Influence of autozygosity on common disease risk across the phenotypic spectrum.

Autozygosity is associated with rare Mendelian disorders and clinically relevant quantitative traits. We investigated associations between the fraction of the genome in runs of homozygosity (FROH) and common diseases in Genes & Health (n = 23,978 British South Asians), UK Biobank (n = 397,184), and 23andMe. We show that restricting analysis to offspring of first cousins is an effective way of reducing confounding due to social/environmental correlates of FROH. Within this group in G&H+UK Biobank, we found experiment-wide significant associations between FROH and twelve common diseases. We replicated associations with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and post-traumatic stress disorder via within-sibling analysis in 23andMe (median n = 480,282). We estimated that autozygosity due to consanguinity accounts for 5%-18% of T2D cases among British Pakistanis. Our work highlights the possibility of widespread non-additive genetic effects on common diseases and has important implications for global populations with high rates of consanguinity.

Addressing Ancestry and Sex Bias in Pharmacogenomics.

The association of an individual's genetic makeup with their response to drugs is referred to as pharmacogenomics. By understanding the relationship between genetic variants and drug efficacy or toxicity, we are able to optimize pharmacological therapy according to an individual's genotype. Pharmacogenomics research has historically suffered from bias and underrepresentation of people from certain ancestry groups and of the female sex. These biases can arise from factors such as drugs and indications studied, selection of study participants, and methods used to collect and analyze data. To examine the representation of biogeographical populations in pharmacogenomic data sets, we describe individuals involved in gene-drug response studies from PharmGKB, a leading repository of drug-gene annotations, and showcaseCYP2D6, a gene that metabolizes approximately 25% of all prescribed drugs. We also show how the historical underrepresentation of females in clinical trials has led to significantly more adverse drug reactions in females than in males.

Factors associated with COVID-19-related death using OpenSAFELY.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly affected mortality worldwide1. There is unprecedented urgency to understand who is most at risk of severe outcomes, and this requires new approaches for the timely analysis of large datasets. Working on behalf of NHS England, we created OpenSAFELY-a secure health analytics platform that covers 40% of all patients in England and holds patient data within the existing data centre of a major vendor of primary care electronic health records. Here we used OpenSAFELY to examine factors associated with COVID-19-related death. Primary care records of 17,278,392 adults were pseudonymously linked to 10,926 COVID-19-related deaths. COVID-19-related death was associated with: being male (hazard ratio (HR) 1.59 (95% confidence interval 1.53-1.65)); greater age and deprivation (both with a strong gradient); diabetes; severe asthma; and various other medical conditions. Compared with people of white ethnicity, Black and South Asian people were at higher risk, even after adjustment for other factors (HR 1.48 (1.29-1.69) and 1.45 (1.32-1.58), respectively). We have quantified a range of clinical factors associated with COVID-19-related death in one of the largest cohort studies on this topic so far. More patient records are rapidly being added to OpenSAFELY, we will update and extend our results regularly.

Trends in weight gain recorded in English primary care before and during the Coronavirus-19 pandemic: An observational cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform.

BACKGROUND: Obesity and rapid weight gain are established risk factors for noncommunicable diseases and have emerged as independent risk factors for severe disease following Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Restrictions imposed to reduce COVID-19 transmission resulted in profound societal changes that impacted many health behaviours, including physical activity and nutrition, associated with rate of weight gain. We investigated which clinical and sociodemographic characteristics were associated with rapid weight gain and the greatest acceleration in rate of weight gain during the pandemic among adults registered with an English National Health Service (NHS) general practitioner (GP) during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND FINDINGS: With the approval of NHS England, we used the OpenSAFELY platform inside TPP to conduct an observational cohort study of routinely collected electronic healthcare records. We investigated changes in body mass index (BMI) values recorded in English primary care between March 2015 and March 2022. We extracted data on 17,742,365 adults aged 18 to 90 years old (50.1% female, 76.1% white British) registered with an English primary care practice. We estimated individual rates of weight gain before (δ-prepandemic) and during (δ-pandemic) the pandemic and identified individuals with rapid weight gain (>0.5 kg/m2/year) in each period. We also estimated the change in rate of weight gain between the prepandemic and pandemic period (δ-change = δ-pandemic-δ-prepandemic) and defined extreme accelerators as the 10% of individuals with the greatest increase in their rate of weight gain (δ-change ≥1.84 kg/m2/year) between these periods. We estimated associations with these outcomes using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, index of multiple deprivation (IMD), and ethnicity. P-values were generated in regression models. The median BMI of our study population was 27.8 kg/m2, interquartile range (IQR) [24.3, 32.1] in 2019 (March 2019 to February 2020) and 28.0 kg/m2, IQR [24.4, 32.6] in 2021. Rapid pandemic weight gain was associated with sex, age, and IMD. Male sex (male versus female: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.76, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) [0.76, 0.76], p < 0.001), older age (e.g., 50 to 59 years versus 18 to 29 years: aOR 0.60, 95% CI [0.60, 0.61], p < 0.001]); and living in less deprived areas (least-deprived-IMD-quintile versus most-deprived: aOR 0.77, 95% CI [0.77, 0.78] p < 0.001) reduced the odds of rapid weight gain. Compared to white British individuals, all other ethnicities had lower odds of rapid pandemic weight gain (e.g., Indian versus white British: aOR 0.69, 95% CI [0.68, 0.70], p < 0.001). Long-term conditions (LTCs) increased the odds, with mental health conditions having the greatest effect (e.g., depression (aOR 1.18, 95% CI [1.17, 1.18], p < 0.001)). Similar characteristics increased odds of extreme acceleration in the rate of weight gain between the prepandemic and pandemic periods. However, changes in healthcare activity during the pandemic may have introduced new bias to the data. CONCLUSIONS: We found female sex, younger age, deprivation, white British ethnicity, and mental health conditions were associated with rapid pandemic weight gain and extreme acceleration in rate of weight gain between the prepandemic and pandemic periods. Our findings highlight the need to incorporate sociodemographic, physical, and mental health characteristics when formulating research, policies, and interventions targeting BMI in the period of post pandemic service restoration and in future pandemic planning.

OpenSAFELY: A platform for analysing electronic health records designed for reproducible research.

Electronic health records (EHRs) and other administrative health data are increasingly used in research to generate evidence on the effectiveness, safety, and utilisation of medical products and services, and to inform public health guidance and policy. Reproducibility is a fundamental step for research credibility and promotes trust in evidence generated from EHRs. At present, ensuring research using EHRs is reproducible can be challenging for researchers. Research software platforms can provide technical solutions to enhance the reproducibility of research conducted using EHRs. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we developed the secure, transparent, analytic open-source software platform OpenSAFELY designed with reproducible research in mind. OpenSAFELY mitigates common barriers to reproducible research by: standardising key workflows around data preparation; removing barriers to code-sharing in secure analysis environments; enforcing public sharing of programming code and codelists; ensuring the same computational environment is used everywhere; integrating new and existing tools that encourage and enable the use of reproducible working practices; and providing an audit trail for all code that is run against the real data to increase transparency. This paper describes OpenSAFELY's reproducibility-by-design approach in detail.

Ethnic differences in early onset multimorbidity and associations with health service use, long-term prescribing, years of life lost, and mortality: A cross-sectional study using clustering in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

BACKGROUND: The population prevalence of multimorbidity (the existence of at least 2 or more long-term conditions [LTCs] in an individual) is increasing among young adults, particularly in minority ethnic groups and individuals living in socioeconomically deprived areas. In this study, we applied a data-driven approach to identify clusters of individuals who had an early onset multimorbidity in an ethnically and socioeconomically diverse population. We identified associations between clusters and a range of health outcomes. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using linked primary and secondary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD (CPRD GOLD), we conducted a cross-sectional study of 837,869 individuals with early onset multimorbidity (aged between 16 and 39 years old when the second LTC was recorded) registered with an English general practice between 2010 and 2020. The study population included 777,906 people of White ethnicity (93%), 33,915 people of South Asian ethnicity (4%), and 26,048 people of Black African/Caribbean ethnicity (3%). A total of 204 LTCs were considered. Latent class analysis stratified by ethnicity identified 4 clusters of multimorbidity in White groups and 3 clusters in South Asian and Black groups. We found that early onset multimorbidity was more common among South Asian (59%, 33,915) and Black (56% 26,048) groups compared to the White population (42%, 777,906). Latent class analysis revealed physical and mental health conditions that were common across all ethnic groups (i.e., hypertension, depression, and painful conditions). However, each ethnic group also presented exclusive LTCs and different sociodemographic profiles: In White groups, the cluster with the highest rates/odds of the outcomes was predominantly male (54%, 44,150) and more socioeconomically deprived than the cluster with the lowest rates/odds of the outcomes. On the other hand, South Asian and Black groups were more socioeconomically deprived than White groups, with a consistent deprivation gradient across all multimorbidity clusters. At the end of the study, 4% (34,922) of the White early onset multimorbidity population had died compared to 2% of the South Asian and Black early onset multimorbidity populations (535 and 570, respectively); however, the latter groups died younger and lost more years of life. The 3 ethnic groups each displayed a cluster of individuals with increased rates of primary care consultations, hospitalisations, long-term prescribing, and odds of mortality. Study limitations include the exclusion of individuals with missing ethnicity information, the age of diagnosis not reflecting the actual age of onset, and the exclusion of people from Mixed, Chinese, and other ethnic groups due to insufficient power to investigate associations between multimorbidity and health-related outcomes in these groups. CONCLUSIONS: These findings emphasise the need to identify, prevent, and manage multimorbidity early in the life course. Our work provides additional insights into the excess burden of early onset multimorbidity in those from socioeconomically deprived and diverse groups who are disproportionately and more severely affected by multimorbidity and highlights the need to ensure healthcare improvements are equitable.

Addressing health inequalities in diabetes through research: Recommendations from Diabetes UK's 2022 health inequalities in diabetes workshop.

AIMS: To develop a position statement which identifies research priorities to address health inequalities in diabetes and provides recommendations to researchers and research funders on how best to conduct research in these areas. METHODS: A two-day research workshop was conducted bringing together research experts in diabetes, research experts in health inequalities, healthcare professionals and people living with diabetes. RESULTS: The following key areas were identified as needing increased focus: How can we improve patient and public involvement and engagement to make diabetes research more inclusive of and relevant to diverse communities? How can we improve research design so that the people who could benefit most are represented? How can we use theories from implementation science to facilitate the uptake of research findings into routine practice to reach the populations with highest need? How can we collate and evaluate local innovation projects and disseminate best practice around tackling health inequalities in diabetes? How can we best collect and use data to address health inequalities in diabetes, including the harnessing of real-world and routinely collected data? How could research funders allocate funds to best address health inequalities in diabetes? How do we ensure the research community is representative of the general population? CONCLUSIONS: This position statement outlines recommendations to address the urgent need to tackle health inequalities in diabetes through research and calls on the diabetes research community to act upon these recommendations to ensure future research works to eliminate unfair and avoidable disparities in health.

Factors associated with depression, anxiety and severe mental illness among adults with atopic eczema or psoriasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests an association between atopic eczema (AE) or psoriasis and mental illness; however, the factors associated with mental illness are unclear. OBJECTIVES: To synthesize and evaluate all available evidence on factors associated with depression, anxiety and severe mental illness (SMI) among adults with AE or psoriasis. METHODS: We searched electronic databases, grey literature databases and clinical trial registries from inception to February 2022 for studies of adults with AE or psoriasis. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort, cross-sectional or case-control studies where effect estimates of factors associated with depression, anxiety or SMI were reported. We did not apply language or geographical restrictions. We assessed risk of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. We synthesized results narratively, and if at least two studies were sufficiently homogeneous, we pooled effect estimates in a random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: We included 21 studies (11 observational, 10 RCTs). No observational studies in AE fulfilled our eligibility criteria. Observational studies in people with psoriasis mostly investigated factors associated with depression or anxiety - one cross-sectional study investigated factors associated with schizophrenia. Pooled effect estimates suggest that female sex and psoriatic arthritis were associated with depression [female sex: odds ratio (OR) 1.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09-2.40, 95% prediction intervals (PIs) 0.62-4.23, I2 = 24.90%, τ2 = 0.05; psoriatic arthritis: OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.56-3.25, 95% PI 0.21-24.23, I2 = 0.00%, τ2 = 0.00] and anxiety (female sex: OR 2.59, 95% CI 1.32-5.07, 95% PI 0.00-3956.27, I2 = 61.90%, τ2 = 0.22; psoriatic arthritis: OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.33-2.94, I2 = 0.00%, τ2 = 0.00). Moderate/severe psoriasis was associated with anxiety (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.05-1.25, I2 0.00%, τ2 = 0.00), but not depression. Evidence from RCTs suggested that adults with AE or psoriasis given placebo had higher depression and anxiety scores compared with comparators given targeted treatment (e.g. biologic agents). CONCLUSIONS: Our review highlights limited existing research on factors associated with depression, anxiety and SMI in adults with AE or psoriasis. Observational evidence on factors associated with depression or anxiety in people with psoriasis was conflicting or from single studies, but some identified factors were consistent with those in the general population. Evidence on factors associated with SMIs in people with AE or psoriasis was particularly limited. Evidence from RCTs suggested that AE and psoriasis treated with placebo was associated with higher depression and anxiety scores compared with skin disease treated with targeted therapy; however, follow-up was limited. Therefore, long-term effects on mental health are unclear.

Long-term oral antibiotic use in people with acne vulgaris in UK primary care: a drug utilization study.

BACKGROUND: The inappropriate use of antibiotics is understood to contribute to antimicrobial resistance. Oral antibiotics are regularly used to treat moderate-to-severe acne vulgaris. In practice, we do not know the typical length of oral antibiotic treatment courses for acne in routine primary care and what proportion of people receive more than one course of treatment following a new acne diagnosis. OBJECTIVES: To describe how oral antibiotics are prescribed for acne over time in UK primary care. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive longitudinal drug utilization study using routinely collected primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD (2004-2019). We included individuals (8-50 years) with a new acne diagnosis recorded between 1 January 2004 and 31 July 2019. RESULTS: We identified 217 410 people with a new acne diagnosis. The median age was 17 years [interquartile range (IQR) 15-25] and median follow-up was 4.3 years (IQR 1.9-7.6). Among people with a new acne diagnosis, 96 703 (44.5%) received 248 560 prescriptions for long-term oral antibiotics during a median follow-up of 5.3 years (IQR 2.8-8.5). The median number of continuous courses of antibiotic therapy (≥ 28 days) per person was four (IQR 2-6). The majority (n = 59 010, 61.0%) of first oral antibiotic prescriptions in those with a recorded acne diagnosis were between the ages of 12 and 18. Most (n = 71 544, 74.0%) first courses for oral antibiotics were for between 28 and 90 days. The median duration of the first course of treatment was 56 days (IQR 50-93 days) and 18 127 (18.7%) of prescriptions of ≥ 28 days were for < 6 weeks. Among people who received a first course of oral antibiotic for ≥ 28 days, 56 261 (58.2%) received a second course after a treatment gap of ≥ 28 days. The median time between first and second courses was 135 days (IQR 67-302). The cumulative duration of exposure to oral antibiotics during follow-up was 255 days (8.5 months). CONCLUSIONS: Further work is needed to understand the consequences of using antibiotics for shorter periods than recommended. Suboptimal treatment duration may result in reduced clinical effectiveness or repeated exposures, potentially contributing to antimicrobial resistance.

Ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in initiation of second-line antidiabetic treatment for people with type 2 diabetes in England: A cross-sectional study.

AIMS: To assess any disparities in the initiation of second-line antidiabetic treatments prescribed among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in England according to ethnicity and social deprivation level. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study used linked primary (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) and secondary care data (Hospital Episode Statistics), and the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD). We included people aged 18 years or older with T2DM who intensified to second-line oral antidiabetic medication between 2014 and 2020 to investigate disparities in second-line antidiabetic treatment prescribing (one of sulphonylureas [SUs], dipeptidyl peptidase-4 [DPP-4] inhibitors, or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 [SGLT2] inhibitors, in combination with metformin) by ethnicity (White, South Asian, Black, mixed/other) and deprivation level (IMD quintiles). We report prescriptions of the alternative treatments by ethnicity and deprivation level according to predicted percentages derived from multivariable, multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 36 023 people, 85% were White, 10% South Asian, 4% Black and 1% mixed/other. After adjustment, the predicted percentages for SGLT2 inhibitor prescribing by ethnicity were 21% (95% confidence interval [CI] 19-23%), 20% (95% CI 18-22%), 19% (95% CI 16-22%) and 17% (95% CI 14-21%) among people with White, South Asian, Black, and mixed/other ethnicity, respectively. After adjustment, the predicted percentages for SGLT2 inhibitor prescribing by deprivation were 22% (95% CI 20-25%) and 19% (95% CI 17-21%) for the least deprived and the most deprived quintile, respectively. When stratifying by prevalent cardiovascular disease (CVD) status, we found lower predicted percentages of people with prevalent CVD prescribed SGLT2 inhibitors compared with people without prevalent CVD across all ethnicity groups and all levels of social deprivation. CONCLUSIONS: Among people with T2DM, there were no substantial differences by ethnicity or deprivation level in the percentage prescribed either SGLT2 inhibitors, DPP-4 inhibitors or SUs as second-line antidiabetic treatment.

Incidence, age at diagnosis and survival with dementia across ethnic groups in England: A longitudinal study using electronic health records.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated the incidence of diagnosed dementia and whether age at diagnosis and survival afterward differs among the United Kingdom's three largest ethnic groups. METHODS: We used primary care electronic health records, linked Hospital Episode Statistics and mortality data for adults aged ≥65 years. We compared recorded dementia incidence 1997-2018, age at diagnosis, survival time and age at death after diagnosis in White, South Asian, and Black people. RESULTS: Dementia incidence was higher in Black people (incidence rate ratios [IRR] 1.22, 95% CI 1.15-1.30). South Asian and Black people with dementia had a younger age of death than White participants (mean difference for South Asian participants -2.97 years, (95% CI -3.41 to -2.53); and Black participants -2.66 years, (95% CI -3.08 to -2.24). DISCUSSION: South Asian and Black peoples' younger age of diagnosis and death means targeted prevention and care strategies for these groups should be prioritized and tailored to facilitate take-up.

Type 2 diabetes risks and determinants in second-generation migrants and mixed ethnicity people of South Asian and African Caribbean descent in the UK.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Excess risks of type 2 diabetes in UK South Asians (SA) and African Caribbeans (AC) compared with Europeans remain unexplained. We studied risks and determinants of type 2 diabetes in first- and second-generation (born in the UK) migrants, and in those of mixed ethnicity. METHODS: Data from the UK Biobank, a population-based cohort of ~500,000 participants aged 40-69 at recruitment, were used. Type 2 diabetes was assigned using self-report and HbA1c. Ethnicity was both self-reported and genetically assigned using admixture level scores. European, mixed European/South Asian (MixESA), mixed European/African Caribbean (MixEAC), SA and AC groups were analysed, matched for age and sex to enable comparison. In the frames of this cross-sectional study, we compared type 2 diabetes in second- vs first-generation migrants, and mixed ethnicity vs non-mixed groups. Risks and explanations were analysed using logistic regression and mediation analysis, respectively. RESULTS: Type 2 diabetes prevalence was markedly elevated in SA (599/3317 = 18%) and AC (534/4180 = 13%) compared with Europeans (140/3324 = 4%). Prevalence was lower in second- vs first-generation SA (124/1115 = 11% vs 155/1115 = 14%) and AC (163/2200 = 7% vs 227/2200 = 10%). Favourable adiposity (i.e. lower waist/hip ratio or BMI) contributed to lower risk in second-generation migrants. Type 2 diabetes in mixed populations (MixESA: 52/831 = 6%, MixEAC: 70/1045 = 7%) was lower than in comparator ethnic groups (SA: 18%, AC: 13%) and higher than in Europeans (4%). Greater socioeconomic deprivation accounted for 17% and 42% of the excess type 2 diabetes risk in MixESA and MixEAC compared with Europeans, respectively. Replacing self-reported with genetically assigned ethnicity corroborated the mixed ethnicity analysis. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Type 2 diabetes risks in second-generation SA and AC migrants are a fifth lower than in first-generation migrants. Mixed ethnicity risks were markedly lower than SA and AC groups, though remaining higher than in Europeans. Distribution of environmental risk factors, largely obesity and socioeconomic status, appears to play a key role in accounting for ethnic differences in type 2 diabetes risk.

Severity of Severe Acute Respiratory System Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Alpha Variant (B.1.1.7) in England.

BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) alpha variant (B.1.1.7) is associated with higher transmissibility than wild-type virus, becoming the dominant variant in England by January 2021. We aimed to describe the severity of the alpha variant in terms of the pathway of disease from testing positive to hospital admission and death. METHODS: With the approval of NHS England, we linked individual-level data from primary care with SARS-CoV-2 community testing, hospital admission, and Office for National Statistics all-cause death data. We used testing data with S-gene target failure as a proxy for distinguishing alpha and wild-type cases, and stratified Cox proportional hazards regression to compare the relative severity of alpha cases with wild-type diagnosed from 16 November 2020 to 11 January 2021. RESULTS: Using data from 185 234 people who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the community (alpha = 93 153; wild-type = 92 081), in fully adjusted analysis accounting for individual-level demographics and comorbidities as well as regional variation in infection incidence, we found alpha associated with 73% higher hazards of all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.41-2.13; P < .0001) and 62% higher hazards of hospital admission (1.62; 1.48-1.78; P < .0001) compared with wild-type virus. Among patients already admitted to the intensive care unit, the association between alpha and increased all-cause mortality was smaller and the CI included the null (aHR: 1.20; 95% CI: .74-1.95; P = .45). CONCLUSIONS: The SARS-CoV-2 alpha variant is associated with an increased risk of both hospitalization and mortality than wild-type virus.

Integrating polygenic risk scores in the prediction of type 2 diabetes risk and subtypes in British Pakistanis and Bangladeshis: A population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is highly prevalent in British South Asians, yet they are underrepresented in research. Genes & Health (G&H) is a large, population study of British Pakistanis and Bangladeshis (BPB) comprising genomic and routine health data. We assessed the extent to which genetic risk for T2D is shared between BPB and European populations (EUR). We then investigated whether the integration of a polygenic risk score (PRS) for T2D with an existing risk tool (QDiabetes) could improve prediction of incident disease and the characterisation of disease subtypes. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this observational cohort study, we assessed whether common genetic loci associated with T2D in EUR individuals were replicated in 22,490 BPB individuals in G&H. We replicated fewer loci in G&H (n = 76/338, 22%) than would be expected given power if all EUR-ascertained loci were transferable (n = 101, 30%; p = 0.001). Of the 27 transferable loci that were powered to interrogate this, only 9 showed evidence of shared causal variants. We constructed a T2D PRS and combined it with a clinical risk instrument (QDiabetes) in a novel, integrated risk tool (IRT) to assess risk of incident diabetes. To assess model performance, we compared categorical net reclassification index (NRI) versus QDiabetes alone. In 13,648 patients free from T2D followed up for 10 years, NRI was 3.2% for IRT versus QDiabetes (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.0% to 4.4%). IRT performed best in reclassification of individuals aged less than 40 years deemed low risk by QDiabetes alone (NRI 5.6%, 95% CI 3.6% to 7.6%), who tended to be free from comorbidities and slim. After adjustment for QDiabetes score, PRS was independently associated with progression to T2D after gestational diabetes (hazard ratio (HR) per SD of PRS 1.23, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.42, p = 0.028). Using cluster analysis of clinical features at diabetes diagnosis, we replicated previously reported disease subgroups, including Mild Age-Related, Mild Obesity-related, and Insulin-Resistant Diabetes, and showed that PRS distribution differs between subgroups (p = 0.002). Integrating PRS in this cluster analysis revealed a Probable Severe Insulin Deficient Diabetes (pSIDD) subgroup, despite the absence of clinical measures of insulin secretion or resistance. We also observed differences in rates of progression to micro- and macrovascular complications between subgroups after adjustment for confounders. Study limitations include the absence of an external replication cohort and the potential biases arising from missing or incorrect routine health data. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of the transferability of T2D loci between EUR and BPB indicates the need for larger, multiancestry studies to better characterise the genetic contribution to disease and its varied aetiology. We show that a T2D PRS optimised for this high-risk BPB population has potential clinical application in BPB, improving the identification of T2D risk (especially in the young) on top of an established clinical risk algorithm and aiding identification of subgroups at diagnosis, which may help future efforts to stratify care and treatment of the disease.

Overall and cause-specific hospitalisation and death after COVID-19 hospitalisation in England: A cohort study using linked primary care, secondary care, and death registration data in the OpenSAFELY platform.

BACKGROUND: There is concern about medium to long-term adverse outcomes following acute Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), but little relevant evidence exists. We aimed to investigate whether risks of hospital admission and death, overall and by specific cause, are raised following discharge from a COVID-19 hospitalisation. METHODS AND FINDINGS: With the approval of NHS-England, we conducted a cohort study, using linked primary care and hospital data in OpenSAFELY to compare risks of hospital admission and death, overall and by specific cause, between people discharged from COVID-19 hospitalisation (February to December 2020) and surviving at least 1 week, and (i) demographically matched controls from the 2019 general population; and (ii) people discharged from influenza hospitalisation in 2017 to 2019. We used Cox regression adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, obesity, smoking status, deprivation, and comorbidities considered potential risk factors for severe COVID-19 outcomes. We included 24,673 postdischarge COVID-19 patients, 123,362 general population controls, and 16,058 influenza controls, followed for ≤315 days. COVID-19 patients had median age of 66 years, 13,733 (56%) were male, and 19,061 (77%) were of white ethnicity. Overall risk of hospitalisation or death (30,968 events) was higher in the COVID-19 group than general population controls (fully adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.22, 2.14 to 2.30, p < 0.001) but slightly lower than the influenza group (aHR 0.95, 0.91 to 0.98, p = 0.004). All-cause mortality (7,439 events) was highest in the COVID-19 group (aHR 4.82, 4.48 to 5.19 versus general population controls [p < 0.001] and 1.74, 1.61 to 1.88 versus influenza controls [p < 0.001]). Risks for cause-specific outcomes were higher in COVID-19 survivors than in general population controls and largely similar or lower in COVID-19 compared with influenza patients. However, COVID-19 patients were more likely than influenza patients to be readmitted or die due to their initial infection or other lower respiratory tract infection (aHR 1.37, 1.22 to 1.54, p < 0.001) and to experience mental health or cognitive-related admission or death (aHR 1.37, 1.02 to 1.84, p = 0.039); in particular, COVID-19 survivors with preexisting dementia had higher risk of dementia hospitalisation or death (age- and sex-adjusted HR 2.47, 1.37 to 4.44, p = 0.002). Limitations of our study were that reasons for hospitalisation or death may have been misclassified in some cases due to inconsistent use of codes, and we did not have data to distinguish COVID-19 variants. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that people discharged from a COVID-19 hospital admission had markedly higher risks for rehospitalisation and death than the general population, suggesting a substantial extra burden on healthcare. Most risks were similar to those observed after influenza hospitalisations, but COVID-19 patients had higher risks of all-cause mortality, readmission or death due to the initial infection, and dementia death, highlighting the importance of postdischarge monitoring.

Ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalisation, intensive care unit admission, and death in 17 million adults in England: an observational cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has disproportionately affected minority ethnic populations in the UK. Our aim was to quantify ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 outcomes during the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in England. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of adults (aged ≥18 years) registered with primary care practices in England for whom electronic health records were available through the OpenSAFELY platform, and who had at least 1 year of continuous registration at the start of each study period (Feb 1 to Aug 3, 2020 [wave 1], and Sept 1 to Dec 31, 2020 [wave 2]). Individual-level primary care data were linked to data from other sources on the outcomes of interest: SARS-CoV-2 testing and positive test results and COVID-19-related hospital admissions, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and death. The exposure was self-reported ethnicity as captured on the primary care record, grouped into five high-level census categories (White, South Asian, Black, other, and mixed) and 16 subcategories across these five categories, as well as an unknown ethnicity category. We used multivariable Cox regression to examine ethnic differences in the outcomes of interest. Models were adjusted for age, sex, deprivation, clinical factors and comorbidities, and household size, with stratification by geographical region. FINDINGS: Of 17 288 532 adults included in the study (excluding care home residents), 10 877 978 (62·9%) were White, 1 025 319 (5·9%) were South Asian, 340 912 (2·0%) were Black, 170 484 (1·0%) were of mixed ethnicity, 320 788 (1·9%) were of other ethnicity, and 4 553 051 (26·3%) were of unknown ethnicity. In wave 1, the likelihood of being tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection was slightly higher in the South Asian group (adjusted hazard ratio 1·08 [95% CI 1·07-1·09]), Black group (1·08 [1·06-1·09]), and mixed ethnicity group (1·04 [1·02-1·05]) and was decreased in the other ethnicity group (0·77 [0·76-0·78]) relative to the White group. The risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection was higher in the South Asian group (1·99 [1·94-2·04]), Black group (1·69 [1·62-1·77]), mixed ethnicity group (1·49 [1·39-1·59]), and other ethnicity group (1·20 [1·14-1·28]). Compared with the White group, the four remaining high-level ethnic groups had an increased risk of COVID-19-related hospitalisation (South Asian group 1·48 [1·41-1·55], Black group 1·78 [1·67-1·90], mixed ethnicity group 1·63 [1·45-1·83], other ethnicity group 1·54 [1·41-1·69]), COVID-19-related ICU admission (2·18 [1·92-2·48], 3·12 [2·65-3·67], 2·96 [2·26-3·87], 3·18 [2·58-3·93]), and death (1·26 [1·15-1·37], 1·51 [1·31-1·71], 1·41 [1·11-1·81], 1·22 [1·00-1·48]). In wave 2, the risks of hospitalisation, ICU admission, and death relative to the White group were increased in the South Asian group but attenuated for the Black group compared with these risks in wave 1. Disaggregation into 16 ethnicity groups showed important heterogeneity within the five broader categories. INTERPRETATION: Some minority ethnic populations in England have excess risks of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and of adverse COVID-19 outcomes compared with the White population, even after accounting for differences in sociodemographic, clinical, and household characteristics. Causes are likely to be multifactorial, and delineating the exact mechanisms is crucial. Tackling ethnic inequalities will require action across many fronts, including reducing structural inequalities, addressing barriers to equitable care, and improving uptake of testing and vaccination. FUNDING: Medical Research Council.

Describing the population experiencing COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough following second vaccination in England: a cohort study from OpenSAFELY.

BACKGROUND: While the vaccines against COVID-19 are highly effective, COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough is possible despite being fully vaccinated. With SARS-CoV-2 variants still circulating, describing the characteristics of individuals who have experienced COVID-19 vaccine breakthroughs could be hugely important in helping to determine who may be at greatest risk. METHODS: With the approval of NHS England, we conducted a retrospective cohort study using routine clinical data from the OpenSAFELY-TPP database of fully vaccinated individuals, linked to secondary care and death registry data and described the characteristics of those experiencing COVID-19 vaccine breakthroughs. RESULTS: As of 1st November 2021, a total of 15,501,550 individuals were identified as being fully vaccinated against COVID-19, with a median follow-up time of 149 days (IQR: ​107-179). From within this population, a total of 579,780 (<4%) individuals reported a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. For every 1000 years of patient follow-up time, the corresponding incidence rate (IR) was 98.06 (95% CI 97.93-98.19). There were 28,580 COVID-19-related hospital admissions, 1980 COVID-19-related critical care admissions and 6435 COVID-19-related deaths; corresponding IRs 4.77 (95% CI 4.74-4.80), 0.33 (95% CI 0.32-0.34) and 1.07 (95% CI 1.06-1.09), respectively. The highest rates of breakthrough COVID-19 were seen in those in care homes and in patients with chronic kidney disease, dialysis, transplant, haematological malignancy or who were immunocompromised. CONCLUSIONS: While the majority of COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough cases in England were mild, some differences in rates of breakthrough cases have been identified in several clinical groups. While it is important to note that these findings are simply descriptive and cannot be used to answer why certain groups have higher rates of COVID-19 breakthrough than others, the emergence of the Omicron variant of COVID-19 coupled with the number of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests still occurring is concerning and as numbers of fully vaccinated (and boosted) individuals increases and as follow-up time lengthens, so too will the number of COVID-19 breakthrough cases. Additional analyses, to assess vaccine waning and rates of breakthrough COVID-19 between different variants, aimed at identifying individuals at higher risk, are needed.

Recording of 'COVID-19 vaccine declined': a cohort study on 57.9 million National Health Service patients' records in situ using OpenSAFELY, England, 8 December 2020 to 25 May 2021.

BackgroundPriority patients in England were offered COVID-19 vaccination by mid-April 2021. Codes in clinical record systems can denote the vaccine being declined.AimWe describe records of COVID-19 vaccines being declined, according to clinical and demographic factors.MethodsWith the approval of NHS England, we conducted a retrospective cohort study between 8 December 2020 and 25 May 2021 with primary care records for 57.9 million patients using OpenSAFELY, a secure health analytics platform. COVID-19 vaccination priority patients were those aged ≥ 50 years or ≥ 16 years clinically extremely vulnerable (CEV) or 'at risk'. We describe the proportion recorded as declining vaccination for each group and stratified by clinical and demographic subgroups, subsequent vaccination and distribution of clinical code usage across general practices.ResultsOf 24.5 million priority patients, 663,033 (2.7%) had a decline recorded, while 2,155,076 (8.8%) had neither a vaccine nor decline recorded. Those recorded as declining, who were subsequently vaccinated (n = 125,587; 18.9%) were overrepresented in the South Asian population (32.3% vs 22.8% for other ethnicities aged ≥ 65 years). The proportion of declining unvaccinated patients was highest in CEV (3.3%), varied strongly with ethnicity (black 15.3%, South Asian 5.6%, white 1.5% for ≥ 80 years) and correlated positively with increasing deprivation.ConclusionsClinical codes indicative of COVID-19 vaccinations being declined are commonly used in England, but substantially more common among black and South Asian people, and in more deprived areas. Qualitative research is needed to determine typical reasons for recorded declines, including to what extent they reflect patients actively declining.

Ethnic differences in guideline-indicated statin initiation for people with type 2 diabetes in UK primary care, 2006-2019: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes is 2-3 times more prevalent in people of South Asian and African/African Caribbean ethnicity than people of European ethnicity living in the UK. The former 2 groups also experience excess atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) complications of diabetes. We aimed to study ethnic differences in statin initiation, a cornerstone of ASCVD primary prevention, for people with type 2 diabetes. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Observational cohort study of UK primary care records, from 1 January 2006 to 30 June 2019. Data were studied from 27,511 (88%) people of European ethnicity, 2,386 (8%) people of South Asian ethnicity, and 1,142 (4%) people of African/African Caribbean ethnicity with incident type 2 diabetes, no previous ASCVD, and statin use indicated by guidelines. Statin initiation rates were contrasted by ethnicity, and the number of ASCVD events that could be prevented by equalising prescribing rates across ethnic groups was estimated. Median time to statin initiation was 79, 109, and 84 days for people of European, South Asian, and African/African Caribbean ethnicity, respectively. People of African/African Caribbean ethnicity were a third less likely to receive guideline-indicated statins than European people (n/N [%]: 605/1,142 [53%] and 18,803/27,511 [68%], respectively; age- and gender-adjusted HR 0.67 [95% CI 0.60 to 0.76], p < 0.001). The HR attenuated marginally in a model adjusting for total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio (0.77 [95% CI 0.69 to 0.85], p < 0.001), with no further diminution when deprivation, ASCVD risk factors, comorbidity, polypharmacy, and healthcare usage were accounted for (fully adjusted HR 0.76 [95% CI 0.68, 0.85], p < 0.001). People of South Asian ethnicity were 10% less likely to receive a statin than European people (1,489/2,386 [62%] and 18,803/27,511 [68%], respectively; fully adjusted HR 0.91 [95% CI 0.85 to 0.98], p = 0.008, adjusting for all covariates). We estimated that up to 12,600 ASCVD events could be prevented over the lifetimes of people currently affected by type 2 diabetes in the UK by equalising statin prescribing across ethnic groups. Limitations included incompleteness of recording of routinely collected data. CONCLUSIONS: In this study we observed that people of African/African Caribbean ethnicity with type 2 diabetes were substantially less likely, and people of South Asian ethnicity marginally less likely, to receive guideline-indicated statins than people of European ethnicity, even after accounting for sociodemographics, healthcare usage, ASCVD risk factors, and comorbidity. Underuse of statins in people of African/African Caribbean or South Asian ethnicity with type 2 diabetes is a missed opportunity to prevent cardiovascular events.

Use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and risk of death from COVID-19: an OpenSAFELY cohort analysis based on two cohorts.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the association between routinely prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and deaths from COVID-19 using OpenSAFELY, a secure analytical platform. METHODS: We conducted two cohort studies from 1 March to 14 June 2020. Working on behalf of National Health Service England, we used routine clinical data in England linked to death data. In study 1, we identified people with an NSAID prescription in the last 3 years from the general population. In study 2, we identified people with rheumatoid arthritis/osteoarthritis. We defined exposure as current NSAID prescription within the 4 months before 1 March 2020. We used Cox regression to estimate HRs for COVID-19 related death in people currently prescribed NSAIDs, compared with those not currently prescribed NSAIDs, accounting for age, sex, comorbidities, other medications and geographical region. RESULTS: In study 1, we included 536 423 current NSAID users and 1 927 284 non-users in the general population. We observed no evidence of difference in risk of COVID-19 related death associated with current use (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.14) in the multivariable-adjusted model. In study 2, we included 1 708 781 people with rheumatoid arthritis/osteoarthritis, of whom 175 495 (10%) were current NSAID users. In the multivariable-adjusted model, we observed a lower risk of COVID-19 related death (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.94) associated with current use of NSAID versus non-use. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of a harmful effect of routinely prescribed NSAIDs on COVID-19 related deaths. Risks of COVID-19 do not need to influence decisions about the routine therapeutic use of NSAIDs.