Show simple item record

Efficacy and safety during extended treatment of lesinurad in combination with febuxostat in patients with tophaceous gout: CRYSTAL extension study

dc.contributor.authorDalbeth, Nicola
dc.contributor.authorJones, Graeme
dc.contributor.authorTerkeltaub, Robert
dc.contributor.authorKhanna, Dinesh
dc.contributor.authorFung, Maple
dc.contributor.authorBaumgartner, Scott
dc.contributor.authorPerez-Ruiz, Fernando
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-14T08:14:34Z
dc.date.available2019-01-14T08:14:34Z
dc.date.issued2019-01-07
dc.identifier.citationArthritis Research & Therapy. 2019 Jan 07;21(1):8
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s13075-018-1788-4
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/146783
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background In gout, long-term urate-lowering therapy (ULT) promotes dissolution of tissue urate crystal deposits. However, no studies using combined xanthine oxidase inhibition and uricosuric ULT have focused on clinical outcomes or adverse events (AEs) beyond 12 months of therapy. Our objective in the present study was to examine efficacy and long-term safety in patients with tophaceous gout receiving febuxostat plus lesinurad as combination therapy. Methods Patients receiving combined lesinurad and febuxostat in the 12-month core CRYSTAL study continued at the same doses in the extension study (“200CONT”, “400CONT”), whereas those receiving only febuxostat 80 mg were randomized to lesinurad 200 or 400 mg with febuxostat (“200CROSS”, “400CROSS”). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients experiencing complete resolution (CR) of at least one target tophus by extension month (EM) 12. The key secondary endpoint was mean rate of gout flares requiring treatment from the end of EM 2 to the end of EM 12. Secondary endpoints included reduction in the sum of areas for all target tophi. Safety assessments included AEs and laboratory data for the entire extension study (median length of lesinurad exposure, 800 days). Results Of 235 patients completing the core study, 196 (83.4%) enrolled in the extension: 200CONT (n = 64), 200CROSS (n = 33), 400CONT (n = 65), and 400CROSS (n = 34). At EM 12, 59.6%, 43.5%, 66.7%, and 50.0% of patients, respectively, had CR of at least one target tophus. The sum of areas for all target tophi was reduced by 76.4%, 58.1%, 77.5%, and 62.8%, respectively. The adjusted mean (SE) rates of gout flares requiring treatment from the end of EM 2 to the end of EM 12 were 0.6 (0.19), 1.3 (0.48), 0.2 (0.08), and 1.9 (0.93), respectively. Target sUA < 5.0 mg/dl was achieved by 77.1%, 79.2%, 88.5%, and 71.4% of patients, respectively. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and renal-related TEAEs in the core study were not increased with prolonged lesinurad exposure in the extension study. Conclusions Patients receiving lesinurad plus febuxostat therapy for 2 years continued to be at sUA target. Patients exhibited a progressive increase in CR of at least one target tophus, progressive reduction in tophus size, and reduction of gout flares requiring treatment over the second year, with AEs consistent with those observed in the core study. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01510769 . Registered on 13 January 2012.
dc.titleEfficacy and safety during extended treatment of lesinurad in combination with febuxostat in patients with tophaceous gout: CRYSTAL extension study
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146783/1/13075_2018_Article_1788.pdf
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s).
dc.date.updated2019-01-14T08:14:36Z
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.