Febuxostat and Cardiovascular Events: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Febuxostat is approved in the United States for the management of hyperuricemia in patients with gout. In November 2017 the FDA released a warning alert on a possible link between febuxostat and cardiovascular disease (CVD) reported in a single clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis and assess the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients receiving febuxostat compared to a control group. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE database for studies published up until March 2018. We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared febuxostat to control groups including placebo and allopurinol. We calculated the pooled relative risk (RR) of MACE and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Our search yielded 374 potentially relevant studies. Among the 25 RCTs included in the systematic review, 10 qualified for the meta-analysis. Among the 14,402 subjects included, the median age was 54 years (IQR 52-67) and 90% were male (IQR 82-96); 8602 received febuxostat, 5118 allopurinol, and 643 placebo. The pooled RR of MACE for febuxostat was 0.9; 95% CI 0.6-1.5 (p= 0.96) compared to the control. The RR of CV-related death for febuxostat was 1.29; 95% CI 1.01-1.66 (p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with other SU-lowering treatments, febuxostat does not increase or decrease the risk of cardiovascular disease but may increase the risk of CVD death. More RCTs measuring cardiovascular safety as a primary outcome are needed to adequately evaluate the risk of CVD with febuxostat.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".