Incidence of diabetes after SARS-CoV-2 infection in England and the implications of COVID-19 vaccination: a retrospective cohort study of 16 million people.

BACKGROUND: Some studies have shown that the incidence of type 2 diabetes increases after a diagnosis of COVID-19, although the evidence is not conclusive. However, the effects of the COVID-19 vaccine on this association, or the effect on other diabetes subtypes, are not clear. We aimed to investigate the association between COVID-19 and incidence of type 2, type 1, gestational and non-specific diabetes, and the effect of COVID- 19 vaccination, up to 52 weeks after diagnosis. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we investigated the diagnoses of incident diabetes following COVID-19 diagnosis in England in a pre-vaccination, vaccinated, and unvaccinated cohort using linked electronic health records. People alive and aged between 18 years and 110 years, registered with a general practitioner for at least 6 months before baseline, and with available data for sex, region, and area deprivation were included. Those with a previous COVID-19 diagnosis were excluded. We estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) comparing diabetes incidence after COVID-19 diagnosis with diabetes incidence before or in the absence of COVID-19 up to 102 weeks after diagnosis. Results were stratified by COVID-19 severity (categorised as hospitalised or non-hospitalised) and diabetes type. FINDINGS: 16 669 943 people were included in the pre-vaccination cohort (Jan 1, 2020-Dec 14, 2021), 12 279 669 in the vaccinated cohort, and 3 076 953 in the unvaccinated cohort (both June 1-Dec 14, 2021). In the pre-vaccination cohort, aHRs for the incidence of type 2 diabetes after COVID-19 (compared with before or in the absence of diagnosis) declined from 4·30 (95% CI 4·06-4·55) in weeks 1-4 to 1·24 (1·14-1.35) in weeks 53-102. aHRs were higher in unvaccinated people (8·76 [7·49-10·25]) than in vaccinated people (1·66 [1·50-1·84]) in weeks 1-4 and in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 (pre-vaccination cohort 28·3 [26·2-30·5]) in weeks 1-4 declining to 2·04 [1·72-2·42] in weeks 53-102) than in those who were not hospitalised (1·95 [1·78-2·13] in weeks 1-4 declining to 1·11 [1·01-1·22] in weeks 53-102). Type 2 diabetes persisted for 4 months after COVID-19 in around 60% of those diagnosed. Patterns were similar for type 1 diabetes, although excess incidence did not persist beyond 1 year after a COVID-19 diagnosis. INTERPRETATION: Elevated incidence of type 2 diabetes after COVID-19 is greater, and persists for longer, in people who were hospitalised with COVID-19 than in those who were not, and is markedly less apparent in people who have been vaccinated against COVID-19. Testing for type 2 diabetes after severe COVID-19 and the promotion of vaccination are important tools in addressing this public health problem. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research, UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Medical Research Council, UKRI Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Health Data Research UK, Diabetes UK, British Heart Foundation, and the Stroke Association.

Discrimination of the Veterans Aging Cohort Study Index 2.0 for Predicting Cause-specific Mortality Among Persons With HIV in Europe and North America.

Background: Predicting cause-specific mortality among people with HIV (PWH) could facilitate targeted care to improve survival. We assessed discrimination of the Veterans Aging Cohort Study (VACS) Index 2.0 in predicting cause-specific mortality among PWH on antiretroviral therapy (ART). Methods: Using Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration data for PWH who initiated ART between 2000 and 2018, VACS Index 2.0 scores (higher scores indicate worse prognosis) were calculated around a randomly selected visit date at least 1 year after ART initiation. Missingness in VACS Index 2.0 variables was addressed through multiple imputation. Cox models estimated associations between VACS Index 2.0 and causes of death, with discrimination evaluated using Harrell's C-statistic. Absolute mortality risk was modelled using flexible parametric survival models. Results: Of 59 741 PWH (mean age: 43 years; 80% male), the mean VACS Index 2.0 at baseline was 41 (range: 0-129). For 2425 deaths over 168 162 person-years follow-up (median: 2.6 years/person), AIDS (n = 455) and non-AIDS-defining cancers (n = 452) were the most common causes. Predicted 5-year mortality for PWH with a mean VACS Index 2.0 score of 38 at baseline was 1% and approximately doubled for every 10-unit increase. The 5-year all-cause mortality C-statistic was .83. Discrimination with the VACS Index 2.0 was highest for deaths resulting from AIDS (0.91), liver-related (0.91), respiratory-related (0.89), non-AIDS infections (0.87), and non-AIDS-defining cancers (0.83), and lowest for suicides/accidental deaths (0.65). Conclusions: For deaths among PWH, discrimination with the VACS Index 2.0 was highest for deaths with measurable physiological causes and was lowest for suicide/accidental deaths.

Cohort study of cardiovascular safety of different COVID-19 vaccination doses among 46 million adults in England.

The first dose of COVID-19 vaccines led to an overall reduction in cardiovascular events, and in rare cases, cardiovascular complications. There is less information about the effect of second and booster doses on cardiovascular diseases. Using longitudinal health records from 45.7 million adults in England between December 2020 and January 2022, our study compared the incidence of thrombotic and cardiovascular complications up to 26 weeks after first, second and booster doses of brands and combinations of COVID-19 vaccines used during the UK vaccination program with the incidence before or without the corresponding vaccination. The incidence of common arterial thrombotic events (mainly acute myocardial infarction and ischaemic stroke) was generally lower after each vaccine dose, brand and combination. Similarly, the incidence of common venous thrombotic events, (mainly pulmonary embolism and lower limb deep venous thrombosis) was lower after vaccination. There was a higher incidence of previously reported rare harms after vaccination: vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia after first ChAdOx1 vaccination, and myocarditis and pericarditis after first, second and transiently after booster mRNA vaccination (BNT-162b2 and mRNA-1273). These findings support the wide uptake of future COVID-19 vaccination programs.

Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines as First Booster Doses in England: An Observational Study in OpenSAFELY-TPP.

BACKGROUND: The UK delivered its first "booster" COVID-19 vaccine doses in September 2021, initially to individuals at high risk of severe disease, then to all adults. The BNT162b2 Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was used initially, then also Moderna mRNA-1273. METHODS: With the approval of the National Health Service England, we used routine clinical data to estimate the effectiveness of boosting with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 compared with no boosting in eligible adults who had received two primary course vaccine doses. We matched each booster recipient with an unboosted control on factors relating to booster priority status and prior COVID-19 immunization. We adjusted for additional factors in Cox models, estimating hazard ratios up to 182 days (6 months) following booster dose. We estimated hazard ratios overall and within the following periods: 1-14, 15-42, 43-69, 70-97, 98-126, 127-152, and 155-182 days. Outcomes included a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, COVID-19 hospitalization, COVID-19 death, non-COVID-19 death, and fracture. RESULTS: We matched 8,198,643 booster recipients with unboosted controls. Adjusted hazard ratios over 6-month follow-up were: positive SARS-CoV-2 test 0.75 (0.74, 0.75); COVID-19 hospitalization 0.30 (0.29, 0.31); COVID-19 death 0.11 (0.10, 0.14); non-COVID-19 death 0.22 (0.21, 0.23); and fracture 0.77 (0.75, 0.78). Estimated effectiveness of booster vaccines against severe COVID-19-related outcomes peaked during the first 3 months following the booster dose. By 6 months, the cumulative incidence of positive SARS-CoV-2 test was higher in boosted than unboosted individuals. CONCLUSIONS: We estimate that COVID-19 booster vaccination, compared with no booster vaccination, provided substantial protection against COVID-19 hospitalization and COVID-19 death but only limited protection against positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Lower rates of fracture in boosted than unboosted individuals may suggest unmeasured confounding. Observational studies should report estimated vaccine effectiveness against nontarget and negative control outcomes.

Care interruptions and mortality among adults in Europe and North America.

OBJECTIVE: Interruptions in care of people with HIV (PWH) on antiretroviral therapy (ART) are associated with adverse outcomes, but most studies have relied on composite outcomes. We investigated whether mortality risk following care interruptions differed from mortality risk after first starting ART. DESIGN: Collaboration of 18 European and North American HIV observational cohort studies of adults with HIV starting ART between 2004 and 2019. METHODS: Care interruptions were defined as gaps in contact of ≥365 days, with a subsequent return to care (distinct from loss to follow-up), or ≥270 days and ≥545 days in sensitivity analyses. Follow-up time was allocated to no/preinterruption or postinterruption follow-up groups. We used Cox regression to compare hazards of mortality between care interruption groups, adjusting for time-updated demographic and clinical characteristics and biomarkers upon ART initiation or re-initiation of care. RESULTS: Of 89 197 PWH, 83.4% were male and median age at ART start was 39 years [interquartile range (IQR): 31-48)]. 8654 PWH (9.7%) had ≥1 care interruption; 10 913 episodes of follow-up following a care interruption were included. There were 6104 deaths in 536 334 person-years, a crude mortality rate of 11.4 [95% confidence interval (CI): 11.1-11.7] per 1000 person-years. The adjusted mortality hazard ratio (HR) for the postinterruption group was 1.72 (95% CI: 1.57-1.88) compared with the no/preinterruption group. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses assuming ≥270-day (HR 1.49, 95% CI: 1.40-1.60) and ≥545-day (HR 1.67, 95% CI: 1.48-1.88) interruptions. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality was higher among PWH reinitiating care following an interruption, compared with when PWH initially start ART, indicating the importance of uninterrupted care.

Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening and 15-Year Prostate Cancer Mortality: A Secondary Analysis of the CAP Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer (CAP) reported no effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer mortality at a median 10-year follow-up (primary outcome), but the long-term effects of PSA screening on prostate cancer mortality remain unclear. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a single invitation for PSA screening on prostate cancer-specific mortality at a median 15-year follow-up compared with no invitation for screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of the CAP randomized clinical trial included men aged 50 to 69 years identified at 573 primary care practices in England and Wales. Primary care practices were randomized between September 25, 2001, and August 24, 2007, and men were enrolled between January 8, 2002, and January 20, 2009. Follow-up was completed on March 31, 2021. Intervention: Men received a single invitation for a PSA screening test with subsequent diagnostic tests if the PSA level was 3.0 ng/mL or higher. The control group received standard practice (no invitation). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was reported previously. Of 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, results of 4 were reported previously. The 4 remaining prespecified secondary outcomes at 15-year follow-up were prostate cancer-specific mortality, all-cause mortality, and prostate cancer stage and Gleason grade at diagnosis. Results: Of 415 357 eligible men (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [5.6] years), 98% were included in these analyses. Overall, 12 013 and 12 958 men with a prostate cancer diagnosis were in the intervention and control groups, respectively (15-year cumulative risk, 7.08% [95% CI, 6.95%-7.21%] and 6.94% [95% CI, 6.82%-7.06%], respectively). At a median 15-year follow-up, 1199 men in the intervention group (0.69% [95% CI, 0.65%-0.73%]) and 1451 men in the control group (0.78% [95% CI, 0.73%-0.82%]) died of prostate cancer (rate ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99]; P = .03). Compared with the control, the PSA screening intervention increased detection of low-grade (Gleason score [GS] ≤6: 2.2% vs 1.6%; P < .001) and localized (T1/T2: 3.6% vs 3.1%; P < .001) disease but not intermediate (GS of 7), high-grade (GS ≥8), locally advanced (T3), or distally advanced (T4/N1/M1) tumors. There were 45 084 all-cause deaths in the intervention group (23.2% [95% CI, 23.0%-23.4%]) and 50 336 deaths in the control group (23.3% [95% CI, 23.1%-23.5%]) (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.94-1.01]; P = .11). Eight of the prostate cancer deaths in the intervention group (0.7%) and 7 deaths in the control group (0.5%) were related to a diagnostic biopsy or prostate cancer treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, a single invitation for PSA screening compared with standard practice without routine screening reduced prostate cancer deaths at a median follow-up of 15 years. However, the absolute reduction in deaths was small. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN92187251.

Impact of vaccination on the association of COVID-19 with cardiovascular diseases: An OpenSAFELY cohort study.

Infection with SARS-CoV-2 is associated with an increased risk of arterial and venous thrombotic events, but the implications of vaccination for this increased risk are uncertain. With the approval of NHS England, we quantified associations between COVID-19 diagnosis and cardiovascular diseases in different vaccination and variant eras using linked electronic health records for ~40% of the English population. We defined a 'pre-vaccination' cohort (18,210,937 people) in the wild-type/Alpha variant eras (January 2020-June 2021), and 'vaccinated' and 'unvaccinated' cohorts (13,572,399 and 3,161,485 people respectively) in the Delta variant era (June-December 2021). We showed that the incidence of each arterial thrombotic, venous thrombotic and other cardiovascular outcomes was substantially elevated during weeks 1-4 after COVID-19, compared with before or without COVID-19, but less markedly elevated in time periods beyond week 4. Hazard ratios were higher after hospitalised than non-hospitalised COVID-19 and higher in the pre-vaccination and unvaccinated cohorts than the vaccinated cohort. COVID-19 vaccination reduces the risk of cardiovascular events after COVID-19 infection. People who had COVID-19 before or without being vaccinated are at higher risk of cardiovascular events for at least two years.

A tool to assess risk of bias in non-randomized follow-up studies of exposure effects (ROBINS-E).

BACKGROUND: Observational epidemiologic studies provide critical data for the evaluation of the potential effects of environmental, occupational and behavioural exposures on human health. Systematic reviews of these studies play a key role in informing policy and practice. Systematic reviews should incorporate assessments of the risk of bias in results of the included studies. OBJECTIVE: To develop a new tool, Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Exposures (ROBINS-E) to assess risk of bias in estimates from cohort studies of the causal effect of an exposure on an outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: ROBINS-E was developed by a large group of researchers from diverse research and public health disciplines through a series of working groups, in-person meetings and pilot testing phases. The tool aims to assess the risk of bias in a specific result (exposure effect estimate) from an individual observational study that examines the effect of an exposure on an outcome. A series of preliminary considerations informs the core ROBINS-E assessment, including details of the result being assessed and the causal effect being estimated. The assessment addresses bias within seven domains, through a series of 'signalling questions'. Domain-level judgements about risk of bias are derived from the answers to these questions, then combined to produce an overall risk of bias judgement for the result, together with judgements about the direction of bias. CONCLUSION: ROBINS-E provides a standardized framework for examining potential biases in results from cohort studies. Future work will produce variants of the tool for other epidemiologic study designs (e.g. case-control studies). We believe that ROBINS-E represents an important development in the integration of exposure assessment, evidence synthesis and causal inference.

Estimation of Improvements in Mortality in Spectrum Among Adults With HIV Receiving Antiretroviral Therapy in High-Income Countries.

INTRODUCTION: Mortality rates for people living with HIV (PLHIV) on antiretroviral therapy (ART) in high-income countries continue to decline. We compared mortality rates among PLHIV on ART in Europe for 2016-2020 with Spectrum's estimates. METHODS: The AIDS Impact Module in Spectrum is a compartmental HIV epidemic model coupled with a demographic population projection model. We used national Spectrum projections developed for the 2022 HIV estimates round to calculate mortality rates among PLHIV on ART, adjusting to the age/country distribution of PLHIV starting ART from 1996 to 2020 in the Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration (ART-CC)'s European cohorts. RESULTS: In the ART-CC, 11,504 of 162,835 PLHIV died. Between 1996-1999 and 2016-2020, AIDS-related mortality in the ART-CC decreased from 8.8 (95% CI: 7.6 to 10.1) to 1.0 (0.9-1.2) and from 5.9 (4.4-8.1) to 1.1 (0.9-1.4) deaths per 1000 person-years among men and women, respectively. Non-AIDS-related mortality decreased from 9.1 (7.9-10.5) to 6.1 (5.8-6.5) and from 7.0 (5.2-9.3) to 4.8 (4.3-5.2) deaths per 1000 person-years among men and women, respectively. Adjusted all-cause mortality rates in Spectrum among men were near ART-CC estimates for 2016-2020 (Spectrum: 7.02-7.47 deaths per 1000 person-years) but approximately 20% lower in women (Spectrum: 4.66-4.70). Adjusted excess mortality rates in Spectrum were 2.5-fold higher in women and 3.1-3.4-fold higher in men in comparison to the ART-CC's AIDS-specific mortality rates. DISCUSSION: Spectrum's all-cause mortality estimates among PLHIV are consistent with age/country-controlled mortality observed in ART-CC, with some underestimation of mortality among women. Comparing results suggest that 60%-70% of excess deaths among PLHIV on ART in Spectrum are from non-AIDS causes.

Longitudinal trends in causes of death among adults with HIV on antiretroviral therapy in Europe and North America from 1996 to 2020: a collaboration of cohort studies.

BACKGROUND: Mortality rates among people with HIV have fallen since 1996 following the widespread availability of effective antiretroviral therapy (ART). Patterns of cause-specific mortality are evolving as the population with HIV ages. We aimed to investigate longitudinal trends in cause-specific mortality among people with HIV starting ART in Europe and North America. METHODS: In this collaborative observational cohort study, we used data from 17 European and North American HIV cohorts contributing data to the Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration. We included data for people with HIV who started ART between 1996 and 2020 at the age of 16 years or older. Causes of death were classified into a single cause by both a clinician and an algorithm if International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision or Tenth Revision data were available, or independently by two clinicians. Disagreements were resolved through panel discussion. We used Poisson models to compare cause-specific mortality rates during the calendar periods 1996-99, 2000-03, 2004-07, 2008-11, 2012-15, and 2016-20, adjusted for time-updated age, CD4 count, and whether the individual was ART-naive at the start of each period. FINDINGS: Among 189 301 people with HIV included in this study, 16 832 (8·9%) deaths were recorded during 1 519 200 person-years of follow-up. 13 180 (78·3%) deaths were classified by cause: the most common causes were AIDS (4203 deaths; 25·0%), non-AIDS non-hepatitis malignancy (2311; 13·7%), and cardiovascular or heart-related (1403; 8·3%) mortality. The proportion of deaths due to AIDS declined from 49% during 1996-99 to 16% during 2016-20. Rates of all-cause mortality per 1000 person-years decreased from 16·8 deaths (95% CI 15·4-18·4) during 1996-99 to 7·9 deaths (7·6-8·2) during 2016-20. Rates of all-cause mortality declined with time: the average adjusted mortality rate ratio per calendar period was 0·85 (95% CI 0·84-0·86). Rates of cause-specific mortality also declined: the most pronounced reduction was for AIDS-related mortality (0·81; 0·79-0·83). There were also reductions in rates of cardiovascular-related (0·83, 0·79-0·87), liver-related (0·88, 0·84-0·93), non-AIDS infection-related (0·91, 0·86-0·96), non-AIDS-non-hepatocellular carcinoma malignancy-related (0·94, 0·90-0·97), and suicide or accident-related mortality (0·89, 0·82-0·95). Mortality rates among people who acquired HIV through injecting drug use increased in women (1·07, 1·00-1·14) and decreased slightly in men (0·96, 0·93-0·99). INTERPRETATION: Reductions of most major causes of death, particularly AIDS-related deaths among people with HIV on ART, were not seen for all subgroups. Interventions targeted at high-risk groups, substance use, and comorbidities might further increase life expectancy in people with HIV towards that in the general population. FUNDING: US National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

Implementing Germ Defence digital behaviour change intervention via all primary care practices in England to reduce respiratory infections during the COVID-19 pandemic: an efficient cluster randomised controlled trial using the OpenSAFELY platform.

BACKGROUND: Germ Defence ( www.germdefence.org ) is an evidence-based interactive website that promotes behaviour change for infection control within households. To maximise the potential of Germ Defence to effectively reduce the spread of COVID-19, the intervention needed to be implemented at scale rapidly. METHODS: With NHS England approval, we conducted an efficient two-arm (1:1 ratio) cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine the effectiveness of randomising implementation of Germ Defence via general practitioner (GP) practices across England, UK, compared with usual care to disseminate Germ Defence to patients. GP practices randomised to the intervention arm (n = 3292) were emailed and asked to disseminate Germ Defence to all adult patients via mobile phone text, email or social media. Usual care arm GP practices (n = 3287) maintained standard management for the 4-month trial period and then asked to share Germ Defence with their adult patients. The primary outcome was the rate of GP presentations for respiratory tract infections (RTI) per patient. Secondary outcomes comprised rates of acute RTIs, confirmed COVID-19 diagnoses and suspected COVID-19 diagnoses, COVID-19 symptoms, gastrointestinal infection diagnoses, antibiotic usage and hospital admissions. The impact of the intervention on outcome rates was assessed using negative binomial regression modelling within the OpenSAFELY platform. The uptake of the intervention by GP practice and by patients was measured via website analytics. RESULTS: Germ Defence was used 310,731 times. The average website satisfaction score was 7.52 (0-10 not at all to very satisfied, N = 9933). There was no evidence of a difference in the rate of RTIs between intervention and control practices (rate ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% CI 0.96, 1.06, p = 0.70). This was similar to all other eight health outcomes. Patient engagement within intervention arm practices ranged from 0 to 48% of a practice list. CONCLUSIONS: While the RCT did not demonstrate a difference in health outcomes, we demonstrated that rapid large-scale implementation of a digital behavioural intervention is possible and can be evaluated with a novel efficient prospective RCT methodology analysing routinely collected patient data entirely within a trusted research environment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in the ISRCTN registry (14602359) on 12 August 2020.

Integrase strand-transfer inhibitor use and cardiovascular events in adults with HIV: an emulation of target trials in the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration and the Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration.

BACKGROUND: A recent observational study suggested that the risk of cardiovascular events could be higher among antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive individuals with HIV who receive integrase strand-transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-based ART than among those who receive other ART regimens. We aimed to emulate target trials separately in ART-naive and ART-experienced individuals with HIV to examine the effect of using INSTI-based regimens versus other ART regimens on the 4-year risk of cardiovascular events. METHODS: We used routinely recorded clinical data from 12 cohorts that collected information on cardiovascular events, BMI, and blood pressure from two international consortia of cohorts of people with HIV from Europe and North America. For the target trial in individuals who had previously never used ART (ie, ART-naive), eligibility criteria were aged 18 years or older, a detectable HIV-RNA measurement while ART-naive (>50 copies per mL), and no history of a cardiovascular event or cancer. Eligibility criteria for the target trial in those with previous use of non-INSTI-based ART (ie, ART-experienced) were the same except that individuals had to have been on at least one non-INSTI-based ART regimen and be virally suppressed (≤50 copies per mL). We assessed eligibility for both trials for each person-month between January, 2013, and January, 2023, and assigned individuals to the treatment strategy that was compatible with their data. We estimated the standardised 4-year risks of cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, or invasive cardiovascular procedure) via pooled logistic regression models adjusting for time and baseline covariates. In per-protocol analyses, we censored individuals if they deviated from their assigned treatment strategy for more than 2 months and weighted uncensored individuals by the inverse of their time-varying probability of remaining uncensored. The denominator of the weight was estimated via a pooled logistic model that included baseline and time-varying covariates. FINDINGS: The analysis in ART-naive individuals included 10 767 INSTI initiators and 8292 non-initiators of INSTI. There were 43 cardiovascular events in INSTI initiators (median follow-up of 29 months; IQR 15-45) and 52 in non-initiators (39 months; 18-47): standardised 4-year risks were 0·76% (95% CI 0·51 to 1·04) in INSTI initiators and 0·75% (0·54 to 0·98) in non-INSTI initiators; risk ratio 1·01 (0·57 to 1·57); risk difference 0·0089% (-0·43 to 0·36). The analysis in ART-experienced individuals included 7875 INSTI initiators and 373 965 non-initiators. There were 56 events in INSTI initiators (median follow-up 18 months; IQR 9-29) and 3103 events (808 unique) in non-INSTI initiators (26 months; 15-37) in non-initiators: standardised 4-year risks 1·41% (95% CI 0·88 to 2·03) in INSTI initiators and 1·48% (1·28 to 1·71) in non-initiators; risk ratio 0·95 (0·60 to 1·36); risk difference -0·068% (-0·60 to 0·52). INTERPRETATION: We estimated that INSTI use did not result in a clinically meaningful increase of cardiovascular events in ART-naive and ART-experienced individuals with HIV. FUNDING: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

HIV-1 drug resistance in people on dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy: a collaborative cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: The widespread use of the integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) dolutegravir in first-line and second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) might facilitate emerging resistance. The DTG RESIST study combined data from HIV cohorts to examine patterns of drug resistance mutations (DRMs) and identify risk factors for dolutegravir resistance. METHODS: We included cohorts with INSTI resistance data from two collaborations (ART Cohort Collaboration, International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS in Southern Africa), and the UK Collaborative HIV Cohort. Eight cohorts from Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland, South Africa, and the UK contributed data on individuals who were viraemic on dolutegravir-based ART and underwent genotypic resistance testing. Individuals with unknown dolutegravir initiation date were excluded. Resistance levels were categorised using the Stanford algorithm. We identified risk factors for resistance using mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression models. FINDINGS: We included 599 people with genotypic resistance testing on dolutegravir-based ART between May 22, 2013, and Dec 20, 2021. Most had HIV-1 subtype B (n=351, 59%), a third had been exposed to first-generation INSTIs (n=193, 32%), 70 (12%) were on dolutegravir dual therapy, and 18 (3%) were on dolutegravir monotherapy. INSTI DRMs were detected in 86 (14%) individuals; 20 (3%) had more than one mutation. Most (n=563, 94%) were susceptible to dolutegravir, seven (1%) had potential low, six (1%) low, 17 (3%) intermediate, and six (1%) high-level dolutegravir resistance. The risk of dolutegravir resistance was higher on dolutegravir monotherapy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 34·1, 95% CI 9·93-117) and dolutegravir plus lamivudine dual therapy (aOR 9·21, 2·20-38·6) compared with combination ART, and in the presence of potential low or low (aOR 5·23, 1·32-20·7) or intermediate or high-level (aOR 13·4, 4·55-39·7) nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) resistance. INTERPRETATION: Among people with viraemia on dolutegravir-based ART, INSTI DRMs and dolutegravir resistance were rare. NRTI resistance substantially increased the risk of dolutegravir resistance, which is of concern, notably in resource-limited settings. Monitoring is important to prevent resistance at the individual and population level and ensure the long-term sustainability of ART. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health, Swiss National Science Foundation.

Reporting of Observational Studies Explicitly Aiming to Emulate Randomized Trials: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Observational (nonexperimental) studies that aim to emulate a randomized trial (ie, the target trial) are increasingly informing medical and policy decision-making, but it is unclear how these studies are reported in the literature. Consistent reporting is essential for quality appraisal, evidence synthesis, and translation of evidence to policy and practice. Objective: To assess the reporting of observational studies that explicitly aimed to emulate a target trial. Evidence Review: We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science for observational studies published between March 2012 and October 2022 that explicitly aimed to emulate a target trial of a health or medical intervention. Two reviewers double-screened and -extracted data on study characteristics, key predefined components of the target trial protocol and its emulation (eligibility criteria, treatment strategies, treatment assignment, outcome[s], follow-up, causal contrast[s], and analysis plan), and other items related to the target trial emulation. Findings: A total of 200 studies that explicitly aimed to emulate a target trial were included. These studies included 26 subfields of medicine, and 168 (84%) were published from January 2020 to October 2022. The aim to emulate a target trial was explicit in 70 study titles (35%). Forty-three studies (22%) reported use of a published reporting guideline (eg, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology). Eighty-five studies (43%) did not describe all key items of how the target trial was emulated and 113 (57%) did not describe the protocol of the target trial and its emulation. Conclusion and Relevance: In this systematic review of 200 studies that explicitly aimed to emulate a target trial, reporting of how the target trial was emulated was inconsistent. A reporting guideline for studies explicitly aiming to emulate a target trial may improve the reporting of the target trial protocols and other aspects of these emulation attempts.

Comparative Effectiveness of Dynamic Treatment Strategies for Medication Use and Dosage: Emulating a Target Trial Using Observational Data.

BACKGROUND: Availability of detailed data from electronic health records (EHRs) has increased the potential to examine the comparative effectiveness of dynamic treatment strategies using observational data. Inverse probability (IP) weighting of dynamic marginal structural models can control for time-varying confounders. However, IP weights for continuous treatments may be sensitive to model choice. METHODS: We describe a target trial comparing strategies for treating anemia with darbepoetin in hemodialysis patients using EHR data from the UK Renal Registry 2004 to 2016. Patients received a specified dose (microgram/week) or did not receive darbepoetin. We compared 4 methods for modeling time-varying treatment: (A) logistic regression for zero dose, standard linear regression for log dose; (B) logistic regression for zero dose, heteroscedastic linear regression for log dose; (C) logistic regression for zero dose, heteroscedastic linear regression for log dose, multinomial regression for patients who recently received very low or high doses; and (D) ordinal logistic regression. RESULTS: For this dataset, method (C) was the only approach that provided a robust estimate of the mortality hazard ratio (HR), with less-extreme weights in a fully weighted analysis and no substantial change of the HR point estimate after weight truncation. After truncating IP weights at the 95th percentile, estimates were similar across the methods. CONCLUSIONS: EHR data can be used to emulate target trials estimating the comparative effectiveness of dynamic strategies adjusting treatment to evolving patient characteristics. However, model checking, monitoring of large weights, and adaptation of model strategies to account for these is essential if an aspect of treatment is continuous.

Development of the TrAnsparent ReportinG of observational studies Emulating a Target trial (TARGET) guideline.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies are increasingly used to inform health decision-making when randomised trials are not feasible, ethical or timely. The target trial approach provides a framework to help minimise common biases in observational studies that aim to estimate the causal effect of interventions. Incomplete reporting of studies using the target trial framework limits the ability for clinicians, researchers, patients and other decision-makers to appraise, synthesise and interpret findings to inform clinical and public health practice and policy. This paper describes the methods that we will use to develop the TrAnsparent ReportinG of observational studies Emulating a Target trial (TARGET) reporting guideline. METHODS/DESIGN: The TARGET reporting guideline will be developed in five stages following recommended guidance. The first stage will identify target trial reporting practices by systematically reviewing published studies that explicitly emulated a target trial. The second stage will identify and refine items to be considered for inclusion in the TARGET guideline by consulting content experts using sequential online surveys. The third stage will prioritise and consolidate key items to be included in the TARGET guideline at an in-person consensus meeting of TARGET investigators. The fourth stage will produce and pilot-test both the TARGET guideline and explanation and elaboration document with relevant stakeholders. The fifth stage will disseminate the TARGET guideline and resources via journals, conferences and courses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the survey has been attained (HC220536). The TARGET guideline will be disseminated widely in partnership with stakeholders to maximise adoption and improve reporting of these studies.

All-cause hospitalisation among people living with HIV according to gender, mode of HIV acquisition, ethnicity, and geographical origin in Europe and North America: findings from the ART-CC cohort collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Understanding demographic disparities in hospitalisation is crucial for the identification of vulnerable populations, interventions, and resource planning. METHODS: Data were from the Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration (ART-CC) on people living with HIV in Europe and North America, followed up between January, 2007 and December, 2020. We investigated differences in all-cause hospitalisation according to gender and mode of HIV acquisition, ethnicity, and combined geographical origin and ethnicity, in people living with HIV on modern combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). Analyses were performed separately for European and North American cohorts. Hospitalisation rates were assessed using negative binomial multilevel regression, adjusted for age, time since cART intitiaion, and calendar year. FINDINGS: Among 23 594 people living with HIV in Europe and 9612 in North America, hospitalisation rates per 100 person-years were 16·2 (95% CI 16·0-16·4) and 13·1 (12·8-13·5). Compared with gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men, rates were higher for heterosexual men and women, and much higher for men and women who acquired HIV through injection drug use (adjusted incidence rate ratios ranged from 1·2 to 2·5 in Europe and from 1·2 to 3·3 in North America). In both regions, individuals with geographical origin other than the region of study generally had lower hospitalisation rates compared with those with geographical origin of the study country. In North America, Indigenous people and Black or African American individuals had higher rates than White individuals (adjusted incidence rate ratios 1·9 and 1·2), whereas Asian and Hispanic people living with HIV had somewhat lower rates. In Europe there was a lower rate in Asian individuals compared with White individuals. INTERPRETATION: Substantial disparities exist in all-cause hospitalisation between demographic groups of people living with HIV in the current cART era in high-income settings, highlighting the need for targeted support. FUNDING: Royal Free Charity and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

Inequality in uptake of bowel cancer screening by deprivation, ethnicity and smoking status: cross-sectional study in 86 850 citizens.

BACKGROUND: Survival from colorectal cancer depends on stage at detection. In England, bowel cancer mortality has historically been highest in deprived areas. During the initial stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was necessary to temporarily halt many screening programmes, which may have led to inequalities in uptake since screening restarted. METHODS: Cross-sectional data from the Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire Systemwide Dataset were analyzed. Associations of baseline characteristics with uptake of bowel screening were examined using logistic regression. RESULTS: Amongst 86 850 eligible adults aged 60-74 years, 5261 had no screening record. There was little evidence of association between no screening and sex (adjusted odds ratio 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.90, 1.02)). Absence of screening record was associated with deprivation (1.26 (1.14, 1.40) for the most compared with the least deprived groups), smoking (1.11 (1.04, 1.18)) compared with no smoking record and black (1.36 (1.09, 1.70)) and mixed (1.08 (1.01, 1.15)) ethnicity compared with white ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: In a data set covering a whole NHS Integrated Care Board, there was evidence of lower uptake of bowel cancer screening in adults living in more deprived areas, of minority ethnic groups and who smoked. These findings may help focus community engagement work and inform research aimed at reducing inequalities.