Geographical Variation in Underlying Social Deprivation, Cardiovascular and Other Comorbidities in Patients with Potentially Curable Cancers in England: Results from a National Registry Dataset Analysis.

AIMS: To describe the prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD), multiple comorbidities and social deprivation in patients with a potentially curable cancer in 20 English Cancer Alliances. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This National Registry Dataset Analysis used national cancer registry data and CVD databases to describe rates of CVD, comorbidities and social deprivation in patients diagnosed with a potentially curable malignancy (stage I-III breast cancer, stage I-III colon cancer, stage I-III rectal cancer, stage I-III prostate cancer, stage I-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer, stage I-IV diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, stage I-IV Hodgkin lymphoma) between 2013 and 2018. Outcome measures included observation of CVD prevalence, other comorbidities (evaluated by the Charlson Comorbidity Index) and deprivation (using the Index of Multiple Deprivation) according to tumour site and allocation to Cancer Alliance. Patients were allocated to CVD prevalence tertiles (minimum: <33.3rd percentile; middle: 33.3rd to 66.6th percentile; maximum: >66.6th percentile). RESULTS: In total, 634 240 patients with a potentially curable malignancy were eligible. The total CVD prevalence for all cancer sites varied between 13.4% (CVD n = 2058; 95% confidence interval 12.8, 13.9) and 19.6% (CVD n = 7818; 95% confidence interval 19.2, 20.0) between Cancer Alliances. CVD prevalence showed regional variation both for male (16-26%) and female patients (8-16%) towards higher CVD prevalence in northern Cancer Alliances. Similar variation was observed for social deprivation, with the proportion of cancer patients being identified as most deprived varying between 3.3% and 32.2%, depending on Cancer Alliance. The variation between Cancer Alliance for total comorbidities was much smaller. CONCLUSION: Social deprivation, CVD and other comorbidities in patients with a potentially curable malignancy in England show significant regional variations, which may partly contribute to differences observed in treatments and outcomes.

Value of risk scores in the decision to palliate patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to develop a 48-h mortality risk score, which included morphology data, for patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm presenting to an emergency department, and to assess its predictive accuracy and clinical effectiveness in triaging patients to immediate aneurysm repair, transfer or palliative care. METHODS: Data from patients in the IMPROVE (Immediate Management of the Patient With Ruptured Aneurysm: Open Versus Endovascular Repair) randomized trial were used to develop the risk score. Variables considered included age, sex, haemodynamic markers and aortic morphology. Backwards selection was used to identify relevant predictors. Predictive performance was assessed using calibration plots and the C-statistic. Validation of the newly developed and other previously published scores was conducted in four external populations. The net benefit of treating patients based on a risk threshold compared with treating none was quantified. RESULTS: Data from 536 patients in the IMPROVE trial were included. The final variables retained were age, sex, haemoglobin level, serum creatinine level, systolic BP, aortic neck length and angle, and acute myocardial ischaemia. The discrimination of the score for 48-h mortality in the IMPROVE data was reasonable (C-statistic 0·710, 95 per cent c.i. 0·659 to 0·760), but varied in external populations (from 0·652 to 0·761). The new score outperformed other published risk scores in some, but not all, populations. An 8 (95 per cent c.i. 5 to 11) per cent improvement in the C-statistic was estimated compared with using age alone. CONCLUSION: The assessed risk scores did not have sufficient accuracy to enable potentially life-saving decisions to be made regarding intervention. Focus should therefore shift to offering repair to more patients and reducing non-intervention rates, while respecting the wishes of the patient and family.

Predicting risk of rupture and rupture-preventing reinterventions following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND: Clinical and imaging surveillance practices following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) vary considerably and compliance with recommended lifelong surveillance is poor. The aim of this study was to develop a dynamic prognostic model to enable stratification of patients at risk of future secondary aortic rupture or the need for intervention to prevent rupture (rupture-preventing reintervention) to enable the development of personalized surveillance intervals. METHODS: Baseline data and repeat measurements of postoperative aneurysm sac diameter from the EVAR-1 and EVAR-2 trials were used to develop the model, with external validation in a cohort from a single-centre vascular database. Longitudinal mixed-effects models were fitted to trajectories of sac diameter, and model-predicted sac diameter and rate of growth were used in prognostic Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Some 785 patients from the EVAR trials were included, of whom 155 (19·7 per cent) experienced at least one rupture or required a rupture-preventing reintervention during follow-up. An increased risk was associated with preoperative AAA size, rate of sac growth and the number of previously detected complications. A prognostic model using predicted sac growth alone had good discrimination at 2 years (C-index 0·68), 3 years (C-index 0·72) and 5 years (C-index 0·75) after operation and had excellent external validation (C-index 0·76-0·79). More than 5 years after operation, growth rates above 1 mm/year had a sensitivity of over 80 per cent and specificity over 50 per cent in identifying events occurring within 2 years. CONCLUSION: Secondary sac growth is an important predictor of rupture or rupture-preventing reintervention to enable the development of personalized surveillance intervals. A dynamic prognostic model has the potential to tailor surveillance by identifying a large proportion of patients who may require less intensive follow-up.

Lessons learned about prevalence and growth rates of abdominal aortic aneurysms from a 25-year ultrasound population screening programme.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess how the prevalence and growth rates of small and medium abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) (3·0-5·4 cm) have changed over time in men aged 65 years, and to evaluate long-term outcomes in men whose aortic diameter is 2·6-2·9 cm (subaneurysmal), and below the standard threshold for most surveillance programmes. METHODS: The Gloucestershire Aneurysm Screening Programme (GASP) started in 1990. Men aged 65 years with an aortic diameter of 2·6-5·4 cm, measured by ultrasonography using the inner to inner wall method, were included in surveillance. Aortic diameter growth rates were estimated separately for men who initially had a subaneurysmal aorta, and those who had a small or medium AAA, using mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Since 1990, 81 150 men had ultrasound screening for AAA (uptake 80·7 per cent), of whom 2795 had an aortic diameter of 2·6-5·4 cm. The prevalence of screen-detected AAA of 3·0 cm or larger decreased from 5·0 per cent in 1991 to 1·3 per cent in 2015. There was no evidence of a change in AAA growth rates during this time. Of men who initially had a subaneurysmal aorta, 57·6 (95 per cent c.i. 54·4 to 60·7) per cent were estimated to develop an AAA of 3·0 cm or larger within 5 years of the initial scan, and 28·0 (24·2 to 31·8) per cent to develop a large AAA (at least 5·5 cm) within 15 years. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of screen-detected small and medium AAAs has decreased over the past 25 years, but growth rates have remained similar. Men with a subaneurysmal aorta at age 65 years have a substantial risk of developing a large AAA by the age of 80 years.

Sex differences in mortality after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the UK.

BACKGROUND: The UK abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening programmes currently invite only men for screening because the benefit in women is uncertain. Perioperative risk is critical in determining the effectiveness of screening, and contemporary estimates of these risks in women are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare mortality following AAA repair between women and men in the UK. METHODS: Anonymized data from the UK National Vascular Registry (NVR) for patients undergoing AAA repair (January 2010 to December 2014) were analysed. Co-variables were extracted for analysis by sex. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome measures included mortality by 5-year age groups and duration of hospital stay. Logistic regression was performed to adjust for age, calendar time, AAA diameter and smoking status. NVR-based outcomes were checked against Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data. RESULTS: A total of 23 245 patients were included (13·0 per cent women). Proportionally, more women than men underwent open repair. For elective open AAA repair, the in-hospital mortality rate was 6·9 per cent in women and 4·0 per cent in men (odds ratio (OR) 1·48, 95 per cent c.i. 1·08 to 2·02; P = 0·014), whereas for elective endovascular AAA repair it was 1·8 per cent in women and 0·7 per cent in men (OR 2·86, 1·72 to 4·74; P < 0·001); the results in HES were similar. For ruptured AAA, there was no sex difference in mortality within the NVR; however, in HES, for ruptured open AAA repair, the in-hospital mortality rate was higher in women (33·6 versus 27·1 per cent; OR 1·36, 1·16 to 1·59; P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: Women have a higher in-hospital mortality rate than men after elective AAA repair even after adjustment. This higher mortality may have an impact on the benefit offered by any screening programme offered to women.

Meta-analysis of individual-patient data from EVAR-1, DREAM, OVER and ACE trials comparing outcomes of endovascular or open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm over 5 years.

BACKGROUND: The erosion of the early mortality advantage of elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm remains without a satisfactory explanation. METHODS: An individual-patient data meta-analysis of four multicentre randomized trials of EVAR versus open repair was conducted to a prespecified analysis plan, reporting on mortality, aneurysm-related mortality and reintervention. RESULTS: The analysis included 2783 patients, with 14 245 person-years of follow-up (median 5·5 years). Early (0-6 months after randomization) mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (46 of 1393 versus 73 of 1390 deaths; pooled hazard ratio 0·61, 95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 0·89; P = 0·010), primarily because 30-day operative mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (16 deaths versus 40 for open repair; pooled odds ratio 0·40, 95 per cent c.i. 0·22 to 0·74). Later (within 3 years) the survival curves converged, remaining converged to 8 years. Beyond 3 years, aneurysm-related mortality was significantly higher in the EVAR groups (19 deaths versus 3 for open repair; pooled hazard ratio 5·16, 1·49 to 17·89; P = 0·010). Patients with moderate renal dysfunction or previous coronary artery disease had no early survival advantage under EVAR. Those with peripheral artery disease had lower mortality under open repair (39 deaths versus 62 for EVAR; P = 0·022) in the period from 6 months to 4 years after randomization. CONCLUSION: The early survival advantage in the EVAR group, and its subsequent erosion, were confirmed. Over 5 years, patients of marginal fitness had no early survival advantage from EVAR compared with open repair. Aneurysm-related mortality and patients with low ankle : brachial pressure index contributed to the erosion of the early survival advantage for the EVAR group. Trial registration numbers: EVAR-1, ISRCTN55703451; DREAM (Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management), NCT00421330; ACE (Anévrysme de l'aorte abdominale, Chirurgie versus Endoprothèse), NCT00224718; OVER (Open Versus Endovascular Repair Trial for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms), NCT00094575.

Misspecification of at-risk periods and distributional assumptions in estimating COPD exacerbation rates: The resultant bias in treatment effect estimation.

In trials comparing the rate of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation between treatment arms, the rate is typically calculated on the basis of the whole of each patient's follow-up period. However, the true time a patient is at risk should exclude periods in which an exacerbation episode is occurring, because a patient cannot be at risk of another exacerbation episode until recovered. We used data from two chronic obstructive pulmonary disease randomized controlled trials and compared treatment effect estimates and confidence intervals when using two different definitions of the at-risk period. Using a simulation study we examined the bias in the estimated treatment effect and the coverage of the confidence interval, using these two definitions of the at-risk period. We investigated how the sample size required for a given power changes on the basis of the definition of at-risk period used. Our results showed that treatment efficacy is underestimated when the at-risk period does not take account of exacerbation duration, and the power to detect a statistically significant result is slightly diminished. Correspondingly, using the correct at-risk period, some modest savings in required sample size can be achieved. Using the proposed at-risk period that excludes recovery times requires formal definitions of the beginning and end of an exacerbation episode, and we recommend these be always predefined in a trial protocol.

Meta-analysis of the current prevalence of screen-detected abdominal aortic aneurysm in women.

BACKGROUND: Although women represent an increasing proportion of those presenting with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture, the current prevalence of AAA in women is unknown. The contemporary population prevalence of screen-detected AAA in women was investigated by both age and smoking status. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken of studies screening for AAA, including over 1000 women, aged at least 60 years, done since the year 2000. Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL databases until 13 January 2016. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scoring system. RESULTS: Eight studies were identified, including only three based on population registers. The largest studies were based on self-purchase of screening. Altogether 1 537 633 women were screened. Overall AAA prevalence rates were very heterogeneous, ranging from 0·37 to 1·53 per cent: pooled prevalence 0·74 (95 per cent c.i. 0·53 to 1·03) per cent. The pooled prevalence increased with both age (more than 1 per cent for women aged over 70 years) and smoking (more than 1 per cent for ever smokers and over 2 per cent in current smokers). CONCLUSION: The current population prevalence of screen-detected AAA in older women is subject to wide demographic variation. However, in ever smokers and those over 70 years of age, the prevalence is over 1 per cent.

Individual-patient meta-analysis of three randomized trials comparing endovascular versus open repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm remain controversial, without any strong evidence about advantages in specific subgroups. METHODS: An individual-patient data meta-analysis of three recent randomized trials of endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm was conducted according to a prespecified analysis plan, reporting on results to 90 days after the index event. RESULTS: The trials included a total of 836 patients. The mortality rate across the three trials was 31.3 per cent for patients randomized to endovascular repair/strategy and 34.0 per cent for those randomized to open repair at 30 days (pooled odds ratio 0.88, 95 per cent c.i. 0.66 to 1.18), and 34.3 and 38.0 per cent respectively at 90 days (pooled odds ratio 0.85, 0.64 to 1.13). There was no evidence of significant heterogeneity in the odds ratios between trials. Mean(s.d.) aneurysm diameter was 8.2(1.9) cm and the overall in-hospital mortality rate was 34.8 per cent. There was no significant effect modification with age or Hardman index, but there was indication of an early benefit from an endovascular strategy for women. Discharge from the primary hospital was faster after endovascular repair (hazard ratio 1.24, 95 per cent c.i. 1.04 to 1.47). For open repair, 30-day mortality diminished with increasing aneurysm neck length (adjusted odds ratio 0.69 (95 per cent c.i. 0.53 to 0.89) per 15 mm), but aortic diameter was not associated with mortality for either type of repair. CONCLUSION: Survival to 90 days following an endovascular or open repair strategy is similar for all patients and for the restricted population anatomically suitable for endovascular repair. Women may benefit more from an endovascular strategy than men and patients are, on average, discharged sooner after endovascular repair.

Ruptured Aneurysm Trials: The Importance of Longer-term Outcomes and Meta-analysis for 1-year Mortality.

OBJECTIVE: To assess current knowledge for the management of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), based on the 1-year outcomes of 3 recent randomised trials. METHODS: An individual patient data meta-analysis of three recent randomised trials of endovascular versus open repair, including 817 patients, was conducted according to a pre-specified analysis plan, report all-cause mortality and re-interventions at 1 year after the index event. RESULTS: Mortality across the 3 trials at 1-year was 38.6% for the EVAR or endovascular strategy patient groups and 42.8% for the open repair groups, pooled odds ratio 0.84 (95% CI 0.63-1.11), p = .209. There was no evidence of heterogeneity in the odds ratios between trials. When the patients in the endovascular strategy group of the IMPROVE trial were restricted to those with proven rupture who were anatomically suitable for endovascular repair, the pooled odds ratio reduced slightly to 0.80 (95% CI 0.56-1.16), p = .240. CONCLUSIONS: After 1 year there is a consistent but non-significant trend for lower mortality for EVAR or an endovascular strategy. Taken together with the recent gains in health economic outcomes demonstrated at 1 year in the IMPROVE trial, the evidence suggests that endovascular repair should be used more widely for ruptured aneurysms.

Cost-effectiveness of the National Health Service Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Screening Programme in England.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of the National Health Service abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening programme (NAAASP) for men aged 65 years began in England in 2009. An important element of the evidence base supporting its introduction was the economic modelling of the long-term cost-effectiveness of screening, which was based mainly on 4-year follow-up data from the Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study (MASS) randomized trial. Concern has been expressed about whether this conclusion of cost-effectiveness still holds, given the early performance parameters, particularly the lower prevalence of AAA observed in NAAASP. METHODS: The existing published model was adjusted and updated to reflect the current best evidence. It was recalibrated to mirror the 10-year follow-up data from MASS; the main cost parameters were re-estimated to reflect current practice; and more robust estimates of AAA growth and rupture rates from recent meta-analyses were incorporated, as were key parameters as observed in NAAASP (attendance rates, AAA prevalence and size distributions). RESULTS: The revised and updated model produced estimates of the long-term incremental cost-effectiveness of £5758 (95 per cent confidence interval £4285 to £7410) per life-year gained, or £7370 (£5467 to £9443) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. CONCLUSION: Although the updated parameters, particularly the increased costs and lower AAA prevalence, have increased the cost per QALY, the latest modelling provides evidence that AAA screening as now being implemented in England is still highly cost-effective.

Observations from the IMPROVE trial concerning the clinical care of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

BACKGROUND: Single-centre series of the management of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) are usually too small to identify clinical factors that could improve patient outcomes. METHODS: IMPROVE is a pragmatic, multicentre randomized clinical trial in which eligible patients with a clinical diagnosis of ruptured aneurysm were allocated to a strategy of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) or to open repair. The influences of time and manner of hospital presentation, fluid volume status, type of anaesthesia, type of endovascular repair and time to aneurysm repair on 30-day mortality were investigated according to a prespecified plan, for the subgroup of patients with a proven diagnosis of ruptured or symptomatic AAA. Adjustment was made for potential confounding factors. RESULTS: Some 558 of 613 randomized patients had a symptomatic or ruptured aneurysm: diagnostic accuracy was 91·0 per cent. Patients randomized outside routine working hours had higher operative mortality (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1·47, 95 per cent confidence interval 1·00 to 2·17). Mortality rates after primary and secondary presentation were similar. Lowest systolic blood pressure was strongly and independently associated with 30-day mortality (51 per cent among those with pressure below 70 mmHg). Patients who received EVAR under local anaesthesia alone had greatly reduced 30-day mortality compared with those who had general anaesthesia (adjusted OR 0·27, 0·10 to 0·70). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the outcome of ruptured AAA might be improved by wider use of local anaesthesia for EVAR and that a minimum blood pressure of 70 mmHg is too low a threshold for permissive hypotension.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the growth and rupture rates of small abdominal aortic aneurysms: implications for surveillance intervals and their cost-effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs; 3.0-5.4 cm in diameter) are usually asymptomatic and managed by regular ultrasound surveillance until they grow to a diameter threshold (commonly 5.5 cm) at which surgical intervention is considered. The choice of appropriate surveillance intervals is governed by the growth and rupture rates of small AAAs, as well as their relative cost-effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this series of studies was to inform the evidence base for small AAA surveillance strategies. This was achieved by literature review, collation and analysis of individual patient data, a focus group and health economic modelling. DATA SOURCES: We undertook systematic literature reviews of growth rates and rupture rates of small AAAs. The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE on OvidSP, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 2009 Issue 4, ClinicalTrials.gov, and controlled-trials.com were searched from inception up until the end of 2009. We also obtained individual data on 15,475 patients from 18 surveillance studies. REVIEW METHODS: Systematic reviews of publications identified 15 studies providing small AAA growth rates, and 14 studies with small AAA rupture rates, up to December 2009 (later updated to September 2012). We developed statistical methods to analyse individual surveillance data, including the effects of patient characteristics, to inform the choice of surveillance intervals and provide inputs for health economic modelling. We updated an existing health economic model of AAA screening to address the cost-effectiveness of different surveillance intervals. RESULTS: In the literature reviews, the mean growth rate was 2.3 mm/year and the reported rupture rates varied between 0 and 1.6 ruptures per 100 person-years. Growth rates increased markedly with aneurysm diameter, but insufficient detail was available to guide surveillance intervals. Based on individual surveillance data, for each 0.5-cm increase in AAA diameter, growth rates increased by about 0.5 mm/year and rupture rates doubled. To control the risk of exceeding 5.5 cm to below 10% in men, on average a 7-year surveillance interval is sufficient for a 3.0-cm aneurysm, whereas an 8-month interval is necessary for a 5.0-cm aneurysm. To control the risk of rupture to below 1%, the corresponding estimated surveillance intervals are 9 years and 17 months. Average growth rates were higher in smokers (by 0.35 mm/year) and lower in patients with diabetes (by 0.51 mm/year). Rupture rates were almost fourfold higher in women than men, doubled in current smokers and increased with higher blood pressure. Increasing the surveillance interval from 1 to 2 years for the smallest aneurysms (3.0-4.4 cm) decreased costs and led to a positive net benefit. For the larger aneurysms (4.5-5.4 cm), increasing surveillance intervals from 3 to 6 months led to equivalent cost-effectiveness. LIMITATIONS: There were no clear reasons why the growth rates varied substantially between studies. Uniform diagnostic criteria for rupture were not available. The long-term cost-effectiveness results may be susceptible to the modelling assumptions made. CONCLUSIONS: Surveillance intervals of several years are clinically acceptable for men with AAAs in the range 3.0-4.0 cm. Intervals of around 1 year are suitable for 4.0-4.9-cm AAAs, whereas intervals of 6 months would be acceptable for 5.0-5.4-cm AAAs. These intervals are longer than those currently employed in the UK AAA screening programmes. Lengthening surveillance intervals for the smallest aneurysms was also shown to be cost-effective. Future work should focus on optimising surveillance intervals for women, studying whether or not the threshold for surgery should depend on patient characteristics, evaluating the usefulness of surveillance for those with aortic diameters of 2.5-2.9 cm, and developing interventions that may reduce the growth or rupture rates of small AAAs. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Making predictions from complex longitudinal data, with application to planning monitoring intervals in a national screening programme.

When biological or physiological variables change over time, we are often interested in making predictions either of future measurements or of the time taken to reach some threshold value. On the basis of longitudinal data for multiple individuals, we develop Bayesian hierarchical models for making these predictions together with their associated uncertainty. Particular aspects addressed, which include some novel components, are handling curvature in individuals' trends over time, making predictions for both underlying and measured levels, making predictions from a single baseline measurement, making predictions from a series of measurements, allowing flexibility in the error and random-effects distributions, and including covariates. In the context of data on the expansion of abdominal aortic aneurysms over time, where reaching a certain threshold leads to referral for surgery, we discuss the practical application of these models to the planning of monitoring intervals in a national screening programme. Prediction of the time to reach a threshold was too imprecise to be practically useful, and we focus instead on limiting the probability of exceeding the threshold after given time intervals. Although more complex models can be shown to fit the data better, we find that relatively simple models seem to be adequate for planning monitoring intervals.

Meta-analysis of individual patient data to examine factors affecting growth and rupture of small abdominal aortic aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance is a common management strategy for small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) (3.0-5.4 cm in diameter). Individual characteristics, other than diameter, may influence aneurysm growth or rupture rates. METHODS: Individual data were collated from 15 475 people under follow-up for a small aneurysm in 18 studies. The influence of co-variables (including demographics, medical and drug history) on aneurysm growth and rupture rates (analysed using longitudinal random-effects modelling and survival analysis with adjustment for aneurysm diameter) were summarized in an individual patient meta-analysis. RESULTS: The mean aneurysm growth rate of 2.21 mm/year was independent of age and sex. Growth rate was increased in smokers (by 0.35 mm/year) and decreased in patients with diabetes (by 0.51 mm/year). Mean arterial pressure had no effect and antihypertensive or other cardioprotective medications had only small, non-significant effects on aneurysm growth, consistent with the observation that calendar year of enrollment was not associated with growth rate. Rupture rates were almost fourfold higher in women than men (P < 0.001), were double in current smokers (P = 0.001) and increased with higher blood pressure (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Follow-up schedules for individuals with a small AAA may need to consider diabetes and smoking, in addition to aneurysm diameter. The differing risk factors for growth and rupture suggest that a lower threshold for surgical intervention in women may be justified. No single drug used for cardiovascular risk reduction had a major effect on the growth or rupture of small aneurysms.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of growth rates of small abdominal aortic aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: Small abdominal aortic aneurysms are usually asymptomatic and managed safely in ultrasound surveillance programmes until they grow to a diameter threshold where intervention is considered. The aim of this study was to synthesize systematically the published data on growth rates for small aneurysms to investigate the evidence basis for surveillance intervals. METHODS: This was a systematic review of the literature published before January 2010, which identified 61 potentially eligible reports. Detailed review yielded 15 studies providing growth rates for aneurysms 3·0-5·5 cm in diameter (14 in millimetres per year, 1 as percentage change per year). These studies included 7630 people (predominantly men) enrolled during 1976-2005. RESULTS: The pooled mean growth rate was 2·32 (95 per cent confidence interval 1·95 to 2·70) mm/year but there was very high heterogeneity between studies; the growth rate ranged from - 0·33 to + 3·95 mm/year. Six studies reported growth rates by 5-mm diameter bands, which showed the trend for growth rate to increase with aneurysm diameter. Simple methods to determine growth rate were associated with higher estimates. Meta-regression analysis showed that a 10-mm increase in aneurysm diameter was associated with a mean(s.e.m.) 1·62(0·20) mm/year increase in growth rate. Neither mean age nor percentage of women in each study had a significant effect. On average, a 3·5-cm aneurysm would take 6·2 years to reach 5·5 cm, whereas a 4·5-cm aneurysm would take only 2·3 years. CONCLUSION: There was considerable variation in the reported growth rates of small aneurysms beyond that explained by aneurysm diameter. Fuller evidence on which to base surveillance intervals for patients in screening programmes requires a meta-analysis based on individual patient data.

Rupture rates of small abdominal aortic aneurysms: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Small aneurysms of the abdominal aorta (3.0-5.5 cm in diameter) often are managed by regular surveillance, rather than surgery, because the risk of surgery is considered to outweigh the risk of aneurysm rupture. The risk of small aneurysm rupture is considered to be low. The purpose of this review is to summarise the reported estimates of small aneurysm rupture rates. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature published before 2010 and identified 54 potentially eligible reports. Detailed review of these studies showed that both ascertainment of rupture, patient follow-up and causes of death were poorly reported: diagnostic criteria for rupture were never reported. There were only 14 studies from which rupture rates (as ruptures per 100 person-years) were available. These 14 published studies included 9779 patients (89% male) over the time period 1976-2006 but only 7 of these studies provided rupture rates specifically for the diameter range 3.0-5.5 cm, which ranged from 0 to 1.61 ruptures per 100 person-years. CONCLUSIONS: Rupture rates of small abdominal aortic aneurysms would appear to be low, but most studies have been poorly reported and did not have clear ascertainment and diagnostic criteria for aneurysm rupture.

Multi-state Markov models for disease progression in the presence of informative examination times: an application to hepatitis C.

In many chronic diseases it is important to understand the rate at which patients progress from infection through a series of defined disease states to a clinical outcome, e.g. cirrhosis in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected individuals or AIDS in HIV-infected individuals. Typically data are obtained from longitudinal studies, which often are observational in nature, and where disease state is observed only at selected examinations throughout follow-up. Transition times between disease states are therefore interval censored. Multi-state Markov models are commonly used to analyze such data, but rely on the assumption that the examination times are non-informative, and hence the examination process is ignorable in a likelihood-based analysis. In this paper we develop a Markov model that relaxes this assumption through the premise that the examination process is ignorable only after conditioning on a more regularly observed auxiliary variable. This situation arises in a study of HCV disease progression, where liver biopsies (the examinations) are sparse, irregular, and potentially informative with respect to the transition times. We use additional information on liver function tests (LFTs), commonly collected throughout follow-up, to inform current disease state and to assume an ignorable examination process. The model developed has a similar structure to a hidden Markov model and accommodates both the series of LFT measurements and the partially latent series of disease states. We show through simulation how this model compares with the commonly used ignorable Markov model, and a Markov model that assumes the examination process is non-ignorable.

The cost-effectiveness of screening and treatment for hepatitis C in prisons in England and Wales: a cost-utility analysis.

Prisoners have a high prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection compared with the general population in England and Wales and in many locations throughout the world. This is because of large numbers of injecting drug users that engage in behaviours likely to transmit HCV being present within prison populations. It is, therefore, suggested that prison may be an appropriate location for HCV screening and treatment to be administered. Using cost-utility analysis, this study considers the costs and benefits of administering a single round of screening on reception into prison to all individuals followed by possible later screening in the community and comparing this to individuals who may only be tested and treated in the community at a later date. The cost/QALY of one round of prison testing and treatment was found to be 54,852 pounds sterling, although probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed extensive uncertainty about this estimate. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed the importance of the parameters describing the progression of chronic HCV and the discount rates. While the results presented here at baseline would suggest that screening and treatment for HCV in prisons is not cost-effective, these results are subject to much uncertainty. The importance of the rates describing the progression of chronic HCV on the cost-effectiveness of this intervention has been demonstrated and this suggests that future work should be undertaken to gain further insight into the rates that individuals progress to the later stages of chronic HCV infection.