara, Masanari / Dehlin, Mats / Janssen, Matthijs / Doherty, Michael / Hershfield, Michael S / Pillinger, Michael / Edwards, N Lawrence / Schlesinger, Naomi / Kumar, Nitin / Slot, Ole / Ottaviani, Sebastien / Richette, Pascal / MacMullan, Paul A / Chapman, Peter T / Lipsky, Peter E / Robinson, Philip / Khanna, Puja P / Gancheva, Rada N / Grainger, Rebecca / Johnson, Richard J / Te Kampe, Ritch / Keenan, Robert T / Tedeschi, Sara K / Kim, Seoyoung / Choi, Sung Jae / Fields, Theodore R / Bardin, Thomas / Uhlig, Till / Jansen, Tim / Merriman, Tony / Pascart, Tristan / Neogi, Tuhina / Klück, Viola / Louthrenoo, Worawit / Dalbeth, Nicola. ·Department of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia davebursill@bigpond.com. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. · Wellington Regional Rheumatology Unit, Hutt Valley District Health Board, Lower Hutt, New Zealand. · Department of Rheumatology, UCSD/ VA Medical Center, San Diego, California, USA. · Department of Academic Rheumatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. · Department of Musculoskeletal Medicine, Service de RMR, Lausanne, Switzerland. · Department of Internal Medicine, Rheumatology Unit, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. · Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA. · Division of Rheumatology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA. · Translational Research Unit, Clement J Zablocki VA Medical Center, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA. · Department of Rheumatology, University Hospital 'Carl Gustav Carus' of the Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany. · Division of Rheumatology, The Warren Alpert School of Medicine at Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA. · Rheumatology and Immunology, Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany. · Section of Rheumatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy. · Epidemiology Unit, Italian Society for Rheumatology, Milan, Italy. · Department of Rheumatology, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación Luis Guillermo Ibarra Ibarra, Mexico City, Mexico. · Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands. · Division of Allergy, Immunology and Rheumatology, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. · Department of Immunology and Dermatology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan, USA. · Department of Rheumatology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA. · Outpatient Rheumatology Clinic, Nutritional and Lifestyle Medicine Centre, ORLIK, Warsaw, Poland. · Research Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK. · Department of Rheumatology, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Alicante, Spain. · Departamento de Medicina Clínica, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Alicante, Spain. · Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. · Rheumatology Division, Cruces University Hospital, Baracaldo, Spain. · Department of Medicine, University of the Basque Country, Biscay, Spain. · Investigation Group for Arthritis, Biocruces Health Research Institute, Baracaldo, Spain. · Department of Rheumatology, Hospital General Universitario Elda, Elda, Spain. · Department of Rhumatologie, Hôpital Lariboisière, Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris, Paris, France. · Department of Rhumatologie, INSERM UMR-1132 and Université Paris Diderot, Paris, France. · Department of Internal Medicine III, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg and Universitatsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany. · Insititute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. · Department of Rheumatology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. · School of Medicine and Medical Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. · Department of Rheumatology, Hôpital Lariboisière, Paris, France. · Rheumatology, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. · Institute of Rheumatology, Tokyo Women's Medical University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. · School of Medicine, Tokyo Women's Medical University, Tokyo, Japan. · Section of Rheumatology and Clinical Epidemiology, Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · President and CEO, Aristea Therapeutics, San Diego, California, USA. · Division of Rheumatology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA. · Department of Rheumatology, Hospital General de Mexico and Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City, Mexico. · Department of Medicine at School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA. · Medicine Service, Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Birmingham, Alabama, USA. · Division of Epidemiology at School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA. · Department of Medicine/Rheumatology, David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA. · Department of Rheumatology and Inflammation Research, Institute of Medicine, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. · Department of Internal Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. · Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA. · Chief Scientific Officer, Corrona, LLC, Southborough, Massachusetts, USA. · Department of Medicine, Otago University, Christchurch, New Zealand. · Department of Rheumatology, Hospital Universitario de Alicante, Alicante, Spain. · Division of Musculoskeletal and Rheumatic Diseases, Instituto Nacional Rehabilitación, México City, México. · Division of Renal Diseases and Hypertension, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado, USA. · Department of Cardiology, Toranomon Hospital, Minato-ku, Japan. · Department of Rheumatology and Inflammation Research, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Göteborg, Göteborg, Sweden. · Department of Rheumatology, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, The Netherlands. · Division of Rheumatology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA. · Department of Rheumatology/Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York City, New York, USA. · College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA. · Department of Medicine, Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA. · Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Detroit, Michigan, USA. · Department of Rheumatology, Copenhagen Center for Arthritis Research, Center for Rheumatology and Spinal Disorders, Rigshospitalet Glostrup, Glostrup, Denmark. · Department of Rheumatology, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, University of Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France. · Service de Rhumatologie, Hôpital Lariboisière, Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris, and INSERM UMR-1132 and Université de Paris, Paris, France. · Division of Rheumatology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. · Department of Rheumatology, Immunology and Allergy, Canterbury District Health Board, Christchurch, New Zealand. · CEO and CMO, AMPEL BioSolutions, LLC, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA. · School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. · Department of Rheumatology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. · Clinic of Rheumatology, University Hospital 'St. Ivan Rilski', Sofia, Bulgaria. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand. · Division of Renal Diseases and Hypertension, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado, USA. · Division of Rheumatology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA. · Division of Rheumatology, Immunology and Allergy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · Arthritis Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Medical College, Ansan, South Korea. · Weill Cornell Medical College, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York City, New York, USA. · Department of Rheumatology, Hôpital Lariboisière, Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris, and INSERM UMR-1132 and Université de Paris, Paris, France. · Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway. · Department of Biochemistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. · Department of Rheumatology, Lille Catholic University, Saint-Philibert Hospital, Lomme, France. · Section of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · Department of Internal Medicine, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. · Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand. · Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. ·Ann Rheum Dis · Pubmed #31501138.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of standardisation in the terminology used to describe gout. The aim of this project was to develop a consensus statement describing the recommended nomenclature for disease states of gout. METHODS: A content analysis of gout-related articles from rheumatology and general internal medicine journals published over a 5-year period identified potential disease states and the labels commonly assigned to them. Based on these findings, experts in gout were invited to participate in a Delphi exercise and face-to-face consensus meeting to reach agreement on disease state labels and definitions. RESULTS: The content analysis identified 13 unique disease states and a total of 63 unique labels. The Delphi exercise (n=76 respondents) and face-to-face meeting (n=35 attendees) established consensus agreement for eight disease state labels and definitions. The agreed labels were as follows: 'asymptomatic hyperuricaemia', 'asymptomatic monosodium urate crystal deposition', 'asymptomatic hyperuricaemia with monosodium urate crystal deposition', 'gout', 'tophaceous gout', 'erosive gout', 'first gout flare' and 'recurrent gout flares'. There was consensus agreement that the label 'gout' should be restricted to current or prior clinically evident disease caused by monosodium urate crystal deposition (gout flare, chronic gouty arthritis or subcutaneous tophus). CONCLUSION: Consensus agreement has been established for the labels and definitions of eight gout disease states, including 'gout' itself. The Gout, Hyperuricaemia and Crystal-Associated Disease Network recommends the use of these labels when describing disease states of gout in research and clinical practice.

18 Article Gout, Hyperuricemia, and Crystal-Associated Disease Network Consensus Statement Regarding Labels and Definitions for Disease Elements in Gout. 2019

Bursill, David / Taylor, William J / Terkeltaub, Robert / Kuwabara, Masanari / Merriman, Tony R / Grainger, Rebecca / Pineda, Carlos / Louthrenoo, Worawit / Edwards, N Lawrence / Andrés, Mariano / Vargas-Santos, Ana Beatriz / Roddy, Edward / Pascart, Tristan / Lin, Ching-Tsai / Perez-Ruiz, Fernando / Tedeschi, Sara K / Kim, Seoyoung C / Harrold, Leslie R / McCarthy, Geraldine / Kumar, Nitin / Chapman, Peter T / Tausche, Anne-Kathrin / Vazquez-Mellado, Janitzia / Gutierrez, Marwin / da Rocha Castelar-Pinheiro, Geraldo / Richette, Pascal / Pascual, Eliseo / Fisher, Mark C / Burgos-Vargas, Ruben / Robinson, Philip C / Singh, Jasvinder A / Jansen, Tim L / Saag, Kenneth G / Slot, Ole / Uhlig, Tillmann / Solomon, Daniel H / Keenan, Robert T / Scire, Carlo Alberto / Biernat-Kaluza, Edyta / Dehlin, Mats / Nuki, George / Schlesinger, Naomi / Janssen, Matthijs / Stamp, Lisa K / Sivera, Francisca / Reginato, Anthony M / Jacobsson, Lennart / Lioté, Frédéric / Ea, Hang-Korng / Rosenthal, Ann / Bardin, Thomas / Choi, Hyon K / Hershfield, Michael S / Czegley, Christine / Choi, Sung Jae / Dalbeth, Nicola. ·University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand, and Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. · University of Otago, Wellington, and Hutt Valley District Health Board, Lower Hutt, New Zealand. · Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University of California, San Diego. · Toranomon Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, and University of Colorado Denver, Aurora. · University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. · Instituto Nacional Rehabilitación Luis Guillermo Ibarra Ibarra, Mexico City, Mexico. · Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand. · University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville. · Hospital Universitario de Alicante and Universidad Miguel Hernández, Alicante, Spain. · State University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. · Keele University, Keele, UK. · Lille Catholic University and Saint-Philibert Hospital, Lomme, France. · Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. · University of the Basque Country, Biscay, and Cruces University Hospital and Biocruces Health Research Institute, Baracaldo, Spain. · Harvard Medical School, and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. · Corrona, LLC, Waltham, and University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester. · Mater Misericordiae University Hospital and University College, Dublin, Ireland. · Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan. · Christchurch Hospital, Christchurch, New Zealand. · University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany. · Hospital General de México and Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City, Mexico. · Instituto Nacional Rehabilitación, Mexico City, Mexico. · Hôpital Lariboisière, Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris, and INSERM UMR-1132 and Université Paris Diderot, Paris, France. · Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital Boston. · University of Queensland School of Medicine and Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, Queensland, Australia. · Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Birmingham, and University of Alabama at Birmingham. · Viecuri Medical Centre, Venlo, The Netherlands. · University of Alabama at Birmingham. · Rigshospitalet Glostrup, Glostrup, Denmark. · Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway. · Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. · University of Ferrara, Ferrara, and Italian Society for Rheumatology, Milan, Italy. · ORLIK, Warsaw, Poland. · Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. · University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. · Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, New Jersey. · University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand. · Hospital General Universitario de Elda, Alicante, Spain. · Warren Alpert School of Medicine at Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. · Medical College of Wisconsin and the Clement J. Zablocki Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Milwaukee. · Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. · Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany. · University of California, San Diego, and Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, South Korea. · University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. ·Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) · Pubmed #29799677.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: The language currently used to describe gout lacks standardization. The aim of this project was to develop a consensus statement on the labels and definitions used to describe the basic disease elements of gout. METHODS: Experts in gout (n = 130) were invited to participate in a Delphi exercise and face-to-face consensus meeting to reach consensus on the labeling and definitions for the basic disease elements of gout. Disease elements and labels in current use were derived from a content analysis of the contemporary medical literature, and the results of this analysis were used for item selection in the Delphi exercise and face-to-face consensus meeting. RESULTS: There were 51 respondents to the Delphi exercise and 30 attendees at the face-to-face meeting. Consensus agreement (≥80%) was achieved for the labels of 8 disease elements through the Delphi exercise; the remaining 3 labels reached consensus agreement through the face-to-face consensus meeting. The agreed labels were monosodium urate crystals, urate, hyperuric(a)emia, tophus, subcutaneous tophus, gout flare, intercritical gout, chronic gouty arthritis, imaging evidence of monosodium urate crystal deposition, gouty bone erosion, and podagra. Participants at the face-to-face meeting achieved consensus agreement for the definitions of all 11 elements and a recommendation that the label "chronic gout" should not be used. CONCLUSION: Consensus agreement was achieved for the labels and definitions of 11 elements representing the fundamental components of gout etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical presentation. The Gout, Hyperuricemia, and Crystal-Associated Disease Network recommends the use of these labels when describing the basic disease elements of gout.

19 Article The nomenclature of the basic disease elements of gout: A content analysis of contemporary medical journals. 2018

Bursill, David / Taylor, William J / Terkeltaub, Robert / Dalbeth, Nicola. ·Bone and Joint Research Group, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, 85 Park Rd, Grafton, Auckland 1023, New Zealand; Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Australia. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. · Veterans Affairs Medical Center, University of California, San Diego, CA. · Bone and Joint Research Group, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, 85 Park Rd, Grafton, Auckland 1023, New Zealand. Electronic address: n.dalbeth@auckland.ac.nz. ·Semin Arthritis Rheum · Pubmed #29706241.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: There is currently no standardised nomenclature for the basic disease elements of gout. This study aimed to identify these elements and examine how they are labelled in contemporary medical literature. METHODS: We analysed articles from the ten highest ranked general rheumatology journals, and five highest ranked general internal medicine journals (by Impact Factor, according to 2015 Thomson-Reuters Journal Citation Reports), published between 1 January 2012 and 31 January 2017. For each journal, articles relevant to gout and hyperuricaemia were identified by the search terms 'gout' and/or 'urate' and/or 'uric acid' using MEDLINE. Basic disease elements were identified and their labels extracted. Labels designated 'unique' used different words or phrases to describe an element. RESULTS: A total of 549 articles were analysed. Eleven basic disease elements and 343 unique labels were identified. Labelling was imprecise for most elements. 'An episode of acute inflammation triggered by the presence of pathogenic crystals' was represented by a total of 162 unique labels; 33.6% of articles referring to this element used at least four unique labels. For articles referencing 'the circulating form of the final enzymatic product generated by xanthine oxidase in purine metabolism in humans', the labels 'uric acid' and 'urate' were used with similar frequency (63.0% and 62.5%, respectively), and both labels were used in 25.9% of articles. CONCLUSION: Labelling of the basic disease elements of gout is characterised by imprecision, inaccuracy and lack of clarity. Consensus regarding the nomenclature of these elements is required.

20 Article Predictors of activity limitation in people with gout: a prospective study. 2018

Stewart, Sarah / Rome, Keith / Eason, Alastair / House, Meaghan E / Horne, Anne / Doyle, Anthony J / Knight, Julie / Taylor, William J / Dalbeth, Nicola. ·Health and Rehabilitation Research Institute, Auckland University of Technology, 90 Akoranga Drive, Northcote, Auckland, 0627, New Zealand. sarah.stewart@aut.ac.nz. · Health and Rehabilitation Research Institute, Auckland University of Technology, 90 Akoranga Drive, Northcote, Auckland, 0627, New Zealand. · Department of Radiology, Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand. · Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. · Radiology with Anatomy, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. ·Clin Rheumatol · Pubmed #29680870.

ABSTRACT: The objective of the study was to determine clinical factors associated with activity limitation and predictors of a change in activity limitation after 1 year in people with gout. Two hundred ninety-five participants with gout (disease duration < 10 years) attended a baseline assessment which included medical and disease-specific history, pain visual analog score and plain radiographs scored for erosion and narrowing. Activity limitation was assessed using the Health Assessment Questionnaire-II (HAQ-II). After 1 year, participants were invited to complete a further HAQ-II; follow-up questionnaires were available for 182 participants. Fully saturated and stepwise regression analyses were used to determine associations between baseline characteristics and HAQ-II at baseline and 1 year, and to determine predictors of worsening HAQ-II in those with normal baseline scores. Median (range) baseline HAQ-II was 0.20 (0-2.50) and 0.20 (0-2.80) after 1 year of follow-up. Pain score was the strongest independent predictor of baseline HAQ-II, followed by radiographic narrowing score, type 2 diabetes, swollen joint count, BMI, age and urate (model R

21 Article Serum urate as surrogate endpoint for flares in people with gout: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis. 2018

Stamp, Lisa / Morillon, Melanie B / Taylor, William J / Dalbeth, Nicola / Singh, Jasvinder A / Lassere, Marissa / Christensen, Robin. ·Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Christchurch, P.O. Box 4345, Christchurch, New Zealand. Electronic address: lisa.stamp@cdhb.health.nz. · Musculoskeletal Statistics Unit, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Rheumatology, Odense University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Medicine, Vejle Hospital, Denmark. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. · Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, New Zealand. · Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham & Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Birmingham, Alabama. · Department of Rheumatology, St George Hospital, University of NSW, Sydney, Australia. · Musculoskeletal Statistics Unit, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. ·Semin Arthritis Rheum · Pubmed #29566967.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: The primary efficacy outcome in trials of urate lowering therapy (ULT) for gout is serum urate (SU). The aim of this study was to examine the strength of the relationship between SU and patient-important outcomes to determine whether SU is an adequate surrogate endpoint for clinical trials. METHODS: Multiple databases through October 2017 were searched. Randomized controlled trials comparing any ULT in people with gout with any control or placebo, ≥three months duration were included. Open label extension (OLE) trial data were included in secondary analyses. Standardized data elements were extracted independently by two reviewers. RESULTS: Ten RCTs and 3 OLE studies were identified. From the RCTs (maximum duration 24 months) meta-regression did not reveal an association between the relative risk of a gout flare and the difference in proportions of individuals with SU < 6mg/dL (P = 0.47; R CONCLUSIONS: Based on aggregate clinical trial-level data an association between SU and gout flare could not be confirmed. However, based on observational ecological study design data-including longer duration extension studies-SU < 6mg/dL was associated with reduced gout flares.

22 Article Relationship between serum urate concentration and clinically evident incident gout: an individual participant data analysis. 2018

Dalbeth, Nicola / Phipps-Green, Amanda / Frampton, Christopher / Neogi, Tuhina / Taylor, William J / Merriman, Tony R. ·Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. · Department of Biochemistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Christchurch, Christchurch, New Zealand. · Clinical Epidemiology Research & Training Unit, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. ·Ann Rheum Dis · Pubmed #29463518.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: To provide estimates of the cumulative incidence of gout according to baseline serum urate. METHODS: Using individual participant data from four publicly available cohorts (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study, Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults Study, and both the Original and Offspring cohorts of the Framingham Heart Study), the cumulative incidence of clinically evident gout was calculated according to baseline serum urate category. Cox proportional hazards modelling was used to evaluate the relation of baseline urate categories to risk of incident gout. RESULTS: This analysis included 18 889 participants who were gout-free at baseline, with mean (SD) 11.2 (4.2) years and 212 363 total patient-years of follow-up. The cumulative incidence at each time point varied according to baseline serum urate concentrations, with 15-year cumulative incidence (95% CI) ranging from 1.1% (0.9 to 1.4) for <6 mg/dL to 49% (31 to 67) for ≥10 mg/dL. Compared with baseline serum urate <6 mg/dL, the adjusted HR for baseline serum urate 6.0-6.9 mg/dL was 2.7, for 7.0-7.9 mg/dL was 6.6, for 8.0-8.9 mg/dL was 15, for 9.0-9.9 mg/dL was 30, and for ≥10 mg/dL was 64. CONCLUSIONS: Serum urate level is a strong non-linear concentration-dependent predictor of incident gout. Nonetheless, only about half of those with serum urate concentrations ≥10mg/dL develop clinically evident gout over 15 years, implying a role for prolonged hyperuricaemia and additional factors in the pathogenesis of gout.

23 Article Variability in the Reporting of Serum Urate and Flares in Gout Clinical Trials: Need for Minimum Reporting Requirements. 2018

Stamp, Lisa K / Morillon, Melanie B / Taylor, William J / Dalbeth, Nicola / Singh, Jasvinder A / Lassere, Marissa / Christensen, Robin. ·From the Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Christchurch, Wellington; Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand; Musculoskeletal Statistics Unit, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen; Department of Rheumatology, Odense University Hospital, Odense; Department of Medicine, Vejle Hospital, Vejle, Denmark; Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham and Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Birmingham, Alabama, USA; Department of Rheumatology, St. George Hospital, University of New South Wales (NSW), Sydney, Australia. lisa.stamp@cdhb.health.nz. · L.K. Stamp, MBChB, PhD, FRACP, Department of Medicine, University of Otago; M.B. Morillon, MD, Musculoskeletal Statistics Unit, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Department of Rheumatology, Odense University Hospital, and Department of Medicine, Vejle Hospital; W.J. Taylor, MBChB, PhD, FRACP, Department of Medicine, University of Otago; N. Dalbeth, MBChB, MD, FRACP, Department of Medicine, University of Auckland; J.A. Singh, MD, MPH, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham and Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center; M. Lassere, MBBS (Hons) Grad Dip Epi, PhD, FRACP, FAFPHM, Department of Rheumatology, St. George Hospital, University of NSW; R. Christensen, MSc, PhD, Musculoskeletal Statistics Unit, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital. lisa.stamp@cdhb.health.nz. · From the Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Christchurch, Wellington; Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand; Musculoskeletal Statistics Unit, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen; Department of Rheumatology, Odense University Hospital, Odense; Department of Medicine, Vejle Hospital, Vejle, Denmark; Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham and Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Birmingham, Alabama, USA; Department of Rheumatology, St. George Hospital, University of New South Wales (NSW), Sydney, Australia. · L.K. Stamp, MBChB, PhD, FRACP, Department of Medicine, University of Otago; M.B. Morillon, MD, Musculoskeletal Statistics Unit, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Department of Rheumatology, Odense University Hospital, and Department of Medicine, Vejle Hospital; W.J. Taylor, MBChB, PhD, FRACP, Department of Medicine, University of Otago; N. Dalbeth, MBChB, MD, FRACP, Department of Medicine, University of Auckland; J.A. Singh, MD, MPH, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham and Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center; M. Lassere, MBBS (Hons) Grad Dip Epi, PhD, FRACP, FAFPHM, Department of Rheumatology, St. George Hospital, University of NSW; R. Christensen, MSc, PhD, Musculoskeletal Statistics Unit, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital. ·J Rheumatol · Pubmed #29247147.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To describe the ways in which serum urate (SU) and gout flares are reported in clinical trials, and to propose minimum reporting requirements. METHODS: This analysis was done as part of a systematic review aiming to validate SU as a biomarker for gout. The ways in which SU and flares were reported were extracted from each study by 2 reviewers. RESULTS: A total of 22 studies (10 randomized controlled trials, 3 open-label extension studies, and 9 observational studies) were identified. There were 3 broad categories of SU reporting: percentage at target SU, mean SU, and change in SU. A median of 2 (range 1-3) categories were reported across all studies. The most common method of reporting SU was percentage at target in 17/22 (77.3%) studies, with all studies reporting a target of SU < 6 mg/dl. There were 12/22 (54.5%) studies reporting mean SU at some time after study entry, with 7 (58.3%) of these reporting at more than just the final study visit. Two ways of reporting gout flares were identified: mean flare rate and percentage of participants with flares. There was variability in time periods over which flares rates were reported. CONCLUSION: There is inconsistent reporting of SU and flares in gout studies. Reporting the percentage of participants who achieve a target SU reflects international treatment guidelines. SU should also be reported as a continuous variable with a relevant central and dispersion estimate. Gout flares should be reported as both percentage of participants and mean flare rates at each timepoint.

24 Article Brief Report: Validation of a Definition of Flare in Patients With Established Gout. 2018

Gaffo, Angelo L / Dalbeth, Nicola / Saag, Kenneth G / Singh, Jasvinder A / Rahn, Elizabeth J / Mudano, Amy S / Chen, Yi-Hsing / Lin, Ching-Tsai / Bourke, Sandra / Louthrenoo, Worawit / Vazquez-Mellado, Janitzia / Hernández-Llinas, Hansel / Neogi, Tuhina / Vargas-Santos, Ana Beatriz / da Rocha Castelar-Pinheiro, Geraldo / Amorim, Rodrigo B C / Uhlig, Till / Hammer, Hilde B / Eliseev, Maxim / Perez-Ruiz, Fernando / Cavagna, Lorenzo / McCarthy, Geraldine M / Stamp, Lisa K / Gerritsen, Martijn / Fana, Viktoria / Sivera, Francisca / Taylor, William. ·University of Alabama at Birmingham and Birmingham VA Medical Center, Birmingham, Alabama. · University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. · University of Alabama at Birmingham. · Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. · Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand. · Hospital General de Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico. · Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts. · Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, and Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. · Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. · Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway. · Research Institute of Rheumatology of Russia, Moscow, Russia. · University of the Basque Country, Cruces University Hospital, and Biocruces Health Research Institute, Vizcaya, Spain. · University and IRCCS Policlinico S. Matteo Foundation, Pavia, Italy. · Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. · University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand. · Westfries Gasthuis, Hoorn, The Netherlands. · Rigshospitalet Glostrup, Copenhagen, Denmark. · Hospital General Universitario Elda, Elda, Spain. · University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand. ·Arthritis Rheumatol · Pubmed #29161469.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To perform external validation of a provisional definition of disease flare in patients with gout. METHODS: Five hundred nine patients with gout were enrolled in a cross-sectional study during a routine clinical care visit at 17 international sites. Data were collected to classify patients as experiencing or not experiencing a gout flare, according to a provisional definition. A local expert rheumatologist performed the final independent adjudication of gout flare status. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine the diagnostic performance of gout flare definitions. RESULTS: The mean ± SD age of the patients was 57.5 ± 13.9 years, and 89% were male. The definition requiring fulfillment of at least 3 of 4 criteria (patient-defined gout flare, pain at rest score of >3 on a 0-10-point numerical rating scale, presence of at least 1 swollen joint, and presence of at least 1 warm joint) was 85% sensitive and 95% specific in confirming the presence of a gout flare, with an accuracy of 92%. The ROC area under the curve was 0.97. The definition based on a classification and regression tree algorithm (entry point, pain at rest score >3, followed by patient-defined flare "yes") was 73% sensitive and 96% specific. CONCLUSION: The definition of gout flare that requires fulfillment of at least 3 of 4 patient-reported criteria is now validated to be sensitive, specific, and accurate for gout flares, as demonstrated using an independent large international patient sample. The availability of a validated gout flare definition will improve the ascertainment of an important clinical outcome in studies of gout.

25 Article Performance of the 2015 ACR-EULAR classification criteria for gout in a primary care population presenting with monoarthritis. 2017

Janssens, Hein J E M / Fransen, Jaap / Janssen, Matthijs / Neogi, Tuhina / Schumacher, H Ralph / Jansen, Tim L / Dalbeth, Nicola / Taylor, William J. ·Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen. · Department Family Physicians, Primary Healthcare Center Lobede, Lobith-Tolkamer. · Department of Rheumatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen. · Department of Rheumatology, Rijnstate hospital, Arnhem, the Netherlands. · Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA. · Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · Department of Rheumatology, Viecuri Medical Center, Venlo, the Netherlands. · School of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland. · Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. ·Rheumatology (Oxford) · Pubmed #28431109.

ABSTRACT: Objective: To test the performance of the 2015 ACR-EULAR gout classification criteria against presence of SF MSU crystals in a primary healthcare population. Methods: The criteria were applied to an existing dataset of consecutive patients with monoarthritis presenting to Dutch family physicians; all patients underwent microscopic SF analysis by design. The data had been prospectively collected to develop a diagnostic decision rule for gout in 2010. Diagnostic performance was assessed by calculating area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and constructing calibration plots for the full version of the criteria (including SF analysis results of all patients) and the clinical-only version (not including SF analysis results). Performance of both versions was compared with the 2010 diagnostic rule. Results: Of 381 patients enrolled into the study, 216 (57%) were MSU crystal-positive. The full and clinical-only versions of the criteria had satisfactory area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.96 and 0.87, respectively), high specificity (0.98 and 0.84), high PPV (0.98 and 0.84), but lower sensitivity (0.68 and 0.68) and NPV (0.70 and 0.67). Specificity and PPV of both versions were higher compared with 0.71 and 0.89 of the 2010 diagnostic decision rule. The decison rule had the highest sensitivity and NPV (0.99 and 0.97). Conclusion: This study presents the first external validation of the 2015 ACR-EULAR gout classification criteria in a primary healthcare setting. The criteria perform well in this setting in patients presenting with monoarthritis for the purpose of enrolling into gout clinical trials.

Next