Colchicine is an established treatment for gout, Behcet's Disease, and Familial Mediterranean Fever (1). Recent literature suggests that colchicine has cardiovascular benefits in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), with a decrease in the risk of myocardial infarction and other cardiac outcomes by reducing inflammation (2–4). Colchicine at a dose of 0.5 mg once daily reduces inflammasome (NLRP3) activation and neutrophil degranulation (5, 6). Additionally, in patients with CAD with high leukocyte activation (> 7,500 WBC/mm²), endothelial function is significantly improved (7). Vaidya et al. (8) suggested that low-dose colchicine therapy in the post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) of patients favorably modifies coronary plaque, independent of high-dose statin intensification therapy and substantial low-density lipoprotein reduction. The same group of researchers proved that colchicine inhibits neutrophil extracellular trap formation in ACS post percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (9). In addition, colchicine is a relatively safe and low-cost medication, which has been available for many years. Since 2019, three large clinical randomized studies have been published that proved a favorable effect of colchicine on cardiovascular events in patients with CAD (10–12). However, some meta-analyses did not confirm these results (13–15). These inconclusive observations were the source of the present systematic review and meta-analysis. The aim was to assess the effect of colchicine treatment on cardiovascular events. Additionally, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first estimation of the risk of discontinuation of colchicine therapy and net clinical benefit.

The study was conducted following the preferred reporting items for meta-analysis (PRISMA) recommendations and was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO).

A total of 226 studies were examined for eligibility, of which 14 papers were finally selected. A total of 13,186 patients who met the inclusion criteria (Figure 1) were included in the final analysis. A total number of 11,790 patients were included in the sensitivity analysis (Supplementary Material). Baseline patient characteristic for each study is summarized in Table 2. The mean age of the patients ranged from 56.3 to 68.7 years, with men accounting for 82.7% of the population. Ten trials used placebo and four were open-label type.

The results of our meta-analysis prove that treatment with colchicine at a dose 0.5 mg once daily in patients with CAD significantly reduces the primary endpoint composed of cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and urgent ischemia-driven revascularization by 30% (relative risk). The estimated NNT is 36 (26–58) on average. This result does not confirm the negative results of other meta-analyses, which have shown a favorable reduction of ischemic events, although the differences were not significant (13–15). Additionally, we proved that colchicine treatment significantly reduces the relative risk of myocardial infarction (27%), ischemia-driven revascularization (43%), and stroke (51%). Our results are consistent with the two most recent meta-analyses (25, 26). The reasons for this discrepancy should be seen in the number of patients included in the assessment. Among all cited meta-analyses, ours contains the largest number of 13,186 (7, 8, 10–12, 16–24). After excluding small observational clinical trials, 11,790 patients were included in the sensitivity meta-analysis and the results were almost identical to those in the main meta-analysis (Supplementary Material). This confirms the reliability and robustness of the obtained results.

Like all other investigators, we did not find a significant effect of the drug on cardiovascular and total mortality. In the cited studies, the beneficial effect of colchicine treatment was observed in both chronic (CCS) and acute (ACS) coronary syndromes. In the latter, the therapeutic efficacy of colchicine was greater the sooner the treatment was introduced after a myocardial infarction (the best period up to 3 days) (27). Almost all studies showed a decrease in serum hs-CRP, but the presentation of results by individual authors varied. We managed to extract the result in the form of the mean +/- SD from six studies. In patients after treatment with colchicine (n = 446), the mean value of hs-CRP was 1.78 mg% compared with 3.7 mg% in the placebo group (n = 416) (Figure 3D). In patients with ACS, elevated levels of hs - CRP, interleukin-1, and interleukin-6 are indicators of the risk of cardiovascular complications (28–31). Treatment with colchicine in comparison with placebo leads to a greater reduction in the volume of atherosclerotic plaque, and changes in its volume also correlate with changes in serum hs-CRP levels (8). Therefore, in patients with CAD, the combination of colchicine with aggressive statin therapy seems to be justified and desired (28, 30).

Generally, colchicine is well tolerated. However, in many studies, several side effects were observed. Compared with placebo, the occurrence of diarrhea (17.9 vs. 13.1%) and gastrointestinal disorders (17.6 vs 13.1%) was significantly more frequent. There were no significant increase in hepatic, muscle, infectious, hematological complications, sensory disturbances, serious side effects, and deaths (2, 32). The dose of colchicine used in cardiovascular diseases is 0.5 mg once daily and is lower than in the treatment of rheumatoid diseases.

In patients with cardiovascular diseases, simple gastrointestinal side effects are most common, leading them however to discontinue treatment. We found data on patients who discontinued the drug because of side effects in 10 studies. Colchicine was discontinued by 10.2% (648/6,350) of the patients and by 8.7% (549/6,264) of the placebo/control group. Compared with placebo, the relative risk of colchicine withdrawal was 60% (RR 1.60 95% CI 1.06–2.42) (Figure 5A). After excluding the non-placebo trials (21, 26, 33), the risk of withdrawal was reduced by half (RR 1.34 95% CI.97–1.84) (Figure 5B). We calculated the Net Clinical endpoint (colchicine vs. placebo) as the difference between the reduction of the composite endpoint (benefit) and the increase in the number of patients discontinuing treatment due to side effects (harm). However, in individual studies, the follow-up time varied significantly from 1 to 28 months, not all studies used a placebo (PROBE study) (17, 21, 33), and the sample size ranged from 44 to 5,522 patients. In the three largest studies with a composite endpoint, a placebo was used, the follow-up was over 6 months, and the number of subjects was over 100 in each arm (10–12), while the risk of discontinuation of colchicine treatment was reduced to 26% (Figure 5C).

Taking into account the risk of discontinuation of colchicine treatment, the estimated potential benefit from the continued use of the drug covers 18/1,000 patients and this ratio is statistically significant (p = 0.001, Figure 5D). From a clinical point of view, the values of NNT 36 (26–58) for the primary endpoint and NNH 83 (380–47) for the occurrence of side effects causing discontinuation are interesting and acceptable. In all studies, these favorable results were seen in patients treated with statins and antiplatelet drugs. Colchicine is a cheap drug, and if added to the standard treatment of patients with ischemic heart disease, it can significantly enhance the power of preventive therapy at a low cost. Although colchicine does not reduce the risk of cardiovascular mortality in patients with ACS and CCS, colchicine should be considered to reduce cardiovascular morbidity in patients who tolerate the drug.

In CAD, low-dose colchicine (0.5 mg once daily) significantly reduces the risk of the primary composite endpoint by about 30%. The drug should be considered as part of the preventive treatment in patients with good tolerance. When added to standard therapy, it significantly reduces cardiovascular morbidity.

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

SG: conceptualization, methodology, analysis, original draft preparation, and supervision. MM: software, methodology, and draft editing. TU: analysis and draft editing. AO-W: analysis, methodology, and draft editing. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.