Effect of Urate-lowering Therapy on the Risk of Cardiovascular Disease and All-cause Mortality in Patients with Gout: A Case-matched Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine (1) the risk of death from cardiovascular disease (CVD) and from all causes in patients with gout who do not undergo urate-lowering therapy (ULT), and (2) the effect of ULT on mortality risk in patients with gout. METHODS: In this prospective case-matched cohort study, 40,623 Taiwanese individuals aged ≥ 17 years were followed for 6.5 years. Mortality rate was compared between 1189 patients with gout who did not receive ULT and reference subjects (no gout, no ULT) matched for age, sex, and the index date of gout diagnosis (1:3 patients with gout/reference subjects), and between 764 patients with gout who received ULT and 764 patients with gout who did not receive ULT matched 1-to-1 based on their propensity score and the index date of ULT prescription. Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to estimate the respective risk of CVD (International Classification of Diseases, 9th ed. code 390-459) and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: After adjustment, patients with gout not treated with ULT had an increased risk of CVD mortality (HR 2.43, 95% CI 1.33-4.45) and all-cause mortality (1.45, 1.05-2.00) relative to the matched reference subjects (no gout, no ULT). Patients with gout treated with ULT had a lower risk of CVD (0.29, 0.11-0.80) and all-cause mortality (0.47, 0.29-0.79) relative to patients with gout not treated with ULT. This survival benefit persisted for users of either allopurinol or benzbromarone. CONCLUSION: Patients with gout who received ULT had significantly better survival rates than those who did not. Thus, undertreatment of gout has serious negative consequences.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".