15 results on '"Colm D Andrews"'
Search Results
2. Consistency, completeness and external validity of ethnicity recording in NHS primary care records: a cohort study in 25 million patients’ records at source using OpenSAFELY
- Author
-
The OpenSAFELY Collaborative, Colm D. Andrews, Rohini Mathur, Jon Massey, Robin Park, Helen J. Curtis, Lisa Hopcroft, Amir Mehrkar, Seb Bacon, George Hickman, Rebecca Smith, David Evans, Tom Ward, Simon Davy, Peter Inglesby, Iain Dillingham, Steven Maude, Thomas O’Dwyer, Ben F. C. Butler-Cole, Lucy Bridges, Chris Bates, John Parry, Frank Hester, Sam Harper, Jonathan Cockburn, Ben Goldacre, Brian MacKenna, Laurie A. Tomlinson, Alex J. Walker, and William J. Hulme
- Subjects
Primary care health sciences ,Electronic health records ,Ethnicity ,Data curation ,Medicine - Abstract
Abstract Background Ethnicity is known to be an important correlate of health outcomes, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, where some ethnic groups were shown to be at higher risk of infection and adverse outcomes. The recording of patients’ ethnic groups in primary care can support research and efforts to achieve equity in service provision and outcomes; however, the coding of ethnicity is known to present complex challenges. We therefore set out to describe ethnicity coding in detail with a view to supporting the use of this data in a wide range of settings, as part of wider efforts to robustly describe and define methods of using administrative data. Methods We describe the completeness and consistency of primary care ethnicity recording in the OpenSAFELY-TPP database, containing linked primary care and hospital records in > 25 million patients in England. We also compared the ethnic breakdown in OpenSAFELY-TPP with that of the 2021 UK census. Results 78.2% of patients registered in OpenSAFELY-TPP on 1 January 2022 had their ethnicity recorded in primary care records, rising to 92.5% when supplemented with hospital data. The completeness of ethnicity recording was higher for women than for men. The rate of primary care ethnicity recording ranged from 77% in the South East of England to 82.2% in the West Midlands. Ethnicity recording rates were higher in patients with chronic or other serious health conditions. For each of the five broad ethnicity groups, primary care recorded ethnicity was within 2.9 percentage points of the population rate as recorded in the 2021 Census for England as a whole. For patients with multiple ethnicity records, 98.7% of the latest recorded ethnicities matched the most frequently coded ethnicity. Patients whose latest recorded ethnicity was categorised as Other were most likely to have a discordant ethnicity recording (32.2%). Conclusions Primary care ethnicity data in OpenSAFELY is present for over three quarters of all patients, and combined with data from other sources can achieve a high level of completeness. The overall distribution of ethnicities across all English OpenSAFELY-TPP practices was similar to the 2021 Census, with some regional variation. This report identifies the best available codelist for use in OpenSAFELY and similar electronic health record data.
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Ethnic differences in the indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical monitoring and hospitalisations for non-COVID conditions in England: a population-based, observational cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platformResearch in context
- Author
-
Ruth E. Costello, John Tazare, Dominik Piehlmaier, Emily Herrett, Edward P.K. Parker, Bang Zheng, Kathryn E. Mansfield, Alasdair D. Henderson, Helena Carreira, Patrick Bidulka, Angel Y.S. Wong, Charlotte Warren-Gash, Joseph F. Hayes, Jennifer K. Quint, Brian MacKenna, Amir Mehrkar, Rosalind M. Eggo, Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi, Laurie Tomlinson, Sinéad M. Langan, Rohini Mathur, Nishi Chaturvedi, Chloe Park, Alisia Carnemolla, Dylan Williams, Anika Knueppel, Andy Boyd, Emma L. Turner, Katharine M. Evans, Richard Thomas, Samantha Berman, Stela McLachlan, Matthew Crane, Rebecca Whitehorn, Jacqui Oakley, Diane Foster, Hannah Woodward, Kirsteen C. Campbell, Nicholas Timpson, Alex Kwong, Ana Goncalves Soares, Gareth Griffith, Renin Toms, Louise Jones, Herbert Annie, Ruth Mitchell, Tom Palmer, Jonathan Sterne, Venexia Walker, Lizzie Huntley, Laura Fox, Rachel Denholm, Rochelle Knight, Kate Northstone, Arun Kanagaratnam, Elsie Horne, Harriet Forbes, Teri North, Kurt Taylor, Marwa A.L. Arab, Scott Walker, Jose I.C. Coronado, Arun S. Karthikeyan, George Ploubidis, Bettina Moltrecht, Charlotte Booth, Sam Parsons, Bozena Wielgoszewska, Charis Bridger-Staatz, Claire Steves, Ellen Thompson, Paz Garcia, Nathan Cheetham, Ruth Bowyer, Maxim Freydin, Amy Roberts, Ben Goldacre, Alex Walker, Jess Morley, William Hulme, Linda Nab, Louis Fisher, Colm Andrews, Helen Curtis, Lisa Hopcroft, Amelia Green, Praveetha Patalay, Jane Maddock, Kishan Patel, Jean Stafford, Wels Jacques, Kate Tilling, John Macleod, Eoin McElroy, Anoop Shah, Richard Silverwood, Spiros Denaxas, Robin Flaig, Daniel McCartney, Archie Campbell, Liam Smeeth, Thomas Cowling, Kate Mansfield, Kevin Wang, Kathryn Mansfield, Viyaasan Mahalingasivam, Ian Douglas, Sinead Langan, Sinead Brophy, Michael Parker, Jonathan Kennedy, Rosie McEachan, John Wright, Kathryn Willan, Ellena Badrick, Gillian Santorelli, Tiffany Yang, Bo Hou, Andrew Steptoe, Di Gessa Giorgio, Jingmin Zhu, Paola Zaninotto, Angela Wood, Genevieve Cezard, Samantha Ip, Tom Bolton, Alexia Sampri, Elena Rafeti, Fatima Almaghrabi, Aziz Sheikh, Syed A. Shah, Vittal Katikireddi, Richard Shaw, Olivia Hamilton, Michael Green, Theocharis Kromydas, Daniel Kopasker, Felix Greaves, Robert Willans, Fiona Glen, Steve Sharp, Alun Hughes, Andrew Wong, Lee Hamill Howes, Alicja Rapala, Lidia Nigrelli, Fintan McArdle, Chelsea Beckford, Betty Raman, Richard Dobson, Amos Folarin, Callum Stewart, Yatharth Ranjan, Jd Carpentieri, Laura Sheard, Chao Fang, Sarah Baz, Andy Gibson, John Kellas, Stefan Neubauer, Stefan Piechnik, Elena Lukaschuk, Laura C. Saunders, James M. Wild, Stephen Smith, Peter Jezzard, Elizabeth Tunnicliffe, Zeena-Britt Sanders, Lucy Finnigan, Vanessa Ferreira, Mark Green, Rebecca Rhead, Milla Kibble, Yinghui Wei, Agnieszka Lemanska, Francisco Perez-Reche, Lucy Teece, Edward Parker, Alex J. Walker, Peter Inglesby, Helen J. Curtis, Caroline E. Morton, Jessica Morley, Sebastian C.J. Bacon, George Hickman, Richard Croker, David Evans, Tom Ward, Nicholas J. DeVito, Amelia C.A. Green, Jon Massey, Rebecca M. Smith, William J. Hulme, Simon Davy, Colm D. Andrews, Lisa E.M. Hopcroft, Henry Drysdale, Iain Dillingham, Robin Y. Park, Rose Higgins, Christine Cunningham, Milan Wiedemann, Steven Maude, Orla Macdonald, Ben F.C. Butler-Cole, Thomas O'Dwyer, Catherine L. Stables, Christopher Wood, Andrew D. Brown, Victoria Speed, Lucy Bridges, Andrea L. Schaffer, Caroline E. Walters, Christopher T. Rentsch, Krishnan Bhaskaran, Anna Schultze, Elizabeth J. Williamson, Helen I. McDonald, Laurie A. Tomlinson, Kevin Wing, Richard Grieve, Daniel J. Grint, Ian J. Douglas, Stephen J.W. Evans, Jemma L. Walker, Thomas E. Cowling, Emily L. Herrett, Christopher Bates, Jonathan Cockburn, John Parry, Frank Hester, Sam Harper, Shaun O'Hanlon, Alex Eavis, Richard Jarvis, Dima Avramov, Paul Griffiths, Aaron Fowles, Nasreen Parkes, Brian Nicholson, Rafael Perera, David Harrison, Kamlesh Khunti, Jonathan AC. Sterne, and Jennifer Quint
- Subjects
Ethnic differences ,Pandemic ,Healthcare utilisation ,Medicine (General) ,R5-920 - Abstract
Summary: Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted healthcare and may have impacted ethnic inequalities in healthcare. We aimed to describe the impact of pandemic-related disruption on ethnic differences in clinical monitoring and hospital admissions for non-COVID conditions in England. Methods: In this population-based, observational cohort study we used primary care electronic health record data with linkage to hospital episode statistics data and mortality data within OpenSAFELY, a data analytics platform created, with approval of NHS England, to address urgent COVID-19 research questions. We included adults aged 18 years and over registered with a TPP practice between March 1, 2018, and April 30, 2022. We excluded those with missing age, sex, geographic region, or Index of Multiple Deprivation. We grouped ethnicity (exposure), into five categories: White, Asian, Black, Other, and Mixed. We used interrupted time-series regression to estimate ethnic differences in clinical monitoring frequency (blood pressure and Hba1c measurements, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma annual reviews) before and after March 23, 2020. We used multivariable Cox regression to quantify ethnic differences in hospitalisations related to diabetes, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, and mental health before and after March 23, 2020. Findings: Of 33,510,937 registered with a GP as of 1st January 2020, 19,064,019 were adults, alive and registered for at least 3 months, 3,010,751 met the exclusion criteria and 1,122,912 were missing ethnicity. This resulted in 14,930,356 adults with known ethnicity (92% of sample): 86.6% were White, 7.3% Asian, 2.6% Black, 1.4% Mixed ethnicity, and 2.2% Other ethnicities. Clinical monitoring did not return to pre-pandemic levels for any ethnic group. Ethnic differences were apparent pre-pandemic, except for diabetes monitoring, and remained unchanged, except for blood pressure monitoring in those with mental health conditions where differences narrowed during the pandemic. For those of Black ethnicity, there were seven additional admissions for diabetic ketoacidosis per month during the pandemic, and relative ethnic differences narrowed during the pandemic compared to the White ethnic group (Pre-pandemic hazard ratio (HR): 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41, 0.60, Pandemic HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.65, 0.87). There was increased admissions for heart failure during the pandemic for all ethnic groups, though highest in those of White ethnicity (heart failure risk difference: 5.4). Relatively, ethnic differences narrowed for heart failure admission in those of Asian (Pre-pandemic HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.49, 1.64, Pandemic HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.19, 1.29) and Black ethnicity (Pre-pandemic HR 1.41, 95% CI: 1.30, 1.53, Pandemic HR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.09, 1.25) compared with White ethnicity. For other outcomes the pandemic had minimal impact on ethnic differences. Interpretation: Our study suggests that ethnic differences in clinical monitoring and hospitalisations remained largely unchanged during the pandemic for most conditions. Key exceptions were hospitalisations for diabetic ketoacidosis and heart failure, which warrant further investigation to understand the causes. Funding: LSHTM COVID-19 Response Grant (DONAT15912).
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. First dose COVID-19 vaccine coverage amongst adolescents and children in England: an analysis of 3.21 million patients' primary care records in situ using OpenSAFELY [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
- Author
-
Frank Hester, John Parry, Sam Harper, Colm D. Andrews, Christopher Bates, Peter Inglesby, Alex J. Walker, Lisa E. Hopcroft, Laurie A. Tomlinson, Helen J. Curtis, Sebastian C. Bacon, Andrew D. Brown, Caroline E. Morton, Viyaasan Mahalingasivam, Rosalind M. Eggo, Edward P. K. Parker, William J. Hulme, Ben Goldacre, Brian MacKenna, Jonathan Cockburn, Jessica Morley, and Amir Mehrkar
- Subjects
Covid-19 ,Primary Health Care ,Public Health ,vaccine ,eng ,Medicine ,Science - Abstract
Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination programme in England was extended to include all adolescents and children by April 2022. The aim of this paper is to describe trends and variation in vaccine coverage in different clinical and demographic groups amongst adolescents and children in England by August 2022. Methods: With the approval of NHS England, a cohort study was conducted of 3.21 million children and adolescents’ records in general practice in England, in situ and within the infrastructure of the electronic health record software vendor TPP using OpenSAFELY. Vaccine coverage across various demographic (sex, deprivation index and ethnicity) and clinical (risk status) populations is described. Results: Coverage is higher amongst adolescents than it is amongst children, with 53.5% adolescents and 10.8% children having received their first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Within those groups, coverage varies by ethnicity, deprivation index and risk status; there is no evidence of variation by sex. Conclusion: First dose COVID-19 vaccine coverage is shown to vary amongst various demographic and clinical groups of children and adolescents.
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. Changes in COVID-19-related mortality across key demographic and clinical subgroups in England from 2020 to 2022: a retrospective cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform
- Author
-
Linda Nab, Edward P K Parker, Colm D Andrews, William J Hulme, Louis Fisher, Jessica Morley, Amir Mehrkar, Brian MacKenna, Peter Inglesby, Caroline E Morton, Sebastian C J Bacon, George Hickman, David Evans, Tom Ward, Rebecca M Smith, Simon Davy, Iain Dillingham, Steven Maude, Ben F C Butler-Cole, Thomas O’Dwyer, Catherine L Stables, Lucy Bridges, Christopher Bates, Jonathan Cockburn, John Parry, Frank Hester, Sam Harper, Bang Zheng, Elizabeth J Williamson, Rosalind M Eggo, Stephen J W Evans, Ben Goldacre, Laurie A Tomlinson, and Alex J Walker
- Subjects
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health - Published
- 2023
6. OA19 Incidence and management of inflammatory arthritis in England before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a population-level cohort study using OpenSAFELY
- Author
-
Mark D Russell, James B Galloway, Colm D Andrews, Brian MacKenna, Ben Goldacre, Amir Mehrkar, Helen J Curtis, Ben Butler-Cole, Thomas O'Dwyer, Sumera Qureshi, Joanna M Ledingham, Arti Mahto, Andrew I Rutherford, Maryam A Adas, Edward Alveyn, Sam Norton, Andrew P Cope, and Katie Bechman
- Subjects
Rheumatology ,Pharmacology (medical) - Abstract
Background/Aims The impact of the pandemic on the incidence and management of inflammatory arthritis (IA) is not understood. Routinely-captured data in secure platforms, such as OpenSAFELY, offer unique opportunities to understand how IA was impacted upon by the pandemic. Our objective was to use OpenSAFELY to assess the effects of the pandemic on diagnostic incidence and care delivery for IA in England, and replicate key metrics from the National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit. Methods With the approval of NHS England, we used primary care and hospital data for 17 million adults registered with general practices using TPP health record software, to explore the following outcomes between 1 April 2019 and 31 March 2022: 1) incidence of IA diagnoses (rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, undifferentiated IA) recorded in primary care; 2) time to first rheumatology assessment; 3) time to first prescription of a conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD) in primary care, and choice of first csDMARD. Results From 17,683,500 adults (representing 40% of the English population), there were 31,280 incident IA diagnoses recorded between April 2019 and March 2022. New IA diagnoses decreased by 39.7% in the early months of the pandemic. Overall, a 20.3% decrease in IA diagnoses was seen in the year commencing April 2020, relative to the preceding year (5.1 vs. 6.4 diagnoses per 10,000 adults, respectively). Further decreases coincided with rising COVID-19 numbers, before returning to pre-pandemic levels by the end of the study period. No rebound increase in IA incidence was observed as of April 2022. The median time from referral to first rheumatology assessment was shorter during the pandemic (18 days; IQR 8-35 days) than before (21 days; 9-41 days). The proportion of patients prescribed csDMARDs in primary care was comparable to before the pandemic; however, fewer people were prescribed methotrexate or leflunomide, and more were prescribed sulfasalazine or hydroxychloroquine. Conclusion IA diagnoses decreased markedly during the early phase of the pandemic; however, the impact on rheumatology assessment times and DMARD prescribing was less marked than might have been anticipated. This study demonstrates the feasibility of using routinely-captured, near real-time data in the secure OpenSAFELY platform to benchmark care quality on a national scale, without the need for manual data collection. Disclosure M.D. Russell: Honoraria; Lilly, Menarini, Biogen. Other; Lilly, Pfizer, Janssen, UCB. J.B. Galloway: Honoraria; Abbvie, Biovitrum, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Sobi, UCB. C.D. Andrews: None. B. MacKenna: None. B. Goldacre: Grants/research support; Laura and John Arnold Foundation, NIHR, Mohn-Westlake Foundation, Wellcome Trust, Good Thinking Foundation, Health Data Research UK, Health Foundation, World Health Organisation, UKRI, Asthma UK, British Lung Foundation, and National Core Studies programme. A. Mehrkar: Other; Former employee and interim CMO of NHS Digital, and RCGP representative on GP Data Professional Advisory Group to NHS Digital. H.J. Curtis: None. B. Butler-Cole: None. T. O'Dwyer: None. S. Qureshi: Grants/research support; BMS. J.M. Ledingham: Other; Clinical director for NEIAA, Secretary for The Federation of Joint Royal Colleges of Physicians SCE Board, and trustee of the BSR. A. Mahto: Honoraria; Abbvie, Galapagos. Other; Lilly. A.I. Rutherford: Other; Lilly. M.A. Adas: None. E. Alveyn: None. S. Norton: None. A.P. Cope: Consultancies; BMS, Abbvie, GSK/Galvini. Member of speakers’ bureau; BMS, Abbvie. Grants/research support; BMS. Other; Executive committee of the EULAR research centre. K. Bechman: Grants/research support; Versus Arthritis and Pfizer Global Medical Grants.
- Published
- 2023
7. Incidence and management of inflammatory arthritis in England before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a population-level cohort study using OpenSAFELY
- Author
-
Mark D Russell, James B Galloway, Colm D Andrews, Brian MacKenna, Ben Goldacre, Amir Mehrkar, Helen J Curtis, Ben Butler-Cole, Thomas O'Dwyer, Sumera Qureshi, Joanna M Ledingham, Arti Mahto, Andrew I Rutherford, Maryam A Adas, Edward Alveyn, Sam Norton, Andrew P Cope, and Katie Bechman
- Subjects
Rheumatology ,Immunology ,Immunology and Allergy - Abstract
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the incidence and management of inflammatory arthritis is not understood. Routinely captured data in secure platforms, such as OpenSAFELY, offer unique opportunities to understand how care for patients with inflammatory arthritis was impacted upon by the pandemic. Our objective was to use OpenSAFELY to assess the effects of the pandemic on diagnostic incidence and care delivery for inflammatory arthritis in England and to replicate key metrics from the National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit.In this population-level cohort study, we used primary care and hospital data for 17·7 million adults registered with general practices using TPP health record software, to explore the following outcomes between April 1, 2019, and March 31, 2022: (1) incidence of inflammatory arthritis diagnoses (rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, and undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis) recorded in primary care; (2) time to first rheumatology assessment; (3) time to first prescription of a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) in primary care; and (4) choice of first DMARD.Among 17 683 500 adults, there were 31 280 incident inflammatory arthritis diagnoses recorded between April 1, 2019, and March 31, 2022. The mean age of diagnosed patients was 55·4 years (SD 16·6), 18 615 (59·5%) were female, 12 665 (40·5%) were male, and 22 925 (88·3%) of 25 960 with available ethnicity data were White. New inflammatory arthritis diagnoses decreased by 20·3% in the year commencing April, 2020, relative to the preceding year (5·1Inflammatory arthritis diagnoses decreased markedly during the early phase of the pandemic. The impact on rheumatology assessment times and DMARD prescribing in primary care was less marked than might have been anticipated. This study demonstrates the feasibility of using routinely captured, near real-time data in the secure OpenSAFELY platform to benchmark care quality on a national scale, without the need for manual data collection.None.
- Published
- 2022
8. OpenSAFELY: Representativeness of electronic health record platform OpenSAFELY-TPP data compared to the population of England
- Author
-
Colm D Andrews, Anna Schultze, Helen J Curtis, William J Hulme, John Tazare, Stephen JW Evans, Amir Mehrkhar, Seb Bacon, George Hickman, Chris Bates, John Parry, Frank Hester, Sam Harper, Jonathan Cockburn, David Evans, Tom Ward, Simon Davey, Peter Inglesby, Ben Goldacre, Brian MacKenna, Laurie Tomlinson, and Alex J Walker
- Subjects
Medicine (miscellaneous) ,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology - Abstract
BackgroundSince its inception in March 2020, data from the OpenSAFELY-TPP electronic health record platform has been used for more than 50 studies relating to the global COVID-19 emergency. OpenSAFELY-TPP data is derived from practices in England using SystmOne software, and has been used for the majority of these studies. We set out to investigate the representativeness of OpenSAFELY-TPP data by comparing it to national population estimates.MethodsWith the approval of NHS England, we describe the age, sex, Index of Multiple Deprivation and ethnicity of the OpenSAFELY-TPP population compared to national estimates from the Office for National Statistics. The five leading causes of death occurring between the 1st January 2020 and the 31st December 2020 were also compared to deaths registered in England during the same period.ResultsDespite regional variations, TPP is largely representative of the general population of England in terms of IMD (all within 1.1 percentage points), age, sex (within 0.1 percentage points), ethnicity and causes of death. The proportion of the five leading causes of death is broadly similar to those reported by ONS (all within 1 percentage point).ConclusionsData made available via OpenSAFELY-TPP is broadly representative of the English population.SummaryUsers of OpenSAFELY must consider the issues of representativeness, generalisability and external validity associated with using TPP data for health research. Although the coverage of TPP practices varies regionally across England, TPP registered patients are generally representative of the English population as a whole in terms of key demographic characteristics.Key messagesThere is regional variability across England in terms of key population characteristicsUsers of OpenSAFELY should carefully consider the issues of representativeness, generalisability and external validity associated with using TPP data for health research.TPP registered patients are a representative sub-sample of the English population as a whole in terms of age, sex, IMD and ethnicity.The proportions of the five leading causes of death in TPP in 2020 are broadly similar to those reported by ONS.
- Published
- 2022
9. Comparative effectiveness of BNT162b2 versus mRNA-1273 covid-19 vaccine boosting in England: matched cohort study in OpenSAFELY-TPP
- Author
-
William J Hulme, Elsie M F Horne, Edward P K Parker, Ruth H Keogh, Elizabeth J Williamson, Venexia Walker, Tom M Palmer, Helen J Curtis, Alex J Walker, Colm D Andrews, Amir Mehrkar, Jessica Morley, Brian MacKenna, Sebastian C J Bacon, Ben Goldacre, Miguel A Hernán, and Jonathan A C Sterne
- Subjects
General Medicine - Abstract
Objective To compare the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 mRNA (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) covid-19 vaccines during the booster programme in England. Design Matched cohort study, emulating a comparative effectiveness trial. Setting Linked primary care, hospital, and covid-19 surveillance records available within the OpenSAFELY-TPP research platform, covering a period when the SARS-CoV-2 delta and omicron variants were dominant. Participants 3 237 918 adults who received a booster dose of either vaccine between 29 October 2021 and 25 February 2022 as part of the national booster programme in England and who received a primary course of BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1. Intervention Vaccination with either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 as a booster vaccine dose. Main outcome measures Recorded SARS-CoV-2 positive test, covid-19 related hospital admission, covid-19 related death, and non-covid-19 related death at 20 weeks after receipt of the booster dose. Results 1 618 959 people were matched in each vaccine group, contributing a total 64 546 391 person weeks of follow-up. The 20 week risks per 1000 for a positive SARS-CoV-2 test were 164.2 (95% confidence interval 163.3 to 165.1) for BNT162b2 and 159.9 (159.0 to 160.8) for mRNA-1273; the hazard ratio comparing mRNA-1273 with BNT162b2 was 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.95 to 0.96). The 20 week risks per 1000 for hospital admission with covid-19 were 0.75 (0.71 to 0.79) for BNT162b2 and 0.65 (0.61 to 0.69) for mRNA-1273; the hazard ratio was 0.89 (0.82 to 0.95). Covid-19 related deaths were rare: the 20 week risks per 1000 were 0.028 (0.021 to 0.037) for BNT162b2 and 0.024 (0.018 to 0.033) for mRNA-1273; hazard ratio 0.83 (0.58 to 1.19). Comparative effectiveness was generally similar within subgroups defined by the primary course vaccine brand, age, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and clinical vulnerability. Relative benefit was similar when vaccines were compared separately in the delta and omicron variant eras. Conclusions This matched observational study of adults estimated a modest benefit of booster vaccination with mRNA-1273 compared with BNT162b2 in preventing positive SARS-CoV-2 tests and hospital admission with covid-19 20 weeks after vaccination, during a period of delta followed by omicron variant dominance.
- Published
- 2023
10. First dose COVID-19 vaccine coverage amongst adolescents and children in England: an analysis of 3.21 million patients' primary care records in situ using OpenSAFELY
- Author
-
Lisa E. Hopcroft, Helen J. Curtis, Andrew D. Brown, William J. Hulme, Colm D. Andrews, Caroline E. Morton, Peter Inglesby, Jessica Morley, Amir Mehrkar, Sebastian C. Bacon, Rosalind M. Eggo, Viyaasan Mahalingasivam, Edward P. K. Parker, Laurie A. Tomlinson, Christopher Bates, Jonathan Cockburn, John Parry, Frank Hester, Sam Harper, Ben Goldacre, Alex J. Walker, and Brian MacKenna
- Subjects
Medicine (miscellaneous) ,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology - Abstract
Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination programme in England was extended to include all adolescents and children by April 2022. The aim of this paper is to describe trends and variation in vaccine coverage in different clinical and demographic groups amongst adolescents and children in England. Methods: With the approval of NHS England, a cohort study was conducted of 3.21 million children and adolescents’ records in general practice in England, in situ and within the infrastructure of the electronic health record software vendor TPP using OpenSAFELY. Vaccine coverage across various demographic (sex, deprivation index and ethnicity) and clinical (risk status) populations is described. Results: Coverage is higher amongst adolescents than it is amongst children, with 53.5% adolescents and 10.8% children having received their first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Within those groups, coverage varies by ethnicity, deprivation index and risk status; there is no evidence of variation by sex. Conclusion: First dose COVID-19 vaccine coverage is shown to vary amongst various demographic and clinical groups of children and adolescents.
- Published
- 2023
11. Trends, variation, and clinical characteristics of recipients of antiviral drugs and neutralising monoclonal antibodies for covid-19 in community settings: retrospective, descriptive cohort study of 23.4 million people in OpenSAFELY
- Author
-
Amelia C A Green, Helen J Curtis, Rose Higgins, Linda Nab, Viyaasan Mahalingasivam, Rebecca M Smith, Amir Mehrkar, Peter Inglesby, Henry Drysdale, Nicholas J DeVito, Richard Croker, Christopher T Rentsch, Krishnan Bhaskaran, John Tazare, Bang Zheng, Colm D Andrews, Sebastian C J Bacon, Simon Davy, Iain Dillingham, David Evans, Louis Fisher, George Hickman, Lisa E M Hopcroft, William J Hulme, Jon Massey, Orla MacDonald, Jessica Morley, Caroline E Morton, Robin Y Park, Alex J Walker, Tom Ward, Milan Wiedemann, Christopher Bates, Jonathan Cockburn, John Parry, Frank Hester, Sam Harper, Ian J Douglas, Stephen J W Evans, Ben Goldacre, Laurie A Tomlinson, and Brian MacKenna
- Abstract
ObjectiveTo ascertain patient eligibility status and describe coverage of antiviral drugs and neutralising monoclonal antibodies (nMAB) as treatment for covid-19 in community settings in England.DesignRetrospective, descriptive cohort study, approved by NHS England.SettingRoutine clinical data from 23.4 million people linked to data on covid-19 infection and treatment, within the OpenSAFELY-TPP database.ParticipantsOutpatients with covid-19 at high risk of severe outcomes.InterventionsNirmatrelvir/ritonavir (paxlovid), sotrovimab, molnupiravir, casirivimab/imdevimab, or remdesivir, used in the community by covid-19 medicine delivery units.Results93 870 outpatients with covid-19 were identified between 11 December 2021 and 28 April 2022 to be at high risk of severe outcomes and therefore potentially eligible for antiviral or nMAB treatment (or both). Of these patients, 19 040 (20%) received treatment (sotrovimab, 9660 (51%); molnupiravir, 4620 (24%); paxlovid, 4680 (25%); casirivimab/imdevimab, 50 (ConclusionsUsing the OpenSAFELY platform, we were able to identify patients with covid-19 at high risk of severe outcomes who were potentially eligible to receive treatment and assess the coverage of these new treatments among these patients. In the context of a rapid deployment of a new service, the NHS analytical code used to determine eligibility could have been over-inclusive and some of the eligibility criteria not fully captured in healthcare data. However targeted activity might be needed to resolve apparent lower treatment coverage observed among certain groups, in particular (at present): different NHS regions, ethnic groups, people aged ≥80 years, those living in socioeconomically deprived areas, and care home residents.
- Published
- 2023
12. Circulating free testosterone and risk of aggressive prostate cancer: Prospective and Mendelian randomisation analyses in international consortia
- Author
-
Eleanor L, Watts, Aurora, Perez-Cornago, Georgina K, Fensom, Karl, Smith-Byrne, Urwah, Noor, Colm D, Andrews, Marc J, Gunter, Michael V, Holmes, Richard M, Martin, Konstantinos K, Tsilidis, Demetrius, Albanes, Aurelio, Barricarte, Bas, Bueno-de-Mesquita, Chu, Chen, Barbara A, Cohn, Niki L, Dimou, Luigi, Ferrucci, Leon, Flicker, Neal D, Freedman, Graham G, Giles, Edward L, Giovannucci, Gary E, Goodman, Christopher A, Haiman, Graeme J, Hankey, Jiaqi, Huang, Wen-Yi, Huang, Lauren M, Hurwitz, Rudolf, Kaaks, Paul, Knekt, Tatsuhiko, Kubo, Hilde, Langseth, Gail, Laughlin, Loic, Le Marchand, Tapio, Luostarinen, Robert J, MacInnis, Hanna O, Mäenpää, Satu, Männistö, E Jeffrey, Metter, Kazuya, Mikami, Lorelei A, Mucci, Anja W, Olsen, Kotaro, Ozasa, Domenico, Palli, Kathryn L, Penney, Elizabeth A, Platz, Harri, Rissanen, Norie, Sawada, Jeannette M, Schenk, Pär, Stattin, Akiko, Tamakoshi, Elin, Thysell, Chiaojung Jillian, Tsai, Shoichiro, Tsugane, Lars, Vatten, Elisabete, Weiderpass, Stephanie J, Weinstein, Lynne R, Wilkens, Bu B, Yeap, Naomi E, Allen, Timothy J, Key, Ruth C, Travis, Department of Public Health, HUS Comprehensive Cancer Center, and Department of Oncology
- Subjects
Male ,Cancer Research ,CALCULATED FREE TESTOSTERONE ,3122 Cancers ,Prostatic Neoplasms/epidemiology ,PSA ,Risk Factors ,Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin ,BINDING ,Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin/analysis ,Humans ,Testosterone ,SHBG ,Mendelian randomisation ,Cancer och onkologi ,FOCUS ,Prostate ,Prostatic Neoplasms ,MEN ,Mendelian Randomization Analysis ,prostate cancer ,Oncology ,aggressive prostate cancer ,Cancer and Oncology ,testosterone ,FINASTERIDE ,ICEP ,SENSITIVITY ,FOLLOW-UP ,Biomarkers - Abstract
Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC. Previous studies had limited power to assess the associations of testosterone with aggressive disease as a primary endpoint. Further, the association of genetically predicted testosterone with aggressive disease is not known. We investigated the associations of calculated free and measured total testosterone and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) with aggressive, overall and early-onset prostate cancer. In blood-based analyses, odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for prostate cancer were estimated using conditional logistic regression from prospective analysis of biomarker concentrations in the Endogenous Hormones, Nutritional Biomarkers and Prostate Cancer Collaborative Group (up to 25 studies, 14 944 cases and 36 752 controls, including 1870 aggressive prostate cancers). In Mendelian randomisation (MR) analyses, using instruments identified using UK Biobank (up to 194 453 men) and outcome data from PRACTICAL (up to 79 148 cases and 61 106 controls, including 15 167 aggressive cancers), ORs were estimated using the inverse-variance weighted method. Free testosterone was associated with aggressive disease in MR analyses (OR per 1 SD = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.08-1.40). In blood-based analyses there was no association with aggressive disease overall, but there was heterogeneity by age at blood collection (OR for men aged
- Published
- 2022
13. Rapid Quantification of the Binocular Visual Field for Clinical Trials: Performance of a Modified Esterman Supra-Threshold Test Implemented with the Open Perimetry Interface
- Author
-
Colm D Andrews, Aislin A Sheldon, Holly Bridge, Susan M Downes, Robert E MacLaren, and Jasleen K Jolly
- Subjects
Ophthalmology ,genetic structures ,Clinical Ophthalmology - Abstract
Colm D Andrews,1,2 Aislin A Sheldon,3 Holly Bridge,3 Susan M Downes,2,4 Robert E MacLaren,2,4 Jasleen K Jolly2– 5 1Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; 2Oxford Eye Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK; 3Oxford Centre for Functional MRI of the Brain (FMRIB), Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; 4Nuffield Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; 5Vision and Eye Research Institute, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UKCorrespondence: Jasleen K Jolly, Vision and Eye Research Institute, School of Medicine, Anglia Ruskin University, Young Street, Cambridge, CB1 2LZ, UK, Email jasleen.jolly@aru.ac.ukPurpose: We aimed to assess the performance of the modified-Esterman test (mET) as a rapid suprathreshold binocular quantification tool for the assessment of peripheral visual fields. The mET consists of an even spread of test points across the visual field.Materials and Methods: The mET was implemented on the Octopus 0900 perimeter using the Open Perimetry Interface (OPI) and consisted of 160 points. Patients with choroideremia, a rod-cone dystrophy, Stargardt disease, a cone-rod dystrophy, and healthy volunteers underwent both the mET and the standard Esterman tests twice. Disease severity (mild/moderate/severe) was graded on both tests independently. Voronoi tessellation was utilised to compare the tests.Results: The Voronoi visualisation was able to demonstrate that the mET was able to provide more information about the disease state at all stages of diseases. This was confirmed by the agreement statistic, which showed that the mET detected 27% more points of visual field loss compared to the Esterman test, being most useful in patients with rod-cone dystrophies.Conclusion: The mET provides a speedy quantitative measure of the peripheral visual field loss, which can be used in clinical trials to monitor longitudinal assessment of peripheral visual function. The mET provides a more even coverage across the visual field compared to the Esterman test points, making it more suitable for this purpose. This is a key part of safety monitoring in retinal clinical trials. The mET can easily be implemented on commercially available perimeters that allow Open Perimetry.Keywords: visual field, functional testing, screening, Stargardt disease, choroideremia
- Published
- 2021
14. Long-term efficacy and tolerability of TNFα inhibitors in the treatment of non-infectious ocular inflammation: an 8-year prospective surveillance study
- Author
-
Erika M. Damato, Srilakshmi M Sharma, Ann E Hinchcliffe, Colm D Andrews, Andrew D. Dick, Richard W J Lee, and Katie Myint
- Subjects
Adult ,Male ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Time Factors ,Population ,Anti-Inflammatory Agents ,drugs ,Uveitis ,immunology ,Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience ,Internal medicine ,Adalimumab ,medicine ,Humans ,Prospective Studies ,education ,Adverse effect ,Prospective cohort study ,Inflammation ,education.field_of_study ,Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha ,business.industry ,Clinical Science ,medicine.disease ,Infliximab ,Sensory Systems ,Ophthalmology ,Treatment Outcome ,Tolerability ,Antirheumatic Agents ,Population Surveillance ,Quality of Life ,Female ,business ,Scleritis ,Follow-Up Studies ,medicine.drug - Abstract
Background/Aim To report the efficacy and tolerability of antitumour necrosis factor-alpha therapy (TNF inhibitors [TNFi]) in the management of non-infectious ocular inflammation, including uveitis and scleritis, in adult patients over an 8-year period.Materials and methods This is a prospective cohort study of infliximab and adalimumab in the treatment of non-infectious ocular inflammatory disease. 43 of 85 adult patients on TNFi (34 infliximab, 9 adalimumab) for ≥1 year with non-infectious uveitis or scleritis were followed from 2006 to 2014. Clinical assessments, medication, adverse events and history of steroid rescues were collected at 6 monthly intervals. General quality of life (Short Form Health Survey (SF-36)) and visual quality of life (Vision-related quality of life Core Measure (VCM1)) were assessed annually. Outcome measures included rate of sustained remission, rate of relapse, systemic corticosteroid reduction, adverse events, and VCM1 and SF-36 scores.Results The median time on infliximab was 3.2 years (IQR 4.3) and on adalimumab was 2.4 years (IQR 1.8). Sustained remission was induced in 39 patients (91%) (0.5 per patient year) after a median of 1.2 years on a TNFi. 22 (51%) experienced one relapse, and 5 (12%) had two relapses. 23 (54%) had at least one adverse event; serious adverse events necessitating hospitalisation or cessation of medication occurred in four (9%) patients. 10 patients (23%) switched from the initiation of TNFi, at 1.7 years after starting, to another TNFi or another class of biologic therapy.Conclusion TNFi treatment is associated with long-term drug-induced remission of ocular inflammation, visual stability and corticosteroid reduction. Adverse events were common and no new safety signals occurred. Relapse of inflammation occurs in half of the treated population.This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
- Published
- 2019
15. The positive impact of e-mail referrals on access to specialist macula services
- Author
-
Nicole Lim, Colm D Andrews, Susan M. Downes, John Logan, and Christopher King
- Subjects
Medical education ,Electronic Mail ,Ophthalmologists ,MEDLINE ,Choroidal Neovascularization ,Health Services Accessibility ,Ophthalmology ,Specialization (functional) ,Correspondence ,Wet Macular Degeneration ,Humans ,Business ,Referral and Consultation ,Specialization - Published
- 2018
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.