PLoS Medicine最新文献

Background: Identifying patients presenting with nonspecific abdominal symptoms who have underlying cancer is a challenge. Common blood tests are widely used to investigate these symptoms in primary care, but their predictive value for detecting cancer in this context is unknown. We quantify the predictive value of 19 abnormal blood test results for detecting underlying cancer in patients presenting with 2 nonspecific abdominal symptoms.

Methods and findings: Using data from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) linked to the National Cancer Registry, Hospital Episode Statistics and Index of Multiple Deprivation, we conducted a population-based cohort study of patients aged ≥30 presenting to English general practice with abdominal pain or bloating between January 2007 and October 2016. Positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV), sensitivity, and specificity for cancer diagnosis (overall and by cancer site) were calculated for 19 abnormal blood test results co-occurring in primary care within 3 months of abdominal pain or bloating presentations. A total of 9,427/425,549 (2.2%) patients with abdominal pain and 1,148/52,321 (2.2%) with abdominal bloating were diagnosed with cancer within 12 months post-presentation. For both symptoms, in both males and females aged ≥60, the PPV for cancer exceeded the 3% risk threshold used by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence for recommending urgent specialist cancer referral. Concurrent blood tests were performed in two thirds of all patients (64% with abdominal pain and 70% with bloating). In patients aged 30 to 59, several blood abnormalities updated a patient's cancer risk to above the 3% threshold: For example, in females aged 50 to 59 with abdominal bloating, pre-blood test cancer risk of 1.6% increased to: 10% with raised ferritin, 9% with low albumin, 8% with raised platelets, 6% with raised inflammatory markers, and 4% with anaemia. Compared to risk assessment solely based on presenting symptom, age and sex, for every 1,000 patients with abdominal bloating, assessment incorporating information from blood test results would result in 63 additional urgent suspected cancer referrals and would identify 3 extra cancer patients through this route (a 16% relative increase in cancer diagnosis yield). Study limitations include reliance on completeness of coding of symptoms in primary care records and possible variation in PPVs if extrapolated to healthcare settings with higher or lower rates of blood test use.

Conclusions: In patients consulting with nonspecific abdominal symptoms, the assessment of cancer risk based on symptoms, age and sex alone can be substantially enhanced by considering additional information from common blood test results. Male and female patients aged ≥60 presenting to primary care with abdominal pain or bloating warrant consideration for urgent cancer referral or investigation. Fu

Background: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are hotspots for pathogen transmission. Infection control interventions are essential, but the high density and heterogeneity of interindividual contacts within LTCF may hinder their efficacy. Here, we explore how the patient-staff contact structure may inform effective intervention implementation.

Methods and findings: Using an individual-based model (IBM), we reproduced methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonisation transmission dynamics over a detailed contact network recorded within a French LTCF of 327 patients and 263 staff over 3 months. Simulated baseline cumulative colonisation incidence was 21 patients (prediction interval: 11, 31) and 35 staff (prediction interval: 19, 54). We examined the potential impact of 3 types of interventions against transmission (reallocation reducing the number of unique contacts per staff, reinforced contact precautions, and hypothetical vaccination protecting against acquisition), targeted towards specific populations. All 3 interventions were effective when applied to all nurses or healthcare assistants (median reduction in MRSA colonisation incidence up to 35%), but the benefit did not exceed 8% when targeting any other single staff category. We identified "supercontactor" individuals with most contacts ("frequency-based," overrepresented among nurses, porters, and rehabilitation staff) or with the longest cumulative time spent in contact ("duration-based," overrepresented among healthcare assistants and patients in elderly care or persistent vegetative state (PVS)). Targeting supercontactors enhanced interventions against pathogen spread in the LTCF. With contact precautions, targeting frequency-based staff supercontactors led to the highest incidence reduction (20%, 95% CI: 19, 21). Vaccinating a mix of frequency- and duration-based staff supercontactors led to a higher reduction (23%, 95% CI: 22, 24) than all other approaches. Although based on data from a single LTCF, when varying epidemiological parameters to extend to other pathogens, our results suggest that targeting supercontactors is always the most effective strategy, indicating this approach could be applied to prevent transmission of other nosocomial pathogens.

Conclusions: By characterising the contact structure in hospital settings and identifying the categories of staff and patients more likely to be supercontactors, with either more or longer contacts than others, interventions against nosocomial spread could be more effective. We find that the most efficient implementation strategy depends on the intervention (reallocation, contact precautions, vaccination) and target population (staff, patients, supercontactors). Importantly, both staff and patients may be supercontactors, highlighting the importance of including patients in measures to prevent pathogen transmission in LTCF.

In the Editorial, Giles Yeo discusses if it is possible that the UPF concept could be doing more harm than good.

In the Perspective, William Burman and colleagues advocate improving the safety and acceptability of treatment, rather than treatment-shortening, of rifampin-susceptible tuberculosis.

Background: Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for coronavirus disease (COVID) are used in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to inform treatment decisions. However, to date, it is unclear when this use is cost-effective. Existing analyses are limited to a narrow set of countries and uses. The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of COVID RDTs to inform the treatment of patients with severe illness in LMICs, considering real world practice.

Methods and findings: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of COVID testing across LMICs using a decision tree model, differentiating results by country income level, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) prevalence, and testing scenario (none, RDTs, polymerase chain reaction tests-PCRs and combinations). LMIC experts defined realistic care pathways and treatment options. Using a healthcare provider perspective and net monetary benefit approach, we assessed both intended (COVID symptom alleviation) and unintended (treatment side effects) health and economic impacts for each testing scenario. We included the side effects of corticosteroids, which are often the only available treatment for COVID. Because side effects depend both on the treatment and the patient's underlying illness (COVID or COVID-like illnesses, such as influenza), we considered the prevalence of COVID-like illnesses in our analyses. We found that SARS-CoV-2 testing of patients with severe COVID-like illness can be cost-effective in all LMICs, though only in some circumstances. High influenza prevalence among suspected COVID cases improves cost-effectiveness, since incorrectly provided corticosteroids may worsen influenza outcomes. In low- and some lower-middle-income countries, only patients with a high index of suspicion for COVID should be tested with RDTs, while other patients should be presumed to not have COVID. In some lower-middle-income and upper-middle-income countries, suspected severe COVID cases should almost always be tested. Further, in these settings, negative test results in patients with a high initial index of suspicion should be confirmed through PCR and, during influenza outbreaks, positive results in patients with a low initial index of suspicion should also be confirmed with a PCR. The use of interleukin-6 receptor blockers, when supported by testing, may also be cost-effective in higher-income LMICs. The cost at which they would be cost-effective in low-income countries ($162 to $406 per treatment course) is below current prices. The primary limitation of our analysis is substantial uncertainty around some of the parameters in our model due to limited data, most notably on current COVID mortality with standard of care, and insufficient evidence on the impact of corticosteroids on patients with severe influenza.

Conclusions: COVID testing can be cost-effective to inform treatment of LMIC patients with severe COVID-like

Background: The consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) is associated with obesity, metabolic diseases, and incremental healthcare costs. Given their health consequences, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended that countries implement taxes on SSB. Over the last 10 years, obesity prevalence has almost doubled in Brazil, yet, in 2016, the Brazilian government cut the existing federal SSB taxes to their current 4%. Since 2022, a bill to impose a 20% tax on SSB has been under discussion in the Brazilian Senate. To simulate the potential impact of increasing taxes on SSB in Brazil, we aimed to estimate the price-elasticity of SSB and the potential impact of a new 20% or 30% excise SSB tax on consumption, obesity prevalence, and cost savings.

Methods and findings: Using household purchases data from the Brazilian Household Budget Survey (POF) from 2017/2018, we estimated constant elasticity regressions. We used a log-log specification by income level for all beverage categories: (1) sugar-sweetened beverages; (2) alcoholic beverages; (3) unsweetened beverages; and (4) low-calorie or artificially sweetened beverages. We estimated the adult nationwide baseline intake for each beverage category using 24-h dietary recall data collected in 2017/2018. Taking group one as the taxed beverages, we applied the price and cross-price elasticities to the baseline intake data, we obtained changes in caloric intake. The caloric reduction was introduced into an individual dynamic model to estimate changes in weight and obesity prevalence. No benefits on cost savings were modeled during the first 3 years of intervention to account for the time lag in obesity cases to reduce costs. We multiplied the reduction in obesity cases during 7 years by the obesity costs per capita to predict the costs savings attributable to the sweetened beverage tax. SSB price elasticities were higher among the lowest tertile of income (-1.24) than in the highest income tertile (-1.13), and cross-price elasticities suggest SSB were weakly substituted by milk, water, and 100% fruit juices. We estimated a caloric change of -17.3 kcal/day/person under a 20% excise tax and -25.9 kcal/day/person under a 30% tax. Ten years after implementation, a 20% tax is expected to reduce obesity prevalence by 6.7%; 9.1% for a 30% tax. These reductions translate into a -2.8 million and -3.8 million obesity cases for a 20% and 30% tax, respectively, and a reduction of $US 13.3 billion and $US 17.9 billion in obesity costs over 10 years for a 20% and 30% tax, respectively. Study limitations include using a quantile distribution method to adjust self-reported baseline weight and height, which could be insufficient to correct for reporting bias; also, weight, height, and physical activity were assumed to be steady over time.

Conclusions: Adding a 20% to 30% excise tax on top of Brazil's current federal tax could help to reduce the co

Background: Evidence suggests reduced survival rates following Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in people with preexisting mental disorders, especially psychotic disorders, before the broad introduction of vaccines. It remains unknown whether this elevated mortality risk persisted at later phases of the pandemic and when accounting for the confounding effect of vaccination uptake and clinically recorded physical comorbidities.

Methods and findings: We used data from Czech national health registers to identify first-ever serologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections in 5 epochs related to different phases of the pandemic: 1st March 2020 to 30th September 2020, 1st October 2020 to 26th December 2020, 27th December 2020 to 31st March 2021, 1st April 2021 to 31st October 2021, and 1st November 2021 to 29th February 2022. In these people, we ascertained cases of mental disorders using 2 approaches: (1) per the International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision (ICD-10) diagnostic codes for substance use, psychotic, affective, and anxiety disorders; and (2) per ICD-10 diagnostic codes for the above mental disorders coupled with a prescription for anxiolytics/hypnotics/sedatives, antidepressants, antipsychotics, or stimulants per the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification codes. We matched individuals with preexisting mental disorders with counterparts who had no recorded mental disorders on age, sex, month and year of infection, vaccination status, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). We assessed deaths with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and from all-causes in the time period of 28 and 60 days following the infection using stratified Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for matching variables and additional confounders. The number of individuals in matched-cohorts ranged from 1,328 in epoch 1 to 854,079 in epoch 5. The proportion of females ranged from 34.98% in people diagnosed with substance use disorders in epoch 3 to 71.16% in individuals diagnosed and treated with anxiety disorders in epoch 5. The mean age ranged from 40.97 years (standard deviation [SD] = 15.69 years) in individuals diagnosed with substance use disorders in epoch 5 to 56.04 years (SD = 18.37 years) in people diagnosed with psychotic disorders in epoch 2. People diagnosed with or diagnosed and treated for psychotic disorders had a consistently elevated risk of dying with COVID-19 in epochs 2, 3, 4, and 5, with adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) ranging from 1.46 [95% confidence intervals (CIs), 1.18, 1.79] to 1.93 [95% CIs, 1.12, 3.32]. This patient group demonstrated also a consistently elevated risk of all-cause mortality in epochs 2, 3, 4, and 5 (aHR from 1.43 [95% CIs, 1.23, 1.66] to 1.99 [95% CIs, 1.25, 3.16]). The models could not be reliably fit for psychotic disorders in epoch 1. People diagnosed with substance use disorders had an increased risk of all-cause mort

Background: Primary Health Care (PHC) is essential for effective, efficient, and more equitable health systems for all people, including those living with HIV/AIDS. This study evaluated the impact of the exposure to one of the largest community-based PHC programs in the world, the Brazilian Family Health Strategy (FHS), on AIDS incidence and mortality.

Methods and findings: A retrospective cohort study carried out in Brazil from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2015. We conducted an impact evaluation using a cohort of 3,435,068 ≥13 years low-income individuals who were members of the 100 Million Brazilians Cohort, linked to AIDS diagnoses and deaths registries. We evaluated the impact of FHS on AIDS incidence and mortality and compared outcomes between residents of municipalities with low or no FHS coverage (unexposed) with those in municipalities with 100% FHS coverage (exposed). We used multivariable Poisson regressions adjusted for all relevant municipal and individual-level demographic, socioeconomic, and contextual variables, and weighted with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). We also estimated the FHS impact by sex and age and performed a wide range of sensitivity and triangulation analyses; 100% FHS coverage was associated with lower AIDS incidence (rate ratio [RR]: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.68 to 0.84) and mortality (RR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.56 to 0.82). FHS impact was similar between men and women, but was larger in people aged ≥35 years old both for incidence (RR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.53 to 0.72) and mortality (RR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.72). The absence of important confounding variables (e.g., sexual behavior) is a key limitation of this study.

Conclusions: AIDS should be an avoidable outcome for most people living with HIV today and our study shows that FHS coverage could significantly reduce AIDS incidence and mortality among low-income populations in Brazil. Universal access to comprehensive healthcare through community-based PHC programs should be promoted to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals of ending AIDS by 2030.