Febuxostat Use and Risks of Cardiovascular Disease Events, Cardiac Death, and All-cause Mortality: Metaanalysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. To assess whether febuxostat use increases the risk of developing cardiovascular (CV) events, cardiac death, and all-cause mortalities. Methods. The relevant literature was searched in several databases including MEDLINE (PubMed, January 1, 1966–February 29, 2020), Web of Science, EMBASE (January 1, 1974–February 29, 2020), ClinicalTrials. gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Manual searches for references cited in the original studies and relevant review articles were also performed. All studies included in this metaanalysis were published in English. Results. In the end, 20 studies that met our inclusion criteria were included in our metaanalysis. Use of febuxostat was found not to be associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.57–1.32,P= 0.51). Also, there was no association between febuxostat use and mortalities arising from CV diseases (CVD; RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.49–1.45,P= 0.53). The RR also revealed that febuxostat use was not associated with CVD events (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.83–1.16,P= 0.83). Further, the likelihood of occurrence of CVD events was found not to be dependent on febuxostat dose (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.84–1.30,P= 0.72). Conclusion. Febuxostat use is not associated with increased risks of all-cause mortality, death from CVD, or CVD events. Accordingly, it is a safe drug for the treatment of gout.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Meta-analysis | high |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Meta-analysis | high |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.032 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.027 | 0.063 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".