↓ Skip to main content

Feasibility randomised multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy controlled trial of anakinra, an interleukin-1 receptor antagonist versus intramuscular methylprednisolone for acute gout attacks in…

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Open, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Feasibility randomised multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy controlled trial of anakinra, an interleukin-1 receptor antagonist versus intramuscular methylprednisolone for acute gout attacks in patients with chronic kidney disease (ASGARD): protocol study
Published in
BMJ Open, September 2017
DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017121
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gowrie Balasubramaniam, Trisha Parker, David Turner, Mike Parker, Jonathan Scales, Patrick Harnett, Michael Harrison, Khalid Ahmed, Sweta Bhagat, Thiraupathy Marianayagam, Costantino Pitzalis, Christian Mallen, Edward Roddy, Mike Almond, Bhaskar Dasgupta

Abstract

Acute gout occurs in people with chronic kidney disease, who are commonly older people with comorbidities such as hypertension, heart disease and diabetes. Potentially harmful treatments are administered to these vulnerable patients due to a lack of clear evidence. Newly available treatment that targets a key inflammatory pathway in acute gout attacks provides an opportunity to undertake the first-ever trial specifically looking treating people with kidney disease. This paper describes the protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing anakinra, a novel interleukin-1 antagonist versus steroids in people with chronic kidney disease (ASGARD). ASGARD is a two-parallel group double-blind, double-dummy multicentre RCT comparing anakinra 100 mg, an interleukin-1 antagonist, subcutaneous for 5 days against intramuscular methylprednisolone 120 mg. The primary objective is to assess the feasibility of the trial design and procedures for a definitive RCT. The specific aims are: (1) test recruitment and retention rates and willingness to be randomised; (2) test eligibility criteria; (3) collect and analyse outcome data to inform sample and power calculations for a trial of efficacy; (4) collect economic data to inform a future economic evaluation estimating costs of treatment and (5) assess capacity of the project to scale up to a national multicentre trial. We will also gather qualitative insights from participants. It aims to recruit 32 patients with a 1:1 randomisation. Information from this feasibility study will help design a definitive trial and provide general information in designing acute gout studies. The London-Central Ethics Committee approved the protocol. The results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at scientific conferences. EudraCT No. 2015-001787-19, NCT/Clinicalstrials.gov No. NCT02578394, pre-results, WHO Universal Trials Reference No. U1111-1175-1977. NIHR Grant PB-PG-0614-34090.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 25 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 25 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 September 2017.
All research outputs
#20,663,600
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#21,934
of 25,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250,831
of 323,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#542
of 613 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,593 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,304 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 613 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.