Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness and immune response amongst individuals in clinical risk groups.

Background COVID-19 vaccines approved in the UK are highly effective in general population cohorts, however, data on effectiveness amongst individuals with clinical conditions that place them at increased risk of severe disease are limited. Methods We used GP electronic health record data, sentinel virology swabbing and antibody testing within a cohort of 712 general practices across England to estimate vaccine antibody response and vaccine effectiveness against medically attended COVID-19 amongst individuals in clinical risk groups using cohort and test-negative case control designs. Findings There was no reduction in S-antibody positivity in most clinical risk groups, however reduced S-antibody positivity and response was significant in the immunosuppressed group. Reduced vaccine effectiveness against clinical disease was also noted in the immunosuppressed group; after a second dose, effectiveness was moderate (Pfizer: 59.6%, 95%CI 18.0-80.1%; AstraZeneca 60.0%, 95%CI -63.6-90.2%). Interpretation In most clinical risk groups, immune response to primary vaccination was maintained and high levels of vaccine effectiveness were seen. Reduced antibody response and vaccine effectiveness were seen after 1 dose of vaccine amongst a broad immunosuppressed group, and second dose vaccine effectiveness was moderate. These findings support maximising coverage in immunosuppressed individuals and the policy of prioritisation of this group for third doses.

The health impacts of preventive cardiovascular medication reduction on older populations: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is inevitable and appropriate for many conditions, but in some cases, it can be problematic resulting in an increased risk of harm and reduced quality of life. There has been an increasing interest to reduce cardioprotective medications in older adults to potentially reduce the risk of harm due to treatment; however, there is no evidence on safety and efficacy to support this practice currently. This paper describes a protocol for a systematic review on the safety and efficacy of reducing cardioprotective medication in older populations. METHODS: MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) will be searched from their inception onwards for relevant studies. Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies on interventions (prospective, retrospective cohort, case-control) conducted in older adults (75 years or older) examining reduction of cardioprotective medications will be included. The primary outcome of this study will be all-cause hospitalisation. Secondary outcome variables of interest are all-cause hospitalisation, mortality, quality of life, serious adverse events, major adverse cardiovascular events, falls, fractures, cognitive functioning, bleeding events, renal functioning, medication burden, drug reinstatement, time-in-hospital, and frailty status. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and extract data. Confidence in cumulative evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach; the risk of bias will be assessed by the RoB-II tool for randomised controlled studies and ROBINS-I for non-randomised studies. Where sufficient data are available, we will conduct a random effects meta-analysis by combining the outcomes of the included studies. Sub-group analysis and meta-regression are planned to assess the potential harms and risks of different drug classes and the impacts in different patient populations (e.g. sex, cognitive status, renal status, and age). DISCUSSION: The study will be a comprehensive review on all published articles identified using our search strategy on the safety and efficacy of cardioprotective medication reduction in the older population. The findings will be crucial to inform clinicians on potential health outcomes of reducing cardiovascular medication in the elderly. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020208223.

Opportunities and challenges of a novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS) test to enhance diagnosis of heart failure in primary care: qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the role of the novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS), test in the current diagnostic pathway for heart failure and the opportunities and challenges to potential implementation in primary care. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured in-depth interviews which were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data from the interviews were analysed thematically using an inductive approach. SETTING: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Fourteen healthcare professionals (six males, eight females) from primary (general practitioners (GPs), nurses, healthcare assistant, practice managers) and secondary care (consultant cardiologists). RESULTS: Four themes relating to opportunities and challenges surrounding the implementation of the new diagnostic technology were identified. These reflected that the adoption of CORS test would be an advantage to primary care but the test had barriers to implementation which include: establishment of clinical utility, suitability for immobile patients and cost implication to GP practices. CONCLUSION: The development of a simple non-invasive clinical test to accelerate the diagnosis of heart failure in primary care maybe helpful to reduce unnecessary referrals to secondary care. The CORS test has the potential to serve this purpose; however, factors such as cost effectiveness, diagnostic accuracy and seamless implementation in primary care have to be fully explored.

A novel cardiac output response to stress test developed to improve diagnosis and monitoring of heart failure in primary care.

AIMS: Primary care physicians lack access to an objective cardiac function test. This study for the first time describes a novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS) test developed to improve diagnosis and monitoring of heart failure in primary care and investigates its reproducibility. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective observational study recruited 32 consecutive primary care patients (age, 63 ± 9 years; female, n = 18). Cardiac output was measured continuously using the bioreactance method in supine and standing positions and during two 3 min stages of a step-exercise protocol (10 and 15 steps per minute) using a 15 cm height bench. The CORS test was performed on two occasions, i.e. Test 1 and Test 2. There was no significant difference between repeated measures of cardiac output and stroke volume at supine standing and Stage 1 and Stage 2 step exercises (all P > 0.3). There was a significant positive relationship between Test 1 and Test 2 cardiac outputs (r = 0.92, P = 0.01 with coefficient of variation of 7.1%). The mean difference in cardiac output (with upper and lower limits of agreement) between Test 1 and Test 2 was 0.1 (-1.9 to 2.1) L/min, combining supine, standing, and step-exercise data. CONCLUSIONS: The CORS, as a novel test for objective evaluation of cardiac function, demonstrates acceptable reproducibility and can potentially be implemented in primary care.

Main messages for primary care from the 2016 European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice.

In 2016, a new version of the European Guidelines on Cardiovascular Prevention was released, representing a partnership between the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and nine European societies, including Wonca-Europe. The ESC guidelines underscore the importance of a lifetime approach to cardiovascular (CV) risk since both CV risk and prevention are dynamic and continuous as patients' age and/or accumulate co-morbidities. Healthy people of all ages should be encouraged to adopt a healthy lifestyle, as well as improved lifestyle and reduced risk factor levels are paramount in patients at increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) and in those with established CVD. Healthcare professionals, and especially general practitioners, play an important role in helping patients achieve this and should set a personal example of healthy lifestyle behaviour. The ESC guidelines are based on 'to do' and 'not to do' messages. Of note, what remains uncertain is stated at the end of each dedicated chapter, confirming that guidelines are not absolute rules, and should be interpreted in the light of the healthcare worker's knowledge and experience, patient preferences and the local social, cultural and economic situation.

Randomised controlled feasibility trial of a web-based weight management intervention with nurse support for obese patients in primary care.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for cost-effective weight management interventions that primary care can deliver to reduce the morbidity caused by obesity. Automated web-based interventions might provide a solution, but evidence suggests that they may be ineffective without additional human support. The main aim of this study was to carry out a feasibility trial of a web-based weight management intervention in primary care, comparing different levels of nurse support, to determine the optimal combination of web-based and personal support to be tested in a full trial. METHODS: This was an individually randomised four arm parallel non-blinded trial, recruiting obese patients in primary care. Following online registration, patients were randomly allocated by the automated intervention to either usual care, the web-based intervention only, or the web-based intervention with either basic nurse support (3 sessions in 3 months) or regular nurse support (7 sessions in 6 months). The main outcome measure (intended as the primary outcome for the main trial) was weight loss in kg at 12 months. As this was a feasibility trial no statistical analyses were carried out, but we present means, confidence intervals and effect sizes for weight loss in each group, uptake and retention, and completion of intervention components and outcome measures. RESULTS: All randomised patients were included in the weight loss analyses (using Last Observation Carried Forward). At 12 months mean weight loss was: usual care group (n = 43) 2.44 kg; web-based only group (n = 45) 2.30 kg; basic nurse support group (n = 44) 4.31 kg; regular nurse support group (n = 47) 2.50 kg. Intervention effect sizes compared with usual care were: d = 0.01 web-based; d = 0.34 basic nurse support; d = 0.02 regular nurse support. Two practices deviated from protocol by providing considerable weight management support to their usual care patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the feasibility of delivering a web-based weight management intervention supported by practice nurses in primary care, and suggests that the combination of the web-based intervention with basic nurse support could provide an effective solution to weight management support in a primary care context. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN31685626.

Evaluation of the accuracy of serum MMP-9 as a test for colorectal cancer in a primary care population.

BACKGROUND: Bowel cancer is common and is a major cause of death. Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials estimates that screening for colorectal cancer using faecal occult blood (FOB) test reduces mortality from colorectal cancer by 16%. However, FOB testing has a low positive predictive value, with associated unnecessary cost, risk and anxiety from subsequent investigation, and is unacceptable to a proportion of the target population. Increased levels of an enzyme called matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP-9) have been found to be associated with colorectal cancer, and this can be measured from a blood sample. Serum MMP-9 is potentially an accurate, low risk and cost-effective population screening tool. This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of serum MMP-9 as a test for colorectal cancer in a primary care population. METHODS/DESIGN: People aged 50 to 69 years, who registered in participating general practices in the West Midlands Region, will be asked to complete a questionnaire that asks about symptoms. Respondents who describe any colorectal symptoms (except only abdominal bloating and/or anal symptoms) and are prepared to provide a blood sample for MMP9 estimation and undergo a colonoscopy (current gold standard investigation) will be recruited at GP based clinics by a research nurse. Those unfit for colonoscopy will be excluded. Colonoscopies will be undertaken in dedicated research clinics. The accuracy of MMP-9 will be assessed by comparing the MMP-9 level with the colonoscopy findings, and the combination of factors (e.g. symptoms and MMP-9 level) that best predict a diagnosis of malignancy (invasive disease or polyps) will be determined. DISCUSSION: Colorectal cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Most colorectal cancers arise from adenomas and there is a period for early detection by screening, but available tests have risks, are unacceptable to many, have high false positive rates or are expensive. This study will establish the potential of serum MMP-9 as a screening test for colorectal cancer. If it is confirmed as accurate and acceptable, this serum marker has the potential to assist with reducing the morbidity and mortality from colorectal cancer.

A prospective study to assess the value of MMP-9 in improving the appropriateness of urgent referrals for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Bowel cancer is common and is a major cause of death. Most people with bowel symptoms who meet the criteria for urgent referral to secondary care will not be found to have bowel cancer, and some people who are found to have cancer will have been referred routinely rather than urgently. If general practitioners could better identify people who were likely to have bowel cancer or conditions that may lead to bowel cancer, the pressure on hospital clinics may be reduced, enabling these patients to be seen more quickly. Increased levels of an enzyme called matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP-9) have been found to be associated with such conditions, and this can be measured from a blood sample. This study aims to find out whether measuring MMP-9 levels could improve the appropriateness of urgent referrals for patients with bowel symptoms. METHODS: People aged 18 years or older referred to a colorectal clinic will be asked to complete a questionnaire about symptoms, recent injuries or chronic illnesses (these can increase the level of matrix metalloproteinases) and family history of bowel cancer. A blood sample will be taken from people who consent to take part to assess MMP-9 levels, and the results of examination at the clinic and/or investigations arising from the clinic visit will be collected from hospital records. The accuracy of MMP-9 will be assessed by comparing the MMP-9 level with the resulting diagnosis. The combination of factors (e.g. symptoms and MMP-9 level) that best predict a diagnosis of malignancy (invasive disease or polyps) will be determined. DISCUSSION: Although guidelines are in place to facilitate referrals to colorectal clinics, symptoms alone do not adequately distinguish people with malignancy from people with benign conditions. This study will establish whether MMP-9 could assist this process. If this were the case, measurement of MMP-9 levels could be used by general practitioners to assist in the identification of people who were most likely to have bowel cancer or conditions that may lead to bowel cancer, and who should, therefore, be referred most urgently to secondary care.

SMART: self-management of anticoagulation, a randomised trial [ISRCTN19313375].

BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulation monitoring has traditionally taken place in secondary care because of the need for a laboratory blood test, the international normalised ratio (INR). The development of reliable near patient testing (NPT) systems for INR estimation has facilitated devolution of testing to primary care. Patient self-management is a logical progression from the primary care model. This study will be the first to randomise non-selected patients in primary care, to either self-management or standard care. METHOD: The study was a multi-centred randomised controlled trial with patients from 49 general practices recruited. Those suitable for inclusion were aged 18 or over, with a long term indication for oral anticoagulation, who had taken warfarin for at least six months. Patients randomised to the intervention arm attended at least two training sessions which were practice-based, 1 week apart. Each patient was assessed on their capability to undertake self management. If considered capable, they were given a near patient INR testing monitor, test strips and quality control material for home testing. Patients managed their own anticoagulation for a period of 12 months and performed their INR test every 2 weeks. Control patients continued with their pre-study care either attending hospital or practice based anticoagulant clinics. DISCUSSION: The methodology used in this trial will overcome concerns from previous trials of selection bias and relevance to the UK health service. The study will give a clearer understanding of the benefits of self-management in terms of clinical and cost effectiveness and patient preference.