Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services

User menu

  • My Cart
  • Log In

Search

  • Advanced search
The Journal of Rheumatology
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services
  • My Cart
  • Log In
The Journal of Rheumatology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • Follow jrheum on Twitter
  • Visit jrheum on Facebook
  • Follow jrheum on LinkedIn
  • Follow jrheum on YouTube
  • Follow jrheum on Instagram
  • Follow jrheum on RSS
EditorialEditorial

Gout and Quality of Life

SEO YOUNG KIM and HYON K. CHOI
The Journal of Rheumatology May 2009, 36 (5) 865-868; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.090034
SEO YOUNG KIM
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
HYON K. CHOI
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: dr.choi@yahoo.com
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
  • eLetters
PreviousNext
Loading

Gout is a common inflammatory arthritis triggered by the crystallization of uric acid within the joints1. Gout causes severe pain and suffering and is a substantial cause of morbidity. Further, emerging evidence suggests that gout is strongly associated with the metabolic syndrome2 and may lead to myocardial infarction3–5, diabetes6, and premature death7,8. A number of epidemiological studies from a diverse range of countries suggest that gout has increased in prevalence and incidence in the past few decades. Using the NHANES III age/sex prevalence and the corresponding 2005 population estimates from the US Census Bureau, it is estimated that up to 6.1 million adults aged ≥ 20 years have ever had gout9. Consequently, gout has a significant economic impact in society due to both direct medical costs and indirect costs9–12.

A substantial proportion of gout patients under the care of physicians fail to achieve adequate control of hyperuricemia or symptoms13. Recent studies indicate that the majority of gout patients under the care of physicians are not adequately managed with currently available anti-gout therapies13–17. These gout cases have been referred to as “treatment-failure gout” and have become the primary target for quality improvement of care, including new drug development13,18–23. Although recent treatment guidelines and increased educational efforts could improve the quality of gout care, even under the very best of conditions, between 100,000 and 300,000 in the US are expected to be classified as “treatment-failure gout” cases with currently available anti-gout therapies13.

Being a painful arthritic disorder, gout, particularly “treatment-failure gout,” affects quality of life. Recently, several papers assessed the influence of gout on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among various study populations using different definitions of gout (Table 1)24–32. These studies often employed generic HRQOL instruments such as the Medical Outcome Study Short-Form 36-item health status survey (SF-36)26–30,32 and/or the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI)24–26,29 and only 2 previous studies evaluated the potential utility of a disease-specific HRQOL measure for gout called the Gout Assessment Questionnaire (GAQ)27,28. HAQ-DI scores from these studies suggested gout patients have mild disability (HAQ score range, 0.2 to 0.6)24,25,29. Similarly, SF-36 data showed that the physical component summary (PCS) score was worse (e.g., 1.1 standard deviation below the US general population norm)29. However, none of these previous studies addressed HRQOL data specifically in the “treatment-failure gout” population.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Studies of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with gout.

In this issue of The Journal, Becker and colleagues report on a multicenter, prospective observational study examining this issue26. The authors evaluated self-reported quality of life, disability, and disease severity among patients with “treatment-failure gout.” Their definition of “treatment-failure gout” was (1) symptomatic, crystal-proven gout of at least 2 years’ duration; and (2) intolerance or refractoriness to conventional urate-lowering therapy, as reflected by serum uric acid (SUA) > 6.0 mg/dl. The study enrolled 110 patients and collected SF-36 and HAQ-DI data and gout disease severity-related variables bimonthly. The followup rate by the first 4 months was acceptable (86%), but was low by the end of the 12 months (47%).

The cross-sectional analysis based on the baseline data (mean age 59 yrs) showed that the mean SF-36 physical functioning score was lower than that of the general population of similar age, and was in fact analogous to that of individuals aged ≥ 75 years. Similarly, the mean HAQ-DI score at baseline indicated a moderate level of physical disability in this treatment-failure gout population, which was worse than that observed in gout populations without treatment status specified24,25,29. These data support the empirical notions that the HRQOL impairment in patients with “treatment-failure gout” is substantial, and that this population is the right target for considerable improvement in the quality of care.

As anticipated, the number of painful joints, swollen joints, and flares at baseline were associated with worse scores on all the SF-36 subscales. Further, analyses based on the first 4-month followup data confirmed that the number of flares during the followup was associated with worse scores on several SF-36 subscales. Presence of tophi was also associated with lower scores on SF-36 subscales and PCS, which was consistent with a previous report of a more than 4-fold increased risk of musculoskeletal disability among those with tophi25. These data indicate that these disease severity measures are likely determinants of HRQOL in gout patients and thus are appropriate target outcomes in gout care.

An interesting null finding of the study was the lack of association between SUA levels and HRQOL. This observation was also reported in a previous study27. These findings support the notion that clinical disease outcomes, and not SUA levels, are meaningful for the quality of life in patients with gout. While the initial clinical trials for new urate-lowering agents employ SUA levels as endpoints for several logistic reasons18–20,22,23, more direct evidence demonstrating that these new drugs lead to improved clinical measures (e.g., gout flares, HRQOL) should be sought in future research.

Another notable observation is the potential effect of common comorbidities on HRQOL of patients with “treatment-failure gout.” As expected, the vast majority of the participants had comorbid conditions, typically cardiovascular and metabolic conditions, and those with comorbidities experienced greater disability compared to patients with gout only. Further, subjects with cardiovascular comorbidities had worse scores on the physical functioning subscale than those without cardiovascular comorbidities. While it is likely that these comorbidities explain at least part of the observed poor HRQOL in this population, no data accounting for such an effect is provided. Thus, whether gout or gout severity variables are independently associated with poor HRQOL in this population is yet to be confirmed.

HRQOL measurements in gout are challenging, as gout is often characterized as an intermittent, progressive chronic disease. Nevertheless, the Special Interest Group for gout outcomes at the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT) 7 and 8 meetings recognized the importance of HRQOL measurement in gout and included it as a core domain for clinical trials for chronic gout23,33. This proposal was also supported by the recent US Food and Drug Administration draft guidance for industry on how to use patient-reported outcome instruments as effectiveness endpoints in clinical trials (www.fda.gov/Cder/guidance/5460dft.pdf). As “treatment-failure gout” is a debilitating condition that affects patient functioning and well-being, accurate assessment of HRQOL, particularly in this population, is important in clinical care and research. So far, clinical trials of new urate-lowering drugs, such as febuxostat and pegloticase, for chronic gout have been reported, but HRQOL outcomes are yet to be adopted as an endpoint18–23.

Future studies should refine both the optimal choices of HRQOL tools for gout and the way one should interpret these HRQOL scores in the clinical context of gout. The ability to effectively measure HRQOL is vital to describing the effects of disease, treatment, or other limitations, including normal aging, upon the patient. It is also important to determine the minimum clinically detectable difference specifically in patients with gout, as it helps both researchers and clinicians better understand the overall health burden of gout and, ultimately, the optimal approach to managing gout. With these advances, patient-reported HRQOL measurements in clinical trials of gout treatment will be able to provide more useful and practical information.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Choi H,
    2. Mount D,
    3. Reginato A
    . Pathogenesis of gout. Ann Intern Med 2005;143:499–516.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Choi H,
    2. Ford E,
    3. Li C,
    4. et al
    . Prevalence of the metabolic syndrome in patients with gout: the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Arthritis Rheum 2007;57:109–15.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Abbott R,
    2. Brand F,
    3. Kannel W,
    4. et al
    . Gout and coronary heart disease: the Framingham Study. J Clin Epidemiol 1988;41:237–42.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.
    1. Choi H,
    2. Curhan G
    . Independent impact of gout on mortality and risk for coronary heart disease. Circulation 2007;116:894–900.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Krishnan E,
    2. Baker J,
    3. Furst D,
    4. et al
    . Gout and the risk of acute myocardial infarction. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:2688–96.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Choi H,
    2. De Vera M,
    3. Krishnan E
    . Gout and the risk of type 2 diabetes among men with a high cardiovascular risk profile. Rheumatology 2008;47:1567–70.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Krishnan E,
    2. Svendsen K,
    3. Neaton J,
    4. et al
    . Long-term cardiovascular mortality among middle-aged men with gout. Arch Intern Med 2008;168:1104–10.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Lawrence R,
    2. Felson D,
    3. Helmick C,
    4. et al
    . Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States. Part II. Arthritis Rheum 2008;58:26–35.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Brook R,
    2. Kleinman N,
    3. Patel P,
    4. et al
    . The economic burden of gout on an employed population. Curr Med Res Opin 2006;22:1381–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.
    1. Kleinman N,
    2. Brook R,
    3. Patel P,
    4. et al
    . The impact of gout on work absence and productivity. Value Health 2007;10:231–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.
    1. Mould-Quevedo J,
    2. Peláez-Ballestas I,
    3. Vázquez-Mellado J,
    4. et al
    . Social costs of the most common inflammatory rheumatic diseases in Mexico from the patient’s perspective. Gac Med Mex 2008;144:225–31.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Wu EQ,
    2. Patel PA,
    3. Yu AP,
    4. et al
    . Disease-related and all-cause health care costs of elderly patients with gout. J Manag Care Pharm 2008;14:164–75.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Edwards N
    . Treatment-failure gout: A moving target. Arthritis Rheum 2008;58:2587–90.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.
    1. Pascual E,
    2. Sivera F
    . Why is gout so poorly managed? Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:1269–70.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  15. 15.
    1. Sarawate C,
    2. Brewer K,
    3. Yang W,
    4. et al
    . Gout medication treatment patterns and adherence to standards of care from a managed care perspective. Mayo Clin Proc 2006;81:925–34.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.
    1. Singh J,
    2. Hodges J,
    3. Toscano J,
    4. et al
    . Quality of care for gout in the US needs improvement. Arthritis Rheum 2007;57:822–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Zhang W,
    2. Doherty M,
    3. Bardin T,
    4. et al
    . EULAR evidence based recommendations for gout. Part II: Management. Report of a task force of the EULAR Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutics (ESCISIT). Ann Rheum Dis 2006;65:1312–24.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Becker MA,
    2. Schumacher HR, Jr,
    3. Wortmann RL,
    4. et al
    . Febuxostat compared with allopurinol in patients with hyperuricemia and gout. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2450–61.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.
    1. Becker MA,
    2. Schumacher HR, Jr,
    3. Wortmann RL,
    4. et al
    . Febuxostat, a novel nonpurine selective inhibitor of xanthine oxidase: a twenty-eight-day, multicenter, phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-response clinical trial examining safety and efficacy in patients with gout. Arthritis Rheum 2005;52:916–23.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Schumacher HR,
    2. Becker MA,
    3. Wortmann RL,
    4. et al
    . The FOCUS trial 48-month interim analysis: Long-term clinical outcomes of treatment with febuxostat in subjects with gout in an ongoing phase 2, open-label extension study [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54 Suppl:S642.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  21. 21.
    1. Schumacher HR,
    2. Becker MA,
    3. Wortmann RL,
    4. et al
    . Effects of febuxostat versus allopurinol and placebo in reducing serum urate in subjects with hyperuricemia and gout: A 28-week, phase III, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial. Arthritis Rheum 2008;59:1540–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Sundy JS,
    2. Becker MA,
    3. Baraf HS,
    4. et al
    . Reduction of plasma urate levels following treatment with multiple doses of pegloticase (polyethylene glycol-conjugated uricase) in patients with treatment-failure gout: Results of a phase II randomized study. Arthritis Rheum 2008;58:2882–91.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Taylor W,
    2. Schumacher HR,
    3. Singh J,
    4. et al
    . Assessment of outcome in clinical trials of gout — a review of current measures. Rheumatology 2007;46:1751–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Alvarez-Hernandez E,
    2. Peláez-Ballestas I,
    3. Vázquez-Mellado J,
    4. et al
    . Validation of the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index in patients with gout. Arthritis Rheum 2008;59:665–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Alvarez-Nemegyei J,
    2. Cen-Pisté J,
    3. Medina-Escobedo M,
    4. et al
    . Factors associated with musculoskeletal disability and chronic renal failure in clinically diagnosed primary gout. J Rheumatol 2005;32:1923–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    1. Becker MA,
    2. Schumacher HR,
    3. Benjamin KL,
    4. et al
    . Quality of life and disability in patients with treatment-failure gout. J Rheumatol 2009;36:1041–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    1. Colwell H,
    2. Hunt B,
    3. Pasta D,
    4. et al
    . Gout Assessment Questionnaire: Initial results of reliability, validity and responsiveness. Int J Clin Pract 2006;60:1210–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Hirsch J,
    2. Lee S,
    3. Terkeltaub R,
    4. et al
    . Evaluation of an instrument assessing influence of gout on health-related quality of life. J Rheumatol 2008;35:2406–14.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    1. Khanna D,
    2. Ahmed M,
    3. Yontz D,
    4. et al
    . The disutility of chronic gout. Qual Life Res 2008;17:815–22.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Picavet H,
    2. Hoeymans N
    . Health related quality of life in multiple musculoskeletal diseases: SF-36 and EQ-5D in the DMC3 study. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:723–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. 31.↵
    1. Roddy E,
    2. Zhang W,
    3. Doherty M
    . Is gout associated with reduced quality of life? A case-control study. Rheumatology 2007;46:1441–4.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. 32.↵
    1. Singh J,
    2. Strand V
    . Gout is associated with more comorbidities, poorer health-related quality of life and higher healthcare utilisation in US veterans. Ann Rheum Dis 2008;67:1310–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. 33.↵
    1. Schumacher HR,
    2. Taylor W,
    3. Joseph-Ridge N,
    4. et al
    . Outcome evaluations in gout. J Rheumatol 2007;34:1381–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Rheumatology
Vol. 36, Issue 5
1 May 2009
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by Author
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about The Journal of Rheumatology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Gout and Quality of Life
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from The Journal of Rheumatology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the The Journal of Rheumatology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Gout and Quality of Life
SEO YOUNG KIM, HYON K. CHOI
The Journal of Rheumatology May 2009, 36 (5) 865-868; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.090034

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

 Request Permissions

Share
Gout and Quality of Life
SEO YOUNG KIM, HYON K. CHOI
The Journal of Rheumatology May 2009, 36 (5) 865-868; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.090034
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
  • eLetters

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Celebrating The Journal of Rheumatology’s 50th Year of Publication
  • Cardiovascular Disease Disparities in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • New Advances in the Knowledge of Elemental Enthesis Lesions: Doppler, Erosion, and Thickness
Show more Editorial

Similar Articles

Content

  • First Release
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Collections
  • Audiovisual Rheum
  • COVID-19 and Rheumatology

Resources

  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Author Payment
  • Reviewers
  • Advertisers
  • Classified Ads
  • Reprints and Translations
  • Permissions
  • Meetings
  • FAQ
  • Policies

Subscribers

  • Subscription Information
  • Purchase Subscription
  • Your Account
  • Terms and Conditions

More

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • My Alerts
  • My Folders
  • Privacy/GDPR Policy
  • RSS Feeds
The Journal of Rheumatology
The content of this site is intended for health care professionals.
Copyright © 2022 by The Journal of Rheumatology Publishing Co. Ltd.
Print ISSN: 0315-162X; Online ISSN: 1499-2752
Powered by HighWire