Colchicine in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome

David Tong(St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne), Stephen Quinn(Swinburne University of Technology), Arthur Nasis(Monash Health), C. Hiew(Barwon Health), Philip Roberts‐Thomson(Royal Hobart Hospital), Heath Adams(Royal Hobart Hospital), R. Sriamareswaran(Peninsula Health), Nay Htun(Peninsula Health), William Wilson(The Royal Melbourne Hospital), Dion Stub(Western Health), W. van Gaal(Northern Health), L. G. Howes(Gold Coast Hospital), Nicholas Collins(John Hunter Hospital), A. Yong(Concord Repatriation General Hospital), Ravinay Bhindi(Royal North Shore Hospital), Robert Whitbourn(St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne), A. Lee(Wollongong Hospital), C. Hengel(Ballarat Health Services), Kaleab Asrress(Bankstown Lidcombe Hospital), Melanie Freeman(Eastern Health), John Amerena(Barwon Health), Andrew Wilson(St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne), Jamie Layland(St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne)
Circulation
August 29, 2020
Cited by 375Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

Background: Inflammation plays a crucial role in clinical manifestations and complications of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Colchicine, a commonly used treatment for gout, has recently emerged as a novel therapeutic option in cardiovascular medicine owing to its anti-inflammatory properties. We sought to determine the potential usefulness of colchicine treatment in patients with ACS. Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 17 hospitals in Australia that provide acute cardiac care service. Eligible participants were adults (18–85 years) who presented with ACS and had evidence of coronary artery disease on coronary angiography managed with either percutaneous coronary intervention or medical therapy. Patients were assigned to receive either colchicine (0.5 mg twice daily for the first month, then 0.5 mg daily for 11 months) or placebo, in addition to standard secondary prevention pharmacotherapy, and were followed up for a minimum of 12 months. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, ACS, ischemia-driven (unplanned) urgent revascularization, and noncardioembolic ischemic stroke in a time to event analysis. Results: A total of 795 patients were recruited between December 2015 and September 2018 (mean age, 59.8±10.3 years; 21% female), with 396 assigned to the colchicine group and 399 to the placebo group. Over the 12-month follow-up, there were 24 events in the colchicine group compared with 38 events in the placebo group ( P =0.09, log-rank). There was a higher rate of total death (8 versus 1; P =0.017, log-rank) and, in particular, noncardiovascular death in the colchicine group (5 versus 0; P =0.024, log-rank). The rates of reported adverse effects were not different (colchicine 23.0% versus placebo 24.3%), and they were predominantly gastrointestinal symptoms (colchicine, 23.0% versus placebo, 20.8%). Conclusions: The addition of colchicine to standard medical therapy did not significantly affect cardiovascular outcomes at 12 months in patients with ACS and was associated with a higher rate of mortality. Registration: URL: https://www.anzctr.org.au ; Unique identifier: ACTRN12615000861550.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis