Back

Colchicine for Prevention of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events

Ballacci, F.; Giordano, F.; Conte, C.; Collini, V.; Imazio, M.

2024-12-22 cardiovascular medicine
10.1101/2024.12.19.24319310 medRxiv
Show abstract

AimsInflammation is a main pathophysiological driver in atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD). Low-dose long-term colchicine for secondary prevention in patients with established ASCVD has been studied in multiple randomized trials in the last decade. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of long-term low-dose colchicine for secondary prevention in patients with established ASCVD. MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines to evaluate studies reporting long-term outcomes in patients with ASCVD. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus databases for relevant studies up to December 1, 2024. The primary outcome was the occurrence of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE), a composite of cardiovascular death (CVD), myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR). ResultsTen randomized clinical trials enrolling 22532 patients were identified. Addition of colchicine to standard medical treatment in patients with established ASCVD reduced the risk for MACE by 27% (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57 - 0.95), with a number needed to treat of 52. Colchicine was found to significantly reduce the risk of myocardial infarction (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 - 0.96) and coronary revascularization (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 - 0.94). There were no significant differences between the two groups concerning cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality, risk of serious gastrointestinal events, infections requiring hospitalization and cancer. ConclusionsThese findings support the use of long-term low-dose colchicine for secondary prevention of MACE in clinical practice.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.