-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Colchicine for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events
AJ. Martí-Carvajal, MA. Gemmato-Valecillos, D. Monge Martín, JB. De Sanctis, CE. Martí-Amarista, R. Hidalgo, E. Alegría-Barrero, RJ. Riera Lizardo, A. Correa-Pérez
Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, systematický přehled, metaanalýza, přehledy
- MeSH
- antiflogistika nesteroidní terapeutické užití škodlivé účinky MeSH
- antiflogistika terapeutické užití škodlivé účinky MeSH
- cévní mozková příhoda prevence a kontrola mortalita MeSH
- infarkt myokardu * prevence a kontrola mortalita epidemiologie MeSH
- kardiovaskulární nemoci * prevence a kontrola mortalita MeSH
- kolchicin * terapeutické užití škodlivé účinky MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- příčina smrti MeSH
- primární prevence * metody MeSH
- randomizované kontrolované studie jako téma * MeSH
- zkreslení výsledků (epidemiologie) MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- metaanalýza MeSH
- přehledy MeSH
- systematický přehled MeSH
BACKGROUND: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ACVDs), a condition characterised by lipid accumulation in arterial walls, which is often exacerbated by chronic inflammation disorders, is the major cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Colchicine, with its first medicinal use in ancient Egypt, is an inexpensive drug with anti-inflammatory properties. However, its role in primary prevention of ACVDs in the general population remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical benefits and harms of colchicine as primary prevention of cardiovascular outcomes in the general population. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Heart Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Ovid Embase, Web of Science, and LILACS. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP for ongoing and unpublished studies. We also scanned the reference lists of relevant included studies, reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no limitations on language, date of publication, or study setting. The search results were updated on 31 May 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in any setting, recruiting adults without pre-existing cardiovascular disease. We included trials that compared colchicine versus placebo, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, corticosteroids, immunomodulating drugs, or usual care. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two or more review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and performed risk of bias and GRADE assessments. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 15 RCTs (1721 participants randomised; 1412 participants analysed) with follow-up periods ranging from 4 to 728 weeks. The intervention was oral colchicine compared with placebo, immunomodulating drugs, or usual care or no treatment. Due to biases and imprecision, the evidence was very uncertain for all outcomes. All trials but one had a high risk of bias. Five out of seven meta-analyses included fewer than six trials (71.4%). The objectives of the review were to assess cardiovascular outcomes in the general population, but many of the included trials focused on liver disease. Colchicine compared to placebo Colchicine may reduce all-cause mortality compared to placebo in primary prevention, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 0.91; 6 studies, 463 participants; very low-certainty evidence; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 11, 95% CI 6 to 67). Colchicine may result in little to no difference in non-fatal myocardial infarction, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.82; 1 study, 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Colchicine may not reduce the incidence of stroke, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 2.43, 95% CI 0.67 to 8.86; 1 study, 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Regarding adverse events, colchicine may increase the incidence of diarrhoea (RR 3.99, 95% CI 1.44 to 11.06; 8 studies, 605 participants; very low-certainty evidence; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 10, 95% CI 6 to 17), and may have little to no effect on neurological outcomes such as seizure or mental confusion (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.66; 2 studies, 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. The effect of colchicine on cardiovascular mortality is also very uncertain (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.03 to 62.43; 2 studies, 160 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Colchicine may not reduce post-cardiac procedure atrial fibrillation, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.19; 1 study, 100 participants). We found no trials reporting on pericardial effusion, peripheral artery disease, heart failure, or unstable angina. Colchicine compared to methotrexate (immunomodulating drug) Colchicine may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality compared to methotrexate, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.51; 1 study, 85 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We found no trials reporting other cardiovascular outcomes or adverse events for this comparison. Colchicine compared to usual care or no treatment The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of colchicine compared with usual care on all-cause mortality in primary prevention (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.27; 2 studies, 729 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Regarding adverse events, colchicine may increase the incidence of diarrhoea compared to usual care, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 3.32, 95% CI 1.56 to 7.03; 2 studies, 729 participants; very low-certainty evidence; NNTH 18, 95% CI 12 to 42). No trials reported other cardiovascular outcomes for this comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This Cochrane review evaluated the clinical benefits and harms of using colchicine for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events in the general population. Comparisons were made against placebo, immunomodulating medications, or usual care or no treatment. However, the certainty of the evidence for the predefined outcomes was very low, highlighting the pressing need for high-quality, rigorous studies to ascertain colchicine's clinical impact definitively. We identified numerous biases and inaccuracies in the included studies, limiting their generalisability and precluding a conclusive determination of colchicine's efficacy in preventing cardiovascular events. The existing evidence regarding colchicine's potential cardiovascular benefits or harms for primary prevention is inconclusive owing to the limitations inherent in the current studies. More robust clinical trials are needed to bridge this evidence gap effectively.
Cátedra Rectoral de Medicina Basada en la Evidencia Universidad de Carabobo Valencia Venezuela
Faculty of Medicine Universidad Francisco de Vitoria Madrid Spain
Jencare Senior Medical Center Geriatric Medicine Department Berwyn Illinois USA
Medicine Department Rheumatology Unit Universidad de Carabobo Valencia Venezuela
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc25009907
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20250429135153.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 250415s2025 enk f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1002/14651858.CD015003.pub2 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)39927511
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a enk
- 100 1_
- $a Martí-Carvajal, Arturo J $u Universidad UTE, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud Eugenio Espejo, Centro Asociado Cochrane Ecuador, Centro de Investigación en Salud Pública y Epidemiología Clínica (CISPEC), Quito, Ecuador, Universidad UTE, Quito, Ecuador $u Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Francisco de Vitoria, Madrid, Spain $u Cátedra Rectoral de Medicina Basada en la Evidencia, Universidad de Carabobo, Valencia, Venezuela
- 245 10
- $a Colchicine for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events / $c AJ. Martí-Carvajal, MA. Gemmato-Valecillos, D. Monge Martín, JB. De Sanctis, CE. Martí-Amarista, R. Hidalgo, E. Alegría-Barrero, RJ. Riera Lizardo, A. Correa-Pérez
- 520 9_
- $a BACKGROUND: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ACVDs), a condition characterised by lipid accumulation in arterial walls, which is often exacerbated by chronic inflammation disorders, is the major cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Colchicine, with its first medicinal use in ancient Egypt, is an inexpensive drug with anti-inflammatory properties. However, its role in primary prevention of ACVDs in the general population remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical benefits and harms of colchicine as primary prevention of cardiovascular outcomes in the general population. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Heart Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Ovid Embase, Web of Science, and LILACS. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP for ongoing and unpublished studies. We also scanned the reference lists of relevant included studies, reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no limitations on language, date of publication, or study setting. The search results were updated on 31 May 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in any setting, recruiting adults without pre-existing cardiovascular disease. We included trials that compared colchicine versus placebo, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, corticosteroids, immunomodulating drugs, or usual care. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two or more review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and performed risk of bias and GRADE assessments. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 15 RCTs (1721 participants randomised; 1412 participants analysed) with follow-up periods ranging from 4 to 728 weeks. The intervention was oral colchicine compared with placebo, immunomodulating drugs, or usual care or no treatment. Due to biases and imprecision, the evidence was very uncertain for all outcomes. All trials but one had a high risk of bias. Five out of seven meta-analyses included fewer than six trials (71.4%). The objectives of the review were to assess cardiovascular outcomes in the general population, but many of the included trials focused on liver disease. Colchicine compared to placebo Colchicine may reduce all-cause mortality compared to placebo in primary prevention, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 0.91; 6 studies, 463 participants; very low-certainty evidence; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 11, 95% CI 6 to 67). Colchicine may result in little to no difference in non-fatal myocardial infarction, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.82; 1 study, 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Colchicine may not reduce the incidence of stroke, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 2.43, 95% CI 0.67 to 8.86; 1 study, 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Regarding adverse events, colchicine may increase the incidence of diarrhoea (RR 3.99, 95% CI 1.44 to 11.06; 8 studies, 605 participants; very low-certainty evidence; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 10, 95% CI 6 to 17), and may have little to no effect on neurological outcomes such as seizure or mental confusion (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.66; 2 studies, 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. The effect of colchicine on cardiovascular mortality is also very uncertain (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.03 to 62.43; 2 studies, 160 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Colchicine may not reduce post-cardiac procedure atrial fibrillation, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.19; 1 study, 100 participants). We found no trials reporting on pericardial effusion, peripheral artery disease, heart failure, or unstable angina. Colchicine compared to methotrexate (immunomodulating drug) Colchicine may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality compared to methotrexate, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.51; 1 study, 85 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We found no trials reporting other cardiovascular outcomes or adverse events for this comparison. Colchicine compared to usual care or no treatment The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of colchicine compared with usual care on all-cause mortality in primary prevention (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.27; 2 studies, 729 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Regarding adverse events, colchicine may increase the incidence of diarrhoea compared to usual care, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 3.32, 95% CI 1.56 to 7.03; 2 studies, 729 participants; very low-certainty evidence; NNTH 18, 95% CI 12 to 42). No trials reported other cardiovascular outcomes for this comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This Cochrane review evaluated the clinical benefits and harms of using colchicine for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events in the general population. Comparisons were made against placebo, immunomodulating medications, or usual care or no treatment. However, the certainty of the evidence for the predefined outcomes was very low, highlighting the pressing need for high-quality, rigorous studies to ascertain colchicine's clinical impact definitively. We identified numerous biases and inaccuracies in the included studies, limiting their generalisability and precluding a conclusive determination of colchicine's efficacy in preventing cardiovascular events. The existing evidence regarding colchicine's potential cardiovascular benefits or harms for primary prevention is inconclusive owing to the limitations inherent in the current studies. More robust clinical trials are needed to bridge this evidence gap effectively.
- 650 12
- $a kolchicin $x terapeutické užití $x škodlivé účinky $7 D003078
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 12
- $a randomizované kontrolované studie jako téma $7 D016032
- 650 12
- $a kardiovaskulární nemoci $x prevence a kontrola $x mortalita $7 D002318
- 650 12
- $a primární prevence $x metody $7 D011322
- 650 12
- $a infarkt myokardu $x prevence a kontrola $x mortalita $x epidemiologie $7 D009203
- 650 _2
- $a příčina smrti $7 D002423
- 650 _2
- $a zkreslení výsledků (epidemiologie) $7 D015982
- 650 _2
- $a cévní mozková příhoda $x prevence a kontrola $x mortalita $7 D020521
- 650 _2
- $a antiflogistika nesteroidní $x terapeutické užití $x škodlivé účinky $7 D000894
- 650 _2
- $a antiflogistika $x terapeutické užití $x škodlivé účinky $7 D000893
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a systematický přehled $7 D000078182
- 655 _2
- $a metaanalýza $7 D017418
- 655 _2
- $a přehledy $7 D016454
- 700 1_
- $a Gemmato-Valecillos, Mario A $u Department of Medicine, NYC Health + Hospitals / Elmhurst, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA
- 700 1_
- $a Monge Martín, Diana $u Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Francisco de Vitoria, Madrid, Spain
- 700 1_
- $a De Sanctis, Juan Bautista $u The Institute of Molecular and Translational Medicine, Palacky University Olomouc, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Olomouc, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Martí-Amarista, Cristina Elena $u Jencare Senior Medical Center, Geriatric Medicine Department, Berwyn, Illinois, USA
- 700 1_
- $a Hidalgo, Ricardo $u Universidad UTE, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud Eugenio Espejo, Centro Asociado Cochrane Ecuador, Centro de Investigación en Salud Pública y Epidemiología Clínica (CISPEC), Quito, Ecuador., Universidad UTE, Quito, Ecuador
- 700 1_
- $a Alegría-Barrero, Eduardo $u Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Francisco de Vitoria, Madrid, Spain
- 700 1_
- $a Riera Lizardo, Ricardo J $u Cátedra Rectoral de Medicina Basada en la Evidencia, Universidad de Carabobo, Valencia, Venezuela $u Medicine Department, Rheumatology Unit, Universidad de Carabobo, Valencia, Venezuela
- 700 1_
- $a Correa-Pérez, Andrea $u Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Francisco de Vitoria, Madrid, Spain $u Department of Hospital Pharmacy and Medical Devices, Hospital Central de la Defensa Gómez Ulla, Madrid, Spain
- 773 0_
- $w MED00173409 $t Cochrane database of systematic reviews $x 1469-493X $g Roč. 2, č. 2 (2025), s. CD015003
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39927511 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20250415 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20250429135149 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2311346 $s 1246988
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2025 $b 2 $c 2 $d CD015003 $e 20250210 $i 1469-493X $m Cochrane database of systematic reviews $n Cochrane Database Syst Rev $x MED00173409
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20250415