Cross-sectional analysis of educational inequalities in primary prevention statin use in UK Biobank.

OBJECTIVE: Identify whether participants with lower education are less likely to report taking statins for primary cardiovascular prevention than those with higher education, but an equivalent increase in underlying cardiovascular risk. METHODS: Using data from a large prospective cohort study, UK Biobank, we calculated a QRISK3 cardiovascular risk score for 472 097 eligible participants with complete data on self-reported educational attainment and statin use (55% female participants; mean age 56 years). We used logistic regression to explore the association between (i) QRISK3 score and (ii) educational attainment on self-reported statin use. We then stratified the association between QRISK3 score and statin use, by educational attainment to test for interactions. RESULTS: There was evidence of an interaction between QRISK3 score and educational attainment. Per unit increase in QRISK3 score, more educated individuals were more likely to report taking statins. In women with ≤7 years of schooling, a one unit increase in QRISK3 score was associated with a 7% higher odds of statin use (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.07). In women with ≥20 years of schooling, a one unit increase in QRISK3 score was associated with an 14% higher odds of statin use (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.15). Comparable ORs in men were 1.04 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.05) for ≤7 years of schooling and 1.08 (95% CI 1.08, 1.08) for ≥20 years of schooling. CONCLUSION: Per unit increase in QRISK3 score, individuals with lower educational attainment were less likely to report using statins, likely contributing to health inequalities.

Varenicline versus nicotine replacement therapy for long-term smoking cessation: an observational study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

BACKGROUND: Smoking is the leading avoidable cause of illness and premature mortality. The first-line treatments for smoking cessation are nicotine replacement therapy and varenicline. Meta-analyses of experimental studies have shown that participants allocated to the varenicline group were 1.57 times (95% confidence interval 1.29 to 1.91 times) as likely to be abstinent 6 months after treatment as those allocated to the nicotine replacement therapy group. However, there is limited evidence about the effectiveness of varenicline when prescribed in primary care. We investigated the effectiveness and rate of adverse events of these medicines in the general population. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of prescribing varenicline on smoking cessation rates and health outcomes. DATA SOURCES: Clinical Practice Research Datalink. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study using electronic medical records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We extracted data on all patients who were prescribed varenicline or nicotine replacement therapy after 1 September 2006 who were aged ≥ 18 years. We investigated the effects of varenicline on smoking cessation, all-cause mortality and cause-specific mortality and hospitalisation for: (1) chronic lung disease, (2) lung cancer, (3) coronary heart disease, (4) pneumonia, (5) cerebrovascular disease, (6) diabetes, and (7) external causes; primary care diagnosis of myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, or prescription for anxiety; weight in kg; general practitioner and hospital attendance. Our primary outcome was smoking cessation 2 years after the first prescription. We investigated the baseline differences between patients prescribed varenicline and patients prescribed nicotine replacement therapy. We report results using multivariable-adjusted, propensity score and instrumental variable regression. Finally, we developed methods to assess the relative bias of the different statistical methods we used. RESULTS: People prescribed varenicline were healthier at baseline than those prescribed nicotine replacement therapy in almost all characteristics, which highlighted the potential for residual confounding. Our instrumental variable analysis results found little evidence that patients prescribed varenicline had lower mortality 2 years after their first prescription (risk difference 0.67, 95% confidence interval -0.11 to 1.46) than those prescribed nicotine replacement therapy. They had similar rates of all-cause hospitalisation, incident primary care diagnoses of myocardial infarction and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. People prescribed varenicline subsequently attended primary care less frequently. Patients prescribed varenicline were more likely (odds ratio 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.42 to 1.50) to be abstinent 6 months after treatment than those prescribed nicotine replacement therapy when estimated using multivariable-adjusted for baseline covariates. Patients from more deprived areas were less likely to be prescribed varenicline. However, varenicline had similar effectiveness for these groups. CONCLUSION: Patients prescribed varenicline in primary care were more likely to quit smoking than those prescribed nicotine replacement therapy, but there was little evidence that they had lower rates of mortality or morbidity in the 4 years following the first prescription. There was little evidence of heterogeneity in effectiveness across the population. FUTURE WORK: Future research should investigate the decline in prescribing of smoking cessation products; develop an optimal treatment algorithm for smoking cessation; use methods for using instruments with survival outcomes; and develop methods for comparing multivariable-adjusted and instrumental variable estimates. LIMITATIONS: Not all of our code lists were validated, body mass index and Index of Multiple Deprivation had missing values, our results may suffer from residual confounding, and we had no information on treatment adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered as NCT02681848. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 9. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Smoking is the number one avoidable cause of ill health and death. Experiments suggest that more smokers will quit after being given the drug varenicline than with any other smoking cessation treatment. However, most of the experiments used to license varenicline had a relatively short follow-up (< 1 year) and did not necessarily recruit participants who were representative of smokers seen in a general practice in the UK, who tend to be older, are sicker and more likely to have neuropsychiatric illnesses. In this study, we investigated the outcomes of 287,079 patients prescribed varenicline or nicotine replacement therapy (e.g. nicotine patches and gum). We followed each patient for up to 4 years after they received their prescriptions and matched their data to information on deaths from the Office for National Statistics and hospital admissions. We investigated how often these patients subsequently attended their general practitioner, and how often they received a diagnosis of myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression or anxiety in primary care. We found that patients who were prescribed varenicline were much more likely to quit smoking up to 4 years after they received treatment and subsequently attended their general practitioner less frequently. These findings were robust across the three different analysis methods we used. We also found that patients prescribed varenicline were much less likely to be ill or to die than those prescribed nicotine replacement therapy. However, these results may be because the patients who were prescribed varenicline were much healthier before they received the prescription. Therefore, these differences in health are unlikely to be caused by taking varenicline or quitting smoking. In conclusion, varenicline helped patients quit smoking, but there was little causal evidence that prescribing patients varenicline causally reduced rates of mortality or morbidity compared with prescribing nicotine replacement therapy.

The effect of smoking intensity on all-cause and cause-specific mortality-a Mendelian randomization analysis.

BACKGROUND: Smoking is an important cause of mortality and recent studies have suggested that even low-intensity smoking might be associated with increased mortality. Still, smoking is associated with lower socio-economic status as well as other potential risk factors, and disease onset might motivate smoking cessation, thus residual confounding and reverse causality might bias results. We aimed to assess the evidence of a causal relationship between smoking intensity and cause-specific as well as all-cause-mortality using Mendelian randomization analyses. METHODS: We included 56 019 participants from the Norwegian HUNT2 Study and 337 103 participants from UK Biobank, linked to national registry data on causes of death. We estimated associations of self-reported smoking as well as the genetic variant rs1051730 as an instrument for smoking intensity with all-cause and cause-specific mortality. We subsequently meta-analysed the results from the two cohorts. RESULTS: Each effect allele of the rs1051730 was associated with a 9% increased hazard of all-cause mortality [95% confidence interval (CI) 6-11] among ever smokers. Effect alleles were also associated with death by neoplasms [hazard ratio (HR) 1.11, 95% CI 1.06-1.15], circulatory diseases (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.11) and respiratory diseases (HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.26) among ever smokers. The association was stronger among ever than never smokers for all-cause mortality (p < 0.001), neoplasms (p = 0.001) and respiratory diseases (p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate a causal effect of smoking intensity on all-cause mortality and death by neoplasms and respiratory diseases. There was weaker evidence of a causal effect of smoking intensity on death by circulatory diseases.

What are the effects of varenicline compared with nicotine replacement therapy on long-term smoking cessation and clinically important outcomes? Protocol for a prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking is a major avoidable cause of ill-health and premature death. Treatments that help patients successfully quit smoking have an important effect on health and life expectancy. Varenicline is a medication that can help smokers successfully quit smoking. However, there are concerns that it may cause adverse effects, such as increase in the occurrence of depression, self-harm and suicide and cardiovascular disease. In this study we aim to examine the effects of varenicline versus other smoking cessation pharmacotherapies on smoking cessation, health service use, all-cause and cause-specific mortality and physical and mental health conditions. METHODS: In this project we will investigate the effects of varenicline compared to nicotine replacement therapies on: (1) long-term smoking cessation and whether these effects differ by area level deprivation; and (2) the following clinically-important outcomes: rate of general practice and hospital attendance; all-cause mortality and death due to diseases of the respiratory system and cardiovascular disease; and a primary care diagnosis of respiratory illness, myocardial infarction or depression and anxiety. The study is based on a cohort of patients prescribed these smoking cessation medications from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). We will use three methods to overcome confounding: multivariable adjusted Cox regression, propensity score matched Cox regression, and instrumental variable regression. The total expected sample size for analysis will be at least 180,000. Follow-up will end with the earliest of either an 'event' or censoring due to the end of registration or death. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was not required for this study. This project has been approved by the CPRD's Independent Scientific Advisory Committee (ISAC). We will disseminate our findings via publications in international peer-reviewed journals and presentations at international conferences.