The safety of antivirals and neutralising monoclonal antibodies used in prehospital treatment of Covid-19.

OBJECTIVE: This proof-of-principle pharmacovigilance study used Electronic Health Record (EHR) data to examine the safety of sotrovimab, paxlovid and molnupiravir in prehospital treatment of Covid-19. METHOD: With NHS England approval, we conducted an observational cohort study using OpenSAFELY-TPP, a secure software-platform which executes analyses across EHRs for 24 million people in England. High-risk individuals with Covid-19 eligible for prehospital treatment were included. Adverse events (AEs) were categorised into events in the drug's Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC), drug-reactions and immune-mediated. Cox models compared risk across treatments. A pre-pandemic record analysis was performed for comparative purposes. RESULTS: Between 2021-2023, 37,449 patients received sotrovimab, paxlovid or molnupiravir whilst 109,647 patients made up an eligible-but-untreated population. The 29-day rates of AEs were low: SmPC 0.34 per 1000 patient-years (95%CI 0.32-0.36); drug-reactions 0.01(95% CI0.01-0.02) and immune-mediated 0.03(95%CI 0.03-0.04), and similar or lower than the pre-pandemic period. Compared with the eligible but untreated population, sotrovimab and paxlovid associated with a risk of SmPC AE [adjHR 1.36(95%CI 1.15-1.62) and 1.28(95%CI 1.05-1.55), respectively], whilst sotrovimab associated with a risk of drug-reactions [adjHR 2.95(95%CI 1.56-5.55)] and immune-mediated events [adjHR 3.22(95%CI 1.86-5.57)]. CONCLUSION: Sotrovimab, paxlovid and molnupiravir demonstrate acceptable safety profiles. Although the risk of AEs was greatest with sotrovimab, event rates were lower than comparative pre-pandemic period.

Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio Predicts Survival for Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasm with Associated Invasive Carcinoma of the Pancreas: Results from a High-volume Center.

BACKGROUND: Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) is an important precursor lesion of pancreatic cancer. Systemic inflammatory parameters are widely used in the prognosis prediction of cancer; however, their prognostic implications in IPMN with associated invasive carcinoma (IPMN-INV) are unclear. This study aims to explore the prognostic value of systemic inflammatory parameters in patients with IPMN-INV. METHODS: From 2015 to 2021, patients with pathologically confirmed IPMN who underwent surgical resection at Peking Union Medical College Hospital were enrolled. The clinical, radiological and pathological data of the enrolled patients were collected and analyzed. Preoperative systemic inflammatory parameters were calculated as previously reported. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients with IPMN-INV met the inclusion criteria. The lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) was the only systemic inflammatory parameter independently associated with the cancer-specific survival (CSS). An LMR higher than 3.5 was significantly associated with a favorable CSS in univariate (hazard ratio (HR) 0.305, P = 0.003) and multivariate analyses (HR 0.221, P = 0.001). Other independently prognostic factors included the presence of clinical symptoms, cyst size, N stage and tumor differentiation. Additionally, a model including LMR was established for the prognosis prediction of IPMN-INV and had a C-index of 0.809. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative LMR could serve as a feasible prognostic biomarker for IPMN-INV. A decreased LMR (cutoff value of 3.5) was an independent predictor of poor survival for IPMN-INV.

The association between urinary sodium and the risk of dementia: Evidence from a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Sodium intake reduction is crucial for cardiovascular health, however, its lasting impact on dementia remains unclear. METHODS: We included 458,577 UK Biobank participants without dementia at baseline. We estimated 24-h urinary sodium (E24hUNa) using spot urinary parameters and obtained the incidence of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer's disease, and vascular dementia from multiple sources. RESULTS: The mean E24hUNa was 3.0 g (1st-99th percentile: 1.5 g-5.1 g). Over a mean follow-up of 13.6 years, 7886 (1.7 %) participants developed all-cause dementia, including 3763 (0.8 %) Alzheimer's disease and 1851 (0.4 %) vascular dementia. In the restricted cubic spline model, we identify a potential cutoff of 3.13 g for E24hUNa, below which each 1 g decrease in E24hUNa was associated with 21 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.34) higher all-cause dementia risk and 35 % (95 % CI 1.11-1.63) higher vascular dementia risk (P-value <0.001 for non-linearity). The hazard ratios were 1.15 (95 % CI, 1.07-1.24) for all-cause dementia and 1.21 (95 % CI 1.04-1.40) for vascular dementia among individuals with E24hUNa below 3.13 g compared to those with E24hUNa higher than 3.13 g. LIMITATIONS: One of the major limitations is the estimation of 24-h urinary sodium with spot urine samples. CONCLUSIONS: An E24hUNa level below 3.13 g, equivalent to 3.37 g daily sodium intake, is associated with increased risks of all-cause and vascular dementia. This exploratory study suggests a potential lower limit below which the risk of dementia increases with a lower sodium level. Future studies are necessary to validate our findings.

Can metformin prevent cancer relative to sulfonylureas? A target trial emulation accounting for competing risks and poor overlap via double/debiased machine learning estimators.

There is mounting interest in the possibility that metformin, indicated for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes, has a range of additional beneficial effects. Randomized trials have shown that metformin prevents adverse cardiovascular events, and metformin use has also been associated with reduced cognitive decline and cancer incidence. In this paper, we dig more deeply into whether metformin prevents cancer by emulating target randomized trials comparing metformin to sulfonylureas as first line diabetes therapy using data from Clinical Practice Research Datalink, a U.K. primary care database (1987-2018). We included individuals with diabetes, no prior cancer diagnosis, no chronic kidney disease, and no prior diabetes therapy who initiated metformin (N=93353) or a sulfonylurea (N=13864). In our cohort, the estimated overlap weighted additive separable direct effect of metformin compared to sulfonylureas on cancer risk at 6 years was -1% (.95 CI=-2.2%, 0.1%), which is consistent with metformin providing no direct protection against cancer incidence or substantial protection. The analysis faced two methodological challenges-poor overlap, and pre-cancer death as a competing risk. To address these issues while minimizing nuisance model misspecification, we develop and apply double/debiased machine learning estimators of overlap weighted separable effects in addition to more traditional effect estimates.

Identification of patients undergoing chronic kidney replacement therapy in primary and secondary care data: validation study based on OpenSAFELY and UK Renal Registry.

Objective: To validate primary and secondary care codes in electronic health records to identify people receiving chronic kidney replacement therapy based on gold standard registry data. Design: Validation study using data from OpenSAFELY and the UK Renal Registry, with the approval of NHS England. Setting: Primary and secondary care electronic health records from people registered at 45% of general practices in England on 1 January 2020, linked to data from the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) within the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform, part of the NHS England OpenSAFELY covid-19 service. Participants: 38 745 prevalent patients (recorded as receiving kidney replacement therapy on 1 January 2020 in UKRR data, or primary or secondary care data) and 10 730 incident patients (starting kidney replacement therapy during 2020), from a population of 19 million people alive and registered with a general practice in England on 1 January 2020. Main outcome measures: Sensitivity and positive predictive values of primary and secondary care code lists for identifying prevalent and incident kidney replacement therapy cohorts compared with the gold standard UKRR data on chronic kidney replacement therapy. Agreement across the data sources overall, and by treatment modality (transplantation or dialysis) and personal characteristics. Results: Primary and secondary care code lists were sensitive for identifying the UKRR prevalent cohort (91.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) 90.8% to 91.6%) and 92.0% (91.6% to 92.4%), respectively), but not the incident cohort (52.3% (50.3% to 54.3%) and 67.9% (66.1% to 69.7%)). Positive predictive values were low (77.7% (77.2% to 78.2%) for primary care data and 64.7% (64.1% to 65.3%) for secondary care data), particularly for chronic dialysis (53.7% (52.9% to 54.5%) for primary care data and 49.1% (48.0% to 50.2%) for secondary care data). Sensitivity decreased with age and index of multiple deprivation in primary care data, but the opposite was true in secondary care data. Agreement was lower in children, with 30% (295/980) featuring in all three datasets. Half (1165/2315) of the incident patients receiving dialysis in UKRR data had a kidney replacement therapy code in the primary care data within three months of the start date of the kidney replacement therapy. No codes existed whose exclusion would substantially improve the positive predictive value without a decrease in sensitivity. Conclusions: Codes used in primary and secondary care data failed to identify a small proportion of prevalent patients receiving kidney replacement therapy. Codes also identified many patients who were not recipients of chronic kidney replacement therapy in UKRR data, particularly dialysis codes. Linkage with UKRR kidney replacement therapy data facilitated more accurate identification of incident and prevalent kidney replacement therapy cohorts for research into this vulnerable population. Poor coding has implications for any patient care (including eligibility for vaccination, resourcing, and health policy responses in future pandemics) that relies on accurate reporting of kidney replacement therapy in primary and secondary care data.

The origin of vitamin B12 levels and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer specific mortality: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin B12 is essential to human but the implications of serum vitamin B12 level for mortality in clinical practice remain unclear. We conducted a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis to quantify the relationship between vitamin B12 levels and the risk of all-cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality. METHODS: Electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception through May 2023. Two reviewers independently extracted individual study data and evaluated the risk of bias among the studies using the Newcastle‒Ottawa Scale. To examine a potential nonlinear relationship between the vitamin B12 levels and all-cause mortality, we performed a two-stage random effects dose‒response meta-analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-two cohort studies (92,346 individuals with 10,704 all-cause deaths) were included. A linear trend dose-response analysis showed that each 100 pmol/L increase in serum vitamin B12 concentration was associated with a 4 % higher risk of all-cause mortality in the general population (adjusted HR 1.04, 95 % confidence interval CI 1.01 to 1.08; n = 8; P non-linearity = 0.11) and a 6 % higher risk for all-cause mortality in older adults (adjusted HR 1.06, 95 % CI 1.01 to 1.13; n = 4; P non-linearity = 0.78). Current evidence was mixed for the association between serum vitamin B12 concentration and cardiovascular mortality and was limited for cancer mortality. The meta-analysis of cohort studies showed a positive association between a high serum vitamin B12 concentration (>600 pmol/L) and all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 1.50, 95 % CI 1.29 to 1.74; n = 10; p < 0.01), CVD mortality (adjusted HR 2.04, 95 % CI 0.99 to 4.19; n = 2; p = 0.02), except cancer mortality (adjusted HR 1.56, 95 % CI 0.82 to 2.95; n = 3). Similarly, serum vitamin B12 concentrations (400-600 pmol/L) were associated with increased all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 1.34, 95 % CI 1.10 to 1.64; n = 9; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Serum vitamin B12 concentration was positively associated with the risk of all-cause mortality, especially among older adults, with a linear increasing trend. These findings suggested the primary cause of elevated level of serum vitamin B12 concentration should be timely identified and effectively managed in clinical practice.

Comparative effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir versus sotrovimab and molnupiravir for preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes in non-hospitalised high-risk patients during Omicron waves: observational cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform.

Background: Timely evidence of the comparative effectiveness between COVID-19 therapies in real-world settings is needed to inform clinical care. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir versus sotrovimab and molnupiravir in preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes in non-hospitalised high-risk COVID-19 adult patients during Omicron waves. Methods: With the approval of NHS England, we conducted a real-world cohort study using the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform. Patient-level primary care data were obtained from 24 million people in England and were securely linked with data on COVID-19 infection and therapeutics, hospital admission, and death, covering a period where both nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and sotrovimab were first-line treatment options in community settings (February 10, 2022-November 27, 2022). Molnupiravir (third-line option) was used as an exploratory comparator to nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, both of which were antivirals. Cox proportional hazards model stratified by area was used to compare the risk of 28-day COVID-19 related hospitalisation/death across treatment groups. Findings: A total of 9026 eligible patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (n = 5704) and sotrovimab (n = 3322) were included in the main analysis. The mean age was 52.7 (SD = 14.9) years and 93% (8436/9026) had three or more COVID-19 vaccinations. Within 28 days after treatment initiation, 55/9026 (0.61%) COVID-19 related hospitalisations/deaths were observed (34/5704 [0.60%] treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and 21/3322 [0.63%] with sotrovimab). After adjusting for demographics, high-risk cohort categories, vaccination status, calendar time, body mass index and other comorbidities, we observed no significant difference in outcome risk between nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and sotrovimab users (HR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.48-1.63; P = 0.698). Results from propensity score weighted model also showed non-significant difference between treatment groups (HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.45-1.52; P = 0.535). The exploratory analysis comparing nirmatrelvir/ritonavir users with 1041 molnupiravir users (13/1041 [1.25%] COVID-19 related hospitalisations/deaths) showed an association in favour of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (HR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.22-0.94; P = 0.033). Interpretation: In routine care of non-hospitalised high-risk adult patients with COVID-19 in England, no substantial difference in the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes was observed between those who received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and sotrovimab between February and November 2022, when Omicron subvariants BA.2, BA.5, or BQ.1 were dominant. Funding: UK Research and Innovation, Wellcome Trust, UK Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health and Care Research, and Health Data Research UK.

Comparative effectiveness of sotrovimab and molnupiravir for preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes in patients on kidney replacement therapy: observational study using the OpenSAFELY-UKRR and SRR databases.

Background: Due to limited inclusion of patients on kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in clinical trials, the effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) therapies in this population remains unclear. We sought to address this by comparing the effectiveness of sotrovimab against molnupiravir, two commonly used treatments for non-hospitalised KRT patients with COVID-19 in the UK. Methods: With the approval of National Health Service England, we used routine clinical data from 24 million patients in England within the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform linked to the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) to identify patients on KRT. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of sotrovimab versus molnupiravir with regards to COVID-19-related hospitalisations or deaths in the subsequent 28 days. We also conducted a complementary analysis using data from the Scottish Renal Registry (SRR). Results: Among the 2367 kidney patients treated with sotrovimab (n = 1852) or molnupiravir (n = 515) between 16 December 2021 and 1 August 2022 in England, 38 cases (1.6%) of COVID-19-related hospitalisations/deaths were observed. Sotrovimab was associated with substantially lower outcome risk than molnupiravir {adjusted HR 0.35 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17-0.71]; P = .004}, with results remaining robust in multiple sensitivity analyses. In the SRR cohort, sotrovimab showed a trend toward lower outcome risk than molnupiravir [HR 0.39 (95% CI 0.13-1.21); P = .106]. In both datasets, sotrovimab had no evidence of an association with other hospitalisation/death compared with molnupiravir (HRs ranged from 0.73 to 1.29; P > .05). Conclusions: In routine care of non-hospitalised patients with COVID-19 on KRT, sotrovimab was associated with a lower risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes compared with molnupiravir during Omicron waves.

causalCmprsk: An R package for nonparametric and Cox-based estimation of average treatment effects in competing risks data.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Competing risks data arise in both observational and experimental clinical studies with time-to-event outcomes, when each patient might follow one of the multiple mutually exclusive competing paths. Ignoring competing risks in the analysis can result in biased conclusions. In addition, possible confounding bias of the treatment-outcome relationship has to be addressed, when estimating treatment effects from observational data. In order to provide tools for estimation of average treatment effects on time-to-event outcomes in the presence of competing risks, we developed the R package causalCmprsk. We illustrate the package functionality in the estimation of effects of a right heart catheterization procedure on discharge and in-hospital death from observational data. METHODS: The causalCmprsk package implements an inverse probability weighting estimation approach, aiming to emulate baseline randomization and alleviate possible treatment selection bias. The package allows for different types of weights, representing different target populations. causalCmprsk builds on existing methods from survival analysis and adapts them to the causal analysis in non-parametric and semi-parametric frameworks. RESULTS: The causalCmprsk package has two main functions: fit.cox assumes a semiparametric structural Cox proportional hazards model for the counterfactual cause-specific hazards, while fit.nonpar does not impose any structural assumptions. In both frameworks, causalCmprsk implements estimators of (i) absolute risks for each treatment arm, e.g., cumulative hazards or cumulative incidence functions, and (ii) relative treatment effects, e.g., hazard ratios, or restricted mean time differences. The latter treatment effect measure translates the treatment effect from probability into more intuitive time domain and allows the user to quantify, for example, by how many days or months the treatment accelerates the recovery or postpones illness or death. CONCLUSIONS: The causalCmprsk package provides a convenient and useful tool for causal analysis of competing risks data. It allows the user to distinguish between different causes of the end of follow-up and provides several time-varying measures of treatment effects. The package is accompanied by a vignette that contains more details, examples and code, making the package accessible even for non-expert users.

Genetic risk, adherence to healthy lifestyle and acute cardiovascular and thromboembolic complications following SARS-COV-2 infection.

Current understanding of determinants for COVID-19-related cardiovascular and thromboembolic (CVE) complications primarily covers clinical aspects with limited knowledge on genetics and lifestyles. Here, we analysed a prospective cohort of 106,005 participants from UK Biobank with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We show that higher polygenic risk scores, indicating individual's hereditary risk, were linearly associated with increased risks of post-COVID-19 atrial fibrillation (adjusted HR 1.52 [95% CI 1.44 to 1.60] per standard deviation increase), coronary artery disease (1.57 [1.46 to 1.69]), venous thromboembolism (1.33 [1.18 to 1.50]), and ischaemic stroke (1.27 [1.05 to 1.55]). These genetic associations are robust across genders, key clinical subgroups, and during Omicron waves. However, a prior composite healthier lifestyle was consistently associated with a reduction in all outcomes. Our findings highlight that host genetics and lifestyle independently affect the occurrence of CVE complications in the acute infection phrase, which can guide tailored management of COVID-19 patients and inform population lifestyle interventions to offset the elevated cardiovascular burden post-pandemic.

Ethnic differences in the indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical monitoring and hospitalisations for non-COVID conditions in England: a population-based, observational cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted healthcare and may have impacted ethnic inequalities in healthcare. We aimed to describe the impact of pandemic-related disruption on ethnic differences in clinical monitoring and hospital admissions for non-COVID conditions in England. Methods: In this population-based, observational cohort study we used primary care electronic health record data with linkage to hospital episode statistics data and mortality data within OpenSAFELY, a data analytics platform created, with approval of NHS England, to address urgent COVID-19 research questions. We included adults aged 18 years and over registered with a TPP practice between March 1, 2018, and April 30, 2022. We excluded those with missing age, sex, geographic region, or Index of Multiple Deprivation. We grouped ethnicity (exposure), into five categories: White, Asian, Black, Other, and Mixed. We used interrupted time-series regression to estimate ethnic differences in clinical monitoring frequency (blood pressure and Hba1c measurements, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma annual reviews) before and after March 23, 2020. We used multivariable Cox regression to quantify ethnic differences in hospitalisations related to diabetes, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, and mental health before and after March 23, 2020. Findings: Of 33,510,937 registered with a GP as of 1st January 2020, 19,064,019 were adults, alive and registered for at least 3 months, 3,010,751 met the exclusion criteria and 1,122,912 were missing ethnicity. This resulted in 14,930,356 adults with known ethnicity (92% of sample): 86.6% were White, 7.3% Asian, 2.6% Black, 1.4% Mixed ethnicity, and 2.2% Other ethnicities. Clinical monitoring did not return to pre-pandemic levels for any ethnic group. Ethnic differences were apparent pre-pandemic, except for diabetes monitoring, and remained unchanged, except for blood pressure monitoring in those with mental health conditions where differences narrowed during the pandemic. For those of Black ethnicity, there were seven additional admissions for diabetic ketoacidosis per month during the pandemic, and relative ethnic differences narrowed during the pandemic compared to the White ethnic group (Pre-pandemic hazard ratio (HR): 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41, 0.60, Pandemic HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.65, 0.87). There was increased admissions for heart failure during the pandemic for all ethnic groups, though highest in those of White ethnicity (heart failure risk difference: 5.4). Relatively, ethnic differences narrowed for heart failure admission in those of Asian (Pre-pandemic HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.49, 1.64, Pandemic HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.19, 1.29) and Black ethnicity (Pre-pandemic HR 1.41, 95% CI: 1.30, 1.53, Pandemic HR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.09, 1.25) compared with White ethnicity. For other outcomes the pandemic had minimal impact on ethnic differences. Interpretation: Our study suggests that ethnic differences in clinical monitoring and hospitalisations remained largely unchanged during the pandemic for most conditions. Key exceptions were hospitalisations for diabetic ketoacidosis and heart failure, which warrant further investigation to understand the causes. Funding: LSHTM COVID-19 Response Grant (DONAT15912).

Characteristics and management of vascular compromise after an organ transplantation surgery of the head and neck region: Analysis of 220 submandibular glands with autologous transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Microvascular submandibular gland transplantation (SMGT) for severe dry eye disease (DED) has rarely been reported in the literature. The aim of this study was to report a case series of SMGT with the special focus on monitoring and management of postoperative vascular compromise. METHODS: Using a retrospective single-cohort study design, the investigators enrolled a sample of DED patients undergoing SMGT in a Chinese university hospital during 1999 and 2021. The main outcomes were baseline and surgical data, post-operative manifestations, and surgical results. Descriptive, uni- and bivariate statistics were computed with the significant P < 0.05. RESULTS: During the study period, 220 DED patients (55.9% female) with a mean age of 32.66±14.47 years underwent SMGT. Vascular compromises occurred in 27 grafted glands (12.3%; 22 venous compromises and 5 arterial compromises) at a median of 27 h(range, 3.3 to 288 h) after surgery. Harden texture and swelling of the covering skin flap of the donor indicated venous compromises, while some specific sign was absent for arterial compromise. The accompanying vein of the facial artery (FAV) as a donor's vein was associated with less vascular compromise compared to the anterior facial vein (AFV). Timely reexploration was performed in 25 glands (92.6%), with a salvaged rate of 48%, and more venous compromises were salvaged compared to artery compromises (54.6% vs. 0%, P = 0.047). Temporary hypersecretion on postoperative 2-5 days was noticed in the grafted glands with no or salvaged vascular compromise (Schirmer's test, 35 mm/5 min and 37 mm/5 min, respectively, P = 0.749), while they were absent for the 15 surgically failed grands (Schirmer's test 0 mm/5 min, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Vascular compromise appears to be a common complication of SMGT. Postoperative hypersecretion of the grafted glands may indicate good circulation, and the use of FAV as the donor's vein could help to decrease the risk of vascular compromise.

Dementia risk in patients with type 2 diabetes: Comparing metformin with no pharmacological treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Metformin has been suggested as a therapeutic agent for dementia, but the relevant evidence has been partial and inconsistent. METHODS: We established a national cohort of 210,237 type 2 diabetes patients in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Risks of incident dementia were compared between metformin initiators and those who were not prescribed any anti-diabetes medication during follow-up. RESULTS: Compared with metformin initiators (n = 114,628), patients who received no anti-diabetes medication (n = 95,609) had lower HbA1c and better cardiovascular health at baseline. Both Cox regression and propensity score weighting analysis showed metformin initiators had lower risk of dementia compared to those non-users (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.88 [95% confidence interval: 0.84-0.92] and 0.90 [0.84-0.96]). Patients on long-term metformin treatment had an even lower risk of dementia. DISCUSSION: Metformin may act beyond its glycemic effect and reduce dementia risk to an even lower level than that of patients with milder diabetes and better health profiles. HIGHLIGHTS: Metformin initiators had a significantly lower risk of dementia compared with patients not receiving anti-diabetes medication. Compared with metformin initiators, diabetes patients not receiving pharmacological treatment had better glycemic profiles at baseline and during follow-up. Patients on long-term metformin treatment had an even lower risk of subsequent dementia incidence. Metformin may act beyond its effect on hyperglycemia and has the potential of being repurposed for dementia prevention.

Determinants of recovery from post-COVID-19 dyspnoea: analysis of UK prospective cohorts of hospitalised COVID-19 patients and community-based controls.

Background: The risk factors for recovery from COVID-19 dyspnoea are poorly understood. We investigated determinants of recovery from dyspnoea in adults with COVID-19 and compared these to determinants of recovery from non-COVID-19 dyspnoea. Methods: We used data from two prospective cohort studies: PHOSP-COVID (patients hospitalised between March 2020 and April 2021 with COVID-19) and COVIDENCE UK (community cohort studied over the same time period). PHOSP-COVID data were collected during hospitalisation and at 5-month and 1-year follow-up visits. COVIDENCE UK data were obtained through baseline and monthly online questionnaires. Dyspnoea was measured in both cohorts with the Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify determinants associated with a reduction in dyspnoea between 5-month and 1-year follow-up. Findings: We included 990 PHOSP-COVID and 3309 COVIDENCE UK participants. We observed higher odds of improvement between 5-month and 1-year follow-up among PHOSP-COVID participants who were younger (odds ratio 1.02 per year, 95% CI 1.01-1.03), male (1.54, 1.16-2.04), neither obese nor severely obese (1.82, 1.06-3.13 and 4.19, 2.14-8.19, respectively), had no pre-existing anxiety or depression (1.56, 1.09-2.22) or cardiovascular disease (1.33, 1.00-1.79), and shorter hospital admission (1.01 per day, 1.00-1.02). Similar associations were found in those recovering from non-COVID-19 dyspnoea, excluding age (and length of hospital admission). Interpretation: Factors associated with dyspnoea recovery at 1-year post-discharge among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 were similar to those among community controls without COVID-19. Funding: PHOSP-COVID is supported by a grant from the MRC-UK Research and Innovation and the Department of Health and Social Care through the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) rapid response panel to tackle COVID-19. The views expressed in the publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Health Service (NHS), the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.COVIDENCE UK is supported by the UK Research and Innovation, the National Institute for Health Research, and Barts Charity. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the funders.

Comparative effectiveness of two- and three-dose COVID-19 vaccination schedules involving AZD1222 and BNT162b2 in people with kidney disease: a linked OpenSAFELY and UK Renal Registry cohort study.

Background: Kidney disease is a key risk factor for COVID-19-related mortality and suboptimal vaccine response. Optimising vaccination strategies is essential to reduce the disease burden in this vulnerable population. We therefore compared the effectiveness of two- and three-dose schedules involving AZD1222 (AZ; ChAdOx1-S) and BNT162b2 (BNT) among people with kidney disease in England. Methods: With the approval of NHS England, we performed a retrospective cohort study among people with moderate-to-severe kidney disease. Using linked primary care and UK Renal Registry records in the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform, we identified adults with stage 3-5 chronic kidney disease, dialysis recipients, and kidney transplant recipients. We used Cox proportional hazards models to compare COVID-19-related outcomes and non-COVID-19 death after two-dose (AZ-AZ vs BNT-BNT) and three-dose (AZ-AZ-BNT vs BNT-BNT-BNT) schedules. Findings: After two doses, incidence during the Delta wave was higher in AZ-AZ (n = 257,580) than BNT-BNT recipients (n = 169,205; adjusted hazard ratios [95% CIs] 1.43 [1.37-1.50], 1.59 [1.43-1.77], 1.44 [1.12-1.85], and 1.09 [1.02-1.17] for SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19-related hospitalisation, COVID-19-related death, and non-COVID-19 death, respectively). Findings were consistent across disease subgroups, including dialysis and transplant recipients. After three doses, there was little evidence of differences between AZ-AZ-BNT (n = 220,330) and BNT-BNT-BNT recipients (n = 157,065) for any outcome during a period of Omicron dominance. Interpretation: Among individuals with moderate-to-severe kidney disease, two doses of BNT conferred stronger protection than AZ against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease. A subsequent BNT dose levelled the playing field, emphasising the value of heterologous RNA doses in vulnerable populations. Funding: National Core Studies, Wellcome Trust, MRC, and Health Data Research UK.

Diabetes mellitus, prediabetes and the risk of Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 cohort studies with 29.9 million participants and 86,345 cases.

A diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and prediabetes has been associated with increased risk of Parkinson's disease (PD) in several studies, but results have not been entirely consistent. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies on diabetes mellitus, prediabetes and the risk of PD to provide an up-to-date assessment of the evidence. PubMed and Embase databases were searched for relevant studies up to 6th of February 2022. Cohort studies reporting adjusted relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between diabetes, prediabetes and Parkinson's disease were included. Summary RRs (95% CIs) were calculated using a random effects model. Fifteen cohort studies (29.9 million participants, 86,345 cases) were included in the meta-analysis. The summary RR (95% CI) of PD for persons with diabetes compared to persons without diabetes was 1.27 (1.20-1.35, I2 = 82%). There was no indication of publication bias, based on Egger's test (p = 0.41), Begg's test (p = 0.99), and inspection of the funnel plot. The association was consistent across geographic regions, by sex, and across several other subgroup and sensitivity analyses. There was some suggestion of a stronger association for diabetes patients reporting diabetes complications than for diabetes patients without complications (RR = 1.54, 1.32-1.80 [n = 3] vs. 1.26, 1.16-1.38 [n = 3]), vs. those without diabetes (pheterogeneity=0.18). The summary RR for prediabetes was 1.04 (95% CI: 1.02-1.07, I2 = 0%, n = 2). Our results suggest that patients with diabetes have a 27% increased relative risk of developing PD compared to persons without diabetes, and persons with prediabetes have a 4% increase in RR compared to persons with normal blood glucose. Further studies are warranted to clarify the specific role age of onset or duration of diabetes, diabetic complications, glycaemic level and its long-term variability and management may play in relation to PD risk.

Changes in COVID-19-related mortality across key demographic and clinical subgroups in England from 2020 to 2022: a retrospective cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has been shown to differently affect various demographic and clinical population subgroups. We aimed to describe trends in absolute and relative COVID-19-related mortality risks across clinical and demographic population subgroups during successive SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves. METHODS: We did a retrospective cohort study in England using the OpenSAFELY platform with the approval of National Health Service England, covering the first five SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves (wave one [wild-type] from March 23 to May 30, 2020; wave two [alpha (B.1.1.7)] from Sept 7, 2020, to April 24, 2021; wave three [delta (B.1.617.2)] from May 28 to Dec 14, 2021; wave four [omicron (B.1.1.529)] from Dec 15, 2021, to April 29, 2022; and wave five [omicron] from June 24 to Aug 3, 2022). In each wave, we included people aged 18-110 years who were registered with a general practice on the first day of the wave and who had at least 3 months of continuous general practice registration up to this date. We estimated crude and sex-standardised and age-standardised wave-specific COVID-19-related death rates and relative risks of COVID-19-related death in population subgroups. FINDINGS: 18 895 870 adults were included in wave one, 19 014 720 in wave two, 18 932 050 in wave three, 19 097 970 in wave four, and 19 226 475 in wave five. Crude COVID-19-related death rates per 1000 person-years decreased from 4·48 deaths (95% CI 4·41-4·55) in wave one to 2·69 (2·66-2·72) in wave two, 0·64 (0·63-0·66) in wave three, 1·01 (0·99-1·03) in wave four, and 0·67 (0·64-0·71) in wave five. In wave one, the standardised COVID-19-related death rates were highest in people aged 80 years or older, people with chronic kidney disease stage 5 or 4, people receiving dialysis, people with dementia or learning disability, and people who had received a kidney transplant (ranging from 19·85 deaths per 1000 person-years to 44·41 deaths per 1000 person-years, compared with from 0·05 deaths per 1000 person-years to 15·93 deaths per 1000 person-years in other subgroups). In wave two compared with wave one, in a largely unvaccinated population, the decrease in COVID-19-related mortality was evenly distributed across population subgroups. In wave three compared with wave one, larger decreases in COVID-19-related death rates were seen in groups prioritised for primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, including people aged 80 years or older and people with neurological disease, learning disability, or severe mental illness (90-91% decrease). Conversely, smaller decreases in COVID-19-related death rates were observed in younger age groups, people who had received organ transplants, and people with chronic kidney disease, haematological malignancies, or immunosuppressive conditions (0-25% decrease). In wave four compared with wave one, the decrease in COVID-19-related death rates was smaller in groups with lower vaccination coverage (including younger age groups) and conditions associated with impaired vaccine response, including people who had received organ transplants and people with immunosuppressive conditions (26-61% decrease). INTERPRETATION: There was a substantial decrease in absolute COVID-19-related death rates over time in the overall population, but demographic and clinical relative risk profiles persisted and worsened for people with lower vaccination coverage or impaired immune response. Our findings provide an evidence base to inform UK public health policy for protecting these vulnerable population subgroups. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, Wellcome Trust, UK Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health and Care Research, and Health Data Research UK.

Trends, variation, and clinical characteristics of recipients of antiviral drugs and neutralising monoclonal antibodies for covid-19 in community settings: retrospective, descriptive cohort study of 23.4 million people in OpenSAFELY.

Objective: To ascertain patient eligibility status and describe coverage of antiviral drugs and neutralising monoclonal antibodies (nMAB) as treatment for covid-19 in community settings in England. Design: Retrospective, descriptive cohort study, approved by NHS England. Setting: Routine clinical data from 23.4 million people linked to data on covid-19 infection and treatment, within the OpenSAFELY-TPP database. Participants: Outpatients with covid-19 at high risk of severe outcomes. Interventions: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (paxlovid), sotrovimab, molnupiravir, casirivimab/imdevimab, or remdesivir, used in the community by covid-19 medicine delivery units. Results: 93 870 outpatients with covid-19 were identified between 11 December 2021 and 28 April 2022 to be at high risk of severe outcomes and therefore potentially eligible for antiviral or nMAB treatment (or both). Of these patients, 19 040 (20%) received treatment (sotrovimab, 9660 (51%); molnupiravir, 4620 (24%); paxlovid, 4680 (25%); casirivimab/imdevimab, 50 (<1%); and remdesivir, 30 (<1%)). The proportion of patients treated increased from 9% (190/2220) in the first week of treatment availability to 29% (460/1600) in the latest week. The proportion treated varied by high risk group, being lowest in those with liver disease (16%; 95% confidence interval 15% to 17%); by treatment type, with sotrovimab favoured over molnupiravir and paxlovid in all but three high risk groups (Down's syndrome (35%; 30% to 39%), rare neurological conditions (45%; 43% to 47%), and immune deficiencies (48%; 47% to 50%)); by age, ranging from ≥80 years (13%; 12% to 14%) to 50-59 years (23%; 22% to 23%); by ethnic group, ranging from black (11%; 10% to 12%) to white (21%; 21% to 21%); by NHS region, ranging from 13% (12% to 14%) in Yorkshire and the Humber to 25% (24% to 25%) in the East of England); and by deprivation level, ranging from 15% (14% to 15%) in the most deprived areas to 23% (23% to 24%) in the least deprived areas. Groups that also had lower coverage included unvaccinated patients (7%; 6% to 9%), those with dementia (6%; 5% to 7%), and care home residents (6%; 6% to 7%). Conclusions: Using the OpenSAFELY platform, we were able to identify patients with covid-19 at high risk of severe outcomes who were potentially eligible to receive treatment and assess the coverage of these new treatments among these patients. In the context of a rapid deployment of a new service, the NHS analytical code used to determine eligibility could have been over-inclusive and some of the eligibility criteria not fully captured in healthcare data. However targeted activity might be needed to resolve apparent lower treatment coverage observed among certain groups, in particular (at present): different NHS regions, ethnic groups, people aged ≥80 years, those living in socioeconomically deprived areas, and care home residents.

Characteristics and risk factors for post-COVID-19 breathlessness after hospitalisation for COVID-19.

Background: Persistence of respiratory symptoms, particularly breathlessness, after acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection has emerged as a significant clinical problem. We aimed to characterise and identify risk factors for patients with persistent breathlessness following COVID-19 hospitalisation. Methods: PHOSP-COVID is a multicentre prospective cohort study of UK adults hospitalised for COVID-19. Clinical data were collected during hospitalisation and at a follow-up visit. Breathlessness was measured by a numeric rating scale of 0-10. We defined post-COVID-19 breathlessness as an increase in score of ≥1 compared to the pre-COVID-19 level. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify risk factors and to develop a prediction model for post-COVID-19 breathlessness. Results: We included 1226 participants (37% female, median age 59 years, 22% mechanically ventilated). At a median 5 months after discharge, 50% reported post-COVID-19 breathlessness. Risk factors for post-COVID-19 breathlessness were socioeconomic deprivation (adjusted OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.14-2.44), pre-existing depression/anxiety (adjusted OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.06-2.35), female sex (adjusted OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.21-2.00) and admission duration (adjusted OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02). Black ethnicity (adjusted OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.89) and older age groups (adjusted OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.14-0.66) were less likely to report post-COVID-19 breathlessness. Post-COVID-19 breathlessness was associated with worse performance on the shuttle walk test and forced vital capacity, but not with obstructive airflow limitation. The prediction model had fair discrimination (concordance statistic 0.66, 95% CI 0.63-0.69) and good calibration (calibration slope 1.00, 95% CI 0.80-1.21). Conclusions: Post-COVID-19 breathlessness was commonly reported in this national cohort of patients hospitalised for COVID-19 and is likely to be a multifactorial problem with physical and emotional components.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake in people with kidney disease: an OpenSAFELY cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To characterise factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people with kidney disease in England. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform, performed with the approval of NHS England. SETTING: Individual-level routine clinical data from 24 million people across GPs in England using TPP software. Primary care data were linked directly with COVID-19 vaccine records up to 31 August 2022 and with renal replacement therapy (RRT) status via the UK Renal Registry (UKRR). PARTICIPANTS: A cohort of adults with stage 3-5 chronic kidney disease (CKD) or receiving RRT at the start of the COVID-19 vaccine roll-out was identified based on evidence of reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or inclusion in the UKRR. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Dose-specific vaccine coverage over time was determined from 1 December 2020 to 31 August 2022. Individual-level factors associated with receipt of a 3-dose or 4-dose vaccine series were explored via Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: 992 205 people with stage 3-5 CKD or receiving RRT were included. Cumulative vaccine coverage as of 31 August 2022 was 97.5%, 97.0% and 93.9% for doses 1, 2 and 3, respectively, and 81.9% for dose 4 among individuals with one or more indications for eligibility. Delayed 3-dose vaccine uptake was associated with younger age, minority ethnicity, social deprivation and severe mental illness-associations that were consistent across CKD severity subgroups, dialysis patients and kidney transplant recipients. Similar associations were observed for 4-dose uptake. CONCLUSION: Although high primary vaccine and booster dose coverage has been achieved among people with kidney disease in England, key disparities in vaccine uptake remain across clinical and demographic groups and 4-dose coverage is suboptimal. Targeted interventions are needed to identify barriers to vaccine uptake among under-vaccinated subgroups identified in the present study.