SynthesisJournal of internal medicine2025
Colchicine and cardiovascular events: An updated meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Journal of internal medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Drugging trained immunity: immunometabolic and epigenetic control of maladaptive inflammatory memory in chronic inflammatory diseases.Immunologic research · 2026Review
- Anti-inflammatory agents in atherosclerosis-and a need for reform: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.Journal of internal medicine · 2026Article
- Colchicine in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Prognostic significance of 1-year versus baseline high-sensitivity C-reactive protein after acute myocardial infarction: nationwide landmark results.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2026Article
- Metabolic Reprogramming-Driven Cardiovascular Immune Damage: From Glyco-Lipotoxicity and Epigenetic Memory to Multidimensional Cross-Organ Communication Networks.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColchicine shows promise in reducing cardiovascular risk, but a recent study raised the question whether this is really the case. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess its impact on cardiovascular outcomes in secondary prevention.
methodsWe systematically searched major databases up to March 2025 for RCTs comparing colchicine to placebo over a treatment duration of ≥12 months, reporting major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). Both fixed- and random-effects models were used to compute pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals.
resultsSix RCTs comprising 21,774 patients were included. Colchicine significantly reduced the risk of MACEs (RR 0.74 [0.60-0.92]) and specific components of primary outcome (myocardial infarction, RR 0.85 [0.73-0.98]; stroke, RR 0.79 [0.65-0.95]), with no significant effect on cardiac death and revascularization.
conclusionThese results support the efficacy of low-dose colchicine in reducing MACEs when added to standard care for at least 12 months.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.