Model-based cost-effectiveness analyses comparing combinations of urate lowering therapy and anti-inflammatory treatment in gout patients.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of various combinations of urate lowering therapy (ULT) and anti-inflammatory treatment in the management of newly diagnosed gout patients, from the Dutch societal perspective. METHODS: A probabilistic patient-level simulation estimating costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) comparing gout and hyperuricemia treatment strategies was performed. ULT options febuxostat, allopurinol and no ULT were considered. Flare treatments naproxen, colchicine, prednisone, and anakinra were considered. A Markov Model was constructed to simulate gout disease. Health states were no flare, and severe pain, mild pain, moderate pain, or no pain in the presence of a flare. Model input was derived from patient level clinical trial data, meta-analyses or from previously published health-economic evaluations. The results of probabilistic sensitivity analyses were presented using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and summarized using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs). Scenario analyses were performed. RESULTS: The ICER for allopurinol versus no ULT was €1,381, when combined with naproxen. Febuxostat yielded the highest utility, but also the highest costs (€4,385 vs. €4,063 for allopurinol), resulting in an ICER of €25,173 when compared to allopurinol. No ULT was not cost-effective, yielding the lowest utility. For the gout flare medications, comparable effects on utility were achieved. Combined with febuxostat, naproxen was the cheapest option (€4,404), and anakinra the most expensive (€4,651). The ICER of anakinra compared to naproxen was €818,504. Colchicine and prednisone were dominated by naproxen. CONCLUSION: Allopurinol and febuxostat were both cost-effective compared to No ULT. Febuxostat was cost-effective in comparison with allopurinol at higher willingness-to-pay thresholds. For treating gout flares, colchicine, naproxen and prednisone offered comparable health economic implications, although naproxen was the favoured option.

A systematic literature review of patient-reported outcome measures used in gout: an evaluation of their content and measurement properties.

BACKGROUND: Gout is a common, monosodium urate crystal-driven inflammatory arthritis. Besides its clinical manifestations, patients often also suffer from pain, physical impairment, emotional distress and work productivity loss, as a result of the disease. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used to assess these consequences of the disease. However, current instrument endorsements for measuring such outcomes in acute and chronic gout clinical settings are based on limited psychometric evidence. The objective of this systematic literature review was to identify currently available PROMs for gout, and to critically evaluate their content and psychometric properties, in order to evaluate the current status regarding PROMs for use in gout patients. METHODS: Systematic literature searches were performed in the PubMed and EMBASE databases. The methodological quality of included papers was appraised using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist, and evaluation of measurement properties (reliability, responsiveness, construct validity, floor and ceiling effects) was done in accordance with published quality criteria. Item content was appraised by linking health concepts to the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health (ICF) framework. RESULTS: In total, 13 PROMs were identified, of which three were targeted specifically at gout patients. The majority of the PROMs were rated positively for content validity. For most instruments, limited evidence was available for construct validity and reliability. Instruments to assess pain scored well on responsiveness and floor and ceiling effects, but not much is known about their reliability in gout. CONCLUSIONS: The physical functioning subscale of the SF-36v2 (Short Form-36 item version 2) is the only PROM that had sufficient supporting evidence for all its psychometric properties. Many of the commonly used PROMs in gout are currently not yet well supported and more studies on their measurement properties are needed among both acute and chronic gout populations.

Development and validation of a patient-reported gout attack intensity score for use in gout clinical studies.

OBJECTIVE: Inflammation-related symptoms such as pain, swelling and tenderness of the affected joint are frequently assessed using 5-point diary rating scales in gout clinical trials. Combining these into a single gout attack symptom intensity score may be a useful summary measure for these data, which is potentially more responsive to change compared with the individual components. The objective of this study was to develop a patient-reported gout flare intensity score, the Gout Attack Intensity Score (GAIS), for use in clinical studies, that includes components for gout-related pain, swelling and tenderness. METHODS: Data from a randomized controlled trial comparing anakinra to standard of care for the treatment of acute gout attacks were used for this study. A 7-day flare diary was completed by patients, including questions relating to intensity of pain, swelling and tenderness (5-point rating scales). Scalability of these items was assessed using Mokken Scale Analysis, and reliability using greatest lower bound reliability coefficients. Known-groups validity was evaluated, as well as the responsiveness to change and the presence of floor and ceiling effects. RESULTS: Scalability of the single items was supported, and GAIS scores were reliable (greatest lower bound >0.80). GAIS scores demonstrated responsiveness to change with high effect sizes (>0.8), and discriminated better between responders and non-responders compared with its single-item components. No floor and ceiling effects were found. CONCLUSION: The GAIS seems to be a reliable and responsive instrument for assessing patient-reported gout attack intensity that may be used in gout clinical studies.

Anakinra for the treatment of acute gout flares: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, active-comparator, non-inferiority trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of anakinra in treating acute gout flares in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, active comparator, non-inferiority (NI) trial. METHODS: Patients with a crystal-proven acute gout flare were randomized (1: 1) to treatment with anakinra or treatment as usual (free choice: either colchicine, naproxen or prednisone). The primary end point was the change in pain between baseline and the averaged pain score on days 2-4 measured on a five-point rating scale. NI of anakinra would be established if the upper bound of the 95% CI of the numeric difference in changed pain scores between treatment groups did not exceed the NI limit of 0.4 in favour of treatment as usual, in the per-protocol (PP) and intention-to-treat (ITT) populations, assessed in an analysis of covariance model. Secondary outcomes included safety assessments, improvement in pain, swelling, tenderness and treatment response after 5 days, assessed using linear mixed models and binary logistic regression models. RESULTS: Forty-three patients received anakinra and 45 treatment as usual. Anakinra was non-inferior (mean difference; 95% CI) to treatment as usual in both the PP (-0.13; -0.44, 0.18) and ITT (-0.18; -0.44, 0.08) populations. No unexpected or uncommon (serious) adverse events were observed in either treatment arm. Analyses of secondary outcomes showed that patients in both groups reported similar significant reductions in their gout symptoms. CONCLUSION: Efficacy of anakinra was shown to be non-inferior to treatment as usual for the treatment of acute gout flares, suggesting that anakinra is an effective treatment alternative for acute gout flares. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Het Nederlands Trial Register, www.trialregister.nl, NTR5234.

Quality of care in gout: a clinical audit on treating to the target with urate lowering therapy in real-world gout patients.

The current paper aimed to describe the quality of care for gout patients by showing the clinical outcomes achieved in two patient cohorts in which differing targeted urate lowering therapy (ULT) treatment approaches were employed, both aiming to reach the European League Against Rheumatism recommended serum urate (sUA) targets. A retrospective medical chart review study was conducted. Data from the medical records of gout patients from two clinical centers in The Netherlands, both applying targeted ULT treatments (albeit using different approaches), were reviewed. Patients in cohort A were given a combination of xanthine oxidase inhibitors with uricosurics if treatment with allopurinol monotherapy failed to reach sUA target levels, whereas patients in cohort B were treated with sequential monotherapy. Data on patient characteristics and clinical outcomes were collected. A total of 177 patient dossiers were included: 99 from cohort A and 78 from cohort B. The great majority (n = 146, 82.5%) of the patients in both cohorts had a current sUA level <360 µmol/L. In addition, more than half (n = 104, 58.8%) of the patients met the stringent sUA target level of <300 µmol/L. The largest reductions in mean sUA levels were observed for patients who were treated with combination therapy. This clinical audit of two cohorts of gout patients provides initial-yet promising-results regarding the proportion of real-world gout patients in whom recommended that sUA target levels can be achieved, and demonstrates the added value that a targeted treatment approach may have in reaching these goals.