Dissociation Between Clinical Benefit and Persistent Urate Lowering in Patients with Chronic Refractory Gout Treated with Pegloticase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess clinical benefit in patients with chronic refractory gout who did not meet the protocol-defined criteria of responders to pegloticase. METHODS: This analysis used results from 2 randomized controlled trials (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00325195, NCT01356498) to assess the clinical efficacy in responders and nonresponders to treatment (8 mg of pegloticase every 2 weeks). Serum urate was measured before each infusion and the following were recorded: assessment of gout flares, tophus reduction, patient's global assessment (PtGA), tender and swollen joints (TJC and SJC), pain using a 100-mm visual analog scale, and a variety of patient-reported outcomes [Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 questionnaire physical component summary score and arthritis-specific health index (ASHI) score]. RESULTS: The analysis included 36 persistent urate responders, 49 nonresponders, and 43 patients who received placebo. Results for both responders and nonresponders indicated significant reduction in tophi and improvements from baseline in PtGA, TJC, SJC, pain, and ASHI. No significant improvements were observed in the patients who received placebo. CONCLUSION: Chronic refractory gout patients not achieving protocol-defined persistent urate lowering still achieve significant clinical benefits with pegloticase treatment, suggesting that transient reduction in serum urate may result in sustained clinical benefit.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".