EClinicalMedicine · 2024 · 58 citations · 31 references
MedicinePharmacologyPharmacotherapyCardiovascular PharmacotherapyClinical PharmacologyMeta-analysisAtherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease PreventionCardiovascular Disease PreventionClinical TrialsCoronary Artery DiseaseEfficacy EvaluationStrokeAdverse Cardiovascular Drug EventsCardiovascular Disease MortalityPost-stroke Antithrombotic TherapyRelative Risk EstimationRelative Risk ReductionSecondary Prevention After StrokeTrial RegistriesTrial-level Meta-analysis
Background: Guidelines recommend low-dose colchicine for secondary prevention in cardiovascular disease, but uncertainty remains concerning its efficacy for stroke, efficacy in key subgroups and about uncommon but serious safety outcomes. Methods: In this trial-level meta-analysis, we searched bibliographic databases and trial registries form inception to May 16, 2024. We included randomised trials of colchicine for secondary prevention of ischaemic stroke and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularisation, or cardiovascular death). Secondary outcomes were serious safety outcomes and mortality. A fixed-effect inverse-variance model was used to generate a pooled estimate of relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42024540320. Findings: Six trials involving 14,934 patients with prior stroke or coronary disease were included. In all patients, colchicine compared with placebo or no colchicine reduced the risk for ischaemic stroke by 27% (132 [1.8%] events versus 186 [2.5%] events, RR 0.73 [95% CI 0.58-0.90]) and MACE by 27% (505 [6.8%] events versus 693 [9.4%] events, with RR 0.73 [0.65-0.81]). Efficacy was consistent in key subgroups (females versus males, age below versus above 70, with versus without diabetes, statin versus non-statin users). Colchicine was not associated with an increase in serious safety outcomes: hospitalisation for pneumonia (109 [1.5%] versus 106 [1.5%], RR 0.99 [0.76-1.30]), cancer (247 [3.5%] versus 255 [3.6%], RR 0.97 [0.82-1.15]), and gastro-intestinal events (153 [2.1%] versus 135 [1.9%]), RR 1.15 [0.91-1.44]. There was no difference in all-cause death (201 [2.7%] versus 181 [2.4%], RR 1.09 [0.89-1.33]), cardiovascular death (70 [0.9%] versus 80 [1.1%], RR 0.89 [0.65-1.23]), or non-cardiovascular death (131 [1.8%] versus 101 [1.4%], RR 1.26 [0.98-1.64]). Interpretation: In patients with prior stroke or coronary disease, colchicine reduced ischaemic stroke and MACE, with consistent treatment effect in key subgroups, and did not increase serious safety events or death. Funding: There was no funding source for this study.
31
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Matthew J. Page, Joanne E. McKenzie, Patrick M. Bossuyt et al. · BMJ · 2021 · 95K citations · Full text
The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
Julian P. T. Higgins, Doug Altman, Peter C Gøtzsche et al. · BMJ · 2011 · 34.2K citations · Full text
2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice
Frank L.J. Visseren, François Mach, Yvo M. Smulders et al. · European Heart Journal · 2021 · 6.3K citations · Full text
2023 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes
Robert A. Byrne, Xavier Rosselló, J J Coughlan et al. · European Heart Journal · 2023 · 4.5K citations · Full text