Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22901830›Full record

Trial reportArthritis research & therapy2012

Fractional clearance of urate: validation of measurement in spot-urine samples in healthy subjects and gouty patients.

Diluk R W Kannangara, Sheena N Ramasamy, Praveen L Indraratna, Sophie L Stocker, Garry G Graham, Graham Jones, Ian Portek, Kenneth M Williams, Richard O Day

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialValidation Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Arthritis research & therapy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Extract ofFood science and biotechnology · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Diluk R W Kannangara
Sheena N Ramasamy
Praveen L Indraratna
Sophie L Stocker
Garry G Graham
Graham Jones
Ian Portek
Kenneth M Williams
Richard O Day
St. Vincent's Birmingham · USSt Vincent's Hospital Sydney · AUSt George Hospital · AUSt Vincent's Hospital · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHyperuricemia is the greatest risk factor for gout and is caused by an overproduction and/or inefficient renal clearance of urate. The fractional renal clearance of urate (FCU, renal clearance of urate/renal clearance of creatinine) has been proposed as a tool to identify subjects who manifest inefficient clearance of urate. The aim of the present studies was to validate the measurement of FCU by using spot-urine samples as a reliable indicator of the efficiency of the kidney to remove urate and to explore its distribution in healthy subjects and gouty patients.

methodsTimed (spot, 2-hour, 4-hour, 6-hour, 12-hour, and 24-hour) urine collections were used to derive FCU in 12 healthy subjects. FCUs from spot-urine samples were then determined in 13 healthy subjects twice a day, repeated on 3 nonconsecutive days. The effect of allopurinol, probenecid, and the combination on FCU was explored in 11 healthy subjects. FCU was determined in 36 patients with gout being treated with allopurinol. The distribution of FCU was examined in 118 healthy subjects and compared with that from the 36 patients with gout.

resultsNo substantive or statistically significant differences were observed between the FCUs derived from spot and 24-hour urine collections. Coefficients of variation (CVs) were both 28%. No significant variation in the spot FCU was obtained either within or between days, with mean intrasubject CV of 16.4%. FCU increased with probenecid (P < 0.05), whereas allopurinol did not change the FCU in healthy or gouty subjects. FCUs of patients with gout were lower than the FCUs of healthy subjects (4.8% versus 6.9%; P < 0.0001).

conclusionsThe present studies indicate that the spot-FCU is a convenient, valid, and reliable indicator of the efficiency of the kidney in removing urate from the blood and thus from tissues. Spot-FCU determinations may provide useful correlates in studies investigating molecular mechanisms underpinning the observed range of efficiencies of the kidneys in clearing urate from the blood.

trial registrationACTRN12611000743965.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Over StudiesFemaleGoutHealthy VolunteersHumansHyperuricemiaMaleMetabolic Clearance RateMiddle AgedTime FactorsUric AcidUrinalysisUric Acid

Identifiers

PMID22901830
PMCPMC3580585
OpenAlexW2100686765

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.