IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0263175.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is repeat serum urate testing superior to a single test to predict incident gout over time?

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah Stewart
  • Amanda Phipps-Green
  • Greg D Gamble
  • Lisa K Stamp
  • William J Taylor
  • Tuhina Neogi
  • Tony R Merriman
  • Nicola Dalbeth

Abstract

Elevated serum urate is the most important causal risk factor for developing gout. However, in longitudinal cohort studies, a small proportion of people with normal urate levels develop gout and the majority of those with high urate levels do not. These observations may be due to subsequent variations in serum urate over time. Our analysis examined whether single or repeat testing of serum urate more accurately predicts incident gout over time. Individual participant data from three publicly-available cohorts were included. Data from paired serum urate measures 3–5 years apart, followed by an assessment of gout incidence 5–6 years from the second urate measure were used to calculate the predictive ability of four measures of serum urate on incident gout: the first measure, the second measure, the average of the two measures, and the highest of the two measures. Participants with prevalent gout prior to the second measure were excluded. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves and area under the curve (AUC) statistics were computed to compare the four measures. A total of 16,017 participants were included across the three cohorts, with a mean follow-up from the first serum urate test of 9.3 years (range 8.9–10.1 years). Overall, there was a small increase in the mean serum urate between the first and second measures (322 μmol/L (5.42 mg/dL) vs. 340 μmol/L (5.71 mg/dL), P

Suggested Citation

  • Sarah Stewart & Amanda Phipps-Green & Greg D Gamble & Lisa K Stamp & William J Taylor & Tuhina Neogi & Tony R Merriman & Nicola Dalbeth, 2022. "Is repeat serum urate testing superior to a single test to predict incident gout over time?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-9, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0263175
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263175
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0263175
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0263175&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0263175?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0263175. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.