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: 212

Pegloticase Provides Clinical Benefit in Patients with Chronic Refractory Gout Who Did Not Meet the Clinical Trial Biochemical Definition of Response

Brian F. Mandell1, Michael Weisman2, Anthony Yeo3 and Peter E. Lipsky4, 1Rheumatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, 2Rheumatology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, West Hollywood, CA, 3Horizon Pharma, Lake Forest, IL, 4AMPEL BioSolutions, Charlottesville, VA

Meeting: 2016 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Date of first publication: September 28, 2016

Keywords: gout, patient outcomes, treatment and uric acid

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Date: Sunday, November 13, 2016

Title: Metabolic and Crystal Arthropathies - Poster I: Clinical Practice

Session Type: ACR Poster Session A

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: Pegloticase is a recombinant uricase conjugated to polyethylene glycol approved for the treatment of chronic refractory gout refractory. The pivotal clinical trials for pegloticase defined responders as patients with plasma uric acid (UA) <6.0 mg/dL for ³80% of the time during extensive monitoring from both the week 9 infusion to just before the week 13 infusion and from the week 21 infusion to week 25 (final visit). Nonresponders did not meet this stringent criterion, but had a substantial decrease in UA after the first pegloticase dose followed by a return to a UA level >6mg/dL after ~6 weeks of therapy.1Whether these subjects received persistent clinical benefit from the transient reduction in UA is not known and is the subject of this analysis.

Methods: This analysis used results from two randomized controlled trials (RCTs)1 to assess the clinical efficacy in responders and nonresponders to treatment (8 mg of pegloticase delivered every 2 weeks [q2w]). Serum UA was measured before each infusion and assessment of gout flares, tophus reduction, Patient Global Assessment (PGA), tender and swollen joints (TJC and SJC), pain measured with a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) and a variety of Patient Reported Outcomes were determined for four groups: responders, all nonresponders including those who exited the study and were not available for the UA assessments at 3 and 6 months, per-protocol (PP) nonresponders who received all planned pegloticase infusions in the 6-month RCTs, and patients who received placebo.

Results: The analysis included 36 responders, 49 nonresponders, 24 PP nonresponders, and 43 patients who received placebo. Responders exhibited mean reductions in serum UA to <0.5 mg/dL at 3 and 6 months. Both nonresponders and PP nonresponders had a transient decrease in UA that returned to a mean >6mg/dL by 7 weeks. Results for both responders and nonresponders indicated significant reduction in tophi and improvements from baseline in PGA, TJC, SJC, pain, and ASHI (Table). Improvements were greatest for responders, but were also significant for both groups of nonresponders. No significant improvements were observed in the patients who received placebo.

Conclusion: These results indicate that chronic refractory gout patients not achieving a protocol-defined biochemical response still have significant clinical benefits with pegloticase treatment. This suggests that the substantial, but transient, reduction in UA achieved in patients categorized as nonresponders in the RCTs can result in sustained clinical benefit. These benefits are not merely a result of being enrolled in a clinical trial or receiving hydrocortisone as prophylaxis for infusion reactions (IR) since they were not observed in patients who received placebo and a similar IR prevention protocol.

Tophus Resolution at 6 months

Complete

Partial

Responder (n=36)

52.0%

16%

Nonresponder (n=49)

25.0 %

25%

Per Protocol (PP) Nonresponder (35)

26.9%

26.9%

Placebo (n=43)

10.0%

20%

Time

Mean

SD

P-value*

Time

Mean

SD

P-value*

Flares

Patient Global Assessment (PGA)

Responder (n=36) Responder (n=36)
Baseline

2.1

1.9

–

Baseline

49.9 (n=35)

28.1

–

6 months

1.0

1.4

P=0.009

6 months

12.3 (n=36)

14.2

p<0.0001

Nonresponder (n=49) Nonresponder (n=49)
Baseline

1.3

1.5

–

Baseline

46.0 (n=49)

28.5

–

6 months

0.6

1.0

P=0.0002

6 months

22.7 (n=25)

24.2

P=0.0009

PP Nonresponder (n=24) PP Nonresponder (n=24)
Baseline

1.3

1.6

–

Baseline

52.1 (n=24)

27.0

–

6 months

0.8

1.1

P=0.63

6 months

20.2 (n=23)

21.2

P=0.0002

Placebo (n=43) Placebo (n=43)
Baseline

1.7

2.7

–

Baseline

52.6 (n=43)

28.9

–

6 months

1.3

1.5

P=0.63

6 months

43.8 (n=38)

32.1

P=0.2

Tender Joint Count (TJC) Swollen Joint Count (SJC)
Responder (n=36) Responder (n=36)
Baseline

11.7

13.3

–

Baseline

10.5

11.7

–

6 months

2.7

6.4

p<0.0001

6 months

2.1

3.8

p<0.0001

Nonresponder (n=49) Nonresponder (n=49)
Baseline

11.6 (n=49)

12.8

–

Baseline

7.7

10.6

–

6 months

6.4 (n=25)

10.3

P=0.02

6 months

3.8

(n=25)

6.0

P=0.02

PP Nonresponder (n=24) PP Nonresponder (n=24)
Baseline

13.5 (n=24)

13.8

–

Baseline

7.8

(n=24)

8.1

–

6 months

5.8 (n=23)

9.5(n=23)

P=0.02

6 months

3.3

(n=23)

5.3

P=0.008

Placebo (n=43) Placebo (n=43)
Baseline

14.1 (n=43)

14.8

–

Baseline

13.2

13.7

–

6 months

13.1 (n=38)

15.9 (n=38)

P=0.5

6 months

10.1

(n=38)

12.8

P=0.2

SF-36 Bodily Pain VAS Pain
Responder (n=36) Responder (n=36)
Baseline

41.2

26.6

–

Baseline

44.0

26.7

–

6 months

65.6

25.0

P=0.0004

6 months

24.1

24.3

P=0.003

Nonresponder (n=49) Nonresponder (n=49)
Baseline

40.4

24.3

–

Baseline

44.4

28.7

–

6 months

56.8 (n=25)

25.1

P=0.003

6 months

34.6.7 (n=25)

27.7

P=0.2

PP Nonresponder (n=24) PP Nonresponder (n=24)
Baseline

33.8 (n=23)

21.2

–

Baseline

50.25 (n=23)

30.9

–

6 months

57.4

21.4

P=0.0003

6 months

34.5

27.2

P=0.08

Placebo (n=43) Placebo (n=43)
Baseline

35.3

23.0

–

Baseline

53.9

28.1

–

6 months

35.8

21.7

P=0.7

6 months

57.2

27.6

P=0.5

SF-36 ASHI HAQ-DI Functionality Index Scale
Responder (n=36) Responder (n=36)
Baseline

55.4

29.1

–

Baseline

1

0.8

–

6 months

78.8

28.3

P=0.002

6 months

0.8

0.8

P=0.20

Nonresponder (n=49) Nonresponder (n=49)
Baseline

53.6

28.3

–

Baseline

1.2

0.9

–

6 months

69.7

29.1

P=0.02

6 months

0.9

0.8

P=0.20

PP Nonresponder (n=24) PP Nonresponder (n=24)
Baseline

49.5

26.3

–

Baseline

1.3

0.9

–

6 months

70.3

24.6

P=0.004

6 months

0.9

0.7

P=0.06

Placebo (n=43) Placebo (n=43)
Baseline

45.8

27.3

–

Baseline

1.2

1.0

–

6 months

46.6

29.0

P=1.0

6 months

1.3

0.9

P=0.7

* vs baseline

References

  1. Lipsky PE, et al. Arthritis Ther Res. 2014;16:R60.

Disclosure: B. F. Mandell, Horizon Pharma, 2,Horizon Pharma, Astra Zeneca, 5; M. Weisman, Horizon Pharma, 5; A. Yeo, Horizon Pharma, 5; P. E. Lipsky, AMPEL BioSulutions, 4.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Mandell BF, Weisman M, Yeo A, Lipsky PE. Pegloticase Provides Clinical Benefit in Patients with Chronic Refractory Gout Who Did Not Meet the Clinical Trial Biochemical Definition of Response [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016; 68 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/pegloticase-provides-clinical-benefit-in-patients-with-chronic-refractory-gout-who-did-not-meet-the-clinical-trial-biochemical-definition-of-response/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2016 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/pegloticase-provides-clinical-benefit-in-patients-with-chronic-refractory-gout-who-did-not-meet-the-clinical-trial-biochemical-definition-of-response/

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