Search

Purpose: To illustrate the interest in using interrupted time series (ITS) methods, this study evaluated the impact of the UK MHRA's March 2019 Risk Minimisation Measures (RMM) on fluoroquinolone usage. Methods: Monthly and quarterly fluoroquinolone use incidence rates from 2012 to 2022 were analysed across hospital care (Barts Health NHS Trust), primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum and CPRD GOLD), and linked records from both settings (East Scotland). Rates were stratified by age (19–59 and ≥ 60 years old). Seasonality‐adjusted segmented regression and ARIMA models were employed to model quarterly and monthly rates, respectively. Results: Post‐RMM, with segmented regression, both age groups in Barts Health experienced nearly complete reductions (> 99%); CPRD Aurum saw 20.19% (19–59) and 19.29% (≥$$ \ge $$ 60) reductions; no significant changes in CPRD GOLD; East Scotland had 45.43% (19–59) and 41.47% (≥$$ \ge $$ 60) decreases. Slope analysis indicated increases for East Scotland (19–59) and both CPRD Aurum groups, but a decrease for CPRD GOLD's ≥$$ \ge $$ 60; ARIMA detected significant step changes in CPRD GOLD not identified by segmented regression and noted a significant slope increase in Barts Health's 19–59 group. Both models showed no post‐modelling autocorrelations across databases, yet Barts Health's residuals were non‐normally distributed with non‐constant variance. Conclusions: Both segmented regression and ARIMA confirmed the reduction of fluoroquinolones use after RMM across four different UK primary care and hospital databases. Model diagnostics showed good performance in eliminating residual autocorrelation for both methods. However, diagnostics for hospital databases with low incident use revealed the presence of heteroscedasticity and non‐normal white noise using both methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic affected cancer screening, diagnosis and treatments. Many surgeries were substituted with bridging therapies during the initial lockdown, yet consideration of treatment side effects and their management was not a priority. Objectives: To examine how the changing social restrictions imposed by the pandemic affected incidence and trends of endocrine treatment prescriptions in newly diagnosed (incident) breast and prostate cancer patients and, secondarily, endocrine treatment-related outcomes (including bisphosphonate prescriptions, osteopenia and osteoporosis), in UK clinical practice from March 2020 to June 2022. Design: Population-based cohort study using UK primary care Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD database. Methods: There were 13,701 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients and 12,221 prostate cancer patients with ⩾1-year data availability since diagnosis between January 2017 and June 2022. Incidence rates (IR) and incidence rate ratios (IRR) were calculated across multiple time periods before and after lockdown to examine the impact of changing social restrictions on endocrine treatments and treatment-related outcomes, including osteopenia, osteoporosis and bisphosphonate prescriptions. Results: In breast cancer patients, aromatase inhibitor (AI) prescriptions increased during lockdown versus pre-pandemic [IRR: 1.22 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11–1.34)], followed by a decrease post-first lockdown [IRR: 0.79 (95% CI: 0.69–0.89)]. In prostate cancer patients, first-generation antiandrogen prescriptions increased versus pre-pandemic [IRR: 1.23 (95% CI: 1.08–1.4)]. For breast cancer patients on AIs, diagnoses of osteopenia, osteoporosis and bisphosphonate prescriptions were reduced across all lockdown periods versus pre-pandemic (IRR range: 0.31–0.62). Conclusion: During the first 2 years of the pandemic, newly diagnosed breast and prostate cancer patients were prescribed more endocrine treatments compared to pre-pandemic due to restrictions on hospital procedures replacing surgeries with bridging therapies. But breast cancer patients had fewer diagnoses of osteopenia and osteoporosis and bisphosphonate prescriptions. These patients should be followed up in the coming years for signs of bone thinning. Evidence of poorer management of treatment-related side effects will help assess resource allocation for patients at high risk for bone-related complications. Plain language summary: Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on hormone treatments for breast and prostate cancer in the UK: implications for bone health The COVID-19 pandemic has had a big impact on health, going beyond just causing illness. One area it has influenced is how patients with breast cancer or prostate cancer are treated. Surgeries and radiotherapies were delayed from the first lockdown as hospitals reduced non-covid related procedures. Some patients with breast or prostate cancer were instead given some medications to help stop their cancers from growing until they were able to have surgery or radiotherapy. These medications (called endocrine treatments) have important side effects, such as conditions that affect the bones. Patients on these medications should be monitored by doctors for signs of bone thinning and should, in some cases, be given other medications to help stop this happening. This study used doctors' records from more than 5 million people to find out whether the pandemic affected the number of endocrine medications being prescribed in patients with breast or prostate cancer, and also looked at the number of these patients that were diagnosed with conditions that affect their bones and whether they were given medications that could protect their bone health. We found that during the first lockdown, patients with breast cancer or prostate cancer had more of some types of endocrine treatments compared to before the lockdown. However, they had fewer diagnoses of conditions related to bone health and fewer medications to protect their bones. It is possible that appointments and tests that are usually carried out to diagnose conditions relating to bone health were not performed in the months after the first lockdown, and so these conditions were underdiagnosed. The use of medications to protect their bones was also reduced, likely because this was not considered a priority during the pandemic. This highlights that such patients should be followed up in the coming years for signs of bone thinning, given the relatively poorer management of these side effects in these people after the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

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

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

Purpose: Few studies have examined how the absolute risk of thromboembolism with COVID-19 has evolved over time across different countries. Researchers from the European Medicines Agency, Health Canada, and the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration established a collaboration to evaluate the absolute risk of arterial (ATE) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the 90 days after diagnosis of COVID-19 in the ambulatory (eg, outpatient, emergency department, nursing facility) setting from seven countries across North America (Canada, US) and Europe (England, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Spain) within periods before and during COVID-19 vaccine availability. Patients and Methods: We conducted cohort studies of patients initially diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting from the seven specified countries. Patients were followed for 90 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. The primary outcomes were ATE and VTE over 90 days from diagnosis date. We measured country-level estimates of 90-day absolute risk (with 95% confidence intervals) of ATE and VTE. Results: The seven cohorts included 1,061,565 patients initially diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting before COVID-19 vaccines were available (through November 2020). The 90-day absolute risk of ATE during this period ranged from 0.11% (0.09– 0.13%) in Canada to 1.01% (0.97– 1.05%) in the US, and the 90-day absolute risk of VTE ranged from 0.23% (0.21– 0.26%) in Canada to 0.84% (0.80– 0.89%) in England. The seven cohorts included 3,544,062 patients with COVID-19 during vaccine availability (beginning December 2020). The 90-day absolute risk of ATE during this period ranged from 0.06% (0.06– 0.07%) in England to 1.04% (1.01– 1.06%) in the US, and the 90-day absolute risk of VTE ranged from 0.25% (0.24– 0.26%) in England to 1.02% (0.99– 1.04%) in the US. Conclusion: There was heterogeneity by country in 90-day absolute risk of ATE and VTE after ambulatory COVID-19 diagnosis both before and during COVID-19 vaccine availability. Plain Language Summary: Cohort studies of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in both the ambulatory and hospital settings have suggested that SARS-CoV-2 infection promotes hypercoagulability that could lead to arterial or venous thromboembolism. However, few studies have examined how the risk of thromboembolism with COVID-19 has evolved over time across different countries. A new collaboration was established among the regulatory authorities of Canada, Europe, and the US within the International Coalition of Medicines Regulatory Authorities to evaluate the 90-day risk of both arterial and venous thromboembolism after initial diagnosis of COVID-19 in the ambulatory or hospital setting from seven countries across North America (Canada, US) and Europe (England, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Spain) within periods before and during COVID-19 vaccine availability. The study found that there was variability in the risk of both arterial and venous thromboembolism by month across the countries among patients initially diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory or hospital setting. Differences in the healthcare systems, prevalence of comorbidities in the study cohorts, and approaches to the case definitions of thromboembolism likely contributed to the variability in estimates of thromboembolism risk across the countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

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

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

Although oral bisphosphonates (BP) are commonly used, there is conflicting evidence for their safety in the elderly. Safety concerns might trump BP use in older patients with complex health needs. Our study evaluated the safety of BP, focusing on severe acute kidney injury (AKI), gastrointestinal ulcer (GI ulcer), osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), and femur fractures. We used UK primary care data (Clinical Practice Research Datalink [CPRD GOLD]), linked to hospital (Hospital Episode Statistics [HES] inpatient) and ONS mortality data. We included all patients aged >65 with complex health needs and no BP use in the year before study start (January 1, 2010). Complex health needs were defined in three cohorts: an electronic frailty index score ≥3 (frailty cohort), one or more unplanned hospitalization/s (hospitalization cohort); and prescription of ≥10 different medicines in 2009 (polypharmacy cohort). Incidence rates were calculated for all outcomes. Subsequently, all individuals who experienced AKI or GI ulcer anytime during follow‐up were included for Self‐Controlled Case Series (SCCS) analyses. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were estimated separately for AKI and GI ulcer, comparing event rates between BP‐exposed and unexposed time windows. No SCCS were conducted for ONJ and femur fractures. We identified 94,364 individuals in the frailty cohort, as well as 78,184 and 95,621 persons in the hospitalization and polypharmacy cohorts. Of those, 3023, 1950, and 2992 individuals experienced AKI and 1403, 1019, and 1453 had GI ulcer/s during follow‐up, respectively. Age‐adjusted SCCS models found evidence of increased risk of AKI associated with BP use (frailty cohort: IRR 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25–2.19), but no association with GI ulcers (frailty cohort: IRR 1.24; 95% CI, 0.86–1.78). Similar results were obtained for the hospitalization and polypharmacy cohorts. Our study found a 50% to 65% increased risk of AKI associated with BP use in elderly patients with complex health needs. Future studies should further investigate the risk–benefit of BP use in these patients. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To characterize the trend of opioid use (number of users, dispensations and oral morphine milligram equivalents) in Catalonia (Spain). Design, setting, and participants: This population-based cohort study included all individuals aged 18 years or older, registered in the Information System for Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP), which covers >75% of the population in Catalonia, Spain, from 1 January 2007, to 31 December 2019. Main exposure and outcomes: The exposures were all commercialized opioids and their combinations (ATC-codes): codeine, tramadol, oxycodone, tapentadol, fentanyl, morphine, and other opioids (dihydrocodeine, hydromorphone, dextropropoxyphene, buprenorphine, pethidine, pentazocine). The main outcomes were the annual figures per 1,000 individuals of 1) opioid users, 2) dispensations, and 3) oral morphine milligram equivalents (MME). Results were stratified separately by opioid types, age (5-year age groups), sex (male or female), living area (rural or urban), and socioeconomic status (from least, U1, to most deprived, U5). The overall trends were quantified using the percentage change (PC) between 2007 and 2019. Results: Among 4,656,197 and 4,798,114 residents from 2007 to 2019, the number of opioid users, dispensations and morphine milligram equivalents per 1,000 individuals increased 12% (percentage change: 95% confidence interval (CI) 11.9–12.3%), 105% (95% confidence interval 83%–126%) and 339% (95% CI 289%–390%) respectively. Tramadol represented the majority of opioid use in 2019 (61, 59, and 54% of opioid users, dispensations, and total MME, respectively). Individuals aged 80 years or over reported the sharpest increase regarding opioid users (PC: 162%), dispensations (PC: 424%), and MME (PC: 830%). Strong opioids were increasingly prescribed for non-cancer pains over the years. Conclusion: Despite the modest increase of opioid users, opioid dispensations and MME increased substantially, particularly in the older population. In addition, strong opioids were incrementally indicated for non-cancer pains over the years. These findings suggest a transition of opioid prescriptions from intermittent to chronic and weak to strong and call for more rigorous opioid stewardship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: To estimate the costs of primary hip and knee replacement in individuals with osteoarthritis up to 2 years postsurgery, compare costs before and after the surgery, and identify predictors of hospital costs. Methods: Patients age ≥18 years with primary planned hip or knee replacements and osteoarthritis in England between 2008 and 2016 were identified from the National Joint Registry and linked with Hospital Episode Statistics data containing inpatient episodes. Primary care data linked with hospital outpatient records were also used to identify patients age ≥18 years with primary hip or knee replacements between 2008 and 2016. All health care resource use was valued using 2016/2017 costs, and nonparametric censoring methods were used to estimate total 1‐year and 2‐year costs. Results: We identified 854,866 individuals undergoing hip or knee replacement. The mean censor‐adjusted 1‐year hospitalization costs for hip and knee replacement were £7,827 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 7,813, 7,842) and £7,805 (95% CI 7,790, 7,818), respectively. Complications and revisions were associated with up to a 3‐fold increase in 1‐year hospitalization costs. The censor‐adjusted 2‐year costs were £9,258 (95% CI 9,233, 9,280) and £9,452 (95% CI 9,430, 9,475) for hip and knee replacement, respectively. Adding primary and outpatient care, the mean total hip and knee replacement 2‐year costs were £11,987 and £12,578, respectively. Conclusion: There are significant costs following joint replacement. Revisions and complications accounted for considerable costs and there is a significant incentive to identify best approaches to reduce these. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Identify risk factors for poor pain outcomes six months after primary knee replacement surgery. Methods: Observational cohort study on patients receiving primary knee replacement from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, Hospital Episode Statistics and Patient Reported Outcomes. A wide range of variables routinely collected in primary and secondary care were identified as potential predictors of worsening or only minor improvement in pain, based on the Oxford Knee Score pain subscale. Results are presented as relative risk ratios and adjusted risk differences (ARD) by fitting a generalized linear model with a binomial error structure and log link function. Results: Information was available for 4,750 patients from 2009 to 2016, with a mean age of 69, of whom 56.1% were female. 10.4% of patients had poor pain outcomes. The strongest effects were seen for pre-operative factors: mild knee pain symptoms at the time of surgery (ARD 18.2% (95% Confidence Interval 13.6, 22.8), smoking 12.0% (95% CI:7.3, 16.6), living in the most deprived areas 5.6% (95% CI:2.3, 9.0) and obesity class II 6.3% (95% CI:3.0, 9.7). Important risk factors with more moderate effects included a history of previous knee arthroscopy surgery 4.6% (95% CI:2.5, 6.6), and use of opioids 3.4% (95% CI:1.4, 5.3) within three months after surgery. Those patients with worsening pain state change had more complications by 3 months (11.8% among those in a worse pain state vs. 2.7% with the same pain state). Conclusions: We quantified the relative importance of individual risk factors including mild pre-operative pain, smoking, deprivation, obesity and opioid use in terms of the absolute proportions of patients achieving poor pain outcomes. These findings will support development of interventions to reduce the numbers of patients who have poor pain outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The availability of anti‐osteoporosis medications with rapid onset and high potency requires tools to identify patients at high imminent fracture risk (IFR). There are few tools that predict a patient's IFR. We aimed to develop and validate tools for patients with a recent fracture and for patients initiating oral bisphosphonate therapy. Models for two separate cohorts, those with incident fragility fracture (IFx) and with incident oral bisphosphonate prescription (OBP), were developed in primary care records from Spain (SIDIAP database), UK (Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD), and Denmark (Danish Health Registries). Separate models were developed for hip, major, and any fracture outcomes. Only variables present in all databases were included in Lasso regression models for the development and logistic regression models for external validation. Discrimination was tested using area under curve (AUC) and calibration was assessed using observed versus predicted risk plots stratified by age, sex, and previous fracture history. The development analyses included 35,526 individuals in the IFx and 41,401 in the OBP cohorts, with 671,094 in IFx and 330,256 in OBP for the validation analyses. Both the IFx and OBP models demonstrated similarly good performance for hip fracture at 1 year (with AUCs of 0.79 [95% CI 0.75 to 0.82] and 0.87 [0.83 to 0.91] in Spain, 0.71 [0.71 to 0.72] and 0.73 [0.72 to 0.74] in the UK, and 0.70 [0.70 to 0.70] and 0.69 [0.68 to 0.70] in Denmark), and lower discrimination for major osteoporotic and any fracture sites. Calibration was good across all three countries. Discrimination and calibration for the 2‐year models was similar. The proposed IFR prediction models could be used to identify more precisely patients at high imminent risk of fracture and inform anti‐osteoporosis treatment selection. The freely available model parameters permit local validation and implementation. © 2021 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conflicting results exist about the relationship between bariatric surgery and fracture risk. Also, prediction of who is at increased risk of fracture after bariatric surgery is not currently available. Hence, we used a combination of a self‐controlled case series (SCCS) study to establish the association between bariatric surgery and fracture, and develop a prediction model for postoperative fracture risk estimation using a cohort study. Patients from UK Primary care records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD linked to Hospital Episode Statistics undergoing bariatric surgery with body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 between 1997 and 2018 were included in the cohort. Those sustaining one or more fractures in the 5 years before or after surgery were included in the SCCS. Fractures were considered in three categories: (i) any except skull and digits (primary outcome); (ii) major (hip, vertebrae, wrist/forearm, and humerus); and (iii) peripheral (forearm and lower leg). Of 5487 participants, 252 (4.6%) experienced 272 fractures (of which 80 were major and 135 peripheral) and were included in the SCCS analyses. Major fracture risk increased after surgery, incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs): 2.77 (95% CI, 1.34–5.75) and 3.78 (95% CI, 1.42–10.08) at ≤3 years and 3.1 to 5 years postsurgery when compared to 5 years prior to surgery, respectively. Any fracture risk was higher only in the 2.1 to 5 years following surgery (IRR 1.73; 95% CI, 1.08–2.77) when compared to 5 years prior to surgery. No excess risk of peripheral fracture after surgery was identified. A prediction tool for major fracture was developed using 5487 participants included in the cohort study. It was also internally validated (area under the receiver‐operating characteristic curve [AUC ROC] 0.70) with use of anxiolytics/sedatives/hypnotics and female as major predictors. Hence, major fractures are nearly threefold more likely after bariatric surgery. A simple prediction tool with five variables identifies high risk patients for major fracture. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Although tramadol is increasingly used to manage chronic noncancer pain, few safety studies have compared it with other opioids.Objective: To assess the associations of tramadol, compared with codeine, with mortality and other adverse clinical outcomes as used in outpatient settings.Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective, population-based, propensity score-matched cohort study using a primary care database with routinely collected medical records and pharmacy dispensations covering more than 80% of the population of Catalonia, Spain (≈6 million people). Patients 18 years or older with 1 or more year of available data and dispensation of tramadol or codeine (2007-2017) were included and followed up to December 31, 2017.Exposures: New prescription dispensation of tramadol or codeine (no dispensation in the previous year).Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes studied were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, fractures, constipation, delirium, falls, opioid abuse/dependence, and sleep disorders within 1 year after the first dispensation. Absolute rate differences (ARDs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using cause-specific Cox models.Results: Of the 1 093 064 patients with a tramadol or codeine dispensation during the study period (326 921 for tramadol, 762 492 for codeine, 3651 for both drugs concomitantly), a total of 368 960 patients (184 480 propensity score-matched pairs) were included after study exclusions and propensity score matching (mean age, 53.1 [SD, 16.1] years; 57.3% women). Compared with codeine, tramadol dispensation was significantly associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (incidence, 13.00 vs 5.61 per 1000 person-years; HR, 2.31 [95% CI, 2.08-2.56]; ARD, 7.37 [95% CI, 6.09-8.78] per 1000 person-years), cardiovascular events (incidence, 10.03 vs 8.67 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.05-1.27]; ARD, 1.36 [95% CI, 0.45-2.36] per 1000 person-years), and fractures (incidence, 12.26 vs 8.13 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.37-1.65]; ARD, 4.10 [95% CI, 3.02-5.29] per 1000 person-years). No significant difference was observed for the risk of falls, delirium, constipation, opioid abuse/dependence, or sleep disorders.Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study, a new prescription dispensation of tramadol, compared with codeine, was significantly associated with a higher risk of subsequent all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, and fractures, but there was no significant difference in the risk of constipation, delirium, falls, opioid abuse/dependence, or sleep disorders. The findings should be interpreted cautiously, given the potential for residual confounding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives X-Linked hypophosphataemic rickets (XLH) is a rare multi-systemic disease of mineral homeostasis that has a prominent skeletal phenotype. The aim of this study was to describe additional comorbidities in XLH patients compared with general population controls. Methods The Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD was used to identify a cohort of XLH patients (1995–2016), along with a non-XLH cohort matched (1 : 4) on age, sex and GP practice. Using the CALIBER portal, phenotyping algorithms were used to identify the first diagnosis (and associated age) of 273 comorbid conditions during patient follow-up. Fifteen major disease categories were used and the proportion of patients having ≥1 diagnosis was compared between cohorts for each category and condition. Main analyses were repeated according to the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD). Results There were 64 and 256 patients in the XLH and non-XLH cohorts, respectively. There was increased prevalence of endocrine [OR 3.46 (95% CI: 1.44, 8.31)] and neurological [OR 3.01 (95% CI: 1.41, 6.44)] disorders among XLH patients. Across all specific comorbidities, four were at least twice as likely to be present in XLH cases, but only depression met the Bonferroni threshold: OR 2.95 (95% CI: 1.47, 5.92). Distribution of IMD among XLH cases indicated greater deprivation than the general population. Conclusion We describe a higher risk of mental illness in XLH patients compared with matched controls, and greater than expected deprivation. These findings may have implications for clinical practice guidelines and decisions around health and social care provision for these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bisphosphonates are the first‐line treatment for preventing fractures in osteoporosis patients. However, their use is contraindicated or to be used with caution in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients, primarily because of a lack of information about their safety and effectiveness. We aimed to investigate the safety of oral bisphosphonates in patients with moderate to severe CKD, using primary‐care electronic records from two cohorts, CPRD GOLD (1997–2016) and SIDIAP (2007–2015) in the UK and Catalonia, respectively. Both databases were linked to hospital records. SIDIAP was also linked to end‐stage renal disease registry data. Patients with CKD stages 3b to 5, based on two or more estimated glomerular filtration rate measurements less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m2, aged 40 years or older were identified. New bisphosphonate users were propensity score–matched with up to five non‐users to minimize confounding within this population. Our primary outcome was CKD stage worsening (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] decline or renal replacement therapy). Secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury, gastrointestinal bleeding/ulcers, and severe hypocalcemia. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox regression and Fine and Gray sub‐HRs were calculated for competing risks. We matched 2447 bisphosphonate users with 8931 non‐users from CPRD and 1399 users with 6547 non‐users from SIDIAP. Bisphosphonate use was associated with greater risk of CKD progression in CPRD (sub‐HR [95% CI]: 1.14 [1.04, 1.26]) and SIDIAP (sub‐HR: 1.15 [1.04, 1.27]). No risk differences were found for acute kidney injury, gastrointestinal bleeding/ulcers, or hypocalcemia. Hence, we can conclude a modest (15%) increased risk of CKD progression was identified in association with bisphosphonate use. No other safety concerns were identified. Our findings should be considered before prescribing bisphosphonates to patients with moderate to severe CKD. © 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the long-term prevalence, natural history, progression, and incidence of radiographic first metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint osteoarthritis (OA).Methods: A longitudinal cohort design was used in which radiographic OA at the first MTP joint was investigated in participants from the Chingford 1,000 Women Study at year 6 (1995) and year 23 (2013-2015). Radiographic features of osteophytes (OPs) and/or joint space narrowing (JSN) at the first MTP joint were scored according to a validated foot atlas. Natural history was determined by the change in prevalence, incidence, progression, and worsening of OA in the first MTP joint.Results: Complete case-matched foot radiographic data were available for 193 of the women currently enrolled in the study (mean ± SD age 75.7 ± 5.2 years [range 69-90 years]). At the level of the first MTP joint, prevalence of OA at year 6 was 21.76% in the left and 24.35% in the right; at year 23, it was 23.83% in the left and 32.64% in the right. Over the 19-year period, 13.5% of the women developed incident OA in the right first MTP joint and 8.3% in the left. Both progression and worsening of OA were more evident for OPs and in the right first MTP joints.Conclusion: In this study of the natural history of radiographic first MTP joint OA, which to our knowledge is the longest study to date, the prevalence and incidence of first MTP joint OA increased over a 19-year period. Progression and/or worsening of OA at the first MTP joint over time appears to be driven by OP development rather than JSN, which suggests a biomechanical cause. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To provide descriptive data on rates of total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) within a large RA cohort and describe variation in risk. Incident RA patients (1995 to 2014) were identified from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). First subsequent occurrence of THR and TKR were identified (analysed separately) and incidence rates calculated, stratified by sex, age, BMI, geographic region, and quintiles of the index of multiple deprivation (IMD) score. There were 27,607 RA patients included, with a total of 1,028 THRs (mean age at surgery: 68.4 years) and 1,366 TKRs (mean age at surgery: 67.6 years), at an overall incidence rate per 1,000 person-years (PYs) [95% CI] of 6.38 [6.00–6.78] and 8.57 [8.12–9.04], respectively. TKR incidence was similar by gender but THR rates were higher in females than males. Rates of TKR but not THR rose according to BMI. An increasing trend was observed in rates of both outcomes according to age (although not ≥75) but of decreasing rates according to socio-economic deprivation. There was some evidence for regional variation in TKR. The 10-year cumulative incidence was 5.2% [4.9, 5.6] and 7.0% [6.6, 7.4] for THR and TKR, respectively. We provide generalizable estimates of THR and TKR incidence in the UK RA patient population and note variation across several key variables. Increased BMI was associated with a large increase in TKR but not THR incidence. Increased deprivation was associated with a downward trend in rates of THR and TKR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose — Smoking is a modifiable risk factor that may adversely affect postoperative outcomes. Healthcare providers are increasingly denying smokers access to total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA and TKA) until they stop smoking. Evidence supporting this is unclear. We assessed the effect of smoking on outcomes following arthroplasty. Patients and methods — We identified THAs and TKAs from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, which were linked with datasets from Hospital Episode Statistics and the Office for National Statistics to identify outcomes. The effect of smoking on postoperative outcomes (complications, medications, revision, mortality, patient-reported outcome measures [PROMs]) was assessed using adjusted regression models. Results — We studied 60,812 THAs and 56,212 TKAs (11% smokers, 33% ex-smokers, 57% non-smokers). Following THA, smokers had an increased risk of lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) and myocardial infarction compared with non-smokers and ex-smokers. Following TKA, smokers had an increased risk of LRTI compared with non-smokers. Compared with non-smokers (THA relative risk ratio [RRR] = 0.65; 95% CI = 0.61–0.69; TKA RRR = 0.82; CI = 0.78–0.86) and ex-smokers (THR RRR = 0.90; CI = 0.84–0.95), smokers had increased opioid usage 1-year postoperatively. Similar patterns were observed for weak opioids, paracetamol, and gabapentinoids. 1-year mortality rates were higher in smokers compared with non-smokers (THA hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37, CI = 0.29–0.49; TKA HR = 0.52, CI = 0.34–0.81) and ex-smokers (THA HR = 0.53, CI = 0.40–0.70). Long-term revision rates were not increased in smokers. Smokers had improvement in PROMs compared with preoperatively, with no clinically important difference in postoperative PROMs between smokers, non-smokers, and ex-smokers. Interpretation — Smoking is associated with more medical complications, higher analgesia usage, and increased mortality following arthroplasty. Most adverse outcomes were reduced in ex-smokers, therefore smoking cessation should be encouraged before arthroplasty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]