Association of colchicine use with cardiovascular and limb events in peripheral artery disease: Insights from a retrospective cohort study
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Colchicine has demonstrated efficacy in treating coronary artery disease, but its efficacy in peripheral artery disease (PAD) remains uncertain. This study aims to address this gap in knowledge.
METHODS
A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the TriNetX Network, selecting patients with lower limb PAD between January 1, 2011, and January 1, 2024. Colchicine users were matched 1:1 with non-users through propensity score matching, considering demographics, medical conditions, medications, and psychosocial factors. The primary outcome was a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and limb events (MACLE) - including lower limb amputation, revascularization for lower limb ischemia, acute myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and all-cause mortality - over a ten-year follow-up.
RESULTS
From 53,568 colchicine-treated and 1,499,969 untreated patients with lower limb PAD, 52,350 pairs were successfully matched. Over ten years, colchicine was associated with a significant reduction in MACLE (hazard ratio, [HR] 0.90, 95% CI 0.88-0.92, p < 0.001), any lower limb amputation (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75-0.94, p = 0.002), revascularization for lower limb ischemia (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.82-0.88, p < 0.001), major adverse cardiovascular events (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.91-0.95, p < 0.001), and all-cause mortality (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.87-0.92, p < 0.001). It also result in a reduced risk of ischemic stroke (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.98, p = 0.001), but not of acute myocardial…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,499,969 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Safety and efficacy of COVID‐19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials
- Accuracy Comparison between Robot-Assisted Dental Implant Placement and Static/Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies
- Determinants of passive antibody efficacy in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Cleaning efficacy of EDDY versus ultrasonically-activated irrigation in root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Bonding Efficacy of Universal Resin Adhesives to Zirconia Substrates: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- In vitro antimicrobial activity of extracts and essential oils of Cinnamomum, Salvia, and Mentha spp. against foodborne pathogens: A meta-analysis study
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.