Two-year reduction of dual-energy CT urate depositions during a treat-to-target strategy in gout in the NOR-Gout longitudinal study

Till Uhlig, Tron Eskild, Lars F Karoliussen, Joe Sexton, Tore K Kvien, Espen A Haavardsholm, Nicola Dalbeth, Hilde Berner Hammer, Till Uhlig, Tron Eskild, Lars F Karoliussen, Joe Sexton, Tore K Kvien, Espen A Haavardsholm, Nicola Dalbeth, Hilde Berner Hammer

Abstract

Objectives: There is a lack of large longitudinal studies of urate deposition measured by dual-energy CT (DECT) during urate lowering therapy (ULT) in people with gout. We explored longitudinal changes in DECT urate depositions during a treat-to-target strategy with ULT in gout.

Methods: Patients with a recent gout flare and serum-urate (sUA) >360 µmol/l attended tight-control visits during escalating ULT. The treatment target was sUA <360 µmol/l, and <300 µmol/l if presence of tophi. A DECT scanner (General Electric Discovery CT750 HD) acquired data from bilateral forefeet and ankles at baseline and after one and two years. Images were scored in known order, using the semi-quantitative Bayat method, by one experienced radiologist who was blinded to serum urate and clinical data. Four regions were scored: the first metatarsophalangeal (MTP1) joint, the other joints of the toes, the ankles and midfeet, and all tendons in the feet and ankles.

Results: DECT was measured at baseline in 187 of 211 patients. The mean (s.d.) serum urate level (μmol/l) decreased from 501 (80) at baseline to 311 (48) at 12 months, and 322 (67) at 24 months. DECT scores at all locations decreased during both the first and the second year (P <0.001 for all comparisons vs baseline), both for patients achieving and not achieving the sUA treatment target.

Conclusions: In patients with gout, urate depositions in ankles and feet as measured by DECT decreased both in the first and the second year, when patients were treated using a treat-to-target ULT strategy.

Keywords: DECT; deposition; gout; treat to target; urate lowering treatment.

© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.

Figures

Fig . 1
Fig. 1
Effect sizes (mean change divided on s.d.) for the decrease in dual-energy CT sum scores in the first, second and both years of follow-up

References

    1. Kuo CF, Grainge MJ, Mallen C, Zhang W, Doherty M. Rising burden of gout in the UK but continuing suboptimal management: a nationwide population study. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:661–7.
    1. Zhu Y, Pandya BJ, Choi HK. Prevalence of gout and hyperuricemia in the US general population: the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2007-2008. Arthritis Rheum 2011;63:3136–41.
    1. Dehlin M, Drivelegka P, Sigurdardottir V, Svärd A, Jacobsson LTH. Incidence and prevalence of gout in Western Sweden. Arthritis Res Ther 2016;18:164.
    1. Richette P, Doherty M, Pascual E et al. 2016 updated EULAR evidence-based recommendations for the management of gout. Ann Rheum Dis 2017;76:29–42.
    1. FitzGerald JD, Dalbeth N, Mikuls T et al. 2020 American College of Rheumatology guideline for the management of gout. Arthritis Rheumatol 2020;72:879–95.
    1. Choi HK, Burns LC, Shojania K et al. Dual energy CT in gout: a prospective validation study. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:1466–71.
    1. Dalbeth N, Doyle AJ. Imaging tools to measure treatment response in gout. Rheumatology 2018;57:i27–i34.
    1. Christiansen SN, Müller FC, Østergaard M et al. Dual-energy CT in gout patients: do all colour-coded lesions actually represent monosodium urate crystals? Arthritis Res Ther 2020;22:212.
    1. Bayat S, Aati O, Rech J et al. Development of a dual-energy computed tomography scoring system for measurement of urate deposition in gout. Arthritis Care Res 2016;68:769–75.
    1. Zhang W, Taylor WJ. Outcome measures in gout. Arthritis Care Res 2020;72(Suppl 10):72–81.
    1. Dalbeth N, Billington K, Doyle A et al. Effects of allopurinol dose escalation on bone erosion and urate volume in gout: a dual-energy computed tomography imaging study within a randomized controlled trial . Arthritis Rheumatol 2019;71:1739–46.
    1. Ellmann H, Bayat S, Araujo E et al. Effects of conventional uric acid-lowering therapy on monosodium urate crystal deposits. Arthritis Rheumatol 2020;72:150–6.
    1. Sun Y, Chen H, Zhang Z et al. Dual-energy computed tomography for monitoring the effect of urate-lowering therapy in gouty arthritis. Int J Rheum Dis 2015;18:880–5.
    1. Pascart T, Grandjean A, Capon B et al. Monosodium urate burden assessed with dual-energy computed tomography predicts the risk of flares in gout: a 12-month observational study: MSU burden and risk of gout flare. Arthritis Res Ther 2018;20:210.
    1. Uhlig T, Karoliussen LF, Sexton J et al. 12-month results from the real-life observational treat-to-target and tight-control therapy NOR-Gout study: achievements of the urate target levels and predictors of obtaining this target. RMD Open 2021;7:e001628.
    1. Hammer HB, Karoliussen L, Terslev L et al. Ultrasound shows rapid reduction of crystal depositions during a treat-to-target approach in gout patients: 12-month results from the NOR-Gout study. Ann Rheum Dis 2020;79:1500–5.
    1. Neogi T, Jansen TL, Dalbeth N et al. 2015 Gout classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:1789–98.
    1. Kiltz U, Smolen J, Bardin T et al. Treat-to-target (T2T) recommendations for gout. Ann Rheum Dis 2017;76:632–8.
    1. Rajan A, Aati O, Kalluru R et al. Lack of change in urate deposition by dual-energy computed tomography among clinically stable patients with long-standing tophaceous gout: a prospective longitudinal study. Arthritis Res Ther 2013;15:R160.
    1. Svensson E, Aurell Y, Jacobsson LTH et al. Dual energy CT findings in gout with rapid kilovoltage-switching source with gemstone scintillator detector. BMC Rheumatol 2020;4:7.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다