Cochrane · systematic review · CD009993
Interleukin‐1 inhibitors for acute gout
Sivera, F, Wechalekar, MD, Andrés, M, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2014 · Cochrane Library
MusculoskeletalAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
14
current version
GRADE rated
8
No studies
6
Included studies
NR
No studies 6 · 42.9%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 4 · 28.6%Moderate 4 · 28.6%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Canakinumab versus triamcinolone acetonide
Population: acute gout
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Pain: at 72 hours (canakinumab 150 mg) Canakinumab vs triamcinolone acetonide | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 443 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Inflammation: participants with no swelling at 72 hours (canakinumab 150 mg) Assessed by the investigator as no swelling, mild/palpable, moderate/visible, severe/bulging beyond the joint margins Canakinumab vs triamcinolone acetonide | RR 1.39 [1.11, 1.74] | 3 studies · 523 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Functional disability ‐ not measured Canakinumab vs triamcinolone acetonide | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health‐related quality of life ‐ not measured Canakinumab vs triamcinolone acetonide | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant global assessment of response to treatment: good or excellent at 72 hours (canakinumab 150 mg) Assessed by the participant on a 5‐point Likert scale (excellent, good, acceptable, slight or poor) Canakinumab vs triamcinolone acetonide | RR 1.37 [1.16, 1.61] | 3 studies · 478 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Study withdrawals due to AE (all canakinumab doses) Canakinumab vs triamcinolone acetonide | RR 1.07 [0.16, 7.23] | 3 studies · 654 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Participants with at least 1 AE (all canakinumab doses) Canakinumab vs triamcinolone acetonide | RR 1.2 [1.05, 1.39] | 3 studies · 654 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Rilonacept versus indomethacin for acute gout
Population: acute gout
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Pain ‐ change from baseline to 24 to 72 hours Assessed on numerical rating scale (0 = no pain; 10 = extreme pain) Rilonacept vs indomethacin | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 148 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Inflammation ‐ not measured Rilonacept vs indomethacin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Functional disability ‐ not measured Rilonacept vs indomethacin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health‐related quality of life ‐ not measured Rilonacept vs indomethacin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant global assessment of treatment success ‐ not measured Rilonacept vs indomethacin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events ‐ study withdrawals due to adverse events Rilonacept vs indomethacin | RR 0.51 [0.05, 5.47] | 1 study · 151 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse events ‐ participants with at least 1 adverse event Rilonacept vs indomethacin | RR 1.19 [0.75, 1.88] | 1 study · 151 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |