The effect of benzbromarone on allopurinol/oxypurinol kinetics in patients with gout

Outcome reporting in randomized trials in gout: A systematic scoping review from the OMERACT gout working group assessing the uptake of the core outcome set

OBJECTIVE

The selection and reporting of core outcome measures in clinical trials is essential for patients, researchers, and healthcare providers for clinical research to have an impact on healthcare. In this systematic scoping review, we aimed to quantify the extent to which gout clinical trials are collecting and reporting data in accordance with the core outcome domains from Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) published in 2009 applicable for both acute and chronic trials and evaluate the reporting according to the core domains before and after the 2009 OMERACT endorsement.

METHODS

We searched multiple databases PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) allocating people with gout versus an active pharmacological gout treatment or a control comparator (no date limitation). We extracted the data in accordance with the core outcome sets, focusing individually on core outcome domains and the core outcome measurements for acute and chronic trials, respectively. In this study 'Acute trials' reflect studies that describe interventions for short term management of gout flares, and 'chronic trials' describe interventions for long-term urate lowering therapy in the management of gout.

RESULTS

From 8,522 records identified in the database search, 134 full text papers were reviewed, and 71 trials were included, of which 36 were acute and 35 were chronic. Only 3 of 36 (8%) acute trials reported all five core domains and none of the 35 included chronic trials reported all 7 core domains. In the acute trials, twenty-seven unique measurement instruments across the 5 core domains were identified. For chronic trials there were 31 unique measurement instruments used across the 7 core domains. Serum urate was reported in 100% of the chronic trials and gout flares in 80%. However, other core domains were reported in <30% of chronic trials. In particular the patient-important domains such as HR-QOL, patient global assessment and activity limitations were rarely reported. A broad variety of different measurement instruments were used to assess each endorsed core domain, a minority of trials used the OMERACT endorsed instruments. For acute trials, the number reporting on all core domains was consistently low and no change was detected before and after the endorsement of the core domains in 2009. None of the included chronic trials reported on all 7 endorsed core domains at any time.

CONCLUSION

In this study we found a low adherence with the intended endorsed (i.e., core) outcome domains for acute and chronic gout studies which represents a poor uptake of the global OMERACT efforts for the minimum of what should be measured in clinical trials. In addition, there is a significant variation in how the OMERACT endorsed outcome domains have been measured. This systematic review demonstrates the need for continuous encouragement among gout researchers to adhere to OMERACT core domains as well as further guidance on outcome measurements reporting.

REGISTRATION

Prospero: CRD42019151316.

Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Tolerability of Concomitant Multiple Dose Administration of Verinurad (RDEA3170) and Allopurinol in Adult Male Subjects With Gout

Verinurad (RDEA3170) is a selective uric acid reabsorption inhibitor in clinical development for treatment of hyperuricemia and gout. This phase 1b, multiple‐dose, drug‐drug interaction study evaluated the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and tolerability of verinurad in combination with allopurinol. Adult males with gout were randomized to receive once‐daily oral doses of allopurinol 300 mg or verinurad 10 mg alone for 7 days, allopurinol 300 mg + verinurad 10 mg on days 8 to 14, and the alternative single agent on days 15 to 21. Colchicine 0.6 mg was taken prophylactically for gout flares. Plasma/serum and urine samples were assayed for verinurad, allopurinol, oxypurinol (allopurinol active metabolite), colchicine (plasma only), and uric acid. Safety was assessed by adverse events (AEs) and laboratory tests. Verinurad plasma exposure was unaffected by allopurinol. Verinurad increased the maximum observed plasma concentration (C_max) for allopurinol by 33%; the area under the plasma concentration‐time curve (AUC) was unaffected. Oxypurinol C_max and AUC were reduced 32% and 38%, respectively, by verinurad. Colchicine plasma exposure was unaltered by verinurad. The maximum decrease in serum urate was greater with verinurad + allopurinol (65%) than with verinurad (51%) or allopurinol (43%) alone. Compared with the baseline rate, the maximum rate of uric acid excreted in urine was +56% with verinurad, −46% with allopurinol, and unchanged with verinurad + allopurinol. No serious AEs, discontinuations due to AEs, or clinically significant laboratory abnormalities were noted. Despite decreased systemic exposure of allopurinol and oxypurinol in the presence of verinurad, the combination resulted in greater serum urate reduction compared with either drug alone and was well tolerated at the studied doses.

Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic effects and safety of verinurad in combination with allopurinol in adults with gout: a phase IIa, open-label study

Objectives

Verinurad (RDEA3170) is a high affinity, selective uric acid transporter (URAT1) inhibitor indevelopment for treating gout and asymptomatic hyperuricaemia. This phase IIa study evaluated the pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics and safety of verinurad combined with allopurinol versus allopurinol alone in adults with gout.

Methods

Forty-one subjects were randomised into two cohorts of verinurad (2.5-20 mg) plus allopurinol (300 mg once daily) versus allopurinol 300 mg once daily, 600 mg once daily or 300 mg twice daily alone. Each treatment period was 7 days. Serial plasma/serum and urine samples were assayed for verinurad, allopurinol, oxypurinol and uric acid.

Results

Serum pharmacodynamic data pooled across cohorts demonstrated maximum per cent decreases in serum urate (sUA) from baseline (E_max) at 7-12 hours after verinurad plus allopurinol treatment. Combination treatment decreased sUA in dose-dependent manner: least-squares means E_max was 47%, 59%, 60%, 67%, 68% and 74% for verinurad doses 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 15 and 20 mg plus allopurinol 300 mg once daily, versus 40%, 54% and 54% for allopurinol 300 mg once daily, 600 mg once daily and 300 mg twice daily. Verinurad had no effect on allopurinol plasma pharmacokinetics, but decreased oxypurinol C_max by 19.0%-32.4% and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to the last measurable time point by 20.8%-39.2%. Verinurad plus allopurinol was well tolerated with no serious adverse events (AEs), AE-related withdrawals or renal-related events. Laboratory values showed no clinically meaningful changes.

Conclusion

Verinurad coadministered with allopurinol produced dose-dependent decreases in sUA. All dose combinations of verinurad and allopurinol were generally well tolerated. These data support continued investigation of oral verinurad in patients with gout.

Trial registration number

NCT02498652.

Lesinurad in combination with allopurinol: results of a phase 2, randomised, double-blind study in patients with gout with an inadequate response to allopurinol

Objectives

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of lesinurad, an oral selective uric acid reabsorption inhibitor, in combination with allopurinol versus allopurinol alone in patients with gout and an inadequate response to allopurinol.

Methods

Patients (N=227) with an inadequate response to allopurinol, defined as serum urate (sUA) ≥6 mg/dL on ≥2 occasions ≥2 weeks apart despite ≥6 weeks of allopurinol, were randomised 2:1 to 4 weeks of double-blind treatment with lesinurad (200, 400 or 600 mg/day) or matching placebo in combination with their prestudy allopurinol dose (200–600 mg/day). Colchicine prophylaxis for gout flares was required. The primary end point was percent reduction from baseline sUA levels at 4 weeks. A pharmacokinetic substudy was also conducted. Safety was assessed throughout.

Results

Patients (n=208) received ≥1 dose of blinded medication. Lesinurad 200, 400 and 600 mg in combination with allopurinol produced significant mean percent reductions from baseline sUA of 16%, 22% and 30%, respectively, versus a mean 3% increase with placebo (p<0.0001, all doses vs placebo). Similar results were observed in patients with mild or moderate renal insufficiency (estimated creatinine clearance 30 to <90 mL/min). The incidence of ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event was 46%, 48% and 54% with lesinurad 200, 400 and 600 mg, respectively, and 46% with placebo (most frequent, gout flares, arthralgia, headache and nasopharyngitis), with no deaths or serious adverse events.

Conclusions

Lesinurad achieves clinically relevant and statistically significant reductions in sUA in combination with allopurinol in patients who warrant additional therapy on allopurinol alone.

Trial registration number

NCT01001338.

Uricosuric medications for chronic gout

BACKGROUND

Uricosuric agents have long been used in the treatment of gout but there is little evidence regarding their benefit and safety in this condition.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of uricosuric medications in the treatment of chronic gout.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 4, 2013), Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid EMBASE for studies to the 13 May 2013. We also searched the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov and the 2011 to 2012 American College of Rheumatology and European League against Rheumatism abstracts. WE considered black box warnings and searched drug safety databases to identify and describe rare adverse events.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised controlled trials (controlled clinical trials (CCTs)) that compared uricosuric medications (benzbromarone, probenecid or sulphinpyrazone) alone or in combination with another therapy (placebo or other active uric acid-lowering medication, or non-pharmacological treatment) in adults with chronic gout for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the studies for inclusion, extracted data and performed a risk of bias assessment. Main outcomes were frequency of acute gout attacks, serum urate normalisation, study participant withdrawal due to adverse events, total adverse events, pain reduction, function and tophus regression.

MAIN RESULTS

The search identified four RCTs and one CCT that evaluated the benefit and safety of uricosurics for gout. One study (65 participants) compared benzbromarone with allopurinol for a duration of four months; one compared benzbromarone with allopurinol (36 participants) for a duration of nine to 24 months; one study (62 participants) compared benzbromarone with probenecid for two months and one study (74 participants) compared benzbromarone with probenecid. One study (37 participants) compared allopurinol with probenecid. No study was completely free from bias.Low-quality evidence from one study (55 participants) comparing benzbromarone with allopurinol indicated uncertain effects in terms of frequency of acute gout attacks (4% with benzbromarone versus 0% with allopurinol; risk ratio (RR) 3.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 84.13), while moderate-quality evidence from two studies (101 participants; treated for four to nine months) indicated similar proportions of participants achieving serum urate normalisation (73.9% with benzbromarone versus 60% with allopurinol; pooled RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.79). Low-quality evidence indicated uncertain differences in withdrawals due to adverse events (7.1% with benzbromarone versus 6.1% with allopurinol; pooled RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.28 to 5.62), and total adverse events (20% with benzbromarone versus 6.7% with allopurinol; RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.64 to 14.16). The study did not measure pain reduction, function and tophus regression.When comparing benzbromarone with probenecid, there was moderate-quality evidence based on one study (62 participants) that participants taking benzbromarone were more likely to achieve serum urate normalisation after two months (81.5% with benzbromarone versus 57.1% with probenecid; RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.00). This indicated that when compared with probenecid, five participants needed to be treated with benzbromarone in order to have one additional person achieve serum urate normalisation (number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 5). However, the second study reported no difference in the absolute decrease in serum urate between these groups after 12 weeks. Low-quality evidence from two studies (129 participants) indicated uncertain differences between treatments in the frequency of acute gout attacks (6.3% with benzbromarone versus 10.6% with probenecid; pooled RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.09 to 5.83); fewer withdrawals due to adverse events with benzbromarone (2% with benzbromarone versus 17% with probenecid; pooled RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.79, NNTB 7) and fewer total adverse events (21% with benzbromarone versus 47% with probenecid; pooled RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.74; NNTB 4). The studies did not measure pain reduction, function and tophus regression.Low-quality evidence based on one small CCT (37 participants) indicated uncertainty around the difference in the incidence of acute gout attacks between probenecid and allopurinol after 18 to 20 months' treatment (53% with probenecid versus 55% with allopurinol; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.75). The study did not measure or report the proportion achieving serum urate normalisation, pain reduction, function, tophus regression, withdrawal due to adverse events and total adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was moderate-quality evidence that there is probably no important difference between benzbromarone and allopurinol at achieving serum urate normalisation, but that benzbromarone is probably more successful than probenecid at achieving serum urate normalisation in people with gout. There is some uncertainty around the effect estimates, based on low-quality evidence from only one or two trials, on the number of acute gout attacks, the number of withdrawals due to adverse events or the total number of participants experiencing adverse events when comparing benzbromarone with allopurinol. However, when compared with probenecid, benzbromarone resulted in fewer withdrawals due to adverse events and fewer participants experiencing adverse events. Low-quality evidence from one small study indicated uncertain effects in the incidence of acute gout attacks when comparing probenecid with allopurinol therapy. We downgraded the evidence because of a possible risk of performance and other biases and imprecision.

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.

Pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic and tolerability evaluation of concomitant administration of lesinurad and febuxostat in gout patients with hyperuricaemia

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the pharmacodynamics (PDs), pharmacokinetics (PKs) and safety of lesinurad (selective uric acid reabsorption inhibitor) in combination with febuxostat (xanthine oxidase inhibitor) in patients with gout.

METHODS

This study was a phase IB, multicentre, open-label, multiple-dose study of gout patients with serum uric acid (sUA) >8 mg/dl following washout of urate-lowering therapy with colchicine flare prophylaxis. Febuxostat 40 or 80 mg/day was administered on days 1-21, lesinurad 400 mg/day was added on days 8-14 and then lesinurad was increased to 600 mg/day on days 15-21. sUA, urine uric acid and PK profiles were evaluated at the end of each week. Safety was assessed by adverse events, laboratory tests and physical examinations.

RESULTS

Initial treatment with febuxostat 40 or 80 mg/day monotherapy resulted in 67% and 56% of subjects, respectively, achieving a sUA level <6 mg/dl. Febuxostat 40 or 80 mg/day plus lesinurad 400 or 600 mg/day resulted in 100% of subjects achieving sUA <6 mg/dl and up to 100% achieving sUA <5 mg/dl. No clinically relevant changes in the PKs of either drug were noted. The combination was well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

The clinically important targets of sUA <6 mg/dl and <5 mg/dl are achievable in 100% of patients when combining lesinurad and febuxostat.

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Interaction Between Allopurinol and Probenecid in Patients with Gout

Objective.

To investigate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interaction between probenecid and oxypurinol (the active metabolite of allopurinol) in patients with gout.

Methods.

This was an open-label observational clinical study. Blood and urine samples were collected to measure oxypurinol and urate concentrations. We examined the effects of adding probenecid to allopurinol therapy upon plasma concentrations and renal clearances of urate and oxypurinol.

Results.

Twenty patients taking allopurinol 100–400 mg daily completed the study. Maximum coadministered doses of probenecid were 250 mg/day (n = 1), 500 mg/day (n = 19), 1000 mg/day (n = 7), 1500 mg/day (n = 3), and 2000 mg/day (n = 1). All doses except the 250 mg daily dose were divided and dosing was twice daily. Estimated creatinine clearances ranged from 28 to 113 ml/min. Addition of probenecid 500 mg/day to allopurinol therapy decreased plasma urate concentrations by 25%, from mean 0.37 mmol/l (95% CI 0.33–0.41) to mean 0.28 mmol/l (95% CI 0.24–0.32) (p < 0.001); and increased renal urate clearance by 62%, from mean 6.0 ml/min (95% CI 4.5–7.5) to mean 9.6 ml/min (95% CI 6.9–12.3) (p < 0.001). Average steady-state plasma oxypurinol concentrations decreased by 26%, from mean 11.1 mg/l (95% CI 5.0–17.3) to mean 8.2 mg/l (95% CI 4.0–12.4) (p < 0.001); and renal oxypurinol clearance increased by 24%, from mean 12.7 ml/min (95% CI 9.6–15.8) to mean 16.1 ml/min (95% CI 12.0–20.2) (p < 0.05). The additional hypouricemic effect of probenecid 500 mg/day appeared to be lower in patients with renal impairment.

Conclusion.

Coadministration of allopurinol with probenecid had a significantly greater hypouricemic effect than allopurinol alone despite an associated reduction of plasma oxypurinol concentrations. Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012606000276550.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interaction between allopurinol and probenecid in healthy subjects

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Combination therapy with allopurinol and probenecid is used to treat tophaceous gout in patients who do not respond sufficiently to allopurinol alone. However, the potential interaction between these drugs has not been systematically investigated. The objective of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetics and hypouricaemic effect of oxypurinol (the active metabolite of allopurinol) and probenecid when administered alone and in combination in healthy subjects.

METHODS

An open-label, randomized, three-way crossover clinical trial was conducted in 12 healthy adults. Subjects were randomized to receive treatment for 7 days with allopurinol (150 mg twice daily), probenecid (500 mg twice daily) or combination therapy with both drugs, with a 7-day washout period between treatments. Venous blood samples were collected predose (at 0 hours) and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 hours after dosage for determination of oxypurinol and/or probenecid concentrations. Plasma and urinary urate concentrations were determined on each study day and at the end of each washout period. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters were analysed using two-way ANOVA.

RESULTS

Coadministration of allopurinol and probenecid significantly reduced average steady-state plasma oxypurinol concentrations (mean+/-SD: allopurinol alone 9.7+/-2.1 mg/L vs combination 5.1+/-1.0 mg/L, p<0.001). Probenecid concentrations were unaffected. Plasma urate concentrations decreased (p<0.01) during allopurinol therapy (0.16+/-0.05 mmol/L), probenecid therapy (0.13+/-0.02 mmol/L) and combination therapy (0.09+/-0.02 mmol/L) compared with baseline (0.30+/-0.05 mmol/L).

CONCLUSION

Coadministration of allopurinol and probenecid to healthy subjects had a greater hypouricaemic effect than either allopurinol or probenecid alone, despite a reduction in plasma oxypurinol concentrations when the drugs were taken concomitantly.

Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of allopurinol and oxypurinol

Allopurinol is the drug most widely used to lower the blood concentrations of urate and, therefore, to decrease the number of repeated attacks of gout. Allopurinol is rapidly and extensively metabolised to oxypurinol (oxipurinol), and the hypouricaemic efficacy of allopurinol is due very largely to this metabolite. The pharmacokinetic parameters of allopurinol after oral dosage include oral bioavailability of 79 +/- 20% (mean +/- SD), an elimination half-life (t((1/2))) of 1.2 +/- 0.3 hours, apparent oral clearance (CL/F) of 15.8 +/- 5.2 mL/min/kg and an apparent volume of distribution after oral administration (V(d)/F) of 1.31 +/- 0.41 L/kg. Assuming that 90 mg of oxypurinol is formed from every 100mg of allopurinol, the pharmacokinetic parameters of oxypurinol in subjects with normal renal function are a t((1/2)) of 23.3 +/- 6.0 hours, CL/F of 0.31 +/- 0.07 mL/min/kg, V(d)/F of 0.59 +/- 0.16 L/kg, and renal clearance (CL(R)) relative to creatinine clearance of 0.19 +/- 0.06. Oxypurinol is cleared almost entirely by urinary excretion and, for many years, it has been recommended that the dosage of allopurinol should be reduced in renal impairment. A reduced initial target dosage in renal impairment is still reasonable, but recent data on the toxicity of allopurinol indicate that the dosage may be increased above the present guidelines if the reduction in plasma urate concentrations is inadequate. Measurement of plasma concentrations of oxypurinol in selected patients, particularly those with renal impairment, may help to decrease the risk of toxicity and improve the hypouricaemic response. Monitoring of plasma concentrations of oxypurinol should also help to identify patients with poor adherence. Uricosuric drugs, such as probenecid, have potentially opposing effects on the hypouricaemic efficacy of allopurinol. Their uricosuric effect lowers the plasma concentrations of urate; however, they increase the CL(R) of oxypurinol, thus potentially decreasing the influence of allopurinol. The net effect is an increased degree of hypouricaemia, but the interaction is probably limited to patients with normal renal function or only moderate impairment.

Treatment of crystal arthropathy--history and advances

The history of gout and the many distinguished historical figures who have suffered the agonies of this crystal deposition disorder have claimed the attention of medical historians like no other disease. Its treatment with uric acid lowering drugs became a twentieth century paradigm for the successful management and prevention of a chronic rheumatic disease, but the colorful history of the treatment of gout and crystal deposition disorders stretches back over 4,000 years.

Difficult gout and new approaches for control of hyperuricemia in the allopurinol-allergic patient

A major obstacle to the treatment of hyperuricemia in patients allergic to allopurinol is the limited availability of suitable, equally effective, alternative, urate-lowering drugs. Conventional uricosuric drugs, including probenecid and sulfinpyrazone, are recommended for allopurinol- intolerant patients with gout and "underexcretion" hyperuricemia who have normal renal function and no history of nephrolithiasis. Therapeutic options in those in whom traditional uricosuric drugs are contraindicated, ineffective, or poorly tolerated include slow oral desensitization to allopurinol and cautious administration of oxipurinol. Allopurinol desensitization is useful particularly in those who have failed other treatment modalities. If available (as in Europe, South Africa, and Japan), benzbromarone may be tried in patients with gout and mild-to-moderate renal insufficiency. Recombinant urate oxidase can be used in the short-term prophylaxis and treatment of chemotherapy- associated hyperuricemia in patients with lymphoproliferative and myeloproliferative disorders. Hyperuricemia and gout occur with increased frequency in cyclosporine-treated allograft transplant recipients. The management of gout in these patients is complicated by two main factors: cyclosporine-induced renal impairment, and interactions with medications used to preserve the allograft.

Formulation development of allopurinol suppositories and injectables

Allopurinol was formulated into injectable and suppository dosage forms. The injectable formulation was prepared by dissolving allopurinol in a cosolvent system consisting of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and propylene glycol (v/v = 50/50). The stability of allopurinol in the cosolvent system was studied under accelerated storage conditions, and results indicate first-order degradation kinetics with an activation energy of 24.3 kcal/mol. The development of suppository dosage forms was performed by formulating allopurinol with polyethylene glycol (PEG) mixtures of different molecular weights. In vitro release profiles of suppositories formulated with different polyethylene bases were obtained in the pH 7.4 buffer solution using the USP 23 paddle method at 100 rpm. Results indicate that the release rate of the suppository formulations containing PEG 1500/PEG 4000 at the ratio (w/w) of 2.5/10 to 10/2.5 appeared to be similar. However, the addition of sodium lauryl sulfate in the suppository decreased the release rate of allopurinol significantly. A future study to establish in vitro/in vivo correlation (iv/ivc) is suggested.

Enhancement of anticoagulant action by warfarin-benzbromarone interaction

To investigate the interaction between warfarin potassium and benzbromarone, administration of benzbromarone to patients receiving long-term treatment with both drugs was discontinued for 1 week and then resumed, and the resulting changes in the coagulation system were examined. Thrombotest value, activity of coagulation factors II and VIII, concentration of protein induced by vitamin K absence or antagonist-II (PIVKA-II), total plasma concentration of warfarin, and free warfarin concentration were measured during the period of concurrent administration of the two drugs, 1 week after discontinuation of benzbromarone, and after resumption of benzbromarone administration. After administration of benzbromarone had been discontinued for 1 week, the thrombotest value and factor II activity rose significantly whereas PIVKA-II activity dropped significantly compared with corresponding levels before discontinuation, but these parameters tended to revert to the previously maintained levels after resumption of benzbromarone treatment. Activity of the vitamin K-independent factor VIII displayed almost no changes, however. Total plasma warfarin concentration also decreased significantly, and free warfarin concentration was nearly unchanged. These results verified that the anticoagulant action of warfarin is enhanced by concurrent administration of benzbromarone. Accordingly, adequate consideration must be devoted to the prevention of grave hemorrhagic tendencies when these two drugs are administered concurrently.