ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Anti-inflammatory therapy with long-term colchicine prevented vascular recurrence in coronary disease. Unlike coronary disease, which is typically caused by atherosclerosis, ischaemic stroke is caused by diverse mechanisms including atherosclerosis and small vessel disease or is frequently due to an unknown cause. We aimed to investigate the hypothesis that long-term colchicine would reduce recurrent events after ischaemic stroke. METHODS: We did a randomised, parallel-group, open-label, blinded endpoint assessed trial comparing long-term colchicine (0·5 mg orally per day) plus guideline-based usual care with usual care only. Hospital-based patients with non-severe, non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke or high-risk transient ischaemic attack were eligible. The primary endpoint was a composite of first fatal or non-fatal recurrent ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, or hospitalisation (defined as an admission to an inpatient unit or a visit to an emergency department that resulted in at least a 24 h stay [or a change in calendar date if the hospital admission or discharge times were not available]) for unstable angina. The p value for significance was 0·048 to adjust for two prespecified interim analyses conducted by the data monitoring committee, for which the steering committee and trial investigators remained blinded. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02898610) and is completed. FINDINGS: 3154 patients were randomly assigned between Dec 19, 2016, and Nov 21, 2022, with the last follow-up on Jan 31, 2024. The trial finished before the anticipated number of outcomes was accrued (367 outcomes planned) due to budget constraints attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic. Ten patients withdrew consent for analysis of their data, leaving 3144 patients in the intention-to-treat analysis: 1569 (colchicine and usual care) and 1575 (usual care alone). A primary endpoint occurred in 338 patients, 153 (9·8%) of 1569 patients allocated to colchicine and usual care and 185 (11·7%) of 1575 patients allocated to usual care alone (incidence rates 3·32 vs 3·92 per 100 person-years, hazard ratio 0·84; 95% CI 0·68-1·05, p=0·12). Although no between-group difference in C-reactive protein (CRP) was observed at baseline, patients treated with colchicine had lower CRP at 28 days and at 1, 2, and 3 years (p<0·05 for all timepoints). The rates of serious adverse events were similar in both groups. INTERPRETATION: Although no statistically significant benefit was observed on the primary intention-to-treat analysis, the findings provide new evidence supporting the rationale for anti-inflammatory therapy in further randomised trials. FUNDING: Health Research Board Ireland, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation), and Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Vlaanderen (Research Foundation Flanders), Belgium.
Subject(s)
Colchicine , Ischemic Stroke , Secondary Prevention , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Colchicine/administration & dosage , Colchicine/therapeutic use , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Ischemic Attack, Transient/prevention & control , Ischemic Attack, Transient/drug therapy , Ischemic Stroke/prevention & control , Myocardial Infarction/prevention & control , Recurrence , Secondary Prevention/methods , Stroke/prevention & control , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) can occur in patients who are ineligible for routine ultrasound screening. A simple AAA risk score was derived and compared with current guidelines used for ultrasound screening of AAA. METHODS: United Kingdom Biobank participants without previous AAA were split into a derivation cohort (n=401 820, 54.6% women, mean age 56.4 years, 95.5% White race) and validation cohort (n=83 816). Incident AAA was defined as first hospital inpatient diagnosis of AAA, death from AAA, or an AAA-related surgical procedure. A multivariable Cox model was developed in the derivation cohort into an AAA risk score that did not require blood biomarkers. To illustrate the sensitivity and specificity of the risk score for AAA, a theoretical threshold to refer patients for ultrasound at 0.25% 10-year risk was modeled. Discrimination of the risk score was compared with a model of US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) AAA screening guidelines. RESULTS: In the derivation cohort, there were 1570 (0.40%) cases of AAA over a median 11.3 years of follow-up. Components of the AAA risk score were age (stratified by smoking status), weight (stratified by smoking status), antihypertensive and cholesterol-lowering medication use, height, diastolic blood pressure, baseline cardiovascular disease, and diabetes. In the validation cohort, over 10 years of follow-up, the C-index for the model of the USPSTF guidelines was 0.705 (95% CI, 0.678-0.733). The C-index of the risk score as a continuous variable was 0.856 (95% CI, 0.837-0.878). In the validation cohort, the USPSTF model yielded sensitivity 63.9% and specificity 71.3%. At the 0.25% 10-year risk threshold, the risk score yielded sensitivity 82.1% and specificity 70.7% while also improving the net reclassification index compared with the USPSTF model +0.176 (95% CI, 0.120-0.232). A combined model, whereby risk scoring was combined with the USPSTF model, also improved prediction compared with USPSTF alone (net reclassification index +0.101 [95% CI, 0.055-0.147]). CONCLUSIONS: In an asymptomatic general population, a risk score based on patient age, height, weight, and medical history may improve identification of asymptomatic patients at risk for clinical events from AAA. Further development and validation of risk scores to detect asymptomatic AAA are needed.
Subject(s)
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/epidemiology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/diagnosis , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening , Middle Aged , Proportional Hazards Models , Public Health Surveillance , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Ultrasonography/methods , United Kingdom/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Photoelectric heating--heating of dust grains by far-ultraviolet photons--has long been recognized as the primary source of heating for the neutral interstellar medium. Simulations of spiral galaxies have shown some indication that photoelectric heating could suppress star formation; however, simulations that include photoelectric heating have typically shown that it has little effect on the rate of star formation in either spiral galaxies or dwarf galaxies, which suggests that supernovae are responsible for setting the gas depletion time in galaxies. This result is in contrast with recent work indicating that a star formation law that depends on galaxy metallicity--as is expected with photoelectric heating,but not with supernovae--reproduces the present-day galaxy population better than does a metallicity-independent one. Here we report a series of simulations of dwarf galaxies, the class of galaxy in which the effects of both photoelectric heating and supernovae are expected to be strongest. We simultaneously include space and time-dependent photoelectric heating in our simulations, and we resolve the energy-conserving phase of every supernova blast wave, which allows us to directly measure the relative importance of feedback by supernovae and photoelectric heating in suppressing star formation. We find that supernovae are unable to account for the observed large gas depletion times in dwarf galaxies. Instead, photoelectric heating is the dominant means by which dwarf galaxies regulate their star formation rate at any given time,suppressing the rate by more than an order of magnitude relative to simulations with only supernovae.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The evidence-based interventions of exercise and education have been strongly recommended as part of prominent clinical guidelines for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) for more than ten years. Despite the wealth of strong evidence that exists, implementation in practice is sub-optimal. This paper describes the key methodologies used in the co-design, tailoring, and evaluation of the IMPACT project implementation strategies, to confront this problem across multiple levels (micro, meso, macro) in public and private healthcare settings in Ireland. METHODS: Using a type III hybrid implementation-effectiveness design, a participatory, dynamic and iterative process will be used to tailor and evaluate multi-level implementation strategies using the following stages: 1) Co-design the implementation strategies with key stakeholders using best evidence, a theory-driven implementation framework (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research), local context and expert consensus; 2) Pilot and evaluate the implementation strategies by training physiotherapists to deliver the evidence-based Good Life with osteoArthritis Denmark (GLA:D®) education and exercise programme using the implementation strategies, and conduct a mixed-methods process evaluation; 3) Adapt the implementation strategies based on implementation process evaluation indicators from stage two. The adapted strategies will be used for scale-up and sustainability in subsequent GLA:D® Ireland training programmes that will be rolled out nationally. Evaluation of effectiveness on patient and cost outcomes will continue up to 12 months post-programme delivery, using an online patient registry and pre-post design. DISCUSSION: This implementation science project aims to use participatory health research to address a gap in management of OA across public and private healthcare settings. This research has the potential to change practice and promote a policy of exercise and physical activity referral for chronic musculoskeletal disease that utilises community engagement effectively and enacts change 'together', with involvement of researchers, decision-makers, clinicians and patients.
Subject(s)
Osteoarthritis, Hip , Osteoarthritis, Knee , Physical Therapists , Community-Based Participatory Research , Exercise , Humans , Osteoarthritis, Knee/diagnosis , Osteoarthritis, Knee/therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Two large clinical trials have shown a reduced rate of breast cancer development in high-risk women in the initial 5 years of follow-up after use of aromatase inhibitors (MAP.3 and International Breast Cancer Intervention Study II [IBIS-II]). Here, we report blinded long-term follow-up results for the IBIS-II trial, which compared anastrozole with placebo, with the objective of determining the efficacy of anastrozole for preventing breast cancer (both invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ) in the post-treatment period. METHODS: IBIS-II is an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Postmenopausal women at increased risk of developing breast cancer were recruited and were randomly assigned (1:1) to either anastrozole (1 mg per day, oral) or matching placebo daily for 5 years. After treatment completion, women were followed on a yearly basis to collect data on breast cancer incidence, death, other cancers, and major adverse events (cardiovascular events and fractures). The primary outcome was all breast cancer. FINDINGS: 3864 women were recruited between Feb 2, 2003, and Jan 31, 2012. 1920 women were randomly assigned to 5 years anastrozole and 1944 to placebo. After a median follow-up of 131 months (IQR 105-156), a 49% reduction in breast cancer was observed for anastrozole (85 vs 165 cases, hazard ratio [HR] 0·51, 95% CI 0·39-0·66, p<0·0001). The reduction was larger in the first 5 years (35 vs 89, 0·39, 0·27-0·58, p<0·0001), but still significant after 5 years (50 vs 76 new cases, 0·64, 0·45-0·91, p=0·014), and not significantly different from the first 5 years (p=0·087). Invasive oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer was reduced by 54% (HR 0·46, 95% CI 0·33-0·65, p<0·0001), with a continued significant effect in the period after treatment. A 59% reduction in ductal carcinoma in situ was observed (0·41, 0·22-0·79, p=0·0081), especially in participants known to be oestrogen receptor-positive (0·22, 0·78-0·65, p<0·0001). No significant difference in deaths was observed overall (69 vs 70, HR 0·96, 95% CI 0·69-1·34, p=0·82) or for breast cancer (two anastrozole vs three placebo). A significant decrease in non-breast cancers was observed for anastrozole (147 vs 200, odds ratio 0·72, 95% CI 0·57-0·91, p=0·0042), owing primarily to non-melanoma skin cancer. No excess of fractures or cardiovascular disease was observed. INTERPRETATION: This analysis has identified a significant continuing reduction in breast cancer with anastrozole in the post-treatment follow-up period, with no evidence of new late side-effects. Further follow-up is needed to assess the effect on breast cancer mortality. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, the National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Sanofi Aventis, and AstraZeneca.
Subject(s)
Anastrozole/therapeutic use , Aromatase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Administration, Oral , Adult , Aged , Anastrozole/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/mortality , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/pathology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/pathology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Incidence , Middle Aged , Placebos , Treatment Outcome , United Kingdom/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA) improves diagnostic certainty in the assessment of patients with stable chest pain, its effect on 5-year clinical outcomes is unknown. METHODS: In an open-label, multicenter, parallel-group trial, we randomly assigned 4146 patients with stable chest pain who had been referred to a cardiology clinic for evaluation to standard care plus CTA (2073 patients) or to standard care alone (2073 patients). Investigations, treatments, and clinical outcomes were assessed over 3 to 7 years of follow-up. The primary end point was death from coronary heart disease or nonfatal myocardial infarction at 5 years. RESULTS: The median duration of follow-up was 4.8 years, which yielded 20,254 patient-years of follow-up. The 5-year rate of the primary end point was lower in the CTA group than in the standard-care group (2.3% [48 patients] vs. 3.9% [81 patients]; hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.84; P=0.004). Although the rates of invasive coronary angiography and coronary revascularization were higher in the CTA group than in the standard-care group in the first few months of follow-up, overall rates were similar at 5 years: invasive coronary angiography was performed in 491 patients in the CTA group and in 502 patients in the standard-care group (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.13), and coronary revascularization was performed in 279 patients in the CTA group and in 267 in the standard-care group (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.27). However, more preventive therapies were initiated in patients in the CTA group (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.65), as were more antianginal therapies (odds ratio, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.54). There were no significant between-group differences in the rates of cardiovascular or noncardiovascular deaths or deaths from any cause. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, the use of CTA in addition to standard care in patients with stable chest pain resulted in a significantly lower rate of death from coronary heart disease or nonfatal myocardial infarction at 5 years than standard care alone, without resulting in a significantly higher rate of coronary angiography or coronary revascularization. (Funded by the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office and others; SCOT-HEART ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01149590 .).
Subject(s)
Chest Pain/diagnostic imaging , Computed Tomography Angiography , Coronary Disease/mortality , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Chest Pain/therapy , Coronary Angiography/statistics & numerical data , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/prevention & control , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/statistics & numerical data , RiskABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We investigated the association between body mass index (BMI) and breast cancer risk in women at increased risk of breast cancer receiving tamoxifen or anastrozole compared with placebo using data from the International Breast Cancer Intervention Studies [IBIS-I (tamoxifen) and IBIS-II (anastrozole)]. METHODS: Baseline BMI was calculated from nurse assessed height and weight measurements for premenopausal (n = 3138) and postmenopausal (n = 3731) women in IBIS-I and postmenopausal women in IBIS-II (n = 3787). The primary endpoint was any breast cancer event (invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ). We used Cox proportional hazards regression to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for risk after adjustment for covariates. RESULTS: There were 582 (IBIS-I) and 248 (IBIS-II) breast cancer events [median follow-up = 16.2 years (IQR 14.4-17.7) and 10.9 years (IQR 8.8-13.0), respectively]. In adjusted analysis, women with a higher BMI had an increased breast cancer risk in both IBIS-I [HR = 1.06 per 5 kg/m2 (0.99-1.15), p = 0.114] and in IBIS-II [HR per 5 kg/m2 = 1.21 (1.09-1.35), p < 0.001]. In IBIS-I, the association between BMI and breast cancer risk was positive in postmenopausal women [adjusted HR per 5 kg/m2 = 1.14 (1.03-1.26), p = 0.01] but not premenopausal women [adjusted HR per 5 kg/m2 = 0.97 (0.86-1.09), p = 0.628]. There was no interaction between BMI and treatment group for breast cancer risk in either IBIS-I (p = 0.62) or IBIS-II (p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Higher BMI is associated with greater breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women at increased risk of the disease, but no effect was observed in premenopausal women. The lack of interaction between BMI and treatment group on breast cancer risk suggests women are likely to experience benefit from preventive therapy regardless of their BMI. Trial registration Both trials were registered [IBIS-I: ISRCTN91879928 on 24/02/2006, retrospectively registered ( http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN91879928 ); IBIS-II: ISRCTN31488319 on 07/01/2005, retrospectively registered ( http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN31488319 )].
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating , Anastrozole , Body Mass Index , Female , Humans , Incidence , Risk Factors , TamoxifenABSTRACT
AIMS: The relative benefits of computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA)-guided management in women and men with suspected angina due to coronary heart disease (CHD) are uncertain. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this post hoc analysis of an open-label parallel-group multicentre trial, we recruited 4146 patients referred for assessment of suspected angina from 12 cardiology clinics across the UK. We randomly assigned (1:1) participants to standard care alone or standard care plus CTCA. Fewer women had typical chest pain symptoms (n = 582, 32.0%) when compared with men (n = 880, 37.9%; P < 0.001). Amongst the CTCA-guided group, more women had normal coronary arteries [386 (49.6%) vs. 263 (26.2%)] and less obstructive CHD [105 (11.5%) vs. 347 (29.8%)]. A CTCA-guided strategy resulted in more women than men being reclassified as not having CHD {19.2% vs. 13.1%; absolute risk difference, 5.7 [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.7-8.7, P < 0.001]} or having angina due to CHD [15.0% vs. 9.0%; absolute risk difference, 5.6 (2.3-8.9, P = 0.001)]. After a median of 4.8 years follow-up, CTCA-guided management was associated with similar reductions in the risk of CHD death or non-fatal myocardial infarction in women [hazard ratio (HR) 0.50, 95% CI 0.24-1.04], and men (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42-0.95; Pinteraction = 0.572). CONCLUSION: Following the addition of CTCA, women were more likely to be found to have normal coronary arteries than men. This led to more women being reclassified as not having CHD, resulting in more downstream tests and treatments being cancelled. There were similar prognostic benefits of CTCA for women and men.
Subject(s)
Coronary Artery Disease , Coronary Disease , Angina Pectoris/epidemiology , Chest Pain/epidemiology , Chest Pain/etiology , Computed Tomography Angiography , Coronary Angiography , Coronary Artery Disease/complications , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Disease/complications , Coronary Disease/diagnostic imaging , Female , Humans , Male , Predictive Value of TestsABSTRACT
Background and Purpose- Stroke incidence in younger and middle-aged people is growing. Despite this, its associations in this subset of the stroke population are unknown, and prevention strategies are not tailored to meet their needs. This study examined the association between self-reported walking pace and incident stroke. Methods- Data from the UK Biobank were used in a prospective population-based study. Three hundred and sixty-three thousand, one hundred and thirty-seven participants aged 37 to 73 years (52% women) were recruited. The associations of self-reported walking pace with stroke incidence over follow-up were investigated using Cox proportional-hazard models. Results- Among 363,137 participants, 2705 (0.7%) participants developed a fatal or nonfatal stroke event over the mean follow-up period of 6.1 years (interquartile range, 5.4-6.7). Slow walking pace was associated with a higher hazard for stroke incidence (hazard ratio [HR], 1.45 [95% CI, 1.26-1.66]; P<0.0001). Stroke incidence was not associated with walking pace among people <65 years of age. However, slow walking pace was associated with a higher risk of stroke among participants aged ≥65 years (HR, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.17-1.72]; P<0.0001). A higher risk for stroke was observed on those with middle (HR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.01-1.63]; P=0.039) and higher (HR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.05-1.69]; P=0.012) deprivation levels but not in the least deprived individuals. Similarly, overweight (HR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.04-1.63]; P=0.019) and obese (HR, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.09-1.63]; P=0.004) but not normal-weight individuals had a higher risk of stroke incidence. Conclusions- Slow walking pace was associated with a higher risk of stroke among participants over 64 years of age in this population-based cohort study. The addition of the measurement of self-reported walking pace to primary care or public health clinical consultations may be a useful screening tool for stroke risk.
Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Stroke/epidemiology , Walking Speed/physiology , Walking/physiology , Adult , Aged , Biological Specimen Banks , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Motor Activity/physiology , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , United Kingdom/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Recent efforts to address the obesity epidemic have focused on sugar consumption, especially sugar-sweetened beverages. However, sugar takes many forms, is only one contributor to overall energy consumption and is correlated with other health-related lifestyle factors. The objective was to investigate the associations with all-cause mortality of sugar- and artificially sweetened beverages and naturally sweet juices. METHODS: Setting: UK Biobank, UK. Participants joined the UK Biobank study from 2006 to 2010 and were followed up until 2016; 198,285 men and women aged 40-69 years were eligible for this study (40% of the UK Biobank), of whom 3166 (1.6%) died over a mean of 7 years follow-up. DESIGN: prospective population-based cohort study. Exposure variables: dietary consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, artificially sweetened beverages, naturally sweet juices (100% fruit/vegetable juices) and total sugar intake, self-reported via 24-h dietary assessment tool completed between 2009 and 2012. MAIN OUTCOME: all-cause mortality. Cox regression analyses were used to study the association between the daily intake of the above beverages and all-cause mortality. Models were adjusted for sociodemographic, economic, lifestyle and dietary confounders. RESULTS: Total energy intake, total sugar intake and percentage of energy derived from sugar were comparable among participants who consumed > 2/day sugar-sweetened beverages and > 2/day fruit/vegetable juices (10,221 kJ/day versus 10,381 kJ/day; 183 g versus 190 g; 30.6% versus 31.0%). All-cause mortality was associated with total sugar intake (highest quintile adj. HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.06-1.55) and intake of sugar-sweetened beverages (> 2/day adj. HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.42-2.37) and remained so in sensitivity analyses. An association between artificially sweetened beverage intake and mortality did not persist after excluding deaths in the first 2 years of follow-up (landmark analysis) nor after excluding participants with recent weight loss. Furthermore, the inverse association between fruit/vegetable juice intake and mortality did not persist after additional adjustment for a diet quality score. CONCLUSIONS: Higher mortality is associated with sugar-sweetened beverages specifically. The lack of an adverse association with fruit/vegetable juices suggests that source of sugar may be important and the association with artificially sweetened beverage may reflect reverse causation.
Subject(s)
Fruit and Vegetable Juices/analysis , Sugars/chemistry , Sweetening Agents/chemistry , Adult , Biological Specimen Banks , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , Prospective Studies , United KingdomABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To investigate severe COVID-19 risk by occupational group. METHODS: Baseline UK Biobank data (2006-10) for England were linked to SARS-CoV-2 test results from Public Health England (16 March to 26 July 2020). Included participants were employed or self-employed at baseline, alive and aged <65 years in 2020. Poisson regression models were adjusted sequentially for baseline demographic, socioeconomic, work-related, health, and lifestyle-related risk factors to assess risk ratios (RRs) for testing positive in hospital or death due to COVID-19 by three occupational classification schemes (including Standard Occupation Classification (SOC) 2000). RESULTS: Of 120 075 participants, 271 had severe COVID-19. Relative to non-essential workers, healthcare workers (RR 7.43, 95% CI 5.52 to 10.00), social and education workers (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.82) and other essential workers (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.45) had a higher risk of severe COVID-19. Using more detailed groupings, medical support staff (RR 8.70, 95% CI 4.87 to 15.55), social care (RR 2.46, 95% CI 1.47 to 4.14) and transport workers (RR 2.20, 95% CI 1.21 to 4.00) had the highest risk within the broader groups. Compared with white non-essential workers, non-white non-essential workers had a higher risk (RR 3.27, 95% CI 1.90 to 5.62) and non-white essential workers had the highest risk (RR 8.34, 95% CI 5.17 to 13.47). Using SOC 2000 major groups, associate professional and technical occupations, personal service occupations and plant and machine operatives had a higher risk, compared with managers and senior officials. CONCLUSIONS: Essential workers have a higher risk of severe COVID-19. These findings underscore the need for national and organisational policies and practices that protect and support workers with an elevated risk of severe COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
Background and Purpose- The FOCUS trial (Fluoxetine or Control Under Supervision) showed that fluoxetine did not improve modified Rankin Scale scores (mRS) but increased the risk of fractures. We aimed to describe the fractures, their impact on mRS and factors associated with fracture risk. Methods- A United Kingdom, multicenter, parallel-group, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Patients ≥18 years with a clinical stroke and persisting deficit assessed 2 to 15 days after onset were eligible. Consenting patients were allocated fluoxetine 20 mg or matching placebo for 6 months. The primary outcome was the mRS at 6 months and secondary outcomes included fractures. Results- Sixty-five of 3127 (2.1%) patients had 67 fractures within 6 months of randomization; 43 assigned fluoxetine and 22 placebo. Fifty-nine (90.8%) had fallen and 26 (40%) had fractured their neck of femur. The effect of fluoxetine on mRS (common odds ratio =0.951) was not significantly altered by excluding fracture patients (common odds ratio =0.961). Cox proportional hazards modeling showed that only age >70 year (hazard ratio =1.97; 95% CI, 1.13-3.45; P=0.017), female sex (hazard ratio =2.13; 95% CI, 1.29-3.51; P=0.003), and fluoxetine (hazard ratio =2.00; 95% CI, 1.20-3.34; P=0.008) were independently associated with fractures. Conclusions- Most fractures resulted from falls. Although many fractures were serious, and likely to impair patients' function, the increased fracture risk did not explain the lack of observed effect of fluoxetine on mRS. Only increasing age, female sex, and fluoxetine were independent predictors of fractures. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN83290762.
Subject(s)
Accidental Falls , Femoral Neck Fractures , Fluoxetine , Stroke , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Femoral Neck Fractures/chemically induced , Femoral Neck Fractures/epidemiology , Fluoxetine/administration & dosage , Fluoxetine/adverse effects , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Sex Factors , Stroke/drug therapy , Stroke/epidemiology , Time Factors , United KingdomABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Ovarian failure is a common toxic effect of chemotherapy. Studies of the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists to protect ovarian function have shown mixed results and lack data on pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: We randomly assigned 257 premenopausal women with operable hormone-receptor-negative breast cancer to receive standard chemotherapy with the GnRH agonist goserelin (goserelin group) or standard chemotherapy without goserelin (chemotherapy-alone group). The primary study end point was the rate of ovarian failure at 2 years, with ovarian failure defined as the absence of menses in the preceding 6 months and levels of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) in the postmenopausal range. Rates were compared with the use of conditional logistic regression. Secondary end points included pregnancy outcomes and disease-free and overall survival. RESULTS: At baseline, 218 patients were eligible and could be evaluated. Among 135 with complete primary end-point data, the ovarian failure rate was 8% in the goserelin group and 22% in the chemotherapy-alone group (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09 to 0.97; two-sided P=0.04). Owing to missing primary end-point data, sensitivity analyses were performed, and the results were consistent with the main findings. Missing data did not differ according to treatment group or according to the stratification factors of age and planned chemotherapy regimen. Among the 218 patients who could be evaluated, pregnancy occurred in more women in the goserelin group than in the chemotherapy-alone group (21% vs. 11%, P=0.03); women in the goserelin group also had improved disease-free survival (P=0.04) and overall survival (P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although missing data weaken interpretation of the findings, administration of goserelin with chemotherapy appeared to protect against ovarian failure, reducing the risk of early menopause and improving prospects for fertility. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; POEMS/S0230 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00068601.).
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone/agonists , Goserelin/therapeutic use , Primary Ovarian Insufficiency/prevention & control , Adult , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/mortality , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Goserelin/adverse effects , Humans , Middle Aged , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Rate , Premenopause , Primary Ovarian Insufficiency/chemically induced , Regression AnalysisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. METHODS: In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. RESULTS: Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6-8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64-1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI <1·25), but its superiority to tamoxifen was not (p=0·49). A total of 69 deaths were recorded (33 for anastrozole vs 36 for tamoxifen; HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·58-1·50], p=0·78), and no specific cause was more common in one group than the other. The number of women reporting any adverse event was similar between anastrozole (1323 women, 91%) and tamoxifen (1379 women, 93%); the side-effect profiles of the two drugs differed, with more fractures, musculoskeletal events, hypercholesterolaemia, and strokes with anastrozole and more muscle spasm, gynaecological cancers and symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, and deep vein thromboses with tamoxifen. CONCLUSIONS: No clear efficacy differences were seen between the two treatments. Anastrozole offers another treatment option for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS, which may be be more appropriate for some women with contraindications for tamoxifen. Longer follow-up will be necessary to fully evaluate treatment differences. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, Breast Cancer Research Fund, AstraZeneca, Sanofi Aventis.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use , Aromatase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/prevention & control , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/prevention & control , Nitriles/therapeutic use , Tamoxifen/therapeutic use , Triazoles/therapeutic use , Administration, Oral , Anastrozole , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/administration & dosage , Aromatase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Aromatase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Intention to Treat Analysis , Middle Aged , Nitriles/administration & dosage , Nitriles/adverse effects , Postmenopause , Tamoxifen/administration & dosage , Tamoxifen/adverse effects , Triazoles/administration & dosage , Triazoles/adverse effectsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To examine the effect on cognitive function of adjuvant ovarian function suppression (OFS) for breast cancer. METHODS: The Suppression of Ovarian Function (SOFT) trial randomised premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer to 5 years adjuvant endocrine therapy with tamoxifen+OFS, exemestane+OFS or tamoxifen alone. The Co-SOFT substudy assessed objective cognitive function and patient reported outcomes at randomisation (T0), and 1 year later (T1); the primary endpoint was change in global cognitive function, measured by the composite objective cognitive function score. Data were compared for the pooled tamoxifen+OFS and exemestane+OFS groups vs the tamoxifen alone group using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: Of 86 participants, 74 underwent both T0 and T1 cognitive testing; 54 randomised to OFS+ either tamoxifen (28) or exemestane (26) and 20 randomised to tamoxifen alone. There was no significant difference in the changes in the composite cognitive function scores between the OFS+ tamoxifen or exemestane groups and the tamoxifen group (mean±s.d., -0.21±0.92 vs -0.04±0.49, respectively, P=0.71, effect size=-0.20), regardless of prior chemotherapy status, and adjusting for baseline characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The Co-SOFT study, although limited by small samples size, provides no evidence that adding OFS to adjuvant oral endocrine therapy substantially affects global cognitive function.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/complications , Ovary/metabolism , Tamoxifen/therapeutic use , Adjuvants, Immunologic , Adult , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Cognition , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Premenopause , Quality of LifeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Aromatase inhibitor induced musculoskeletal syndrome is experienced by approximately half of women taking aromatase inhibitors, impairing quality of life and leading some to discontinue treatment. Evidence for effective treatments is lacking. We aimed to understand the manifestations and impact of this syndrome in the Australian breast cancer community, and strategies used for its management. METHODS: A survey invitation was sent to 2390 members of the Breast Cancer Network Australia Review and Survey Group in April 2014. The online questionnaire included 45 questions covering demographics, aromatase inhibitor use, clinical manifestations and risk factors for the aromatase inhibitor musculoskeletal syndrome, reasons for treatment discontinuation and efficacy of interventions used. RESULTS: Aromatase inhibitor induced musculoskeletal syndrome was reported by 302 (82 %) of 370 respondents. Twenty-seven percent had discontinued treatment for any reason and of these, 68 % discontinued because of the musculoskeletal syndrome. Eighty-one percent had used at least one intervention from the following three categories to manage the syndrome: doctor prescribed medications, over-the-counter/complementary medicines or alternative/non-drug therapies. Anti-inflammatories, paracetamol (acetaminophen) and yoga were most successful in relieving symptoms in each of the respective categories. Almost a third of respondents reported that one or more interventions helped prevent aromatase inhibitor discontinuation. However, approximately 20 % of respondents found no intervention effective in any category. CONCLUSION: We conclude that aromatase inhibitor induced musculoskeletal syndrome is a significant issue for Australian women and is an important reason for treatment discontinuation. Women use a variety of interventions to manage this syndrome; however, their efficacy appears limited.
Subject(s)
Aromatase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Musculoskeletal Diseases/chemically induced , Musculoskeletal Diseases/epidemiology , Australia/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Musculoskeletal Diseases/therapy , Quality of Life , Surveys and Questionnaires , Syndrome , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Four previously published randomised clinical trials have shown that tamoxifen can reduce the risk of breast cancer in healthy women at increased risk of breast cancer in the first 10 years of follow-up. We report the long-term follow-up of the IBIS-I trial, in which the participants and investigators remain largely masked to treatment allocation. METHODS: In the IBIS-I randomised controlled trial, premenopausal and postmenopausal women 35-70 years of age deemed to be at an increased risk of developing breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral tamoxifen 20 mg daily or matching placebo for 5 years. Patients were randomly assigned to the two treatment groups by telephone or fax according to a block randomisation schedule (permuted block sizes of six or ten). Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment by use of central randomisation and coded drug supply. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of breast cancer (invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ), analysed by intention to treat. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess breast cancer occurrence and mortality. The trial is closed to recruitment and active treatment is completed, but long-term follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with controlledtrials.com, number ISRCTN91879928. FINDINGS: Between April 14, 1992, and March 30, 2001, 7154 eligible women recruited from genetics clinics and breast care clinics in eight countries were enrolled into the IBIS-I trial and were randomly allocated to the two treatment groups: 3579 to tamoxifen and 3575 to placebo. After a median follow up of 16.0 years (IQR 14.1-17.6), 601 breast cancers have been reported (251 [7.0%] in 3579 patients in the tamoxifen group vs 350 [9.8%] in 3575 women in the placebo group; hazard ratio [HR] 0.71 [95% CI 0.60-0.83], p<0.0001). The risk of developing breast cancer was similar between years 0-10 (226 [6.3%] in 3575 women in the placebo group vs 163 [4.6%] in 3579 women in the tamoxifen group; hazard ratio [HR] 0.72 [95% CI 0.59-0.88], p=0.001) and after 10 years (124 [3.8%] in 3295 women vs 88 [2.6%] in 3343, respectively; HR 0.69 [0.53-0.91], p=0.009). The greatest reduction in risk was seen in invasive oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer (HR 0.66 [95% CI 0.54-0.81], p<0.0001) and ductal carcinoma in situ (0.65 [0.43-1.00], p=0.05), but no effect was noted for invasive oestrogen receptor-negative breast cancer (HR 1.05 [95% CI 0.71-1.57], p=0.8). INTERPRETATION: These results show that tamoxifen offers a very long period of protection after treatment cessation, and thus substantially improves the benefit-to-harm ratio of the drug for breast cancer prevention. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK (UK) and the National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia).
Subject(s)
Anticarcinogenic Agents/administration & dosage , Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/prevention & control , Tamoxifen/administration & dosage , Administration, Oral , Adult , Aged , Anticarcinogenic Agents/adverse effects , Australia , Biomarkers, Tumor/analysis , Breast Neoplasms/chemistry , Breast Neoplasms/etiology , Breast Neoplasms/mortality , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/chemistry , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/etiology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/mortality , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/pathology , Drug Administration Schedule , Europe , Female , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Invasiveness , New Zealand , Odds Ratio , Proportional Hazards Models , Receptors, Estrogen/analysis , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Tamoxifen/adverse effects , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Aromatase inhibitors effectively prevent breast cancer recurrence and development of new contralateral tumours in postmenopausal women. We assessed the efficacy and safety of the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole for prevention of breast cancer in postmenopausal women who are at high risk of the disease. METHODS: Between Feb 2, 2003, and Jan 31, 2012, we recruited postmenopausal women aged 40-70 years from 18 countries into an international, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. To be eligible, women had to be at increased risk of breast cancer (judged on the basis of specific criteria). Eligible women were randomly assigned (1:1) by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or matching placebo every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by country and was done with blocks (size six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation; only the trial statistician was unmasked. The primary endpoint was histologically confirmed breast cancer (invasive cancers or non-invasive ductal carcinoma in situ). Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN31488319. FINDINGS: 1920 women were randomly assigned to receive anastrozole and 1944 to placebo. After a median follow-up of 5·0 years (IQR 3·0-7·1), 40 women in the anastrozole group (2%) and 85 in the placebo group (4%) had developed breast cancer (hazard ratio 0·47, 95% CI 0·32-0·68, p<0·0001). The predicted cumulative incidence of all breast cancers after 7 years was 5·6% in the placebo group and 2·8% in the anastrozole group. 18 deaths were reported in the anastrozole group and 17 in the placebo group, and no specific causes were more common in one group than the other (p=0·836). INTERPRETATION: Anastrozole effectively reduces incidence of breast cancer in high-risk postmenopausal women. This finding, along with the fact that most of the side-effects associated with oestrogen deprivation were not attributable to treatment, provides support for the use of anastrozole in postmenopausal women at high risk of breast cancer. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, the National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, Sanofi-Aventis, and AstraZeneca.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use , Aromatase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/prevention & control , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/prevention & control , Carcinoma, Lobular/prevention & control , Nitriles/therapeutic use , Triazoles/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Anastrozole , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Middle Aged , Postmenopause , Proportional Hazards Models , Risk Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Kyoto Breast Cancer Consensus Conference, Kyoto, Japan, 18-20 February 2014 The loco-regional management of breast cancer is increasingly complex with application of primary systemic therapies, oncoplastic techniques and genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility. Personalization of loco-regional treatment is integral to optimization of breast cancer care. Clinical and pathological tumor stage, biological features and host factors influence loco-regional treatment strategies and extent of surgical procedures. Key issues including axillary staging, axillary treatment, radiation therapy, primary systemic therapy (PST), preoperative hormonal therapy and genetic predisposition were identified and discussed at the Kyoto Breast Cancer Consensus Conference (KBCCC2014). In the first of a two part conference scene, consensus recommendations for axillary management are presented and focus on the following topics: indications for completion axillary lymph node dissection in primary surgical patients with ≤2 macrometastases or any sentinel nodal deposits after PST; the timing of sentinel lymph node biopsy in the context of PST; use of axillary irradiation as a component of primary treatment plans and the role of intraoperative node assessment in the post-Z0011 era.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Precision Medicine , Disease Management , Female , HumansABSTRACT
Kyoto Breast Cancer Consensus Conference, Kyoto, Japan, 18-20 February 2014 The loco-regional management of breast cancer is increasingly complex with application of primary systemic therapies, oncoplastic techniques and genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility. Personalization of loco-regional treatment is integral to optimization of breast cancer care. Clinical and pathological tumor stage, biological features and host factors influence loco-regional treatment strategies and extent of surgical procedures. Key issues including axillary staging, axillary treatment, radiation therapy, primary systemic therapy (PST), preoperative hormonal therapy and genetic predisposition were identified and discussed at the Kyoto Breast Cancer Consensus Conference (KBCCC2014). In the second of a two part conference scene, consensus recommendations for radiation treatment, primary systemic therapies and management of genetic predisposition are reported and focus on the following topics: influence of both clinical response to PST and stage at presentation on recommendations for postmastectomy radiotherapy; use of regional nodal irradiation in selected node-positive patients and those with adverse pathological factors; extent of surgical resection following downstaging of tumors with PST; use of preoperative hormonal therapy in premenopausal women with larger, node-negative luminal A-like tumors and managing increasing demands for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in patients with a unilateral sporadic breast cancer.