Mechanisms of inflammation in gout.

An acute attack of gout is a paradigm of acute sterile inflammation, as opposed to pyogenic inflammation. Recent studies suggest that the triggering of IL-1beta release from leucocytes lies at the heart of a cascade of processes that involves multiple cytokines and mediators. The NLRP3 inflammasome appears to have a specific role in this regard, but the biochemical events leading to its activation are still not well understood. We review the known mechanisms that underlie the inflammatory process triggered by urate crystals and suggest areas that require further research.

How to regulate neutrophils in gout.

Most research in gout has concentrated on the proinflammatory mechanisms to explain the inflammation that is generated when leucocytes are in contact with monosodium urate crystals. However, the episodic nature of gout and the absence of inflammation even when crystals are present suggest that there are natural counter-regulatory mechanisms to limit the inflammatory response. Gagné and colleagues showed that myeloid inhibitory C-type lectin, a C-type lectin inhibitory receptor expressed on neutrophils, modulates monosodium urate-induced neutrophil responses in vitro.

Developments in the scientific and clinical understanding of gout.

Gout is the most common form of inflammatory arthritis in the elderly. In the last two decades, both hyperuricemia and gout have increased markedly and similar trends in the epidemiology of the metabolic syndrome have been observed. Recent studies provide new insights into the transporters that handle uric acid in the kidney as well as possible links between these transporters, hyperuricemia, and hypertension. The treatment of established hyperuricemia has also seen new developments. Febuxostat and PEG-uricase are two novel treatments that have been evaluated and shown to be highly effective in the management of hyperuricemia, thus enlarging the therapeutic options available to lower uric acid levels. Monosodium urate (MSU) crystals are potent inducers of inflammation. Within the joint, they trigger a local inflammatory reaction, neutrophil recruitment, and the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines as well as other inflammatory mediators. Experimentally, the uptake of MSU crystals by monocytes involves interactions with components of the innate immune system, namely Toll-like receptor (TLR)-2, TLR-4, and CD14. Intracellularly, MSU crystals activate multiple processes that lead to the formation of the NALP-3 (NACHT, LRR, and pyrin domain-containing-3) inflammasome complex that in turn processes pro-interleukin (IL)-1 to yield mature IL-1 beta, which is then secreted. The inflammatory effects of MSU are IL-1-dependent and can be blocked by IL-1 inhibitors. These advances in the understanding of hyperuricemia and gout provide new therapeutic targets for the future.

Serum uric acid and gout: from the past to molecular biology.

Abstract Objectives: This review will briefly present the epidemiology and risk factors of gout, with a focus on recent advances. Methods: Key papers for inclusion were identified by a PubMed search, and articles were selected according to their relevance for the topic, according to authors' judgment. Results and conclusions: Gout therapy has remained very much unchanged for the last 50 years, but recently we have seen the approval of another gout treatment: the xanthine oxidase inhibitor febuxostat, and several new drugs are now in the late stages of clinical testing. Together with our enhanced level of understanding of the pathophysiology of the inflammatory process involved, we are entering a new era for the treatment of gout.

The mechanisms of inflammation in gout and pseudogout (CPP-induced arthritis).

Recent advances have stimulated new interest in the area of crystal arthritis, as microcrystals can be considered to be endogenous "danger signals" and are potent stimulators of immune as well as non-immune cells. The best known microcrystals include urate (MSU), and calcium pyrophosphate (CPP) crystals, associated with gout and pseudogout, respectively. Acute inflammation is the hallmark of the acute tissue reaction to crystals in both gout and pseudogout. The mechanisms leading to joint inflammation in these diseases involve first crystal formation and subsequent coating with serum proteins. Crystals can then interact with plasma cell membrane, either directly or via membrane receptors, leading to NLRP3 activation, proteolytic cleavage and maturation of pro-interleukin-1β (pro-IL1β) and secretion of mature IL1β. Once released, this cytokine orchestrates a series of events leading to endothelial cell activation and neutrophil recruitment. Ultimately, gout resolution involves several mechanisms including monocyte differentiation into macrophage, clearance of apoptotic neutrophils by macrophages, production of Transforming Growth Factor (TGF-β) and modification of protein coating on the crystal surface. This review will examine these different steps.

Gout in the spotlight.

Understanding how uric acid crystals provoke inflammation is crucial to improving our management of acute gout. It is well known that urate crystals stimulate monocytes and macrophages to elaborate inflammatory cytokines, but the tissue response of the synovium is less well understood. Microarray analysis of mRNA expression by these lining cells may help to delineate the genes that are modulated. Employing a murine air-pouch model, a number of genes expressed by innate immune cells were found to be rapidly upregulated by monosodium urate crystals. These findings provide new research avenues to investigate the physiopathology of gouty inflammation, and may eventually lead to new therapeutic targets in acute gout.

Update on gout 2012.

Significant scientific advances have been made over the last five years in the pathogenesis of hyperuricemia and understanding how monosodium urate (MSU) crystals provoke gout. New detection methods using ultrasound (US) have been evaluated and may become part of our routine diagnostic approach in a patient presenting with gout. This review will concentrate on the latest developments in the field, and discuss how these data may impact on clinical practice. Finally, a brief review of the therapeutic implications and new therapies that have become available will be presented.

Comparative effects of losartan and irbesartan on serum uric acid in hypertensive patients with hyperuricaemia and gout.

OBJECTIVE: Losartan has been shown to increase urinary uric acid excretion and hence to lower serum uric acid levels. The purposes of the present study were: (1) to evaluate the effects of losartan on serum uric acid in hypertensive patients with hyperuricemia and gout, (2) to compare the effects of losartan with those of irbesartan, another angiotensin II receptor antagonist and (3) to evaluate whether losartan 50 mg b.i.d. has a greater impact on serum uric acid levels than losartan 50 mg once a day. METHODS: Thirteen hypertensive patients with hyperuricaemia and gout completed this prospective, randomized, double-blind, cross-over study. Uric acid-lowering drugs were stopped 3 weeks before the beginning of the study. Patients were randomized to receive either losartan 50 mg or irbesartan 150 mg once a day, for 4 weeks. During this phase, a placebo was given in the evening. After 4 weeks, the dose was increased to losartan 50 mg b.i.d., or irbesartan 150 mg b.i.d. for another 4 week period. Subsequently, the patients were switched to the alternative treatment modality. Enalapril (20 mg o.d.) was given during the run-in period and between the two treatment phases. Serum and urinary uric acid were measured at the beginning and at the end of each treatment phase. RESULTS: Our results show that losartan 50 mg once daily decreased serum uric acid levels from 538 +/- 26 to 491 +/- 20 micromol/l (P < 0.01). Irbesartan had no effect on serum uric acid. Increasing the dose of losartan from 50 mg o.d. to 50 mg twice a day, did not further decrease serum uric acid. This may in part be due to a low compliance to the evening dose as measured with an electronic device. Indeed, whatever the prescribed drug, the mean compliance of the evening dose was always significantly lower than that of the morning dose. The uricosuric effect of losartan appears to decrease with time when a new steady state of lower serum uric acid is reached. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to irbesartan, losartan was uricosuric and decreased serum uric acid levels. Losartan 50 mg b.i.d. did not produce a greater fall in serum uric acid than losartan once a day. Losartan might be a useful therapeutic tool to control blood pressure and reduce serum uric acid levels in hypertensive patients with hyperuricaemia and gout.