Bivalent Omicron BA.1-Adapted BNT162b2 Booster in Adults Older than 55 Years.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of immune-escape variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 warrants the use of sequence-adapted vaccines to provide protection against coronavirus disease 2019. METHODS: In an ongoing phase 3 trial, adults older than 55 years who had previously received three 30-µg doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine were randomly assigned to receive 30 µg or 60 µg of BNT162b2, 30 µg or 60 µg of monovalent B.1.1.529 (omicron) BA.1-adapted BNT162b2 (monovalent BA.1), or 30 µg (15 µg of BNT162b2 + 15 µg of monovalent BA.1) or 60 µg (30 µg of BNT162b2 + 30 µg of monovalent BA.1) of BA.1-adapted BNT162b2 (bivalent BA.1). Primary objectives were to determine superiority (with respect to 50% neutralizing titer [NT50] against BA.1) and noninferiority (with respect to seroresponse) of the BA.1-adapted vaccines to BNT162b2 (30 µg). A secondary objective was to determine noninferiority of bivalent BA.1 to BNT162b2 (30 µg) with respect to neutralizing activity against the ancestral strain. Exploratory analyses assessed immune responses against omicron BA.4, BA.5, and BA.2.75 subvariants. RESULTS: A total of 1846 participants underwent randomization. At 1 month after vaccination, bivalent BA.1 (30 µg and 60 µg) and monovalent BA.1 (60 µg) showed neutralizing activity against BA.1 superior to that of BNT162b2 (30 µg), with NT50 geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of 1.56 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17 to 2.08), 1.97 (95% CI, 1.45 to 2.68), and 3.15 (95% CI, 2.38 to 4.16), respectively. Bivalent BA.1 (both doses) and monovalent BA.1 (60 µg) were also noninferior to BNT162b2 (30 µg) with respect to seroresponse against BA.1; between-group differences ranged from 10.9 to 29.1 percentage points. Bivalent BA.1 (either dose) was noninferior to BNT162b2 (30 µg) with respect to neutralizing activity against the ancestral strain, with NT50 GMRs of 0.99 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.20) and 1.30 (95% CI, 1.07 to 1.58), respectively. BA.4-BA.5 and BA.2.75 neutralizing titers were numerically higher with 30-µg bivalent BA.1 than with 30-µg BNT162b2. The safety profile of either dose of monovalent or bivalent BA.1 was similar to that of BNT162b2 (30 µg). Adverse events were more common in the 30-µg monovalent-BA.1 (8.5%) and 60-µg bivalent-BA.1 (10.4%) groups than in the other groups (3.6 to 6.6%). CONCLUSIONS: The candidate monovalent or bivalent omicron BA.1-adapted vaccines had a safety profile similar to that of BNT162b2 (30 µg), induced substantial neutralizing responses against ancestral and omicron BA.1 strains, and, to a lesser extent, neutralized BA.4, BA.5, and BA.2.75 strains. (Funded by BioNTech and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04955626.).

Safety and Efficacy of a Third Dose of BNT162b2 Covid-19 Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Active immunization with the BNT162b2 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) has been a critical mitigation tool against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection during the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. In light of reports of waning protection occurring 6 months after the primary two-dose vaccine series, data are needed on the safety and efficacy of offering a third (booster) dose in persons 16 years of age or older. METHODS: In this ongoing, placebo-controlled, randomized, phase 3 trial, we assigned participants who had received two 30-µg doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine at least 6 months earlier to be injected with a third dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine or with placebo. We assessed vaccine safety and efficacy against Covid-19 starting 7 days after the third dose. RESULTS: A total of 5081 participants received a third BNT162b2 dose and 5044 received placebo. The median interval between dose 2 and dose 3 was 10.8 months in the vaccine group and 10.7 months in the placebo group; the median follow-up was 2.5 months. Local and systemic reactogenicity events from the third dose were generally of low grade. No new safety signals were identified, and no cases of myocarditis or pericarditis were reported. Among the participants without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection who could be evaluated, Covid-19 with onset at least 7 days after dose 3 was observed in 6 participants in the vaccine group and in 123 participants in the placebo group, which corresponded to a relative vaccine efficacy of 95.3% (95% confidence interval, 89.5 to 98.3). CONCLUSIONS: A third dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine administered a median of 10.8 months after the second dose provided 95.3% efficacy against Covid-19 as compared with two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine during a median follow-up of 2.5 months. (Funded by BioNTech and Pfizer; C4591031 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04955626.).

Immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety of biosimilar insulin glargine (Gan & Lee glargine) compared with originator insulin glargine (Lantus®) in patients with type 2 diabetes after 26 weeks' treatment: A randomized open label study.

AIM: To evaluate the equivalence of immunogenicity, safety and efficacy of Gan & Lee (GL) Glargine (Basalin®; Gan & Lee Pharmaceutical) with that of the reference product (Lantus®) in adult participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: This was a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, equivalence trial conducted across 57 sites. In total, 567 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to undergo treatment with either GL Glargine or Lantus® for 26 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants in each treatment arm who manifested treatment-induced anti-insulin antibodies (AIA). Secondary endpoints included efficacy and safety metrics, changes in glycated haemoglobin levels, and a comparative assessment of adverse events. Results were analysed using an equivalence test comparing the limits of the 90% confidence interval (CI) for treatment-induced AIA development to the prespecified margins. RESULTS: The percentages of participants positive for treatment-induced glycated haemoglobin by week 26 were similar between the GL Glargine (19.2%) and Lantus® (21.3%) treatment groups, with a treatment difference of -2.1 percentage points and a 90% CI (-7.6%, 3.5%) (predefined similarity margins: -10.7%, 10.7%). The difference in glycated haemoglobin was -0.08% (90% CI, -0.23, 0.06). The overall percentage of participants with any treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between the GL Glargine (80.1%) and Lantus® (81.6%) treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: GL Glargine was similar to Lantus® in terms of immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety, based on the current study.

Immunogenicity, Efficacy, and Safety of Biosimilar Insulin Glargine (Gan & Lee Glargine) Compared with Originator Insulin Glargine (Lantus®) in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes after 26 Weeks Treatment.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the immunogenicity, safety, and efficacy of GL Glargine with that of the reference product (Lantus®) in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). METHODS: This was a Phase 3, multicenter, randomized, open-label, equivalence study. 576 subjects with T1DM were randomized 1:1 to receive either GL Glargine or Lantus® treatment for 26 weeks. The primary endpoint was the percentage of subjects in each treatment group who developed treatment-induced anti-insulin antibody (AIA) after baseline and up to visit Week 26, which was evaluated using a country-adjusted logistic regression model. The study also compared the changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and adverse events (AEs) including hypoglycemia. RESULTS: The percentage of subjects positive for treatment-induced AIA by Week 26 was 25.8% in the GL Glargine treatment group and 25.3% in the Lantus® treatment group, with a 90% confidence interval [CI] (-5.4, 6.5) of the difference in proportions that fell completely between the similarity margins (-11.3, 11.3). The least squares (LS) mean difference between treatment groups for changes in HbA1c was -0.08 (90% CI: -0.23, 0.06), and the other immunogenicity and safety profiles were comparable. CONCLUSION: GL Glargine demonstrated similar immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety compared to Lantus® over 26 weeks in patients with T1DM.

Safety and Immunogenicity of a Respiratory Syncytial Virus Prefusion F Vaccine When Coadministered With a Tetanus, Diphtheria, and Acellular Pertussis Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Prevention of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) disease in infants is an unmet vaccine need, and maternal immunization is a potential strategy to address this need. This study evaluated concomitant administration of RSV stabilized prefusion F subunit vaccine (RSVpreF) and tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccine adsorbed (Tdap) in healthy, nonpregnant women 18‒49 years of age. METHODS: In this phase 2b, multicenter, placebo-controlled, observer-blind, noninferiority study, participants were randomized to receive RSVpreF in a range of doses and formulations with Tdap or alone, or Tdap alone. Safety and immunogenicity were assessed. RESULTS: Local reactions and systemic events were generally similar across vaccine groups. Noninferiority of anti-RSV-A and anti-RSV-B immune responses induced by RSVpreF with Tdap was demonstrated compared to RSVpreF alone. Noninferiority of anti-diphtheria toxoid and anti-tetanus toxoid immune responses after administration of RSVpreF with Tdap was demonstrated compared to Tdap alone; noninferiority was not met for anti-pertussis component responses. CONCLUSIONS: RSVpreF was safe and well tolerated when administered with Tdap or alone in nonpregnant women 18‒49 years of age. Immune responses induced by Tdap administered with RSVpreF were noninferior for the tetanus and diphtheria components of Tdap, but not for pertussis. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04071158.

Safety and efficacy of verinurad, a selective URAT1 inhibitor, for the treatment of patients with gout and/or asymptomatic hyperuricemia in the United States and Japan: Findings from two phase II trials.

Objective: Evaluate efficacy/safety of verinurad monotherapy in patients with gout (Japan/US) or asymptomatic hyperuricemia (Japan).Methods: Two randomized, placebo-controlled, phase II studies were conducted (NCT01927198/NCT02078219). Patients were randomized to once-daily doses of placebo or escalating doses of verinurad (study 1: 5-12.5 mg; study 2: 2.5-15 mg). Primary endpoint was percentage change from baseline in serum urate (sUA) at week 12 (study 1)/week 16 (study 2). Safety was also assessed.Results: Most patients in study 1 (n = 171) were white (74.9%); all patients were Japanese in study 2 (n = 204). Least squares means (±SE) estimate of percentage change in sUA levels from baseline in study 1 was 1.2 ± 2.9 for placebo, and -17.5 ± 2.8, -29.1 ± 2.8, -34.4 ± 2.9 for verinurad 5, 10, 12.5 mg, respectively. In study 2, results were -2.4 ± 2.5 and -31.7 ± 2.5, -51.7 ± 2.6,-55.8 ± 2.5, respectively. Difference from placebo was significant for each verinurad dose (p<.0001). The proportion of patients with treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was similar across all groups. Renal-related TEAEs were more common with verinurad than placebo.Conclusion: Verinurad monotherapy resulted in sustained reductions in sUA in Japanese/US patients but renal AEs occurred, so verinurad alone is not recommended for treatment of hyperuricemia or gout. The renal consequences of excessive uric acid excretion deserve study.

Randomized trial to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of a booster (third dose) of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine coadministered with 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in adults ≥65 years old.

BACKGROUND: Older adults are at increased risk of adverse outcomes from pneumococcal disease and COVID-19. Vaccination is an established strategy for preventing both illnesses. This study evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of coadministration of the 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) and a booster (third dose) of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine. METHODS: This phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicentre study included 570 participants aged ≥65 years randomized 1:1:1 to PCV20 and BNT162b2 coadministered, or PCV20 or BNT162b2 only (administered with saline for blinding). Primary safety endpoints included local reactions, systemic events, adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs). Secondary objectives were immunogenicity of PCV20 and BNT162b2 when administered together or separately. RESULTS: Coadministration of PCV20 and BNT162b2 was well tolerated. Local reactions and systemic events were generally mild-moderate; injection-site pain and fatigue were the most frequent local and systemic events, respectively. AE and SAE rates were low and similar across groups. No AEs led to discontinuation; no SAEs were considered vaccination-related. Robust immune responses were observed, with opsonophagocytic activity geometric mean fold rises (GMFRs; from baseline to 1 month) of 2.5-24.5 and 2.3-30.6 across PCV20 serotypes in Coadministration and PCV20-only groups, respectively. GMFRs for full-length S-binding IgG of 35.5 and 39.0, and for neutralizing titres against SARS-CoV-2-wild type virus of 58.8 and 65.4, were observed in the Coadministration and BNT162b2-only groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Safety and immunogenicity of coadministered PCV20 and BNT162b2 were similar to those of PCV20 or BNT162b2 administered alone, suggesting that the 2 vaccines may be coadministered. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04887948.

A randomized phase 1 study of the safety and immunogenicity of 2 novel pneumococcal conjugate vaccines in healthy Japanese adults in the United States.

Expanding serotype coverage of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) to target prevailing disease-causing serotypes could further reduce disease burden. To address this need, 2 different PCVs have been investigated: a 20-valent PCV (PCV20; includes the 13 serotypes in the 13-valent PCV [PCV13] plus 7 additional serotypes [8, 10A, 11A, 12F, 15B, 22F, 33F]) and a complementary 7-valent PCV (cPCV7; contains only the 7 additional serotypes). This phase 1b, randomized, controlled, double-blind study evaluated PCV20 and cPCV7 safety and immunogenicity in healthy Japanese adults 18-49 years of age residing in the United States for ≤5 years. Participants (n = 104) were randomized equally to receive a single dose of PCV20, cPCV7, or PCV13. Immunogenicity was assessed at baseline and 1 month after vaccination using serotype-specific opsonophagocytic activity (OPA) titers and serotype-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) concentrations. Prompted local reactions and systemic events; adverse events (AEs); and serious AEs and newly diagnosed chronic disease were assessed 14 days, through 1 month, and upto 6 months following vaccination, respectively. OPA immune responses were robust for all 20 serotypes in the PCV20 group and for the 7 serotypes in the cPCV7 group 1 month after vaccination. IgG immune response showed similar trends. Injection site pain and muscle pain were the most common local reaction and systemic event; the majority were mild or moderate in severity. Few AEs and no severe AEs, serious AEs, or safety-related withdrawals were reported. Taken together, administration of PCV20 or cPCV7 in Japanese adults was well tolerated and induced robust serotype-specific functional immune responses. NCT03642847.

User experiences with second-generation 32-gauge × 4 mm vs. thinner comparator pen needles: prospective randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: Two similarly designed studies compared user experiences with a second-generation extra-thin-wall, 5-bevel 32 G × 4 mm pen needle (PN) with redesigned hub versus four thinner commercially available PNs. METHODS: Adults (18-75 years old) with type 1 or type 2 diabetes and ≥3 months of experience with pen injectors qualified for single-visit, single-blinded randomized studies. The investigational 32 G PN was compared with three 33-34 G × 3.5-4 mm PNs in Study 1 and one 34 G × 4 mm PN in Study 2. Participants completed 12 abdominal injections of 0.3 mL sterile saline using insulin pens in 6 pairs, each comprising one investigational 32 G PN and one comparator PN in random order. After each injection pair, participants compared injection pain via relative 150 mm visual analog scale (VAS) and perceived dose delivery force via relative 5 point Likert scale. Adjusted models tested injection pain scores (primary endpoint) for noninferiority and, if met, then for superiority. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT03878758 and NCT03878745. RESULTS: The investigational 32 G PN met noninferiority as well as superiority criteria for less injection pain vs. each comparator (p < .01), with adjusted mean relative VAS scores 9.1-17.6 in Study 1 (n = 154) and 7.3 in Study 2 (n = 55). The investigational 32 G PN was also superior vs. each comparator PN in requiring less relative perceived force to deliver the dose (p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The investigational 32 G PN was associated with less participant-reported injection pain and less perceived dose delivery force compared with four thinner PNs, suggesting no additional pain reduction or force reduction benefit conferred by the thinner PNs.

Safety and long-term immunological effects of CryJ2-LAMP plasmid vaccine in Japanese red cedar atopic subjects: A phase I study.

Japanese Red Cedar (JRC) pollen induced allergy affects one third of Japanese and the development of effective therapies remains an unachieved challenge. We designed a DNA vaccine encoding CryJ2 allergen from the JRC pollen and Lysosomal Associated Membrane Protein 1 (LAMP-1) to treat JRC allergy. These Phase IA and IB trials assessed safety and immunological effects of the investigational CryJ2-LAMP DNA vaccine in both non-sensitive and sensitive Japanese expatriates living in Honolulu, Hawaii. In the Phase IA trial, 6 JRC non-sensitive subjects and 9 JRC and/or Mountain Cedar (MC) sensitive subjects were given 4 vaccine doses (each 4mg/1ml) intramuscularly (IM) at 14-day intervals. Nine JRC and/or MC sensitive subjects were given 4 doses (2 mg/0.5 ml) IM at 14-day intervals. The safety and functional biomarkers were followed for 132 d. Following this, 17 of 24 subjects were recruited into the IB trial and received one booster dose (2 mg/0.5 ml) IM approximately 300 d after the first vaccination dose to which they were randomized in the first phase of the trial. All safety endpoints were met and all subjects tolerated CryJ2-LAMP vaccinations well. At the end of the IA trial, 10 out of 12 JRC sensitive and 6 out of 11 MC sensitive subjects experienced skin test negative conversion, possibly related to the CryJ2-LAMP vaccinations. Collectively, these data suggested that the CryJ2-LAMP DNA vaccine is safe and may be immunologically effective in treating JRC induced allergy.

Lesinurad Combined With Allopurinol: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study in Gout Patients With an Inadequate Response to Standard-of-Care Allopurinol (a US-Based Study).

OBJECTIVE: Lesinurad is a selective uric acid reabsorption inhibitor used for the treatment of gout in combination with a xanthine oxidase inhibitor. The Combining Lesinurad with Allopurinol Standard of Care in Inadequate Responders (CLEAR 1) study, a 12-month, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial, was conducted to investigate daily lesinurad (200 mg or 400 mg orally) added to allopurinol versus placebo plus allopurinol in patients with serum urate (UA) levels above a target of <6.0 mg/dl. METHODS: Patients receiving ≥300 mg of allopurinol (≥200 mg in those with moderate renal impairment) who had serum UA levels ≥6.5 mg/dl at screening and ≥2 gout flares during the previous year were studied. The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving a serum UA level of <6.0 mg/dl at month 6. Key secondary end points were the mean gout flare rate requiring treatment (months 7-12) and the proportions of patients with complete resolution of ≥1 target tophus (month 12). Safety assessments included adverse events and laboratory data. RESULTS: The study patients (n = 603) were predominantly male and had a mean ± SD age of 51.9 ± 11.3 years, a gout duration of 11.8 ± 9.4 years, a baseline serum UA level of 6.94 ± 1.27 mg/dl, and were receiving an allopurinol dosage of 306.6 ± 59.58 mg/day. Lesinurad at doses of 200 mg or 400 mg added to allopurinol therapy significantly increased the proportions of patients who achieved serum UA target levels by month 6 as compared with those receiving allopurinol alone (54.2%, 59.2%, and 27.9%, respectively, P < 0.0001). Lesinurad was not significantly superior to allopurinol alone in terms of the secondary end points: rates of gout flares and complete resolution of tophi. Lesinurad was generally well-tolerated; the safety profile of the 200-mg dose was comparable to that of allopurinol alone, except for higher incidences of predominantly reversible elevations of serum creatinine levels. CONCLUSION: Lesinurad added to allopurinol provided benefit as compared with allopurinol alone in reducing serum UA levels and represents a new treatment option for patients needing additional urate-lowering therapy.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of once-daily niacin for the treatment of dyslipidemia associated with type 2 diabetes: results of the assessment of diabetes control and evaluation of the efficacy of niaspan trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic dyslipidemia is characterized by high triglyceride levels; low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels; small, dense low-density lipoprotein particles; and high free fatty acid levels. Niacin reduces concentrations of triglyceride-rich and small low-density lipoprotein particles while increasing high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. It also lowers levels of free fatty acids and lipoprotein(a). However, the use of niacin in patients with diabetes has been discouraged because high doses can worsen glycemic control. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of once-daily extended-release (ER) niacin in patients with diabetic dyslipidemia. METHODS: During a 16-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 148 patients were randomized to placebo (n = 49) or 1000 (n = 45) or 1500 mg/d (n = 52) of ER niacin. Sixty-nine patients (47%) were also receiving concomitant therapy with statins. RESULTS: Dose-dependent increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (+19% to +24% [P<.05] vs placebo for both niacin dosages) and reductions in triglyceride levels (-13% to -28% [P<.05] vs placebo for the 1500-mg ER niacin) were observed. Baseline and week 16 values for glycosylated hemoglobin levels were 7.13% and 7.11%, respectively, in the placebo group; 7.28% and 7.35%, respectively, in the 1000-mg ER niacin group (P=.16 vs placebo); and 7.2% and 7.5%, respectively, in the 1500-mg ER niacin group (P=.048 vs placebo). Four patients discontinued participation because of inadequate glucose control. Rates of adverse event rates other than flushing were similar for the niacin and placebo groups. Four patients discontinued participation owing to flushing (including 1 receiving placebo). No hepatotoxic effects or myopathy were observed. CONCLUSION: Low doses of ER niacin (1000 or 1500 mg/d) are a treatment option for dyslipidemia in patients with type 2 diabetes.

An open-label, 6-month study of allopurinol safety in gout: The LASSO study.

OBJECTIVES: Allopurinol is the most widely prescribed serum uric acid-lowering therapy (ULT) in gout. To achieve serum uric acid (sUA) concentrations associated with clinical benefit, allopurinol is serially uptitrated with sUA monitoring. Suboptimal dosing is a key contributor to poor clinical outcomes, but few data are available on the safety and efficacy of dose-titrated allopurinol, particularly at doses > 300 mg/d. The objective of this open-label study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of allopurinol under conditions where investigators were encouraged to titrate to optimal, medically appropriate doses. METHODS: Long-term Allopurinol Safety Study Evaluating Outcomes in Gout Patients (LASSO) was a large, 6-month, multicenter study of allopurinol (NCT01391325). Adults meeting American Rheumatism Association Criteria for Classification of Acute Arthritis of Primary Gout and ≥ 2 gout flares in the previous year were eligible. Investigators were encouraged (but not required) to titrate allopurinol doses to achieve target sUA < 6.0mg/dL. The primary objective was evaluation of the safety of dose-titrated allopurinol by clinical and laboratory examinations at monthly visits. Secondary objectives included sUA-lowering efficacy and gout flare frequency. RESULTS: Of 1735 patients enrolled, 1732 received ≥ 1 allopurinol doses. The maximal daily allopurinol dose during study was < 300 mg in 14.4%, 300 mg in 65.4%, and > 300 mg in 20.2% of patients; dosing duration was 115.5, 152.0, and 159.7 days, respectively. Overall, baseline demographic characteristics and comorbidity rates were similar across these three categories, but patients receiving > 300-mg maximal dose had more severe gout. Treatment-emergent adverse events possibly related to allopurinol occurred in 15.2%, 9.5%, and 11.4% of patients in the < 300-, 300-, and > 300-mg categories, respectively. Rash incidence was low (1.5%) and allopurinol hypersensitivity syndrome was not reported. No clinically meaningful changes occurred in laboratory values. sUA < 6.0mg/dL at month 6 was achieved by 35.9% of patients overall: 22.4%, 35.0%, and 48.3% in dosing categories < 300, 300, and > 300 mg, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This large multicenter study found that the allopurinol dose-titration strategy was well tolerated, without new safety signals emerging over 6 months. However, despite encouragement to treat to target, significant proportions of patients did not achieve target sUA.