A controlled study of the effect of long term allopurinol treatment on renal function in gout

Efficacy of Xanthine Oxidase Inhibitors in Lowering Serum Uric Acid in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: Current guidelines for gout recommend a treat-to-target approach with serum uric acid (SUA). However, there is little evidence for the dose-dependent effects of urate-lowering therapy (ULT). Herein, we analyzed the reported SUA-lowering effect and SUA target achievement differences for various doses of xanthine oxidase inhibitors. Methods: Approved ULT drugs were selected from the FDA Drug Database. We included prospective randomized controlled trials of ULT drugs from ClinicalTrials.gov, articles published in the journal “Drugs”, and Embase, a literature database. A meta-analysis was performed to determine the ability of different ULT drugs and doses to lower and maintain a target SUA < 6 mg/dL. Results: We identified 35 trials including 8172 patients with a baseline SUA of 8.92 mg/dL. The allopurinol, febuxostat, and topiroxostat showed dose-proportional SUA-lowering responses. Compared with allopurinol 300 mg daily, febuxostat 80 mg daily and 120 mg daily more effectively maintained SUA < 6 mg/dL. Conclusion: Allopurinol, febuxostat, and topiroxostat showed dose-proportional ability to lower and achieve a target SUA < 6 mg/dL. Significance and Innovations. We showed dose-dependent SUA lowering effects of allopurinol, febuxostat, and topiroxostat. Febuxostat is effective at ULT compared to allopurinol and could be potentially offered as an alternative agent when patients (1) have CKD, (2) have the human leukocyte antigen HLA-B*5801 allele, and (3) become refractory to allopurinol. Gradual allopurinol dose increase with a lower starting dose is needed in CKD.

Uric acid lowering therapies for preventing or delaying the progression of chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Non-randomised data have shown a link between hyperuricaemia and the progression or development of chronic kidney disease (CKD). If this is correct, urate lowering therapy might form an important part of chronic kidney disease care, reducing risks for cardiovascular outcomes and end-stage kidney disease.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to study the benefits and harms of uric acid lowering therapy on the progression of CKD and other cardiovascular endpoints.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register to 20 July 2017 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies contained in the Specialised Register are identified through search strategies specifically designed for CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE; handsearching conference proceedings; and searching the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials testing primary urate lowering therapy in patients with or without CKD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using a random effects model and results expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes or mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, or standardised mean difference (SMD) if different scales were used.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve studies (1187 participants) were included in the review. Risk of bias was unclear for the majority of domains in each study.Uric acid lowering therapy may make little or no difference in death at six months (2 studies, 498 participants: RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.61 to 4.48) or two years (2 studies, 220 participants): RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.06) (low certainty evidence). Uric acid lowering therapy may make little of no difference (low certainty evidence) in the incidence of ESKD at one or two years. Kidney function may be improved by uric acid lowering therapy at one year with a reduction in serum creatinine (2 studies, 83 participants: MD -73.35 µmol/L, 95% CI -107.28 to -39.41) and a rise in eGFR (1 study, 113 participants: MD 5.50 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI 0.59 to 10.41). However it probably makes little or no difference to eGFR at two years (2 studies, 164 participants: MD 4.00 mL/min, 95% CI -3.28 to 11.28). Uric acid lowering therapy reduced uric acid levels at all time points (3, 4, 6, 12 and 24 months) (high certainty evidence).There is insufficient evidence to support an effect on blood pressure, proteinuria or other cardiovascular markers by uric acid lowering therapy. It should be noted that the apparent benefits of treatment were not apparent at all time points, introducing the potential for bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited data which suggests uric acid lowering therapy may prevent progression of chronic kidney disease but the conclusion is very uncertain. Benefits were not observed at all time points and study quality was generally low. Larger studies are required to study the effect of uric acid lowering therapy on CKD progression. Three ongoing studies will hopefully provide much needed high quality data.

Allopurinol for chronic gout

BACKGROUND

Allopurinol, a xanthine oxidase inhibitor, is considered one of the most effective urate-lowering drugs and is frequently used in the treatment of chronic gout.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of allopurinol compared with placebo and other urate-lowering therapies for treating chronic gout.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE on 14 January 2014. We also handsearched the 2011 to 2012 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) abstracts, trial registers and regulatory agency drug safety databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised controlled clinical trials (CCTs) that compared allopurinol with a placebo or an active therapy in adults with chronic gout.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted and analysed data using standard methods for Cochrane reviews. The major outcomes of interest were frequency of acute gout attacks, serum urate normalisation, pain, function, tophus regression, study participant withdrawal due to adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE). We assessed the quality of the body of evidence for these outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 trials (4531 participants) that compared allopurinol (various doses) with placebo (two trials); febuxostat (four trials); benzbromarone (two trials); colchicine (one trial); probenecid (one trial); continuous versus intermittent allopurinol (one trial) and different doses of allopurinol (one trial). Only one trial was at low risk of bias in all domains. We deemed allopurinol versus placebo the main comparison, and allopurinol versus febuxostat and versus benzbromarone as the most clinically relevant active comparisons and restricted reporting to these comparisons here.Moderate-quality evidence from one trial (57 participants) indicated allopurinol 300 mg daily probably does not reduce the rate of gout attacks (2/26 with allopurinol versus 3/25 with placebo; risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 3.52) but increases the proportion of participants achieving a target serum urate over 30 days (25/26 with allopurinol versus 0/25 with placebo, RR 49.11, 95% CI 3.15 to 765.58; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 1). In two studies (453 participants), there was no significant increase in withdrawals due to AE (6% with allopurinol versus 4% with placebo, RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.61 to 3.08) or SAE (2% with allopurinol versus 1% with placebo, RR 1.93, 95% CI 0.48 to 7.80). One trial reported no difference in pain reduction or tophus regression, but did not report outcome data or measures of variance sufficiently and we could not calculate the differences between groups. Neither trial reported function.Low-quality evidence from three trials (1136 participants) indicated there may be no difference in the incidence of acute gout attacks with allopurinol up to 300 mg daily versus febuxostat 80 mg daily over eight to 24 weeks (21% with allopurinol versus 23% with febuxostat, RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.1); however more participants may achieve target serum urate level (four trials; 2618 participants) with febuxostat 80 mg daily versus allopurinol 300 mg daily (38% with allopurinol versus 70% with febuxostat, RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.65, NNTB with febuxostat 4). Two trials reported no difference in tophus regression between allopurinol and febuxostat over a 28- to 52-week period; but as the trialists did not provide variance, we could not calculate the mean difference between groups. The trials did not report pain reduction or function. Moderate-quality evidence from pooled data from three trials (2555 participants) comparing allopurinol up to 300 mg daily versus febuxostat 80 mg daily indicated no difference in the number of withdrawals due to AE (7% with allopurinol versus 8% with febuxostat, RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.26) or SAE (4% with allopurinol versus 4% with febuxostat, RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.82) over a 24- to 52-week period.Low-quality evidence from one trial (65 participants) indicated there may be no difference in the incidence of acute gout attacks with allopurinol up to 600 mg daily compared with benzbromarone up to 200 mg daily over a four-month period (0/30 with allopurinol versus 1/25 with benzbromarone, RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.58). Based on the pooled results of two trials (102 participants), there was moderate-quality evidence of no probable difference in the proportion of participants achieving a target serum urate level with allopurinol versus benzbromarone (58% with allopurinol versus 74% with benzbromarone, RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.11). Low-quality evidence from two studies indicated there may be no difference in the number of participants who withdrew due to AE with allopurinol versus benzbromarone over a four- to nine-month period (6% with allopurinol versus 7% with benzbromarone, pooled RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.18 to 3.58). There were no SAEs. They did not report tophi regression, pain and function.All other comparisons were supported by small, single studies only, limiting conclusions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review found low- to moderate-quality evidence indicating similar effects on withdrawals due to AEs and SAEs and incidence of acute gout attacks when allopurinol (100 to 600 mg daily) was compared with placebo, benzbromarone (100 to 200 mg daily) or febuxostat (80 mg daily). There was moderate-quality evidence of little or no difference in the proportion of participants achieving target serum urate when allopurinol was compared with benzbromarone. However, allopurinol seemed more successful than placebo and may be less successful than febuxostat (80 mg daily) in achieving a target serum urate level (6 mg/dL or less; 0.36 mmol/L or less) based on moderate- to low-quality evidence. Single studies reported no difference in pain reduction when allopurinol (300 mg daily) was compared with placebo over 10 days, and no difference in tophus regression when allopurinol (200 to 300 mg daily) was compared with febuxostat (80 mg daily). None of the trials reported on function, health-related quality of life or participant global assessment of treatment success, where further research would be useful.

EULAR evidence based recommendations for gout. Part II: Management. Report of a task force of the EULAR Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutics (ESCISIT)

OBJECTIVE

To develop evidence based recommendations for the management of gout.

METHODS

The multidisciplinary guideline development group comprised 19 rheumatologists and one evidence based medicine expert representing 13 European countries. Key propositions on management were generated using a Delphi consensus approach. Research evidence was searched systematically for each proposition. Where possible, effect size (ES), number needed to treat, relative risk, odds ratio, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated. The quality of evidence was categorised according to the level of evidence. The strength of recommendation (SOR) was assessed using the EULAR visual analogue and ordinal scales.

RESULTS

12 key propositions were generated after three Delphi rounds. Propositions included both non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments and addressed symptomatic control of acute gout, urate lowering therapy (ULT), and prophylaxis of acute attacks. The importance of patient education, modification of adverse lifestyle (weight loss if obese; reduced alcohol consumption; low animal purine diet) and treatment of associated comorbidity and risk factors were emphasised. Recommended drugs for acute attacks were oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), oral colchicine (ES = 0.87 (95% confidence interval, 0.25 to 1.50)), or joint aspiration and injection of corticosteroid. ULT is indicated in patients with recurrent acute attacks, arthropathy, tophi, or radiographic changes of gout. Allopurinol was confirmed as effective long term ULT (ES = 1.39 (0.78 to 2.01)). If allopurinol toxicity occurs, options include other xanthine oxidase inhibitors, allopurinol desensitisation, or a uricosuric. The uricosuric benzbromarone is more effective than allopurinol (ES = 1.50 (0.76 to 2.24)) and can be used in patients with mild to moderate renal insufficiency but may be hepatotoxic. When gout is associated with the use of diuretics, the diuretic should be stopped if possible. For prophylaxis against acute attacks, either colchicine 0.5-1 mg daily or an NSAID (with gastroprotection if indicated) are recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

12 key recommendations for management of gout were developed, using a combination of research based evidence and expert consensus. The evidence was evaluated and the SOR provided for each proposition.

Quality of care indicators for gout management

OBJECTIVE

Despite the significant health impact of gout, there is no consensus on management standards. To guide physician practice, we sought to develop quality of care indicators for gout management.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of gout therapy was performed using the Medline database. Two abstractors independently reviewed each of the articles for relevance and satisfaction of minimal inclusion criteria. Based on the review of the literature, 11 preliminary quality indicators were developed and then reviewed and refined by an initial feasibility panel of community and academic rheumatologists. A twelfth indicator was added at the request of the first panel. Using a modification of the RAND/University of California at Los Angeles appropriateness method (bridging teleconference and white-board Internet technology were added), a second expert panel rated each of the proposed indicators for validity using a 9-point scale, in which ratings of 1-3, 4-6, and 7-9 were considered "invalid," "indeterminate," and "highly valid," respectively. Indicators were considered valid if the median panel rating was > or =7 and there was no evidence of panel disagreement (defined to occur when 2 of 6 panelists provided a validity rating of 1-3 and 2 panelists provided a validity rating of 7-9).

RESULTS

Ten of the 12 draft indicators were rated to be valid by our second expert panel. Validated indicators pertained to 1) the use of urate-lowering medications in chronic gout, 2) the use of antiinflammatory drugs, and 3) counseling on lifestyle modifications.

CONCLUSION

Using a combination of evidence and expert opinion, 10 indicators for quality of gout care were developed. These indicators represent an important initial step in quality improvement initiatives for gout care.