Nogic Jason, Mehta Ojas, Tong David, Brown Adam J, Layland Jamie
Monash Cardiovascular Research Centre, Monash University and Monash Heart, Monash Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Department of Cardiovascular Research, Peninsula Clinical School, Melbourne, Australia.
Cardiol Ther. 2023 Mar;12(1):171-181. doi: 10.1007/s40119-022-00298-y. Epub 2023 Jan 6.
Colchicine, thought to exert its effect via reduction of inflammation, has recently been studied in patients following acute coronary syndromes (ACS). We performed a meta-analysis of all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in this high-risk cohort, evaluating efficacy and safety.
MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, clinical trial registries, and select conference proceedings were searched for RCTs comparing colchicine to placebo in patients following ACS. The primary outcome was trial-defined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Secondary endpoints included stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause and cardiovascular death, and urgent revascularization. Analysis was performed at the longest available clinical follow-up.
Two RCTs with a pooled sample size of 5540 patients with 2778 (50.1%) receiving colchicine and 2762 (49.9%) placebo were included. In order to maximize consistency, composite efficacy endpoints between trials were modified. Compared to placebo, patients receiving colchicine had reduction in study-defined composite endpoint (5.5% vs. 7.6%) OR 0.67 (95% CI 0.46-0.98, p = 0.04, I = 46%). Similarly, there was a significant reduction in cerebrovascular accidents (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.14-0.69, p = 0.004, I = 0%) and repeat revascularization OR 0.36 (95% CI 0.14-0.90, p = 0.03, I = 54%). There was no difference between cardiovascular death (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.52-1.62, p = 0.78, I = 0%), non-cardiovascular death OR 1.27 (95% CI 0.72-2.24, p = 0.41, I = 0%), MI at longest available follow-up OR 0.89 (95% CI 0.67-1.17, p = 0.39, I = 0%) or resuscitated cardiac arrest OR 0.88 (95% CI 0.32-2.43, p = 0.81, I = 0%) in those receiving colchicine.
These data suggest colchicine, in addition to guideline-directed medical therapy following acute coronary syndrome reduces MACE, cerebrovascular accidents, and rates of urgent revascularization at 2 years of follow-up.
秋水仙碱被认为是通过减轻炎症发挥作用,最近在急性冠脉综合征(ACS)患者中进行了研究。我们对该高危队列中所有可用的随机对照试验(RCT)进行了荟萃分析,评估其疗效和安全性。
检索MEDLINE、PubMed、EMBASE、临床试验注册库以及部分会议论文集,查找比较秋水仙碱与安慰剂在ACS患者中的RCT。主要结局是试验定义的主要不良心血管事件(MACE)。次要终点包括中风、心肌梗死(MI)、全因死亡和心血管死亡以及紧急血运重建。分析在最长可用临床随访时进行。
纳入了两项RCT,汇总样本量为5540例患者,其中2778例(50.1%)接受秋水仙碱治疗,2762例(49.9%)接受安慰剂治疗。为了使一致性最大化,对试验之间的复合疗效终点进行了修改。与安慰剂相比,接受秋水仙碱治疗的患者研究定义的复合终点降低(5.5%对7.6%),比值比(OR)为0.67(95%置信区间[CI]0.46 - 0.98,p = 0.04,I = 46%)。同样,脑血管意外显著减少(OR 0.31,95% CI 0.14 - 0.69,p = 0.004,I = 0%),再次血运重建OR为0.36(95% CI 0.14 - 0.90,p = 0.03,I = 54%)。接受秋水仙碱治疗的患者在心血管死亡(OR 0.92,95% CI 0.52 - 1.62,p = 0.78,I = 0%)、非心血管死亡OR 1.27(95% CI 0.72 - 2.24,p = 0.41,I = 0%)、最长可用随访时的MI OR 0.89(95% CI 0.67 - 1.17,p = 0.39,I = 0%)或心脏骤停复苏OR 0.88(95% CI 0.32 - 2.43,p = 0.81,I = 0%)方面无差异。
这些数据表明,除了急性冠脉综合征后的指南指导药物治疗外,秋水仙碱在2年随访时可降低MACE、脑血管意外和紧急血运重建率。