MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392755545 · doi:10.1155/2024/8646351

Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials: Efficacy and Safety of Colchicine for Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease

2024· article· en· W4392755545 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interventional Cardiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammasome and immune disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicinePlaceboCoronary artery diseaseMyocardial infarctionOdds ratioMeta-analysisStroke (engine)Randomized controlled trialColchicineRevascularizationSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. Colchicine has shown potential cardioprotective effects owing to its broad anti-inflammatory properties. We performed a meta-analysis to assess its safety and efficacy in secondary prevention in patients with established coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods. We searched Ovid Healthstar, MEDLINE, and Embase (inception to May 2022) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the cardiovascular effects of colchicine compared with placebo or usual care in patients with CAD. Study-level data on efficacy and safety outcomes were pooled using the Peto method. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular (CV) death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. Results. A total of 8 RCTs were included with a follow-up duration of ≥1 month, comprising a total of 12,151 patients. Compared with placebo or usual care, colchicine was associated with a significant risk reduction in the primary outcome (odds ratio (OR) 0.70, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.83, <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"><a:mi>P</a:mi><a:mo>&lt;</a:mo><a:mn>0.0001</a:mn></a:math> ; <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"><c:msup><c:mrow><c:mi>I</c:mi></c:mrow><c:mrow><c:mn>2</c:mn></c:mrow></c:msup><c:mo>=</c:mo><c:mn>52</c:mn><c:mo>%</c:mo></c:math> ). Risks of MI (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.91, <e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"><e:mi>P</e:mi><e:mo>=</e:mo><e:mn>0.003</e:mn></e:math> ; <g:math xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M4"><g:msup><g:mrow><g:mi>I</g:mi></g:mrow><g:mrow><g:mn>2</g:mn></g:mrow></g:msup><g:mo>=</g:mo><g:mn>33</g:mn><g:mo>%</g:mo></g:math> ), stroke (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.74, <i:math xmlns:i="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M5"><i:mi>P</i:mi><i:mo>=</i:mo><i:mn>0.001</i:mn></i:math> ; <k:math xmlns:k="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M6"><k:msup><k:mrow><k:mi>I</k:mi></k:mrow><k:mrow><k:mn>2</k:mn></k:mrow></k:msup><k:mo>=</k:mo><k:mn>0</k:mn><k:mo>%</k:mo></k:math> ), and unplanned coronary revascularization (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.82, <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M7"><m:mi>P</m:mi><m:mo>=</m:mo><m:mn>0.0001</m:mn></m:math> ; <o:math xmlns:o="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M8"><o:msup><o:mrow><o:mi>I</o:mi></o:mrow><o:mrow><o:mn>2</o:mn></o:mrow></o:msup><o:mo>=</o:mo><o:mn>58</o:mn><o:mo>%</o:mo></o:math> ) were all reduced in the colchicine group. Rates of CV and all-cause mortality did not differ between the two groups, but there was an increase in noncardiac deaths with colchicine (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.15, <q:math xmlns:q="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M9"><q:mi>P</q:mi><q:mo>=</q:mo><q:mn>0.01</q:mn></q:math> ; <s:math xmlns:s="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M10"><s:msup><s:mrow><s:mi>I</s:mi></s:mrow><s:mrow><s:mn>2</s:mn></s:mrow></s:msup><s:mo>=</s:mo><s:mn>51</s:mn><s:mo>%</s:mo></s:math> ). The occurrence of all other adverse events was similar between the two groups, including GI reactions (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.20, <u:math xmlns:u="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M11"><u:mi>P</u:mi><u:mo>=</u:mo><u:mn>0.35</u:mn></u:math> ; <w:math xmlns:w="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M12"><w:msup><w:mrow><w:mi>I</w:mi></w:mrow><w:mrow><w:mn>2</w:mn></w:mrow></w:msup><w:mo>=</w:mo><w:mn>42</w:mn><w:mo>%</w:mo></w:math> ) and infections (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.28, <y:math xmlns:y="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M13"><y:mi>P</y:mi><y:mo>=</y:mo><y:mn>0.74</y:mn></y:math> ; <ab:math xmlns:ab="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M14"><ab:msup><ab:mrow><ab:mi>I</ab:mi></ab:mrow><ab:mrow><ab:mn>2</ab:mn></ab:mrow></ab:msup><ab:mo>=</ab:mo><ab:mn>53</ab:mn><ab:mo>%</ab:mo></ab:math> ). Conclusions. Colchicine therapy may reduce the risk of future cardiovascular events in patients with established CAD; however, there remains a concern about non-CV mortality. Further trials are underway that will shed light on non-CV mortality and colchicine NCT03048825, and NCT02898610.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.014
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it