Search

Smoking has been identified as the second greatest risk factor for global death and disability and has impacts on the oral cavity from aesthetic changes to fatal diseases such as oral cancer. The paper presents a secondary analysis of the National Adult Dental Health Survey (2009). The analysis used descriptive statistics, bivariate analyses and logistic regression models to report the self-reported oral health status and dental attendance of smokers and non-smokers in England. Of the 9,657 participants, 21% reported they were currently smoking. When compared with smokers; non-smokers were more likely to report ‘good oral health’ (75% versus 57% respectively, p<0.05). Smokers were twice as likely to attend the dentist symptomatically (OR = 2.27, CI = 2.02–2.55) compared with non-smoker regardless the deprivation status. Smokers were more likely to attend symptomatically in the most deprived quintiles (OR = 1.99, CI = 1.57–2.52) and perceive they had poorer oral health (OR = 1.77, CI = 1.42–2.20). The present research is consistent with earlier sub-national research and should be considered when planning early diagnosis and management strategies for smoking-related conditions, considering the potential impact dental teams might have on smoking rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: South Asians in England have an increased risk of childhood cancer but incidence by their individual ethnicities using self-assigned ethnicity is unknown. Our objective was to compare the incidence of childhood cancer in British Indians and Whites in Leicester, which has virtually complete, self-assigned, ethnicity data and the largest population of Indians in England. Methods: We obtained data on all cancer registrations from 1996 to 2008 for Leicester with ethnicity obtained by linkage to the Hospital Episodes Statistics database. Age-standardised incidence rates were calculated for childhood cancers in Indians and Whites as well as rate ratios, adjusted for age. Results: There were 33 cancers registered among Indian children and 39 among White children. The incidence rate for Indians was greater compared to Whites for all cancers combined (RR 1.82 (95% CI 1.14 to 2.89); p = 0.01), with some evidence of increased risk of leukaemia (RR 2.20 (0.95 to 5.07); p = 0.07), lymphoma (RR 3.96 (0.99 to 15.84); p = 0.04) and central nervous system tumours (RR 2.70 (1.00 to 7.26); p = 0.05). Rates were also higher in British Indian children compared to children in India. Conclusions: British Indian children in Leicester had an increased risk of developing cancer compared to White children, largely due to a higher incidence of central nervous system and haematological malignancies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In England, during pandemic 2009 H1N1, vaccine efficacy and immunogenicity population studies in priority groups were rolled out in parallel to evaluate the pandemic vaccination programme. This provided a unique opportunity to compare immunogenicity and clinical protection in the same population and thus provide insights into the correlates of protection for the pandemic H1N1 2009 vaccine in risk groups. While clinical protection from AS03-adjuvanted pandemic 2009 H1N1 vaccine was high in those aged <25 years and pregnant women, effectiveness in older adults with chronic conditions has been found to be surprisingly poor. Here we present results from the immunogenicity study derived from the same population. Individuals from priority groups eligible for pandemic vaccination attending participating general practices were recruited. Pre and post-vaccination blood samples were collected and HI antibody testing to assess immune response to vaccination performed. The final cohort consisted of 610 individuals: 60 healthy children aged <5 years; 32 healthy pregnant women; 518 individuals from risk groups. Seroconversion rate in healthy children aged <5 years (87%, 95% CI: 75% to 94%) was higher than that of risk groups combined (65%, 95% CI: 61% to 69%) (p<0.001). Multivariable analysis of risk groups showed that the size of response in those who did seroconvert was lower in those who received the 2009/10 seasonal TIV (Fold effect: 0.52, 0.35 to 0.78). Predicted immunological boosting from higher pre-vaccine titres after 2009 pandemic H1N1 vaccination only occurred in children (seroconversion rate = 92%) and not in individuals aged 10 to 39 from risk groups (seroconversion rate = 74%). The lack of clinical protection identified in the same population in older adults from risk groups could be attributed to these lower seroresponses. Current immunogenicity licensing criteria for pandemic influenza vaccine may not correlate with clinical protection in individuals with chronic disease or immunocompromised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]