Incidence, Prevalence, and Survival of Prostate Cancer in the UK.

Importance: Incidence, prevalence, and survival are pertinent measures to inform the management and provision of prostate cancer care. Objective: To calculate the incidence, prevalence, and survival rates for prostate cancer in the UK from 2000 to 2021. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study uses routinely collected primary care data from the UK. Male patients aged 18 years or older with at least 1 year of history registered in Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD or Aurum were included. Data were analyzed from January 2023 to March 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prostate cancer incidence rates (IR), period prevalence (PP), and 1-, 5-, and 10-year survival after diagnosis between 2000 and 2021, stratified by age and calendar years. Results: This study included 64 925 and 133 200 patients with prostate cancer in CPRD GOLD and Aurum, respectively, with a median age of 72 (65-78) years. The overall IR of prostate cancer was 151.7 (95% CI, 150.6 to 152.9) per 100 000 person-years in GOLD to 153.1 (95% CI, 152.3 to 153.9) per 100 000 person-years for Aurum and increased with age. The incidence of prostate cancer increased from 109 per 100 000 person-years in 2000 to 159 per 100 000 person-years in 2021. Peaks of incidence occurred in 2004 and 2018, before a decline in 2020. PP increased 3.5 times over the study period for both databases, from 0.4% in 2000 to 1.4% in 2021. IR and PP were highest in those aged 80 to 89 years. Median (95% CI) survival was similar in both databases (GOLD: 10.9 [95% CI, 10.7-11.1] years and Aurum: 11.1 [95% CI, 11.0-11.2] years). Survival at 1, 5, and 10 years after diagnosis were 93.4% (95% CI, 93.2%-93.6%), 71.8% (95% CI, 71.4%-72.2%), 53.2% (95% CI, 52.6%-53.7%) in GOLD and 93.9% (95% CI, 93.7%-94.0%), 72.7% (95% CI, 72.5%-73.0%), 53.7% (95% CI, 53.3%-54.1%) in AURUM, respectively. Survival increased over time: 1-year survival was 94.8% (95% CI, 94.5%-95.2%) in those diagnosed between 2015 to 2019 compared with 90.8% (95% CI, 90.2%-91.3%) from 2000 to 2004; 5-year survival improved from 65.3% (95% CI, 64.4%-66.3%) from 2000 to 2004 to 75.3% (95% CI, 74.4%-76.3%) in 2015 to 2019. Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study, incidence and prevalence increased with older age, with high survival rates reflecting a high burden of disease, particularly in the management of cancer survivorship in an aging population. Health care systems should consider this when managing the increasing numbers of people with prevalent prostate cancer.

Treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus: Analysis of treatment patterns in adult and paediatric patients across four European countries.

OBJECTIVE: Multiple treatment options are recommended for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) by clinical guidelines. This study aimed to explore SLE treatment patterns as there is limited real-world data of SLE medication utilisation, especially in childhood-onset SLE (cSLE). METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal cohort study using five routinely collected healthcare databases from four European countries (United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Spain). We described the characteristics of adult and paediatric patients at time of SLE diagnosis. We calculated the percentage of patients commencing SLE treatments in the first month and year after diagnosis, reported number of prescriptions, starting dose, cumulative dose, and duration of each treatment, and characterised the line of therapy. RESULTS: We characterised 11,255 patients with a first diagnosis of SLE and included 5718 in our medication utilisation analyses. The majority of adult SLE patients were female (range 80-88 %), with median age of 49 to 54 years at diagnosis. In the paediatric cohort (n = 378), 66-83 % of SLE patients were female, with median age of 12 to 16 years at diagnosis. Hydroxychloroquine and glucocorticoids were common first-line treatments in both adults and children, with second-line treatments including mycophenolate mofetil and methotrexate. Few cases of monoclonal antibody use were seen in either cohort. Initial glucocorticoid dosing in paediatric patients was often higher than in adults. CONCLUSION: Treatment choices for adult SLE patients across four European countries were in line with recent therapeutic consensus guidelines. High glucocorticoid prescriptions in paediatric patients suggests the need for steroid-sparing treatment alternatives and paediatric specific guidelines.

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

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

Longitudinal trajectories of frailty are associated with short-term mortality in older people: a joint latent class models analysis using 2 UK primary care databases.

OBJECTIVES: Frailty is a dynamic health state that changes over time. Our hypothesis was that there are identifiable subgroups of the older population that have specific patterns of deterioration. The objective of this study was to evaluate the application of joint latent class model in identifying trajectories of frailty progression over time and their group-specific risk of death in older people. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The primary care records of UK patients, aged over 65 as of January 1, 2010, included in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink: GOLD and AURUM databases, were analyzed and linked to mortality data. The electronic frailty index (eFI) scores were calculated at baseline and annually in subsequent years (2010-2013). Joint latent class model was used to divide the population into clusters with different trajectories and associated mortality hazard ratios. The model was built in GOLD and validated in AURUM. RESULTS: Five trajectory clusters were identified and characterized based on baseline and speed of progression: low-slow, low-moderate, low-rapid, high-slow, and high-rapid. The high-rapid cluster had the highest average starting eFI score; 7.9, while the low-rapid cluster had the steepest rate of eFI progression; 1.7. Taking the low-slow cluster as reference, low-rapid and high-rapid had the highest hazard ratios: 3.73 (95% CI 3.71, 3.76) and 3.63 (3.57-3.69), respectively. Good validation was found in the AURUM population. CONCLUSION: Our research found that there are vulnerable subgroups of the older population who are currently frail or have rapid frailty progression. Such groups may be targeted for greater healthcare monitoring.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The role of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing post-COVID-19 thromboembolic and cardiovascular complications.

OBJECTIVE: To study the association between COVID-19 vaccination and the risk of post-COVID-19 cardiac and thromboembolic complications. METHODS: We conducted a staggered cohort study based on national vaccination campaigns using electronic health records from the UK, Spain and Estonia. Vaccine rollout was grouped into four stages with predefined enrolment periods. Each stage included all individuals eligible for vaccination, with no previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccine at the start date. Vaccination status was used as a time-varying exposure. Outcomes included heart failure (HF), venous thromboembolism (VTE) and arterial thrombosis/thromboembolism (ATE) recorded in four time windows after SARS-CoV-2 infection: 0-30, 31-90, 91-180 and 181-365 days. Propensity score overlap weighting and empirical calibration were used to minimise observed and unobserved confounding, respectively.Fine-Gray models estimated subdistribution hazard ratios (sHR). Random effect meta-analyses were conducted across staggered cohorts and databases. RESULTS: The study included 10.17 million vaccinated and 10.39 million unvaccinated people. Vaccination was associated with reduced risks of acute (30-day) and post-acute COVID-19 VTE, ATE and HF: for example, meta-analytic sHR of 0.22 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.29), 0.53 (0.44 to 0.63) and 0.45 (0.38 to 0.53), respectively, for 0-30 days after SARS-CoV-2 infection, while in the 91-180 days sHR were 0.53 (0.40 to 0.70), 0.72 (0.58 to 0.88) and 0.61 (0.51 to 0.73), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination reduced the risk of post-COVID-19 cardiac and thromboembolic outcomes. These effects were more pronounced for acute COVID-19 outcomes, consistent with known reductions in disease severity following breakthrough versus unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Risk of Arterial and Venous Thrombotic Events Among Patients with COVID-19: A Multi-National Collaboration of Regulatory Agencies from Canada, Europe, and United States.

Purpose: Few studies have examined how the absolute risk of thromboembolism with COVID-19 has evolved over time across different countries. Researchers from the European Medicines Agency, Health Canada, and the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration established a collaboration to evaluate the absolute risk of arterial (ATE) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the 90 days after diagnosis of COVID-19 in the ambulatory (eg, outpatient, emergency department, nursing facility) setting from seven countries across North America (Canada, US) and Europe (England, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Spain) within periods before and during COVID-19 vaccine availability. Patients and Methods: We conducted cohort studies of patients initially diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting from the seven specified countries. Patients were followed for 90 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. The primary outcomes were ATE and VTE over 90 days from diagnosis date. We measured country-level estimates of 90-day absolute risk (with 95% confidence intervals) of ATE and VTE. Results: The seven cohorts included 1,061,565 patients initially diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting before COVID-19 vaccines were available (through November 2020). The 90-day absolute risk of ATE during this period ranged from 0.11% (0.09-0.13%) in Canada to 1.01% (0.97-1.05%) in the US, and the 90-day absolute risk of VTE ranged from 0.23% (0.21-0.26%) in Canada to 0.84% (0.80-0.89%) in England. The seven cohorts included 3,544,062 patients with COVID-19 during vaccine availability (beginning December 2020). The 90-day absolute risk of ATE during this period ranged from 0.06% (0.06-0.07%) in England to 1.04% (1.01-1.06%) in the US, and the 90-day absolute risk of VTE ranged from 0.25% (0.24-0.26%) in England to 1.02% (0.99-1.04%) in the US. Conclusion: There was heterogeneity by country in 90-day absolute risk of ATE and VTE after ambulatory COVID-19 diagnosis both before and during COVID-19 vaccine availability.

Ethnicity data resource in population-wide health records: completeness, coverage and granularity of diversity.

Intersectional social determinants including ethnicity are vital in health research. We curated a population-wide data resource of self-identified ethnicity data from over 60 million individuals in England primary care, linking it to hospital records. We assessed ethnicity data in terms of completeness, consistency, and granularity and found one in ten individuals do not have ethnicity information recorded in primary care. By linking to hospital records, ethnicity data were completed for 94% of individuals. By reconciling SNOMED-CT concepts and census-level categories into a consistent hierarchy, we organised more than 250 ethnicity sub-groups including and beyond "White", "Black", "Asian", "Mixed" and "Other, and found them to be distributed in proportions similar to the general population. This large observational dataset presents an algorithmic hierarchy to represent self-identified ethnicity data collected across heterogeneous healthcare settings. Accurate and easily accessible ethnicity data can lead to a better understanding of population diversity, which is important to address disparities and influence policy recommendations that can translate into better, fairer health for all.

The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines to prevent long COVID symptoms: staggered cohort study of data from the UK, Spain, and Estonia.

BACKGROUND: Although vaccines have proved effective to prevent severe COVID-19, their effect on preventing long-term symptoms is not yet fully understood. We aimed to evaluate the overall effect of vaccination to prevent long COVID symptoms and assess comparative effectiveness of the most used vaccines (ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2). METHODS: We conducted a staggered cohort study using primary care records from the UK (Clinical Practice Research Datalink [CPRD] GOLD and AURUM), Catalonia, Spain (Information System for Research in Primary Care [SIDIAP]), and national health insurance claims from Estonia (CORIVA database). All adults who were registered for at least 180 days as of Jan 4, 2021 (the UK), Feb 20, 2021 (Spain), and Jan 28, 2021 (Estonia) comprised the source population. Vaccination status was used as a time-varying exposure, staggered by vaccine rollout period. Vaccinated people were further classified by vaccine brand according to their first dose received. The primary outcome definition of long COVID was defined as having at least one of 25 WHO-listed symptoms between 90 and 365 days after the date of a PCR-positive test or clinical diagnosis of COVID-19, with no history of that symptom 180 days before SARS-Cov-2 infection. Propensity score overlap weighting was applied separately for each cohort to minimise confounding. Sub-distribution hazard ratios (sHRs) were calculated to estimate vaccine effectiveness against long COVID, and empirically calibrated using negative control outcomes. Random effects meta-analyses across staggered cohorts were conducted to pool overall effect estimates. FINDINGS: A total of 1 618 395 (CPRD GOLD), 5 729 800 (CPRD AURUM), 2 744 821 (SIDIAP), and 77 603 (CORIVA) vaccinated people and 1 640 371 (CPRD GOLD), 5 860 564 (CPRD AURUM), 2 588 518 (SIDIAP), and 302 267 (CORIVA) unvaccinated people were included. Compared with unvaccinated people, overall HRs for long COVID symptoms in people vaccinated with a first dose of any COVID-19 vaccine were 0·54 (95% CI 0·44-0·67) in CPRD GOLD, 0·48 (0·34-0·68) in CPRD AURUM, 0·71 (0·55-0·91) in SIDIAP, and 0·59 (0·40-0·87) in CORIVA. A slightly stronger preventative effect was seen for the first dose of BNT162b2 than for ChAdOx1 (sHR 0·85 [0·60-1·20] in CPRD GOLD and 0·84 [0·74-0·94] in CPRD AURUM). INTERPRETATION: Vaccination against COVID-19 consistently reduced the risk of long COVID symptoms, which highlights the importance of vaccination to prevent persistent COVID-19 symptoms, particularly in adults. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Observational methods for COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness research: an empirical evaluation and target trial emulation.

BACKGROUND: There are scarce data on best practices to control for confounding in observational studies assessing vaccine effectiveness to prevent COVID-19. We compared the performance of three well-established methods [overlap weighting, inverse probability treatment weighting and propensity score (PS) matching] to minimize confounding when comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated people. Subsequently, we conducted a target trial emulation to study the ability of these methods to replicate COVID-19 vaccine trials. METHODS: We included all individuals aged ≥75 from primary care records from the UK [Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) AURUM], who were not infected with or vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 as of 4 January 2021. Vaccination status was then defined based on first COVID-19 vaccine dose exposure between 4 January 2021 and 28 January 2021. Lasso regression was used to calculate PS. Location, age, prior observation time, regional vaccination rates, testing effort and COVID-19 incidence rates at index date were forced into the PS. Following PS weighting and matching, the three methods were compared for remaining covariate imbalance and residual confounding. Last, a target trial emulation comparing COVID-19 at 3 and 12 weeks after first vaccine dose vs unvaccinated was conducted. RESULTS: Vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts comprised 583 813 and 332 315 individuals for weighting, respectively, and 459 000 individuals in the matched cohorts. Overlap weighting performed best in terms of minimizing confounding and systematic error. Overlap weighting successfully replicated estimates from clinical trials for vaccine effectiveness for ChAdOx1 (57%) and BNT162b2 (75%) at 12 weeks. CONCLUSION: Overlap weighting performed best in our setting. Our results based on overlap weighting replicate previous pivotal trials for the two first COVID-19 vaccines approved in Europe.

"The burden of post-acute COVID-19 symptoms in a multinational network cohort analysis".

Persistent symptoms following the acute phase of COVID-19 present a major burden to both the affected and the wider community. We conducted a cohort study including over 856,840 first COVID-19 cases, 72,422 re-infections and more than 3.1 million first negative-test controls from primary care electronic health records from Spain and the UK (Sept 2020 to Jan 2022 (UK)/March 2022 (Spain)). We characterised post-acute COVID-19 symptoms and identified key symptoms associated with persistent disease. We estimated incidence rates of persisting symptoms in the general population and among COVID-19 patients over time. Subsequently, we investigated which WHO-listed symptoms were particularly differential by comparing their frequency in COVID-19 cases vs. matched test-negative controls. Lastly, we compared persistent symptoms after first infections vs. reinfections.Our study shows that the proportion of COVID-19 cases affected by persistent post-acute COVID-19 symptoms declined over the study period. Risk for altered smell/taste was consistently higher in patients with COVID-19 vs test-negative controls. Persistent symptoms were more common after reinfection than following a first infection. More research is needed into the definition of long COVID, and the effect of interventions to minimise the risk and impact of persistent symptoms.

Risk of adverse events following the initiation of antihypertensives in older people with complex health needs: a self-controlled case series in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the risk of adverse events-severe acute kidney injury (AKI), falls and fractures-associated with use of antihypertensives in older patients with complex health needs (CHN). SETTING: UK primary care linked to inpatient and mortality records. METHODS: The source population comprised patients aged >65, with ≥1 year of registration and unexposed to antihypertensives in the year before study start. We identified three cohorts of patients with CHN, namely, unplanned hospitalisations, frailty (electronic frailty index deficit count ≥3) and polypharmacy (prescription of ≥10 medicines). Patients in any of these cohorts were included in the CHN cohort. We conducted self-controlled case series for each cohort and outcome (AKI, falls, fractures). Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were estimated by dividing event rates (i) during overall antihypertensive exposed patient-time over unexposed patient-time; and (ii) in the first 30 days after treatment initiation over unexposed patient-time. RESULTS: Among 42,483 patients in the CHN cohort, 7,240, 5,164 and 450 individuals had falls, fractures or AKI, respectively. We observed an increased risk for AKI associated with exposure to antihypertensives across all cohorts (CHN: IRR 2.36 [95% CI: 1.68-3.31]). In the 30 days post-antihypertensive treatment initiation, a 35-50% increased risk for falls was found across all cohorts and increased fracture risk in the frailty cohort (IRR 1.38 [1.03-1.84]). No increased risk for falls/fractures was associated with continuation of antihypertensive treatment or overall use. CONCLUSION: Treatment with antihypertensives in older patients was associated with increased risk of AKI and transiently elevated risk of falls in the 30 days after starting antihypertensive therapy.

Characterising the treatment of thromboembolic events after COVID-19 vaccination in 4 European countries and the US: An international network cohort study.

Background: Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) has been identified as a rare adverse event following some COVID-19 vaccines. Various guidelines have been issued on the treatment of TTS. We aimed to characterize the treatment of TTS and other thromboembolic events (venous thromboembolism (VTE), and arterial thromboembolism (ATE) after COVID-19 vaccination and compared to historical (pre-vaccination) data in Europe and the US. Methods: We conducted an international network cohort study using 8 primary care, outpatient, and inpatient databases from France, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, The United Kingdom, and The United States. We investigated treatment pathways after the diagnosis of TTS, VTE, or ATE for a pre-vaccination (background) cohort (01/2017-11/2020), and a vaccinated cohort of people followed for 28 days after a dose of any COVID-19 vaccine recorded from 12/2020 onwards). Results: Great variability was observed in the proportion of people treated (with any recommended therapy) across databases, both before and after vaccination. Most patients with TTS received heparins, platelet aggregation inhibitors, or direct Xa inhibitors. The majority of VTE patients (before and after vaccination) were first treated with heparins in inpatient settings and direct Xa inhibitors in outpatient settings. In ATE patients, treatments were also similar before and after vaccinations, with platelet aggregation inhibitors prescribed most frequently. Inpatient and claims data also showed substantial heparin use. Conclusion: TTS, VTE, and ATE after COVID-19 vaccination were treated similarly to background events. Heparin use post-vaccine TTS suggests most events were not identified as vaccine-induced thrombosis with thrombocytopenia by the treating clinicians.

Association between outpatient follow-up and incidence of revision after knee and hip replacements: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Follow-up visits 5 or 7 years after surgery were recommended for people having primary hip or knee replacement. The benefits of this practice to patients and the healthcare system, however, have not yet been specifically examined. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between long-term follow-up outpatient hospital visits and revision rates for patients who undergo primary knee or hip replacement surgery. METHODS: Cohorts were identified for patients undergoing knee or hip replacement surgery using medical records from primary care practices within the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD dataset linked to hospital records from the English Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) data. Two groups of patients were compared in terms of revision and mortality rates: those with at least one long-term (between five and 10 years since primary surgery) follow-up visit at the orthopaedic department ('Follow-up' group), and those without ('No follow-up' group). RESULTS: A total of 9856 (4349 in the Follow-up group) patients with knee replacement and 10,837 (4870 in the Follow-up group) with hip replacement were included in the analysis. For knee replacement, the incidence of revision was 3.6% for those followed-up and 0.6% for those not followed-up. An adjusted regression model confirmed the difference in the hazard ratio (HR) for revision was statistically significant (HR: 5.65 [95% CI 3.62 to 8.81]). Mortality at 4 years was lower for the Follow-up (17%) compared to the No follow-up group (21%), but this difference was not statistically significant (HR: 0.95 [0.84 to 1.07]). For hip replacement, the incidence of revision rates were 3.2 and 1.4% for the follow-up and not follow-up groups, respectively, the difference being statistically significant (HR: 2.34 [1.71 to 3.20]). Mortality was lower for the Follow-up (15%) compared to the No follow-up group (21%), but the difference was not statistically significant (HR: 0.91 [0.81 to 1.02]). CONCLUSION: Patients attending follow-up orthopaedic consultations show a higher risk of revision surgery compared to those who are not followed-up. A cause for this difference could not be identified in this study but a likely explanation is that surgeons play an effective role as ultimate arbitrators when identifying patients to be included in long-term follow-up lists.

Characterising complex health needs and the use of preventive therapies in the older population: a population-based cohort analysis of UK primary care and hospital linked data.

BACKGROUND: While several definitions exist for multimorbidity, frailty or polypharmacy, it is yet unclear to what extent single healthcare markers capture the complexity of health-related needs in older people in the community. We aimed to identify and characterise older people with complex health needs based on healthcare resource use (unplanned hospitalisations or polypharmacy) or frailty using large population-based linked records. METHODS: In this cohort study, data was extracted from UK primary care records (CPRD GOLD), with linked Hospital Episode Statistics inpatient data. People aged > 65 on 1st January 2010, registered in CPRD for ≥ 1 year were included. We identified complex health needs as the top quintile of unplanned hospitalisations, number of prescribed medicines, and electronic frailty index. We characterised all three cohorts, and quantified point-prevalence and incidence rates of preventive medicines use. RESULTS: Overall, 90,597, 110,225 and 116,076 individuals were included in the hospitalisation, frailty, and polypharmacy cohorts respectively; 28,259 (5.9%) were in all three cohorts, while 277,332 (58.3%) were not in any (background population). Frailty and polypharmacy cohorts had the highest bi-directional overlap. Most comorbidities such as diabetes and chronic kidney disease were more common in the frailty and polypharmacy cohorts compared to the hospitalisation cohort. Generally, prevalence of preventive medicines use was highest in the polypharmacy cohort compared to the other two cohorts: For instance, one-year point-prevalence of statins was 64.2% in the polypharmacy cohort vs. 60.5% in the frailty cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Three distinct groups of older people with complex health needs were identified. Compared to the hospitalisation cohort, frailty and polypharmacy cohorts had more comorbidities and higher preventive therapies use. Research is needed into the benefit-risk of different definitions of complex health needs and use of preventive therapies in the older population.

Thrombosis and thrombocytopenia after vaccination against and infection with SARS-CoV-2 in the United Kingdom.

Population-based studies can provide important evidence on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. Using data from the United Kingdom, here we compare observed rates of thrombosis and thrombocytopenia following vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and infection with SARS-CoV-2 with background (expected) rates in the general population. First and second dose cohorts for ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2 between 8 December 2020 and 2 May 2021 in the United Kingdom were identified. A further cohort consisted of people with no prior COVID-19 vaccination who were infected with SARS-Cov-2 identified by a first positive PCR test between 1 September 2020 and 2 May 2021. The fourth general population cohort for background rates included those people in the database as of 1 January 2017. In total, we included 3,768,517 ChAdOx1 and 1,832,841 BNT162b2 vaccinees, 401,691 people infected with SARS-CoV-2, and 9,414,403 people from the general population. An increased risk of venous thromboembolism was seen after first dose of ChAdOx1 (standardized incidence ratio: 1.12 [95% CI: 1.05 to 1.20]), BNT162b2 (1.12 [1.03 to 1.21]), and positive PCR test (7.27 [6.86 to 7.72]). Rates of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis were higher than otherwise expected after first dose of ChAdOx1 (4.14 [2.54 to 6.76]) and a SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive test (3.74 [1.56 to 8.98]). Rates of arterial thromboembolism after vaccination were no higher than expected but were increased after a SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive test (1.39 [1.21 to 1.61]). Rates of venous thromboembolism with thrombocytopenia were higher than expected after a SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive test (5.76 [3.19 to 10.40]).

Comparative risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome or thromboembolic events associated with different covid-19 vaccines: international network cohort study from five European countries and the US.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the comparative risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome or thromboembolic events associated with use of adenovirus based covid-19 vaccines versus mRNA based covid-19 vaccines. DESIGN: International network cohort study. SETTING: Routinely collected health data from contributing datasets in France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, the UK, and the US. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (age ≥18 years) registered at any contributing database and who received at least one dose of a covid-19 vaccine (ChAdOx1-S (Oxford-AstraZeneca), BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), or Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen/Johnson & Johnson)), from December 2020 to mid-2021. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome or venous or arterial thromboembolic events within the 28 days after covid-19 vaccination. Incidence rate ratios were estimated after propensity scores matching and were calibrated using negative control outcomes. Estimates specific to the database were pooled by use of random effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: Overall, 1 332 719 of 3 829 822 first dose ChAdOx1-S recipients were matched to 2 124 339 of 2 149 679 BNT162b2 recipients from Germany and the UK. Additionally, 762 517 of 772 678 people receiving Ad26.COV2.S were matched to 2 851 976 of 7 606 693 receiving BNT162b2 in Germany, Spain, and the US. All 628 164 Ad26.COV2.S recipients from the US were matched to 2 230 157 of 3 923 371 mRNA-1273 recipients. A total of 862 thrombocytopenia events were observed in the matched first dose ChAdOx1-S recipients from Germany and the UK, and 520 events after a first dose of BNT162b2. Comparing ChAdOx1-S with a first dose of BNT162b2 revealed an increased risk of thrombocytopenia (pooled calibrated incidence rate ratio 1.33 (95% confidence interval 1.18 to 1.50) and calibrated incidence rate difference of 1.18 (0.57 to 1.8) per 1000 person years). Additionally, a pooled calibrated incidence rate ratio of 2.26 (0.93 to 5.52) for venous thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome was seen with Ad26.COV2.S compared with BNT162b2. CONCLUSIONS: In this multinational study, a pooled 30% increased risk of thrombocytopenia after a first dose of the ChAdOx1-S vaccine was observed, as was a trend towards an increased risk of venous thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome after Ad26.COV2.S compared with BNT162b2. Although rare, the observed risks after adenovirus based vaccines should be considered when planning further immunisation campaigns and future vaccine development.

Estimating the Incidence and Key Risk Factors of Cardiovascular Disease in Patients at High Risk of Imminent Fracture Using Routinely Collected Real-World Data From the UK.

The objective of this work was to estimate the incidence rate of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events (myocardial infarction, stroke, or CVD death) at 1 year among three cohorts of patients at high risk of fracture (osteoporosis, previous fracture, and anti-osteoporosis medication) and to identify the key risk factors of CVD events in these three cohorts. To do so, this prospective cohort study used data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, a primary care database from United Kingdom. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE, a composite outcome for the occurrence of either myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, or CVD death) were identified in patients aged 50 years or older at high or imminent fracture risk identified in three different cohorts (not mutually exclusive): recently diagnosed with osteoporosis (OST, n = 65,295), incident fragility fracture (IFX, n = 67,065), and starting oral bisphosphonates (OBP, n = 145,959). About 1.90%, 4.39%, and 2.38% of the participants in OST, IFX, and OBP cohorts, respectively, experienced MACE events. IFX was the cohort with the higher risk: MACE incidence rates (cases/1000 person-years) were 19.63 (18.54-20.73) in OST, 52.64 (50.7-54.5) in IFX, and 26.26 (25.41-27.12) in OBP cohorts. Risk of MACE events at 1 year was predicted in the three cohorts. Models using a set of general, CVD, and fracture candidates selected by lasso regression had a good discrimination (≥70%) and internal validity and generally outperformed the models using only the CVD risk factors of general population listed in QRISK tool. Main risk factors common in all MACE models were sex, age, smoking, alcohol, atrial fibrillation, antihypertensive medication, prior MI/stroke, established CVD, glomerular filtration rate, systolic blood pressure, cholesterol levels, and number of concomitant medicines. Identified key risk factors highlight the differences of patients at high risk of fracture versus general population. Proposed models could improve prediction of CVD events in patients with osteoporosis in primary care settings. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).