Trends in incidence, prevalence, and survival of breast cancer in the United Kingdom from 2000 to 2021.

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in females globally. However, we know relatively little about trends in males. This study describes United Kingdom (UK) secular trends in breast cancer from 2000 to 2021 for both sexes. We describe a population-based cohort study using UK primary care Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD and Aurum databases. There were 5,848,436 eligible females and 5,539,681 males aged 18+ years, with ≥ one year of prior data availability in the study period. We estimated crude breast cancer incidence rates (IR), prevalence and survival probability at one-, five- and 10-years after diagnosis using the Kaplan-Meier method. Analyses were further stratified by age. Crude IR of breast cancer from 2000 to 2021 was 194.4 per 100,000 person-years for females and 1.16 for males. Crude prevalence in 2021 was 2.1% for females and 0.009% for males. Both sexes have seen around a 2.5-fold increase in prevalence across time. Incidence increased with age for both sexes, peaking in females aged 60-69 years and males 90+ . There was a drop in incidence for females aged 70-79 years. From 2003-2019, incidence increased > twofold in younger females (aged 18-29: IR 2.12 in 2003 vs. 4.58 in 2018); decreased in females aged 50-69 years; and further declined from 2015 onwards in females aged 70-89 years. Survival probability for females after one-, five-, and ten-years after diagnosis was 95.1%, 80.2%, and 68.4%, and for males 92.9%, 69.0%, and 51.3%. Survival probability at one-year increased by 2.08% points, and survival at five years increased by 5.39% from 2000-2004 to 2015-2019 for females, particularly those aged 50-70 years. For males, there were no clear time-trends for short-term and long-term survival probability. Changes in incidence of breast cancer in females largely reflect the success of screening programmes, as rates rise and fall in synchronicity with ages of eligibility for such programmes. Overall survival from breast cancer for females has improved from 2000 to 2021, again reflecting the success of screening programmes, early diagnosis, and improvements in treatments. Male breast cancer patients have worse survival outcomes compared to females, highlighting the need to develop male-specific diagnosis and treatment strategies to improve long-term survival in line with females.

Collateral effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on endocrine treatments for breast and prostate cancer in the UK: a cohort study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic affected cancer screening, diagnosis and treatments. Many surgeries were substituted with bridging therapies during the initial lockdown, yet consideration of treatment side effects and their management was not a priority. Objectives: To examine how the changing social restrictions imposed by the pandemic affected incidence and trends of endocrine treatment prescriptions in newly diagnosed (incident) breast and prostate cancer patients and, secondarily, endocrine treatment-related outcomes (including bisphosphonate prescriptions, osteopenia and osteoporosis), in UK clinical practice from March 2020 to June 2022. Design: Population-based cohort study using UK primary care Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD database. Methods: There were 13,701 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients and 12,221 prostate cancer patients with ⩾1-year data availability since diagnosis between January 2017 and June 2022. Incidence rates (IR) and incidence rate ratios (IRR) were calculated across multiple time periods before and after lockdown to examine the impact of changing social restrictions on endocrine treatments and treatment-related outcomes, including osteopenia, osteoporosis and bisphosphonate prescriptions. Results: In breast cancer patients, aromatase inhibitor (AI) prescriptions increased during lockdown versus pre-pandemic [IRR: 1.22 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11-1.34)], followed by a decrease post-first lockdown [IRR: 0.79 (95% CI: 0.69-0.89)]. In prostate cancer patients, first-generation antiandrogen prescriptions increased versus pre-pandemic [IRR: 1.23 (95% CI: 1.08-1.4)]. For breast cancer patients on AIs, diagnoses of osteopenia, osteoporosis and bisphosphonate prescriptions were reduced across all lockdown periods versus pre-pandemic (IRR range: 0.31-0.62). Conclusion: During the first 2 years of the pandemic, newly diagnosed breast and prostate cancer patients were prescribed more endocrine treatments compared to pre-pandemic due to restrictions on hospital procedures replacing surgeries with bridging therapies. But breast cancer patients had fewer diagnoses of osteopenia and osteoporosis and bisphosphonate prescriptions. These patients should be followed up in the coming years for signs of bone thinning. Evidence of poorer management of treatment-related side effects will help assess resource allocation for patients at high risk for bone-related complications.

Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on hormone treatments for breast and prostate cancer in the UK: implications for bone health The COVID-19 pandemic has had a big impact on health, going beyond just causing illness. One area it has influenced is how patients with breast cancer or prostate cancer are treated. Surgeries and radiotherapies were delayed from the first lockdown as hospitals reduced non-covid related procedures. Some patients with breast or prostate cancer were instead given some medications to help stop their cancers from growing until they were able to have surgery or radiotherapy. These medications (called endocrine treatments) have important side effects, such as conditions that affect the bones. Patients on these medications should be monitored by doctors for signs of bone thinning and should, in some cases, be given other medications to help stop this happening. This study used doctors' records from more than 5 million people to find out whether the pandemic affected the number of endocrine medications being prescribed in patients with breast or prostate cancer, and also looked at the number of these patients that were diagnosed with conditions that affect their bones and whether they were given medications that could protect their bone health. We found that during the first lockdown, patients with breast cancer or prostate cancer had more of some types of endocrine treatments compared to before the lockdown. However, they had fewer diagnoses of conditions related to bone health and fewer medications to protect their bones. It is possible that appointments and tests that are usually carried out to diagnose conditions relating to bone health were not performed in the months after the first lockdown, and so these conditions were underdiagnosed. The use of medications to protect their bones was also reduced, likely because this was not considered a priority during the pandemic. This highlights that such patients should be followed up in the coming years for signs of bone thinning, given the relatively poorer management of these side effects in these people after the pandemic.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Incidence and Short-Term Survival for Common Solid Tumours in the United Kingdom: A Cohort Analysis.

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly affected healthcare systems and patients. There is a need to comprehend the collateral effects of the pandemic on non-communicable diseases. We examined the impact of the pandemic on short-term survival for common solid tumours, including breast, colorectal, head and neck, liver, lung, oesophageal, pancreatic, prostate, and stomach cancer in the UK. Methods: This was a population-based cohort study of electronic health records from the UK primary care Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD database. In sum, 12,259,744 eligible patients aged ≥18 years with ≥1 year's history identified from January 2000 to December 2022 were included. We estimated age-standardised incidence and short-term (one- and two-year) survival for several common cancers from 2000 to 2019 (in five-year strata) and compared these to 2020-2022 using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Incidence decreased for most cancers in 2020 and recovered to different extents in 2021-2022. Short-term survival improved for most cancers between 2000 and 2019, but then declined, albeit minimally, for those diagnosed in 2020-2022. This was most pronounced for colorectal cancer, with one-year survival falling from 78.8% (95% CI 78%-79.6%) in 2015-2019 to 77% (95% CI 75.6-78.3%) for those diagnosed in 2020-2022. Conclusion: Short-term survival for many cancers was impacted, albeit minimally, by the pandemic in the UK, with reductions in survivorship from colorectal cancer equivalent to returning to the mortality seen in the first decade of the 2000s. While data on longer-term survival are needed to fully comprehend the impact of COVID-19 on cancer care, our findings illustrate the need for an urgent and substantial commitment from the UK National Health Service to address the existing backlog in cancer screening and diagnostic procedures to improve cancer care and mortality.

Optimising the use of electronic medical records for large scale research in psychiatry.

The explosion and abundance of digital data could facilitate large-scale research for psychiatry and mental health. Research using so-called "real world data"-such as electronic medical/health records-can be resource-efficient, facilitate rapid hypothesis generation and testing, complement existing evidence (e.g. from trials and evidence-synthesis) and may enable a route to translate evidence into clinically effective, outcomes-driven care for patient populations that may be under-represented. However, the interpretation and processing of real-world data sources is complex because the clinically important 'signal' is often contained in both structured and unstructured (narrative or "free-text") data. Techniques for extracting meaningful information (signal) from unstructured text exist and have advanced the re-use of routinely collected clinical data, but these techniques require cautious evaluation. In this paper, we survey the opportunities, risks and progress made in the use of electronic medical record (real-world) data for psychiatric research.

Trends of use and characterisation of anti-dementia drugs users: a large multinational-network population-based study.

BACKGROUND: An updated time-trend analysis of anti-dementia drugs (ADDs) is lacking. The aim of this study is to assess the incident rate (IR) of ADD in individuals with dementia using real-world data. SETTING: Primary care data (country/database) from the UK/CPRD-GOLD (2007-20), Spain/SIDIAP (2010-20) and the Netherlands/IPCI (2008-20), standardised to a common data model. METHODS: Cohort study. Participants: dementia patients ≥40 years old with ≥1 year of previous data. Follow-up: until the end of the study period, transfer out of the catchment area, death or incident prescription of rivastigmine, galantamine, donepezil or memantine. Other variables: age/sex, type of dementia, comorbidities. Statistics: overall and yearly age/sex IR, with 95% confidence interval, per 100,000 person-years (IR per 105 PY (95%CI)). RESULTS: We identified a total of (incident anti-dementia users/dementia patients) 41,024/110,642 in UK/CPRD-GOLD, 51,667/134,927 in Spain/SIDIAP and 2,088/17,559 in the Netherlands/IPCI.In the UK, IR (per 105 PY (95%CI)) of ADD decreased from 2007 (30,829 (28,891-32,862)) to 2010 (17,793 (17,083-18,524)), then increased up to 2019 (31,601 (30,483 to 32,749)) and decrease in 2020 (24,067 (23,021-25,148)). In Spain, IR (per 105 PY (95%CI)) of ADD decreased by 72% from 2010 (51,003 (49,199-52,855)) to 2020 (14,571 (14,109-15,043)). In the Netherlands, IR (per 105 PY (95%CI)) of ADD decreased by 77% from 2009 (21,151 (14,967-29,031)) to 2020 (4763 (4176-5409)). Subjects aged ≥65-79 years and men (in the UK and the Netherlands) initiated more frequently an ADD. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of dementia remains highly heterogeneous. Further consensus in the pharmacological management of patients living with dementia is urgently needed.

The impact of the UK COVID-19 lockdown on the screening, diagnostics and incidence of breast, colorectal, lung and prostate cancer in the UK: a population-based cohort study.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic had collateral effects on many health systems. Cancer screening and diagnostic tests were postponed, resulting in delays in diagnosis and treatment. This study assessed the impact of the pandemic on screening, diagnostics and incidence of breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer; and whether rates returned to pre-pandemic levels by December, 2021. Methods: This is a cohort study of electronic health records from the United Kingdom (UK) primary care Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD database. The study included individuals registered with CPRD GOLD between January, 2017 and December, 2021, with at least 365 days of clinical history. The study focused on screening, diagnostic tests, referrals and diagnoses of first-ever breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer. Incidence rates (IR) were stratified by age, sex, and region, and incidence rate ratios (IRR) were calculated to compare rates during and after lockdown with rates before lockdown. Forecasted rates were estimated using negative binomial regression models. Results: Among 5,191,650 eligible participants, the first lockdown resulted in reduced screening and diagnostic tests for all cancers, which remained dramatically reduced across the whole observation period for almost all tests investigated. There were significant IRR reductions in breast (0.69 [95% CI: 0.63-0.74]), colorectal (0.74 [95% CI: 0.67-0.81]), and prostate (0.71 [95% CI: 0.66-0.78]) cancer diagnoses. IRR reductions for lung cancer were non-significant (0.92 [95% CI: 0.84-1.01]). Extrapolating to the entire UK population, an estimated 18,000 breast, 13,000 colorectal, 10,000 lung, and 21,000 prostate cancer diagnoses were missed from March, 2020 to December, 2021. Discussion: The UK COVID-19 lockdown had a substantial impact on cancer screening, diagnostic tests, referrals, and diagnoses. Incidence rates remained significantly lower than pre-pandemic levels for breast and prostate cancers and associated tests by December, 2021. Delays in diagnosis are likely to have adverse consequences on cancer stage, treatment initiation, mortality rates, and years of life lost. Urgent strategies are needed to identify undiagnosed cases and address the long-term implications of delayed diagnoses.

Tracing Tomorrow: young people's preferences and values related to use of personal sensing to predict mental health, using a digital game methodology.

BACKGROUND: Use of personal sensing to predict mental health risk has sparked interest in adolescent psychiatry, offering a potential tool for targeted early intervention. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the preferences and values of UK adolescents with regard to use of digital sensing information, including social media and internet searching behaviour. We also investigated the impact of risk information on adolescents' self-understanding. METHODS: Following a Design Bioethics approach, we created and disseminated a purpose-built digital game (www.tracingtomorrow.org) that immersed the player-character in a fictional scenario in which they received a risk assessment for depression Data were collected through game choices across relevant scenarios, with decision-making supported through clickable information points. FINDINGS: The game was played by 7337 UK adolescents aged 16-18 years. Most participants were willing to personally communicate mental health risk information to their parents or best friend. The acceptability of school involvement in risk predictions based on digital traces was mixed, due mainly to privacy concerns. Most participants indicated that risk information could negatively impact their academic self-understanding. Participants overwhelmingly preferred individual face-to-face over digital options for support. CONCLUSIONS: The potential of digital phenotyping in supporting early intervention in mental health can only be fulfilled if data are collected, communicated and actioned in ways that are trustworthy, relevant and acceptable to young people. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: To minimise the risk of ethical harms in real-world applications of preventive psychiatric technologies, it is essential to investigate young people's values and preferences as part of design and implementation processes.

Anemia, hemoglobin concentration and cognitive function in the Longitudinal Ageing Study in India-Harmonized Diagnostic Assessment of Dementia (LASI-DAD) and the Health and Retirement Study.

Background: In India, anemia is widely researched in children and women of reproductive age, however, studies in older populations are lacking. Given the adverse effect of anemia on cognitive function and dementia this older population group warrants further study. The Longitudinal Ageing Study in India - Harmonized Diagnostic Assessment of Dementia (LASI-DAD) dataset contains detailed measures to allow a better understanding of anaemia as a potential risk factor for dementia. Method: 2,758 respondents from the LASI-DAD cohort, aged 60 or older, had a complete blood count measured from venous blood as well as cognitive function tests including episodic memory, executive function and verbal fluency. Linear regression was used to test the associations between blood measures (including anemia and hemoglobin concentration (g/dL)) with 11 cognitive domains. All models were adjusted for age and gender with the full model containing adjustments for rural location, years of education, smoking, region, BMI and population weights.Results from LASI-DAD were validated using the USA-based Health and Retirement Study (HRS) cohort (n=5720) to replicate associations between blood cell measures and global cognition. Results: In LASI-DAD, we showed an association between anemia and poor memory (p=0.0054). We found a positive association between hemoglobin concentration and ten cognitive domains tested (ß=0.041-0.071, p<0.05). The strongest association with hemoglobin was identified for memory-based tests (immediate episodic, delayed episodic and broad domain memory, ß=0.061-0.071, p<0.005). Positive associations were also shown between the general cognitive score and the other red blood count tests including mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC, ß=0.06, p=0.0001) and red cell distribution width (RDW, ß =-0.11, p<0.0001). In the HRS cohort, positive associations were replicated between general cognitive score and other blood count tests (Red Blood Cell, MCHC and RDW, p<0.05). Conclusion: We have established in a large South Asian population that low hemoglobin and anaemia are associated with low cognitive function, therefore indicating that anaemia could be an important modifiable risk factor. We have validated this result in an external cohort demonstrating both the variability of this risk factor cross-nationally and its generalizable association with cognitive outcomes.