Patterns of cigarette and e-cigarette use among UK adolescents: a latent class analysis of the Millennium Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patterning of cigarette and e-cigarette use among young people remains poorly characterized. We aimed to describe these patterns in the UK Millennium Cohort Study at age 14 and 17 years. METHODS: Data on cigarette and e-cigarette use come from 9731 adolescents. Latent class analysis assigned participants to membership of classes of product use and multinomial logistic regression analyses assessed differences in the likelihood of belonging to classes by sociodemographic (age, gender, ethnicity, household income, maternal education and country of residence) and smoking-related social factors (caregiver tobacco use, caregiver e-cigarette use and peer smoking). RESULTS: We identified four classes of use: 45.8% of adolescents 'continued to abstain' from cigarettes or e-cigarettes; 21.3% 'experimented' (used once or in the past but not currently) with cigarettes and/or e-cigarettes by age 17 but were not current users; 19.0% were 'late adopters', characterized by low levels of use at age 14 but high levels of experimentation and current use at age 17; and 13.9% were 'early adopters', characterized by high levels of experimentation and current use at ages 14 and 17. At age 17, 70.4% of 'early adopters' smoked cigarettes regularly plus an additional 27.3% experimented with cigarettes. Corresponding percentages for e-cigarettes were 37.9% and 58.9%. Tobacco and e-cigarette use by caregivers, and cigarette use by peers, were associated with being both 'late adopters' and 'early adopters'. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one in seven adolescents in the UK are 'early adopters' of nicotine products. This highlights the need to develop and implement effective policies to prevent nicotine use uptake.

Acceptability of receiving lifestyle advice at cervical, breast and bowel cancer screening.

Cancer screening could be an opportunity to deliver cancer prevention advice, but it is not known how such information would be received. We explored willingness to receive lifestyle advice in the context of the English National Health Service cervical, breast, and bowel (FS; flexible sigmoidoscopy) screening programmes. A population-based survey was conducted in 2016 to collect nationally representative data on willingness to receive lifestyle advice across cervical (n = 768), breast (n = 420) and FS (n = 308) screening programmes. Additional items assessed the impact of lifestyle advice on screening attendance, preference for receiving advice in the event of an abnormal screening result, and timing of advice. Most respondents were willing to receive lifestyle advice around the time of cancer screening (cervical 78.9%, breast 79.4%, FS 81.8%), and if their results were abnormal (cervical 86.3%, breast 83.0%, FS 85.1%). A small proportion indicated it may discourage future attendance (cervical 4.9%, breast 7.0%, FS 8.8%). Most preferred information to be delivered at the screening appointment (cervical 69.8%, breast 72.6%, FS 70.7%). There were no associations between sociodemographic characteristics and willingness to receive lifestyle advice at breast screening. For those intending to attend cervical screening, non-White ethnicity and higher education were associated with increased willingness to receive lifestyle advice. Women were more likely to be willing to receive advice at FS screening than men. Providing lifestyle advice at cancer screening is likely to be acceptable to the general population. The optimal approach for delivery needs careful consideration to minimise potential negative effects on screening attendance.

Aggregated N-of-1 trials for unlicensed medicines for small populations: an assessment of a trial with ephedrine for myasthenia gravis.

BACKGROUND: Inexpensive medicines with a long history of use may currently be prescribed off-label for rare indications. Reimbursement is at the discretion of health insurance companies, and may be unpredictable. The example addressed was ephedrine as add-on treatment for myasthenia gravis. Stakeholders from academia, a patient organization, the Dutch National Health Care Institute (NHCI) and Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board (MEB) advised on the trial design. The NHCI and MEB agreed to provide scientific advice on the suitability of the evidence generated by the trial, for regulatory decisions. This paper describes the feasibility of the trial and the utility of its aggregated results. RESULTS: The trialists experienced the trial as feasible. Retrospective interviews showed that the trial as performed was acceptable to patients. The treatment effect in the primary outcome measure, muscle strength, was statistically significant when inferred to the population level, though the effect size was modest. Secondary outcomes were statistically significant in a preplanned, fixed effects analysis within the four patients. The NHCI advised that it could potentially make reimbursement decisions based on the Fitting Evidence framework, should the trialists decide to apply for reimbursement. The MEB advised that for a licensing decision, the N-of-1 design is a last-resort option for demonstrating treatment benefit in a rare disease. N-of-1 trials alone do not provide enough evidence on potential risk. The MEB found the current trial inconclusive. It suggested doing a 2-armed trial of longer duration, possibly with a different outcome measure (postponement of corticosteroid use). It suggested engaging a consultancy or commercial sponsor, should the trialists decide to seek market authorization of the drug. CONCLUSIONS: In theory, evidence from aggregated N-of-1 trials is suitable for use in licensing and reimbursement decisions. The current example illustrates differences in interpretation of N-of-1 results by health authorities. In the era of personalized medicine, consensus is required on the interpretation of data from study designs geared to small groups. Demonstrating effectiveness of inexpensive medicines in small populations may require involvement of non-commercial parties, to preserve affordability.

Social Cognitive Mediators of Sociodemographic Differences in Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake.

BACKGROUND: This study examined if and how sociodemographic differences in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake can be explained by social cognitive factors. METHODS: Face-to-face interviews were conducted with individuals aged 60-70 years (n = 1309) living in England as part of a population-based omnibus survey. RESULTS: There were differences in screening uptake by SES, marital status, ethnicity, and age but not by gender. Perceived barriers (stand. b = -0.40, p < 0.001), social norms (stand. b = 0.33, p < 0.001), and screening knowledge (stand. b = 0.17, p < 0.001) had independent associations with uptake. SES differences in uptake were mediated through knowledge, social norms, and perceived barriers. Ethnic differences were mediated through knowledge. Differences in uptake by marital status were primarily mediated through social norms and to a lesser extent through knowledge. Age differences were largely unmediated, except for a small mediated effect via social norms. CONCLUSIONS: Sociodemographic differences in CRC screening uptake were largely mediated through social cognitive factors. Impact. Our findings suggest that multifaceted interventions might be needed to reduce socioeconomic inequalities. Ethnic differences might be reduced through improved screening knowledge. Normative interventions could emphasise screening as an activity endorsed by important others outside the immediate family to appeal to a wider audience.