Time-Varying Cardiovascular Risk of Febuxostat versus Allopurinol in Gout: A One-stage Meta-analysis
Zhang, S.
Show abstract
ObjectivesWhether febuxostat is associated with an increased cardiovascular risk compared to allopurinol in patients with gout remains controversial, with major randomized trials reporting conflicting results. This study aims to perform a comprehensive meta-analysis using reconstructed individual participant data (IPD) to evaluate the time-varying cardiovascular and mortality risk of febuxostat versus allopurinol in gout. MethodsWe conducted a one-stage individual participant data meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched up to November 2025 for randomized controlled trials and propensity score-matched observational studies reporting Kaplan-Meier curves for cardiovascular risk or all-cause mortality. Individual patient data were reconstructed from published curves. Time-varying hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using a mixed-effects Cox model with treatment-by-time interaction across pre-specified intervals (0-12, 12-24, 24-48, >48 months). ResultsFour studies (n=19,090) were included. Analysis revealed significant time-varying effects. For cardiovascular risk, HRs were 0.89 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.99) at 0-12 months, 0.58 (0.50 to 0.68) at 12-24 months, 0.86 (0.74 to 0.99) at 24-48 months, and 1.09 (0.81 to 1.46) after >48 months. For all-cause mortality, HRs were 0.70 (0.62 to 0.79), 0.39 (0.33 to 0.45), 0.75 (0.65 to 0.86), and 1.02 (0.77 to 1.34) across the same intervals, respectively. ConclusionThe cardiovascular and mortality risk of febuxostat relative to allopurinol is time-dependent, showing a significant early reduction that attenuates over time. These findings advocate for a time-aware approach to clinical management and monitoring.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical Trials in COVID-19 Management & Prevention: A Meta-epidemiological Study examining methodological quality 94%
- High-cited favorable studies for COVID-19 treatments ineffective in large trials 93%
- Large-scale validation of the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST) using a short form: high risk of bias models show poorer discrimination 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes associated with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and immune modifying therapies: a nationwide cohort study in the OpenSAFELY platform 91%
- Gout and coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19): the risk of diagnosis and death in the UK Biobank 90%
- Safety of hydroxychloroquine, alone and in combination with azithromycin, in light of rapid wide-spread use for COVID-19: a multinational, network cohort and self-controlled case series study 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Corticosteroids in COVID-19: Optimizing Observational Research through Target Trial Emulations 91%
- Venous Thromboembolism and the Effects of Statin and Hormone Therapy: A Case-Control Study of 250,000 Women 50-64 years of age 91%
- Clinical Trial Evidence Supporting FDA Approval of Novel Therapeutic Agents Over Three Decades, 1995-2017: Cross-Sectional Analysis 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Hydroxychloroquine/Chloroquine for the Treatment of Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis 94%
- Safety and effectiveness of RBD-specific polyclonal equine F(ab′)2 fragments for the treatment of hospitalized patients with severe Covid-19 disease: a retrospective cohort study 93%
- How Informative Were Early SARS-CoV-2 Treatment and Prevention Trials? A longitudinal cohort analysis of trials registered on clinicaltrials.gov 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- General Health Checks in Adult Primary Care: A Review 92%
- Effect of Vitamin D 3 Supplementation vs Placebo on Hospital Length of Stay in Patients with Severe COVID-19: A Multicenter, Double-blind, Randomized Controlled Trial 91%
- Subcutaneous REGEN-COV Antibody Combination in Early Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Randomized Clinical Trial 89%
"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.