Evidence Hub

Effect of colchicine for secondary prevention according to stroke subtype: A secondary analysis of the CONVINCE randomized trial

Louise Maes, C. Walsh, C. Weimar, F. Purroy, Christopher I. Price, Brian Clarke, Pedro Castro, A. Członkowska et al.

International Journal of Stroke, 2025

3,154 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Background: The Colchicine for prevention of vascular inflammation in Non-CardioEmbolic stroke (CONVINCE) trial evaluated long-term treatment with colchicine for the prevention of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in a stroke population. Although the intention-to-treat analysis did not demonstrate a significant reduction in the primary endpoint, fewer outcome events were observed in the colchicine-treated group. It is unknown if a potential treatment effect is modified by ischemic stroke etiology. Aims: In this pre-specified secondary analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of colchicine for prevention of MACE in patients with minor stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack (TIA) according to index event stroke etiology. Methods: A total of 3154 patients with recent non-cardioembolic stroke or TIA were randomly assigned to receive colchicine, 0.5 mg daily in addition to guideline-based usual care or usual care alone. The primary endpoint was a composite of first fatal or non-fatal recurrent ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, or hospitalization for unstable angina. Subgroups of patients with large-artery atherosclerosis, small-vessel disease, and cryptogenic stroke were evaluated. Results: A total of 3100 patients were included in the current analysis. The treatment effect did not vary across stroke subtype subgroups (p = 0.64 for interaction). In patients allocated to colchicine versus usual care alone, the primary endpoint occurred in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, 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: 3,154 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

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.

Open this study Sign up free