Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40420308›Full record

Trial reportArthritis research & therapy2025

Efficacy and safety of epaminurad, a potent hURAT1 inhibitor, in patients with gout: a randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-finding study.

Jae-Bum Jun, Hye-Soon Lee, Sang-Hyon Kim, Seung-Geun Lee, Doo-Ho Lim, Jinhyun Kim, Yong-Beom Park, Mie Jin Lim, Seung-Jae Hong, Hyo-Jin Choi and 8 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyClinical Trial, Phase II
In one paragraph

Trial report in Arthritis research & therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04804111 (A Multi-center, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Dose-finding Phase 2b Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of URC102 in Patient With Gout), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04804111 phase2completednot on this map

A Multi-center, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Dose-finding Phase 2b Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of URC102 in Patient With Gout

TypeinterventionalSponsorJW PharmaceuticalRan2019 to 2020Enrolled171ConditionsGoutArmsarm 0, arm 1, arm 2, arm 3, arm 4
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

18 authors.

Jae-Bum JunDepartment of Rheumatology, Hanyang University Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, Seoul, Korea.
Hye-Soon LeeDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University Guri Hospital, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Guri, Korea.
Sang-Hyon KimDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keimyung University College of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.
Seung-Geun LeeDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, Korea.
Doo-Ho LimDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Ulsan University Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Ulsan, Korea.
Jinhyun KimDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea.
Yong-Beom ParkDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Mie Jin LimDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Inha University, Incheon, Korea.
Seung-Jae HongDepartment of Rheumatology, College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University Hospital, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Korea.
Hyo-Jin ChoiDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Gachon University Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea.
Shin-Seok LeeDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chonnam National University Medical School & Hospital, Gwangju, Korea.
Hyun Ah KimDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang, Korea.
Jiwon HwangDepartment of Rheumatology, College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University Hospital, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Korea.
Chang-Hee SuhDepartment of Rheumatology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea.
Seungwoo HanDivision of Rheumatology, Departments of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea.
Jung-Yoon ChoeDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Daegu Catholic University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.
Wan-Hee YooDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Jeonbuk National University Medical School, Jeonju, Korea.
Jung Soo SongDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chung-Ang University School of Medicine, 102 Heukseok-ro, Dongjak-gu, Seoul, 06973, Korea. drsong@cau.ac.kr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGout is the most common inflammatory arthritis. Current urate-lowering therapies have limitations, such as adverse drug reactions or limited efficacy. Epaminurad is a novel selective human urate transporter 1 (hURAT1) inhibitor that has been shown to reduce serum urate (sUA) levels in healthy volunteers and patients with gout. The aims of the current study were to evaluate the urate-lowering efficacy and safety of epaminurad compared with placebo in patients with gout, and to determine the optimal dose.

methodsThis multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-finding phase 2b clinical trial, which incorporated a standard-treatment reference arm, enrolled patients aged 19-70 years with gout and sUA level ≥ 0.42 mmol/L. Participants received gout prophylaxis and followed therapeutic lifestyle changes, and were randomized to receive epaminurad 3 mg, 6 mg or 9 mg, or febuxostat 80 mg, or matching placebo, once daily for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with sUA level < 0.36 mmol/L at week 4 after initiation of study treatment. Statistical comparisons were performed between the epaminurad and placebo groups.

resultsOverall, 169 patients received study medication (99.40% male, mean ± SD age 48.26 ± 13.15 years, sUA level 0.53 ± 0.09 mmol/L). Mean adherence to treatment was > 90% in all groups. The proportion of patients with sUA < 0.36 mmol/L at week 4 was significantly higher in each epaminurad group (9 mg, 88.89%; 6 mg, 71.79%; 3 mg, 54.05%) compared with placebo (0.00%) (all p < 0.0001). The response rate in the febuxostat group was 84.21%. The proportion of patients who achieved sUA < 0.30 mmol/L, and mean percent and absolute change in sUA, were also significantly greater in all epaminurad groups versus placebo at week 4. Outcomes were consistent at weeks 8 and 12. The adverse event rate did not differ between epaminurad groups and placebo, and most events were mild. There were no significant differences in mean serum creatinine levels or liver function parameters between the epaminurad groups and placebo.

conclusionsEpaminurad was effective at reducing sUA levels in patients with gout. The study also confirmed the safety and tolerability profile during 12 weeks of treatment.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04804111 (registered on 15 November 2020).

Indexed as

GoutGout SuppressantsOrganic Anion TransportersOrganic Cation Transport ProteinsAdultAgedDose-Response Relationship, DrugDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedTreatment OutcomeUric AcidYoung AdultGout SuppressantsOrganic Anion TransportersOrganic Cation Transport ProteinsSLC22A12 protein, humanUric AcidEpaminuradGoutHuman urate transport 1hURAT1 inhibitorHyperuricemiaURC102

Identifiers

PMID40420308
PMCPMC12105222

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.