ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 162

Development of Preliminary Remission Criteria for Gout Using Delphi and 1000Minds Consensus Exercises

Hugh de Lautour1, Nicola Dalbeth2 and William Taylor3, 1Rheumatology, Auckland District Health Broad, Auckland, New Zealand, 2Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand, 3Rehabilitation Teaching & Research Unit, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand

Meeting: 2014 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Gout and remission

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Title: Metabolic and Crystal Arthropathies: Clinical Aspects

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ACR)

Background/Purpose

There are currently no agreed remission criteria for gout. The aim of this study was to establish consensus for elements of potential remission criteria for use in clinical trials of gout.

Methods

Experts in gout from multiple countries (n=88) were invited by email to participate in this web-based questionnaire study to identify remission criteria as an outcome measure for gout clinical trials.  For the purposes of this project, remission was defined as the absence of symptoms and signs attributable to gout, when these symptoms or signs can or are expected to return in the future (for example, if the patient stopped treatment). Three rounds of a Delphi consensus exercise were conducted by online survey.  Questions focused on domains for inclusion in remission criteria, based on the OMERACT core domains for chronic gout studies. Respondents were then asked to choose which option would indicate remission for each domain.  Consensus in the Delphi exercise was defined as >80% agreement in responses. The Delphi exercise was followed by a discrete choice experiment using 1000Minds to further explore the extent of variation in relative weighting for components of remission (particularly the time over which no flares should be observed).

Results

There were 49 respondents (56% response rate). There was consensus about which domains should be included in remission criteria from the Delphi exercise; 98% agreement for serum urate, 96% for flares, 92% tophi, 83% pain due to gout and 93% patient global assessment of gout disease activity (PGA). Consensus was reached that serum urate measurements should be measured at least twice over a set timeframe and that all measurements should be <6mg/dL (94% agreement). There also was consensus that, for both pain and PGA measurements, the results of two separate measurements over a set timeframe would be averaged.  There was agreement that timeframes of three months or less were not suitable for measurement of remission.  However, consensus was not achieved in the Delphi exercise about the timeframe for remission with equal responses for six months (51%) and one year (49%).  In the discrete choice experiment, the range of opinions remained widely distributed, indicating an ongoing lack of consensus between the 6 and 12 month timeframe. The difference in relative weighting accorded to ‘no flares observed over 12 months’ compared to ‘no flares observed over 6 months’ ranged from 0.04 to 0.26 (out of a total weighting available of 1.0), with the middle 80% of respondents ranging from 0.04 to 0.24.  

Conclusion

These consensus exercises have identified domains for remission criteria for gout, and methods for reporting these domains.  Additional analysis is required to determine the relative advantages of a 6 or 12 month timeframe, particularly for the observation of no flare.


Disclosure:

H. de Lautour,
None;

N. Dalbeth,
None;

W. Taylor,
None.

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2014 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/development-of-preliminary-remission-criteria-for-gout-using-delphi-and-1000minds-consensus-exercises/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology