Risks of incident major osteoporotic fractures following SARS-CoV-2 infection among older individuals: a population-based cohort study in Hong Kong.

Population-based epidemiological studies on post-acute phase coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19)-related fractures in older adults are lacking. This study aims to examine the risk of incident major osteoporotic fractures following SARS-CoV-2 infection among individuals aged ≥50, compared to individuals without COVID-19. It was a retrospective, propensity-score matched, population-based cohort study of COVID-19 patients and non-COVID individuals identified from the electronic database of the Hong Kong Hospital Authority from January 2020 to March 2022. The primary outcome was a composite of major osteoporotic fractures (hip, clinical vertebral, and upper limb). COVID-19 patients were 1:1 matched to controls using propensity-score according to age, sex, vaccination status, medical comorbidities and baseline medications. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards regression models. A total of 429 459 COVID-19 patients were included, 1:1 matched to non-COVID individuals. Upon median follow-up of 11 months, COVID-19 patients had higher risks of major osteoporotic fractures (5.08 vs 3.95 per 1000 persons; HR 1.22 95%CI [1.15-1.31]), hip fractures (2.71 vs 1.94; 1.33 [1.22-1.46]), clinical vertebral fractures (0.42 vs 0.31; 1.29 [1.03-1.62]), and falls (13.83 vs 10.36; 1.28 [1.23-1.33]). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant interaction. In acute (within 30 days) and post-acute phases (beyond 30 days) following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, we consistently observed a significant increase in fractures and falls risks. Our study demonstrated increased risk of major osteoporotic fractures after SARS-CoV-2 infection in both acute and post-acute phases in older adults, partly due to increased fall risk. Clinicians should be aware of musculoskeletal health of COVID-19 survivors.

Our study showed that older individuals with coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection are at a higher risk of suffering from major osteoporotic fractures, ie serious bone fractures related to osteoporosis, compared to those not infected. The study analyzed the health records of 429 459 patients aged 50 and older in Hong Kong who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 between January 2020 and March 2022. These patients were compared with a matched group without COVID-19, considering age, sex, vaccination status, medical comorbidities, and concomitant medications. Findings indicated that individuals who had contracted COVID-19 experienced a higher risk of major osteoporotic fractures, hip fractures, and clinical vertebral fractures. The risk of falls, a common cause of these fractures, was also higher in the COVID-19 group. This increased risk of major osteoporotic fractures and falls persists both shortly after infection and in the following months, underscoring the lasting impact of COVID-19 on the bone health of older adults. These results support the recommendations for the assessment of bone health and fall risks, and an urgent review of the requirement for interventions to reduce the risk of fragility fractures in older adult COVID-19 survivors.

Risks of COVID-19-related hospitalisation and mortality among individuals with mental disorders following BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations: A case-control study.

Concerns have been raised regarding potential weaker vaccine immunogenicity with higher immune suppression for individuals with pre-existing mental disorders. Yet, data on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccinations among this vulnerable population are limited. A case-control study was conducted to investigate the risks of COVID-19-related hospitalisation and mortality among individuals with mental disorders following one to three doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations in Hong Kong. Data were extracted from electronic health records, vaccination and COVID-19 confirmed case records. Conditional logistic regression was applied with adjustment for comorbidities and medication history. Subgroup analyses were performed with stratification: by age (< 65 and ≥ 65) and mental disorders diagnosis (depression, schizophrenia, anxiety disorder, and bipolar disorder). Two doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac significantly reduced COVID-19-related hospitalisation and mortality. Further protection for both outcomes was provided after three doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac. The vaccine effectiveness magnitude of BNT162b2 was generally higher than CoronaVac, but the difference diminished after the third dose. Individuals with mental disorders should be prioritised in future mass vaccination programmes of booster doses or bivalent COVID-19 vaccines. Targeted strategies should be developed to resolve the reasons behind vaccine hesitancy among this population and increase their awareness on the benefits of vaccination.

Risk of autoimmune diseases following COVID-19 and the potential protective effect from vaccination: a population-based cohort study.

Background: Case reports suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection could lead to immune dysregulation and trigger autoimmunity while COVID-19 vaccination is effective against severe COVID-19 outcomes. We aim to examine the association between COVID-19 and development of autoimmune diseases (ADs), and the potential protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination on such an association. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in Hong Kong between 1 April 2020 and 15 November 2022. COVID-19 was confirmed by positive polymerase chain reaction or rapid antigen test. Cox proportional hazard regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting was applied to estimate the risk of incident ADs following COVID-19. COVID-19 vaccinated population was compared against COVID-19 unvaccinated population to examine the protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination on new ADs. Findings: The study included 1,028,721 COVID-19 and 3,168,467 non-COVID individuals. Compared with non-COVID controls, patients with COVID-19 presented an increased risk of developing pernicious anaemia [adjusted Hazard Ratio (aHR): 1.72; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.12-2.64]; spondyloarthritis [aHR: 1.32 (95% CI: 1.03-1.69)]; rheumatoid arthritis [aHR: 1.29 (95% CI: 1.09-1.54)]; other autoimmune arthritis [aHR: 1.43 (95% CI: 1.33-1.54)]; psoriasis [aHR: 1.42 (95% CI: 1.13-1.78)]; pemphigoid [aHR: 2.39 (95% CI: 1.83-3.11)]; Graves' disease [aHR: 1.30 (95% CI: 1.10-1.54)]; anti-phospholipid antibody syndrome [aHR: 2.12 (95% CI: 1.47-3.05)]; immune mediated thrombocytopenia [aHR: 2.1 (95% CI: 1.82-2.43)]; multiple sclerosis [aHR: 2.66 (95% CI: 1.17-6.05)]; vasculitis [aHR: 1.46 (95% CI: 1.04-2.04)]. Among COVID-19 patients, completion of two doses of COVID-19 vaccine shows a decreased risk of pemphigoid, Graves' disease, anti-phospholipid antibody syndrome, immune-mediated thrombocytopenia, systemic lupus erythematosus and other autoimmune arthritis. Interpretation: Our findings suggested that COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of developing various ADs and the risk could be attenuated by COVID-19 vaccination. Future studies investigating pathology and mechanisms would be valuable to interpreting our findings. Funding: Supported by RGC Collaborative Research Fund (C7154-20GF).

Vaccine effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac against SARS-CoV-2 omicron infection and related hospital admission among people with substance use disorder in Hong Kong: a matched case-control study.

BACKGROUND: People with substance use disorder have a high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent poor outcomes. Few studies have evaluated COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness among people with substance use disorder. We aimed to estimate the vaccine effectiveness of BNT162b2 (Fosun-BioNTech) and CoronaVac (Sinovac) against SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1.1.529) infection and related hospital admission in this population. METHODS: We did a matched case-control study using electronic health databases in Hong Kong. Individuals diagnosed with substance use disorder between Jan 1, 2016, and Jan 1, 2022, were identified. People aged 18 years and older with SARS-CoV-2 infection from Jan 1 to May 31, 2022, and people with COVID-19-related hospital admission from Feb 16 to May 31, 2022, were included as cases and were matched by age, sex, and previous clinical history with controls from all individuals diagnosed with substance use disorder who attended the Hospital Authority health services: up to three controls for SARS-CoV-2 infection and up to ten controls for hospital admission. Conditional logistical regression was used to evaluate the association between vaccination status (ie, one, two, or three doses of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac) and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospital admission, adjusted for baseline comorbidities and medication use. FINDINGS: Among 57 674 individuals with substance use disorder, 9523 people with SARS-CoV-2 infections (mean age 61·00 years, SD 14·90; 8075 [84·8%] males and 1448 [15·2%] females) were identified and matched to 28 217 controls (mean age 60·99 years, 14·67; 24 006 [85·1%] males and 4211 [14·9%] females), and 843 people with COVID-19-related hospital admissions (mean age 70·48 years, SD 14·68; 754 [89·4%] males and 89 [10·6%] females) were identified and matched to 7459 controls (mean age 70·24 years, 13·87; 6837 [91·7%] males and 622 [8·3%] females). Data on ethnicity were not available. We observed significant vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection for two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination (20·7%, 95% CI 14·0-27·0, p<0·0001) and three-dose vaccination (all BNT162b2 41·5%, 34·4-47·8, p<0·0001; all CoronaVac 13·6%, 5·4-21·0, p=0·0015; BNT162b2 booster after two-dose CoronaVac 31·3%, 19·8-41·1, p<0·0001), but not for one dose of either vaccine or two doses of CoronaVac. Significant vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related hospital admission was detected after one dose of BNT162b2 vaccination (35·7%, 3·8-57·1, p=0·032), two-dose vaccination (both BNT162b2 73·3%, 64·3 to 80·0, p<0·0001; both CoronaVac 59·9%, 50·2-67·7, p<0·0001), and three-dose vaccination (all BNT162b2 86·3%, 75·6-92·3, p<0·0001; all CoronaVac 73·5% 61·0-81·9, p<0·0001; BNT162b2 booster after two-dose CoronaVac 83·7%, 64·6-92·5, p<0·0001), but not after one dose of CoronaVac. INTERPRETATION: For both BNT162b2 and CoronaVac, two-dose or three-dose vaccination was protective against COVID-19-related hospital admission and the booster dose provided protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection among people with substance use disorder. Our findings confirm the importance of booster doses in this population during the period dominated by the omicron variant. FUNDING: Health Bureau, the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Assessment of Hypertension Complications and Health Service Use 5 Years After Implementation of a Multicomponent Intervention.

Importance: There is a lack of information regarding the impact of implementing a protocol-driven, team-based, multicomponent intervention in public primary care settings on hypertension-related complications and health care burden over the long term. Objective: To compare hypertension-related complications and health service use at 5 years among patients managed with Risk Assessment and Management Program for Hypertension (RAMP-HT) vs usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this population-based prospective matched cohort study, patients were followed up until the date of all-cause mortality, an outcome event, or last follow-up appointment before October 2017, whichever occurred first. Participants included 212 707 adults with uncomplicated hypertension managed at 73 public general outpatient clinics in Hong Kong between 2011 and 2013. RAMP-HT participants were matched to patients receiving usual care using propensity score fine stratification weightings. Statistical analysis was conducted from January 2019 to March 2023. Interventions: Nurse-led risk assessment linked to electronic action reminder system, nurse intervention, and specialist consultation (as necessary), in addition to usual care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hypertension-related complications (cardiovascular diseases, end-stage kidney disease), all-cause mortality, public health service use (overnight hospitalization, attendances at accident and emergency department, specialist outpatient clinic, and general outpatient clinic). Results: A total of 108 045 RAMP-HT participants (mean [SD] age: 66.3 [12.3] years; 62 277 [57.6%] female) and 104 662 patients receiving usual care (mean [SD] age 66.3 [13.5] years; 60 497 [57.8%] female) were included. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 5.4 (4.5-5.8) years, RAMP-HT participants had 8.0% absolute risk reduction in cardiovascular diseases, 1.6% absolute risk reduction in end-stage kidney disease, and 10.0% absolute risk reduction in all-cause mortality. After adjusting for baseline covariates, the RAMP-HT group was associated with lower risk of cardiovascular diseases (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.61-0.64), end-stage kidney disease (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.50-0.59), and all-cause mortality (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.50-0.54) compared with the usual care group. The number needed to treat to prevent 1 cardiovascular disease event, end-stage kidney disease, and all-cause mortality was 16, 106, and 17, respectively. RAMP-HT participants had lower hospital-based health service use (incidence rate ratios ranging from 0.60 to 0.87) but more general outpatient clinic attendances (IRR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.06-1.06) compared with usual care patients. Conclusions and Relevance: In this prospective matched cohort study involving 212 707 primary care patients with hypertension, participation in RAMP-HT was associated with statistically significant reductions in all-cause mortality, hypertension-related complications, and hospital-based health service use after 5 years.

BNT162b2 or CoronaVac Vaccinations Are Associated With a Lower Risk of Myocardial Infarction and Stroke After SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Patients With Cardiovascular Disease.

Background COVID-19 vaccines have demonstrated effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and mortality. The association between vaccination and risk of cardiovascular complications shortly after SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients with cardiovascular disease remains unknown. Methods and Results A case-control study was conducted with cases defined as patients who had myocardial infarction or stroke within 28 days after SARS-CoV-2 infection between January 1, 2022 and August 15, 2022. Controls were defined as all other patients who attended any health services and were not cases. Individuals without history of cardiovascular disease were excluded. Each case was randomly matched with 10 controls according to sex, age, Charlson comorbidity index, and date of hospital admission. Adjusted odds ratio with 95% CI was estimated using conditional logistic regression. We identified 808 cases matched with 7771 controls among all patients with cardiovascular disease. Results showed that vaccination with BNT162b2 or CoronaVac was associated with a lower risk of myocardial infarction or stroke after SARS-CoV-2 infection with a dose-response relationship. For BNT162b2, risk decreased from 0.49 (95% CI, 0.29-0.84) to 0.30 (95% CI, 0.20-0.44) and 0.17 (95% CI, 0.08-0.34) from 1 to 3 doses, respectively. Similar trends were observed for CoronaVac, with risk decreased from 0.69 (95% CI, 0.57-0.85) to 0.42 (95% CI, 0.34-0.52) and 0.32 (95% CI, 0.21-0.49) from 1 to 3 doses, respectively. Conclusions Vaccination with BNT162b2 or CoronaVac is associated with a lower risk of myocardial infarction or stroke after SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients with cardiovascular disease.

Safety of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac COVID-19 vaccines in patients with heart failure: A self-controlled case series study.

Background: COVID-19 vaccines are important for patients with heart failure (HF) to prevent severe outcomes but the safety concerns could lead to vaccine hesitancy. This study aimed to investigate the safety of two COVID-19 vaccines, BNT162b2 and CoronaVac, in patients with HF. Methods: We conducted a self-controlled case series analysis using the data from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority and the Department of Health. The primary outcome was hospitalization for HF and the secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and all hospitalization. We identified patients with a history of HF before February 23, 2021 and developed the outcome event between February 23, 2021 and March 31, 2022 in Hong Kong. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) were estimated using conditional Poisson regression to evaluate the risks following the first three doses of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac. Findings: We identified 32,490 patients with HF, of which 3035 were vaccinated and had a hospitalization for HF during the observation period (BNT162b2 = 755; CoronaVac = 2280). There were no increased risks during the 0-13 days (IRR 0.64 [95% confidence interval 0.33-1.26]; 0.94 [0.50-1.78]; 0.82 [0.17-3.98]) and 14-27 days (0.73 [0.35-1.52]; 0.95 [0.49-1.84]; 0.60 [0.06-5.76]) after the first, second and third doses of BNT162b2. No increased risks were observed for CoronaVac during the 0-13 days (IRR 0.60 [0.41-0.88]; 0.71 [0.45-1.12]; 1.64 [0.40-6.77]) and 14-27 days (0.91 [0.63-1.32]; 0.79 [0.46-1.35]; 1.71 [0.44-6.62]) after the first, second and third doses. We also found no increased risk of MACE or all hospitalization after vaccination. Interpretation: Our results showed no increased risk of hospitalization for HF, MACE or all hospitalization after receiving BNT162b2 or CoronaVac vaccines in patients with HF. Funding: The project was funded by a Research Grant from the Food and Health Bureau, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Ref. No. COVID19F01). F.T.T.L. (Francisco T.T. Lai) and I.C.K.W. (Ian C.K. Wong)'s posts were partly funded by the D24H; hence this work was partly supported by AIR@InnoHK administered by Innovation and Technology Commission.

Effectiveness of Simvastatin Versus Gemfibrozil for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events: A Retrospective Cohort Study of 223,699 Primary Care Patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Evidence of the effectiveness of statins compared with fibrates for primary prevention of cardiovascular events is limited. Therefore, we assessed the comparative effectiveness of simvastatin versus gemfibrozil for primary prevention of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and mortality. METHODS: This territory-wide cohort study used electronic health records of simvastatin and gemfibrozil prescriptions from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority and compared simvastatin or gemfibrozil initiation. The primary outcome was MACE, defined as the composite of the first diagnosis of cardiovascular mortality, coronary heart disease, or stroke. Secondary outcomes were the individual components of MACE, all-cause mortality, and non-cardiovascular mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting on the propensity score was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS: A total of 223,699 individuals (120,207 [53.7%] women; median follow-up 7.0 years [interquartile range 5.7-9.1]) who were prescribed simvastatin (n = 168,630) or gemfibrozil (n = 55,069) were included. Simvastatin was associated with a reduced risk of MACE (HR 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-0.93), all-cause mortality (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.86-0.90), cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.67-0.76), and non-cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.89-0.95). Associations for MACE varied according to baseline characteristics with gemfibrozil being associated with a reduced risk of MACE in men and patients with low baseline high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (< 1.0 mmol/L). CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed better population-level effectiveness of simvastatin compared with gemfibrozil for the primary prevention of MACE; however, a definitive randomized controlled trial is required to compare simvastatin with gemfibrozil among patients with low HDL cholesterol, as they appear to obtain benefit with gemfibrozil.

Using the Revised Health Care System Distrust Scale to evaluate healthcare distrust among Chinese men in Hong Kong: An analysis from a prostate cancer screening behaviours survey.

Information about the level of distrust in healthcare systems is very limited in Chinese populations, and no validated instrument has been developed to measure this distrust. Therefore, to begin addressing this research gap, this study evaluated the psychometric properties of a traditional Chinese version of the Revised Health Care System Distrust Scale and used it to assess the level of distrust in a healthcare system. The study involved a community-based personal interview survey of individuals in Hong Kong. A total of 340 men were randomly recruited. In addition to the distrust instrument, the two-item Trust in Physician Scale and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 were used. The two-factor structure of the distrust scale was confirmed. The item-total correlations corrected for overlap were >0.4 for both the Competence and Values Distrust subscales, confirming the internal construct validity of the scale. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.77 for both subscales. The scores of both the Competence and Values subscales were moderately negatively correlated with the total score of the Trust in Physician Scale, providing support for convergent validity. Regarding known-group validity, the scale could differentiate people according to marital status, monthly personal income and severity of depressive symptoms. Moreover, we found that men who had previously undergone prostate cancer screening had higher Values Distrust scores than those who had not. The descriptive analysis showed that only about half of the participants reported that they received high-quality medical care and that the healthcare system provided excellent medical care, suggesting that more effort is needed to improve the quality of care and people's satisfaction with healthcare in Hong Kong. In summary, the translated traditional Chinese version of the Revised Health Care System Distrust Scale used in this study is a valid and reliable scale for assessing the level of distrust in a healthcare system.

Association between BNT162b2 or CoronaVac COVID-19 vaccines and major adverse cardiovascular events among individuals with cardiovascular disease.

AIMS: Concern about the cardiovascular safety of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines among individuals with cardiovascular disease (CVD) may lead to vaccine hesitancy. We sought to assess the association between two COVID-19 vaccines, BNT162b2 and CoronaVac, and the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in individuals with established CVD. METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified individuals with a history of CVD before 23 February 2021 and a diagnosis of MACE between 23 February 2021 and 31 January 2022 in Hong Kong. MACE was defined as a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, and cardiovascular death. Electronic health records from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority were linked to vaccination records from the Department of Health. A self-controlled case-series method was used to evaluate the risk of MACE for 0-13 and 14-27 days after two doses of COVID-19 vaccine. We estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) to compare the risk of MACE between each risk period and the baseline period. A total of 229 235 individuals with CVD were identified, of which 1764 were vaccinated and had a diagnosis of MACE during the observation period (BNT162b2 = 662; CoronaVac = 1102). For BNT162b2, IRRs were 0.48 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23-1.02] for the first dose and 0.87 (95% CI 0.50-1.52) for the second dose during the 0-13 days risk period, 0.40 (95% CI 0.18-0.93) for the first dose and 1.13 (95% CI 0.70-1.84) for the second dose during the 14-27 days risk period. For CoronaVac, the IRRs were 0.43 (95% CI 0.24-0.75) for the first dose and, 0.73 (95% CI 0.46-1.16) for the second dose during the 0-13 days risk period, 0.54 (95% CI 0.33-0.90) for the first dose and 0.83 (95% CI 0.54-1.29) for the second dose during the 14-27 days risk period. Consistent results were found in subgroup analyses for different sexes, age groups and different underlying cardiovascular conditions. CONCLUSION: Our findings showed no evidence of an increased risk of MACE after vaccination with BNT162b2 or CoronaVac in patients with CVD. Future research is required to monitor the risk after the third dose of each vaccine.

COVID-19 Vaccination Preferences of University Students and Staff in Hong Kong.

Importance: COVID-19 has required universities to rapidly develop vaccination policies for students and staff, yet little is known about the preferences of these individuals toward vaccination. Objective: To quantify student and staff preferences for COVID-19 vaccination at a university in Hong Kong. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional online survey study was conducted from July 20 to September 21, 2021, before the announcement of a campus-wide vaccine mandate. A survey of 42 451 eligible university students and staff used discrete-choice experiment methods to quantify 7 attributes of COVID-19 vaccination: risk of a mild or moderate adverse event after vaccination, risk of a severe adverse event after vaccination, efficacy against COVID-19 infection, efficacy against severe manifestation of COVID-19 infection, duration of protection after vaccination, incentive for completing vaccination, and out-of-pocket costs. Main Outcomes and Measures: A mixed logit regression model was used to estimate the preferences of attributes for COVID-19 vaccines and marginal willingness to pay (mWTP) adjusted for background characteristics, role, vaccination, and COVID-19 infection status of family or friends, adverse event status after vaccination among family and friends of participants, and scenario block. Results: Among 42 451 eligible university students and staff invited, 3423 individuals completed the survey (mean [SD] age, 27.1 [9.9] years; 2053 [60.0%] women). Participants included 2506 students (73.2%) and 917 staff (26.8%), with a response rate of 8.1%. Quarantine-free travel was preferred (ß = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72-0.99; mWTP: $235.9; 95% CI, $190.3-$294.2), followed by efficacy against any COVID-19 infection (ß = 0.30; 95% CI, 0.29-0.32; mWTP: $84.1; 95% CI, $71.8-$100.8), against severe manifestation of COVID-19 infection (ß = 0.25; 95% CI, 0.24-0.27; mWTP: $69.7; 95% CI, $465-$653), and risk of severe adverse events following vaccination (ß = -0.24; 95% CI, -0.27 to -0.21; mWTP: -$66.8; 95% CI, -$81.5 to -$55.3). Participants were less concerned about protection duration (ß = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.15-0.18; mWTP: $46.0; 95% CI, $38.6-$56.2) and risk of mild to moderate adverse events (ß = -0.12; 95% CI, -0.13 to -0.10; mWTP: -$32.7; 95% CI, -$41.2 to -$26.4). Conclusions and Relevance: Preference of all attributes were significant and were considered important by the participants for vaccine decision-making. Insights drawn could assist policy makers in future vaccination decisions, such as campus vaccine mandate and requirement of a third dose.

Safety of two-dose COVID-19 vaccination (BNT162b2 and CoronaVac) in adults with cancer: a territory-wide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization has defined a list of adverse events of special interest (AESI) for safety surveillance of vaccines. AESI have not been adequately assessed following COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer contributing to vaccine hesitancy in this population. We aimed to evaluate the association between BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccines and the risk of AESI in adults with active cancer or a history of cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a territory-wide cohort study using electronic health records managed by the Hong Kong Hospital Authority and vaccination records provided by the Department of Health. Patients with a cancer diagnosis between January 1, 2018, and September 30, 2021, were included and stratified into two cohorts: active cancer and history of cancer. Within each cohort, patients who received two doses of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac were 1:1 matched to unvaccinated patients using the propensity score. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for AESI 28 days after the second vaccine dose. RESULTS: A total of 74,878 patients with cancer were included (vaccinated: 25,789 [34%]; unvaccinated: 49,089 [66%]). Among patients with active cancer, the incidence of AESI was 0.31 and 1.02 per 10,000 person-days with BNT162b2 versus unvaccinated patients and 0.13 and 0.88 per 10,000 person-days with CoronaVac versus unvaccinated patients. Among patients with history of cancer, the incidence was 0.55 and 0.89 per 10,000 person-days with BNT162b2 versus unvaccinated patients and 0.42 and 0.93 per 10,000 person-days with CoronaVac versus unvaccinated patients. Neither vaccine was associated with a higher risk of AESI for patients with active cancer (BNT162b2: HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.08-1.09; CoronaVac: 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-1.18) or patients with history of cancer (BNT162b2: 0.62, 95% CI 0.30-1.28; CoronaVac: 0.45, 95% CI 0.21-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: In this territory-wide cohort study of patients with cancer, the incidence of AESI following vaccination with two doses of either BNT162b2 or CoronaVac vaccines was low. The findings of this study can reassure clinicians and patients with cancer about the overall safety of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in patients with cancer, which could increase the COVID-19 vaccination rate in this vulnerable group of patients.

Autoimmune conditions following mRNA (BNT162b2) and inactivated (CoronaVac) COVID-19 vaccination: A descriptive cohort study among 1.1 million vaccinated people in Hong Kong.

BACKGROUND: Concerns regarding the autoimmune safety of COVID-19 vaccines may negatively impact vaccine uptake. We aimed to describe the incidence of autoimmune conditions following BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccination and compare these with age-standardized incidence rates in non-vaccinated individuals. METHODS: This is a descriptive cohort study conducted in public healthcare service settings. Territory-wide longitudinal electronic medical records of Hong Kong Hospital Authority users (≥16 years) were linked with COVID-19 vaccination records between February 23, 2021 and June 30, 2021. We classified participants into first/second dose BNT162b2 groups, first/second dose CoronaVac groups and non-vaccinated individuals for incidence comparison. The study outcomes include hospitalized autoimmune diseases (16 types of immune-mediated diseases across six body systems) within 28 days after first and second dose of vaccination. Age-standardized incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with exact 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Poisson distribution. RESULTS: This study included around 3.9 million Hong Kong residents, of which 1,122,793 received at least one dose of vaccine (BNT162b2: 579,998; CoronaVac: 542,795), and 721,588 completed two doses (BNT162b2: 388,881; CoronaVac: 332,707). Within 28 days following vaccination, cumulative incidences for all autoimmune conditions were below 9 per 100,000 persons, for both vaccines and both doses. None of the age-standardized incidence rates were significantly higher than the non-vaccinated individuals, except for an observed increased incidence of hypersomnia following the first dose of BNT162b2 (standardized IRR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.10-1.94). CONCLUSIONS: Autoimmune conditions requiring hospital care are rare following mRNA and inactivated COVID-19 vaccination with similar incidence to non-vaccinated individuals. The association between first dose BNT162b2 vaccination and immune-related sleeping disorders requires further research. Population-based robust safety surveillance is essential to detect rare and unexpected vaccine safety events.

Postmarketing safety of orphan drugs: a longitudinal analysis of the US Food and Drug Administration database between 1999 and 2018.

BACKGROUND: Information about the specific regulatory environment of orphan drugs is scarce and inconsistent. Uncertainties surrounding the postmarketing long-term safety of orphan drugs remain. This study aimed to evaluate the labelling changes of orphan drugs and to identify postmarketing safety-associated approval factors. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study includes all drugs with orphan drug designation approved by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research of the US Food and Drug Administration between 1999 and 2018. Main outcomes are safety-related labelling changes up to 31 December 2019. We defined any safety-related labelling changes as postmarketing safety events (PMSE). Safety-related withdrawals, suspensions, and boxed warnings were further categorised as severe postmarketing safety events (SPSE). Outcome measurements include frequencies of PMSE, SPSE, and association between approval factors and the occurrence of safety events. RESULTS: Amongst the 214 drugs identified with orphan drug designation (25.7% biologics), 83.6% were approved through at least one expedited programme, and 29.4% were approved with boxed warnings. During a median follow-up of 6.74 years since approval, 69.2% and 14.5% of the analysed orphan drugs had PMSE and SPSE, respectively. Safety-related withdrawal (0%, 0/214), suspended marketing (0.46%, 1/214) and new boxed warnings are uncommon (3.7%, 8/214). The safety-related labelling changes were more frequent in the drugs approved with boxed warnings [Incidence rate ratio (IRR): 1.95 (1.02-3.73)] and approved for long-term use [IRR: 2.76 (1.52-5.00)]. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this long-term postmarketing analysis, approximately 70% of FDA-approved orphan drugs had safety-related labelling changes although severe safety events were rare. While maintaining early access to orphan drugs, the drug regulatory body has taken timely regulatory action with postmarketing surveillance to ensure patient safety.

Attitude Toward Prostate Cancer Screening in Hong Kong: The Importance of Perceived Consequence and Anticipated Regret.

There are long-standing debates about the benefits of prostate cancer screening. Conflicting trial results and inconsistent recommendations regarding prostate cancer screening in clinical guidelines highlight the importance of patient factors that influence decision making in prostate cancer screening. Attitude is an important factor associated with cancer screening. However, attitudes toward prostate cancer screening among Chinese men are still poorly understood. The objective of the study was to evaluate attitudes toward prostate cancer screening and their association with prostate cancer screening intention among Chinese men. In this community-based study, 340 males were randomly recruited. Three distinct concepts related to prostate cancer screening attitudes were evaluated, including perceived consequences of screening, moral obligation, and anticipated regret. The intention to have prostate cancer screening was asked. Only 5.00% of the study participants had prostate cancer screening before, while 69.71% have an intention to undergo screening in the future. Participants with a high level of anticipated regret also had a high likelihood to have screening in the future, with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.82. Participants who had favorable attitudes toward the consequence of participating in prostate cancer screening had a high likelihood to undergo screening, with an aOR of 1.22. Participants who were more concerned about pain and invasion of privacy were less likely to have an intention to have prostate cancer screening, with aORs of 0.53 and 0.57, respectively. To enhance screening intention, public health programs should include components related to anticipated regrets and perceived consequences.

The Experience of Using Dating Applications for Sexual Hook-Ups: A Qualitative Exploration among HIV-Negative Men Who Have Sex With Men in Hong Kong.

Men who have sex with men (MSM) use dating applications (apps) to explore various romantic and sexual relationships. This qualitative study aimed to describe HIV-negative MSM's experiences with app usage, the sexual activities arranged accordingly and their experiences in using dating apps to arrange sexual encounters. Thirty-one MSM who were sexually active and who used dating apps were recruited. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted. Qualitative data were thematically analyzed to outline significant phenomena and perceptions. The factors associated with matching on apps included sex roles, human immunodeficiency virus serostatus and availability of a venue for meetup. Facilitated by these apps, diverse types of sexual encounters were arranged. Condoms were typically used for safer intercourse, except by people who were younger and inexperienced or when drugs were consumed before or during sex (chemsex). Extensive interest in non-penetrative sexual behaviors was expressed by our sample. Searching for post-exposure prophylaxis methods and/or sexual health screenings was common after exposure to risk of infections. Sexually abusive encounters were followed by changes in sex-searching habits and lowered trust in relationship formation. The results of this study are important for the development of appropriate interventions to promote safer sexual practices among HIV-negative MSM dating app users.

Clinical outcomes of different therapeutic options for COVID-19 in two Chinese case cohorts: A propensity-score analysis.

BACKGROUND: The timing of administration of agents and use of combination treatments in COVID-19 remain unclear. We assessed the effectiveness of therapeutics in cohorts in Hong Kong SAR and Anhui, China. METHODS: We conducted propensity-score analysis of 4771 symptomatic patients from Hong Kong between 21st January and 6th December 2020, and 648 symptomatic patients from Anhui between 1st January and 27th February 2020. We censored all observations as at 13st December 2020. Time from hospital admission to discharge, and composite outcome of death, invasive mechanical ventilation or intensive care unit admission across 1) all therapeutic options including lopinavir-ritonavir, ribavirin, umifenovir, interferon-alpha-2b, interferon-beta-1b, corticosteroids, antibiotics, and Chinese medicines, and 2) four interferon-beta-1b combination treatment groups were investigated. FINDINGS: Interferon-beta-1b was associated with an improved composite outcome (OR=0.55, 95%CI 0.38, 0.80) and earlier discharge (-8.8 days, 95%CI -9.7, -7.9) compared to those not administered interferon-beta-1b. Oral ribavirin initiated within 7 days from onset was associated with lower risk of the composite outcome in Hong Kong (OR=0.51, 95%CI 0.29, 0.90). Lopinavir-ritonavir, intravenous ribavirin, umifenovir, corticosteroids, interferon-alpha-2b, antibiotics or Chinese medicines failed to show consistent clinical benefit. Interferon-beta-1b co-administered with ribavirin was associated with improved composite outcome (OR=0.50, 95%CI 0.32, 0.78) and earlier discharge (-2.35 days, 95%CI -3.65, -1.06) compared to interferon-beta-1b monotherapy. INTERPRETATION: Our findings support the early administration of interferon-beta-1b alone or in combination with oral ribavirin for COVID-19 patients. FUNDING: Hong Kong Health and Medical Research Fund; Hong Kong Innovation and Technology Commission; Chinese Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.

Gut Microbiota-Associated Activation of TLR5 Induces Apolipoprotein A1 Production in the Liver.

RATIONALE: Dysbiosis of gut microbiota plays an important role in cardiovascular diseases but the molecular mechanisms are complex. An association between gut microbiome and the variance in HDL-C (high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol) level was suggested in a human study. Besides, dietary fat was shown to increase both HDL-C and LDL-C (low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol) levels. We speculate that certain types of gut bacteria responding to dietary fat may help to regulate HDL-C level and potentially affect atherosclerotic development. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate whether and how high-fat diet (HFD)-associated gut microbiota regulated HDL-C level. METHODS AND RESULTS: We found that HFD increased gut flagellated bacteria population in mice. The increase in HDL-C level was adopted by mice receiving fecal microbiome transplantation from HFD-fed mouse donors. HFD led to increased hepatic but not circulating flagellin, and deletion of TLR5 (Toll-like receptor 5), a receptor sensing flagellin, suppressed HFD-stimulated HDL-C and ApoA1 (apolipoprotein A1) levels. Overexpression of TLR5 in the liver of TLR5-knockout mice was able to partially restore the production of ApoA1 and HDL-C levels. Mechanistically, TLR5 activation by flagellin in primary hepatocytes stimulated ApoA1 production through the transcriptional activation responding to the binding of NF-κB (nuclear factor-κB) on Apoa1 promoter region. Furthermore, oral supplementation of flagellin was able to stimulate hepatic ApoA1 production and HDL-C level and decrease atherosclerotic lesion size in apolipoprotein E-deficient (Apoe-/-) mice without triggering hepatic and systemic inflammation. The stimulation of ApoA1 production was also seen in human ApoA1-transgenic mice treated with oral flagellin. CONCLUSIONS: Our finding suggests that commensal flagellated bacteria in gut can facilitate ApoA1 and HDL-C productions in liver through activation of TLR5 in hepatocytes. Hepatic TLR5 may be a potential drug target to increase ApoA1.

Crowdsourcing to promote hepatitis C testing and linkage-to-care in China: a randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a growing public health problem with a large disease burden worldwide. In China many people living with HCV are unaware of their hepatitis status and not connected to care and treatment. Crowdsourcing is a technique that invites the public to create health promotion materials and has been found to increase HIV testing uptake, including in China. This trial aims to evaluate crowdsourcing as a strategy to improve HCV awareness, testing and linkage-to-care in China. METHODS: A randomized controlled, two-armed trial (RCT) is being conducted in Shenzhen with 1006 participants recruited from primary care sectors of The University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital. Eligible participants are ≥30 years old; a resident in Shenzhen for at least one month after recruitment; no screening for HCV within the past 12 months and not known to have chronic HCV; and, having a WeChat social media account. Allocation is 1:1. Both groups will be administered a baseline and a follow-up survey (4-week post-enrollment). The intervention group will receive crowdsourcing materials to promote HCV testing once a week for two weeks and feedback will be collected thereafter, while the control group will receive no promotional materials. Feedback collected will be judged by a panel and selected to be implemented to improve the intervention continuously. Those identified positive for HCV antibodies will be referred to gastroenterologists for confirmation and treatment. The primary outcome will be confirmed HCV testing uptake, and secondary outcomes include HCV confirmatory testing and initiation of HCV treatment with follow-ups with specialist providers. Data will be collected on Survey Star@ via mobile devices. DISCUSSION: This will be the first study to evaluate the impact of crowdsourcing to improve viral hepatitis testing and linkage-to-care in the health facilities. This RCT will contribute to the existing literature on interventions to improve viral hepatitis testing in primary care setting, and inform future strategies to improve HCV care training for primary care providers in China. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. ChiCTR1900025771. Registered September 7th, 2019, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojen.aspx?proj=42788.