Pub Date : 2023-11-22eCollection Date: 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000468
Lulu Wang, Alex Nicols, Lance Turtle, Alex Richter, Christopher Ja Duncan, Susanna J Dunachie, Paul Klenerman, Rebecca P Payne
The T cell memory response is a crucial component of adaptive immunity responsible for limiting or preventing viral reinfection. T cell memory after infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus or vaccination is broad, and spans multiple viral proteins and epitopes, about 20 in each individual. So far the T cell memory response is long lasting and provides a high level of cross reactivity and hence resistance to viral escape by variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, such as the omicron variant. All current vaccine regimens tested produce robust T cell memory responses, and heterologous regimens will probably enhance protective responses through increased breadth. T cell memory could have a major role in protecting against severe covid-19 disease through rapid viral clearance and early presentation of epitopes, and the presence of cross reactive T cells might enhance this protection. T cell memory is likely to provide ongoing protection against admission to hospital and death, and the development of a pan-coronovirus vaccine might future proof against new pandemic strains.
{"title":"T cell immune memory after covid-19 and vaccination.","authors":"Lulu Wang, Alex Nicols, Lance Turtle, Alex Richter, Christopher Ja Duncan, Susanna J Dunachie, Paul Klenerman, Rebecca P Payne","doi":"10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000468","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000468","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The T cell memory response is a crucial component of adaptive immunity responsible for limiting or preventing viral reinfection. T cell memory after infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus or vaccination is broad, and spans multiple viral proteins and epitopes, about 20 in each individual. So far the T cell memory response is long lasting and provides a high level of cross reactivity and hence resistance to viral escape by variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, such as the omicron variant. All current vaccine regimens tested produce robust T cell memory responses, and heterologous regimens will probably enhance protective responses through increased breadth. T cell memory could have a major role in protecting against severe covid-19 disease through rapid viral clearance and early presentation of epitopes, and the presence of cross reactive T cells might enhance this protection. T cell memory is likely to provide ongoing protection against admission to hospital and death, and the development of a pan-coronovirus vaccine might future proof against new pandemic strains.</p>","PeriodicalId":72433,"journal":{"name":"BMJ medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":"e000468"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10668147/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138464750","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000664
Edyta Szczerba, Janett Barbaresko, Tim Schiemann, Anna Stahl-Pehe, Lukas Schwingshackl, Sabrina Schlesinger
Objective To systematically summarise and evaluate the existing evidence on the effect of diet on the management of type 2 diabetes and prevention of complications. Design Umbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. Data sources PubMed, Embase, Epistemonikos, and Cochrane, from inception up to 5 June 2022. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials reporting summary effect estimates on the effect of diet on any health outcome in populations with type 2 diabetes were included in the review. Only meta-analyses with randomised controlled trials with the duration of at least 12 weeks were eligible for inclusion. Summary data were extracted by two investigators independently. Summary effect estimates with 95% confidence intervals were recalculated with a random effects model if the information provided was insufficient. Methodological quality was assessed with the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool and the certainty of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Results 88 publications with 312 meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials were included. Methodological quality was high to moderate in 23% and low to very low in 77% of the included publications. A high certainty of evidence was found for the beneficial effects of liquid meal replacement on reducing body weight (mean difference −2.37 kg, 95% confidence interval −3.30 to −1.44; n=9 randomised controlled trials included in the meta-analysis) and body mass index (−0.87, −1.32 to −0.43; n=8 randomised controlled trials), and of a low carbohydrate diet (<26% of total energy) on levels of haemoglobin A 1c (−0.47%, −0.60% to −0.34%; n=17 randomised controlled trials) and triglycerides (−0.30 mmol/L, −0.43 to −0.17; n=19 randomised controlled trials). A moderate certainty of evidence was found for the beneficial effects of liquid meal replacement, plant based, Mediterranean, high protein, low glycaemic index, and low carbohydrate diets (<26% total energy) on various cardiometabolic measures. The remaining results had low to very low certainty of evidence. Conclusions The evidence indicated that diet has a multifaceted role in the management of type 2 diabetes. An energy restricted diet can reduce body weight and improve cardiometabolic health. Beyond energy restriction, dietary approaches such as plant based, Mediterranean, low carbohydrate (<26% total energy), or high protein diets, and a higher intake of omega 3 fatty acids can be beneficial for cardiometabolic health in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42021252309.
{"title":"Diet in the management of type 2 diabetes: umbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials","authors":"Edyta Szczerba, Janett Barbaresko, Tim Schiemann, Anna Stahl-Pehe, Lukas Schwingshackl, Sabrina Schlesinger","doi":"10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000664","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000664","url":null,"abstract":"Objective To systematically summarise and evaluate the existing evidence on the effect of diet on the management of type 2 diabetes and prevention of complications. Design Umbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. Data sources PubMed, Embase, Epistemonikos, and Cochrane, from inception up to 5 June 2022. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials reporting summary effect estimates on the effect of diet on any health outcome in populations with type 2 diabetes were included in the review. Only meta-analyses with randomised controlled trials with the duration of at least 12 weeks were eligible for inclusion. Summary data were extracted by two investigators independently. Summary effect estimates with 95% confidence intervals were recalculated with a random effects model if the information provided was insufficient. Methodological quality was assessed with the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool and the certainty of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Results 88 publications with 312 meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials were included. Methodological quality was high to moderate in 23% and low to very low in 77% of the included publications. A high certainty of evidence was found for the beneficial effects of liquid meal replacement on reducing body weight (mean difference −2.37 kg, 95% confidence interval −3.30 to −1.44; n=9 randomised controlled trials included in the meta-analysis) and body mass index (−0.87, −1.32 to −0.43; n=8 randomised controlled trials), and of a low carbohydrate diet (<26% of total energy) on levels of haemoglobin A 1c (−0.47%, −0.60% to −0.34%; n=17 randomised controlled trials) and triglycerides (−0.30 mmol/L, −0.43 to −0.17; n=19 randomised controlled trials). A moderate certainty of evidence was found for the beneficial effects of liquid meal replacement, plant based, Mediterranean, high protein, low glycaemic index, and low carbohydrate diets (<26% total energy) on various cardiometabolic measures. The remaining results had low to very low certainty of evidence. Conclusions The evidence indicated that diet has a multifaceted role in the management of type 2 diabetes. An energy restricted diet can reduce body weight and improve cardiometabolic health. Beyond energy restriction, dietary approaches such as plant based, Mediterranean, low carbohydrate (<26% total energy), or high protein diets, and a higher intake of omega 3 fatty acids can be beneficial for cardiometabolic health in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42021252309.","PeriodicalId":72433,"journal":{"name":"BMJ medicine","volume":"17 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135565210","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000579corr1
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000579.].
{"title":"Correction:<i>Effect of national guidance on survival for babies born at 22 weeks’ gestation in England and Wales: population based cohort study</i>","authors":"","doi":"10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000579corr1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000579corr1","url":null,"abstract":"[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000579.].","PeriodicalId":72433,"journal":{"name":"BMJ medicine","volume":"55 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135764839","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-27eCollection Date: 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000427
Karine Lacombe, Thomas Hueso, Raphael Porcher, Arsene Mekinian, Thibault Chiarabini, Sophie Georgin-Lavialle, Florence Ader, Julien Saison, Guillaume Martin-Blondel, Nathalie De Castro, Fabrice Bonnet, Charles Cazanave, Anne Francois, Pascal Morel, Olivier Hermine, Valerie Pourcher, Marc Michel, Xavier Lescure, Nora Soussi, Phillipe Brun, Fanny Pommeret, Pierre Sellier, Stella Rousset, Lionel Piroth, Jean-Marie Michot, Gabriel Baron, Xavier de Lamballerie, Xavier Mariette, Pierre-Louis Tharaux, Matthieu Resche-Rigon, Philippe Ravaud, Tabassome Simon, Pierre Tiberghien
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of covid-19 convalescent plasma to treat patients admitted to hospital for moderate covid-19 disease with or without underlying immunodeficiency (CORIPLASM trial).
Design: Open label, randomised clinical trial.
Setting: CORIMUNO-19 cohort (publicly supported platform of open label, randomised controlled trials of immune modulatory drugs in patients admitted to hospital with moderate or severe covid-19 disease) based on 19 university and general hospitals across France, from 16 April 2020 to 21 April 2021.
Participants: 120 adults (n=60 in the covid-19 convalescent plasma group, n=60 in the usual care group) admitted to hospital with a positive SARS-CoV2 test result, duration of symptoms <9 days, and World Health Organization score of 4 or 5. 49 patients (n=22, n=27) had underlying immunosuppression.
Interventions: Open label randomisation to usual care or four units (200-220 mL/unit, 2 units/day over two consecutive days) of covid-19 convalescent plasma with a seroneutralisation titre >40.
Main outcome measures: Primary outcomes were proportion of patients with a WHO Clinical Progression Scale score of ≥6 on the 10 point scale on day 4 (higher values indicate a worse outcome), and survival without assisted ventilation or additional immunomodulatory treatment by day 14. Secondary outcomes were changes in WHO Clinical Progression Scale scores, overall survival, time to discharge, and time to end of dependence on oxygen supply. Predefined subgroups analyses included immunosuppression status, duration of symptoms before randomisation, and use of steroids.
Results: 120 patients were recruited and assigned to covid-19 convalescent plasma (n=60) or usual care (n=60), including 22 (covid-19 convalescent plasma) and 27 (usual care) patients who were immunocompromised. 13 (22%) patients who received convalescent plasma had a WHO Clinical Progression Scale score of ≥6 at day 4 versus eight (13%) patients who received usual care (adjusted odds ratio 1.88, 95% credible interval 0.71 to 5.24). By day 14, 19 (31.6%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and 20 (33.3%) patients in the usual care group needed ventilation, additional immunomodulatory treatment, or had died. For cumulative incidence of death, three (5%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and eight (13%) in the usual care group died by day 14 (adjusted hazard ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.10 to 1.53), and seven (12%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and 12 (20%) in the usual care group by day 28 (adjusted hazard ratio 0.51, 0.20 to 1.32). In a subgroup analysis performed in patients who were immunocompromised, transfusion of covid-19 convalescent plasma was associated with mortality (hazard ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 1.10).
{"title":"Use of covid-19 convalescent plasma to treat patients admitted to hospital for covid-19 with or without underlying immunodeficiency: open label, randomised clinical trial.","authors":"Karine Lacombe, Thomas Hueso, Raphael Porcher, Arsene Mekinian, Thibault Chiarabini, Sophie Georgin-Lavialle, Florence Ader, Julien Saison, Guillaume Martin-Blondel, Nathalie De Castro, Fabrice Bonnet, Charles Cazanave, Anne Francois, Pascal Morel, Olivier Hermine, Valerie Pourcher, Marc Michel, Xavier Lescure, Nora Soussi, Phillipe Brun, Fanny Pommeret, Pierre Sellier, Stella Rousset, Lionel Piroth, Jean-Marie Michot, Gabriel Baron, Xavier de Lamballerie, Xavier Mariette, Pierre-Louis Tharaux, Matthieu Resche-Rigon, Philippe Ravaud, Tabassome Simon, Pierre Tiberghien","doi":"10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000427","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000427","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy of covid-19 convalescent plasma to treat patients admitted to hospital for moderate covid-19 disease with or without underlying immunodeficiency (CORIPLASM trial).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Open label, randomised clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>CORIMUNO-19 cohort (publicly supported platform of open label, randomised controlled trials of immune modulatory drugs in patients admitted to hospital with moderate or severe covid-19 disease) based on 19 university and general hospitals across France, from 16 April 2020 to 21 April 2021.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>120 adults (n=60 in the covid-19 convalescent plasma group, n=60 in the usual care group) admitted to hospital with a positive SARS-CoV2 test result, duration of symptoms <9 days, and World Health Organization score of 4 or 5. 49 patients (n=22, n=27) had underlying immunosuppression.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Open label randomisation to usual care or four units (200-220 mL/unit, 2 units/day over two consecutive days) of covid-19 convalescent plasma with a seroneutralisation titre >40.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Primary outcomes were proportion of patients with a WHO Clinical Progression Scale score of ≥6 on the 10 point scale on day 4 (higher values indicate a worse outcome), and survival without assisted ventilation or additional immunomodulatory treatment by day 14. Secondary outcomes were changes in WHO Clinical Progression Scale scores, overall survival, time to discharge, and time to end of dependence on oxygen supply. Predefined subgroups analyses included immunosuppression status, duration of symptoms before randomisation, and use of steroids.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>120 patients were recruited and assigned to covid-19 convalescent plasma (n=60) or usual care (n=60), including 22 (covid-19 convalescent plasma) and 27 (usual care) patients who were immunocompromised. 13 (22%) patients who received convalescent plasma had a WHO Clinical Progression Scale score of ≥6 at day 4 versus eight (13%) patients who received usual care (adjusted odds ratio 1.88, 95% credible interval 0.71 to 5.24). By day 14, 19 (31.6%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and 20 (33.3%) patients in the usual care group needed ventilation, additional immunomodulatory treatment, or had died. For cumulative incidence of death, three (5%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and eight (13%) in the usual care group died by day 14 (adjusted hazard ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.10 to 1.53), and seven (12%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and 12 (20%) in the usual care group by day 28 (adjusted hazard ratio 0.51, 0.20 to 1.32). In a subgroup analysis performed in patients who were immunocompromised, transfusion of covid-19 convalescent plasma was associated with mortality (hazard ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 1.10).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In th","PeriodicalId":72433,"journal":{"name":"BMJ medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":"e000427"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10619082/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71429673","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-22eCollection Date: 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000786
Chris Zielinski
{"title":"Time to treat the climate and nature crisis as one indivisible global health emergency.","authors":"Chris Zielinski","doi":"10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000786","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000786","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":72433,"journal":{"name":"BMJ medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":"e000786"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10603515/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71415671","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-17eCollection Date: 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000554
Aroon D Hingorani, Jasmine Gratton, Chris Finan, A Floriaan Schmidt, Riyaz Patel, Reecha Sofat, Valerie Kuan, Claudia Langenberg, Harry Hemingway, Joan K Morris, Nicholas J Wald
Objective: To clarify the performance of polygenic risk scores in population screening, individual risk prediction, and population risk stratification.
Design: Secondary analysis of data in the Polygenic Score Catalog.
Setting: Polygenic Score Catalog, April 2022. Secondary analysis of 3915 performance metric estimates for 926 polygenic risk scores for 310 diseases to generate estimates of performance in population screening, individual risk, and population risk stratification.
Participants: Individuals contributing to the published studies in the Polygenic Score Catalog.
Main outcome measures: Detection rate for a 5% false positive rate (DR5) and the population odds of becoming affected given a positive result; individual odds of becoming affected for a person with a particular polygenic score; and odds of becoming affected for groups of individuals in different portions of a polygenic risk score distribution. Coronary artery disease and breast cancer were used as illustrative examples.
Results: For performance in population screening, median DR5 for all polygenic risk scores and all diseases studied was 11% (interquartile range 8-18%). Median DR5 was 12% (9-19%) for polygenic risk scores for coronary artery disease and 10% (9-12%) for breast cancer. The population odds of becoming affected given a positive results were 1:8 for coronary artery disease and 1:21 for breast cancer, with background 10 year odds of 1:19 and 1:41, respectively, which are typical for these diseases at age 50. For individual risk prediction, the corresponding 10 year odds of becoming affected for individuals aged 50 with a polygenic risk score at the 2.5th, 25th, 75th, and 97.5th centiles were 1:54, 1:29, 1:15, and 1:8 for coronary artery disease and 1:91, 1:56, 1:34, and 1:21 for breast cancer. In terms of population risk stratification, at age 50, the risk of coronary artery disease was divided into five groups, with 10 year odds of 1:41 and 1:11 for the lowest and highest quintile groups, respectively. The 10 year odds was 1:7 for the upper 2.5% of the polygenic risk score distribution for coronary artery disease, a group that contributed 7% of cases. The corresponding estimates for breast cancer were 1:72 and 1:26 for the lowest and highest quintile groups, and 1:19 for the upper 2.5% of the distribution, which contributed 6% of cases.
Conclusion: Polygenic risk scores performed poorly in population screening, individual risk prediction, and population risk stratification. Strong claims about the effect of polygenic risk scores on healthcare seem to be disproportionate to their performance.
{"title":"Performance of polygenic risk scores in screening, prediction, and risk stratification: secondary analysis of data in the Polygenic Score Catalog.","authors":"Aroon D Hingorani, Jasmine Gratton, Chris Finan, A Floriaan Schmidt, Riyaz Patel, Reecha Sofat, Valerie Kuan, Claudia Langenberg, Harry Hemingway, Joan K Morris, Nicholas J Wald","doi":"10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000554","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000554","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To clarify the performance of polygenic risk scores in population screening, individual risk prediction, and population risk stratification.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Secondary analysis of data in the Polygenic Score Catalog.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Polygenic Score Catalog, April 2022. Secondary analysis of 3915 performance metric estimates for 926 polygenic risk scores for 310 diseases to generate estimates of performance in population screening, individual risk, and population risk stratification.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Individuals contributing to the published studies in the Polygenic Score Catalog.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Detection rate for a 5% false positive rate (DR<sub>5</sub>) and the population odds of becoming affected given a positive result; individual odds of becoming affected for a person with a particular polygenic score; and odds of becoming affected for groups of individuals in different portions of a polygenic risk score distribution. Coronary artery disease and breast cancer were used as illustrative examples.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For performance in population screening, median DR<sub>5</sub> for all polygenic risk scores and all diseases studied was 11% (interquartile range 8-18%). Median DR<sub>5</sub> was 12% (9-19%) for polygenic risk scores for coronary artery disease and 10% (9-12%) for breast cancer. The population odds of becoming affected given a positive results were 1:8 for coronary artery disease and 1:21 for breast cancer, with background 10 year odds of 1:19 and 1:41, respectively, which are typical for these diseases at age 50. For individual risk prediction, the corresponding 10 year odds of becoming affected for individuals aged 50 with a polygenic risk score at the 2.5th, 25th, 75th, and 97.5th centiles were 1:54, 1:29, 1:15, and 1:8 for coronary artery disease and 1:91, 1:56, 1:34, and 1:21 for breast cancer. In terms of population risk stratification, at age 50, the risk of coronary artery disease was divided into five groups, with 10 year odds of 1:41 and 1:11 for the lowest and highest quintile groups, respectively. The 10 year odds was 1:7 for the upper 2.5% of the polygenic risk score distribution for coronary artery disease, a group that contributed 7% of cases. The corresponding estimates for breast cancer were 1:72 and 1:26 for the lowest and highest quintile groups, and 1:19 for the upper 2.5% of the distribution, which contributed 6% of cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Polygenic risk scores performed poorly in population screening, individual risk prediction, and population risk stratification. Strong claims about the effect of polygenic risk scores on healthcare seem to be disproportionate to their performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":72433,"journal":{"name":"BMJ medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":"e000554"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10582890/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49685693","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-12eCollection Date: 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000548
Jiawen Dong, D Aled Rees
Polycystic ovary syndrome is characterised by excessive levels of androgens and ovulatory dysfunction, and is a common endocrine disorder in women of reproductive age. Polycystic ovary syndrome arises as a result of polygenic susceptibility in combination with environmental influences that might include epigenetic alterations and in utero programming. In addition to the well recognised clinical manifestations of hyperandrogenism and ovulatory dysfunction, women with polycystic ovary syndrome have an increased risk of adverse mental health outcomes, pregnancy complications, and cardiometabolic disease. Unlicensed treatments have limited efficacy, mostly because drug development has been hampered by an incomplete understanding of the underlying pathophysiological processes. Advances in genetics, metabolomics, and adipocyte biology have improved our understanding of key changes in neuroendocrine, enteroendocrine, and steroidogenic pathways, including increased gonadotrophin releasing hormone pulsatility, androgen excess, insulin resistance, and changes in the gut microbiome. Many patients with polycystic ovary syndrome have high levels of 11-oxygenated androgens, with high androgenic potency, that might mediate metabolic risk. These advances have prompted the development of new treatments, including those that target the neurokinin-kisspeptin axis upstream of gonadotrophin releasing hormone, with the potential to lessen adverse clinical sequelae and improve patient outcomes.
{"title":"Polycystic ovary syndrome: pathophysiology and therapeutic opportunities.","authors":"Jiawen Dong, D Aled Rees","doi":"10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000548","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000548","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Polycystic ovary syndrome is characterised by excessive levels of androgens and ovulatory dysfunction, and is a common endocrine disorder in women of reproductive age. Polycystic ovary syndrome arises as a result of polygenic susceptibility in combination with environmental influences that might include epigenetic alterations and in utero programming. In addition to the well recognised clinical manifestations of hyperandrogenism and ovulatory dysfunction, women with polycystic ovary syndrome have an increased risk of adverse mental health outcomes, pregnancy complications, and cardiometabolic disease. Unlicensed treatments have limited efficacy, mostly because drug development has been hampered by an incomplete understanding of the underlying pathophysiological processes. Advances in genetics, metabolomics, and adipocyte biology have improved our understanding of key changes in neuroendocrine, enteroendocrine, and steroidogenic pathways, including increased gonadotrophin releasing hormone pulsatility, androgen excess, insulin resistance, and changes in the gut microbiome. Many patients with polycystic ovary syndrome have high levels of 11-oxygenated androgens, with high androgenic potency, that might mediate metabolic risk. These advances have prompted the development of new treatments, including those that target the neurokinin-kisspeptin axis upstream of gonadotrophin releasing hormone, with the potential to lessen adverse clinical sequelae and improve patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":72433,"journal":{"name":"BMJ medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":"e000548"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/38/5b/bmjmed-2023-000548.PMC10583117.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49685694","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-06eCollection Date: 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000651
Rohan Khera, Lovedeep Singh Dhingra, Arya Aminorroaya, Kelly Li, Jin J Zhou, Faaizah Arshad, Clair Blacketer, Mary G Bowring, Fan Bu, Michael Cook, David A Dorr, Talita Duarte-Salles, Scott L DuVall, Thomas Falconer, Tina E French, Elizabeth E Hanchrow, Scott Horban, Wallis Cy Lau, Jing Li, Yuntian Liu, Yuan Lu, Kenneth Kc Man, Michael E Matheny, Nestoras Mathioudakis, Michael F McLemore, Evan Minty, Daniel R Morales, Paul Nagy, Akihiko Nishimura, Anna Ostropolets, Andrea Pistillo, Jose D Posada, Nicole Pratt, Carlen Reyes, Joseph S Ross, Sarah Seager, Nigam Shah, Katherine Simon, Eric Yf Wan, Jianxiao Yang, Can Yin, Seng Chan You, Martijn J Schuemie, Patrick B Ryan, George Hripcsak, Harlan Krumholz, Marc A Suchard
Objective: To assess the uptake of second line antihyperglycaemic drugs among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are receiving metformin.
Design: Federated pharmacoepidemiological evaluation in LEGEND-T2DM.
Setting: 10 US and seven non-US electronic health record and administrative claims databases in the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics network in eight countries from 2011 to the end of 2021.
Participants: 4.8 million patients (≥18 years) across US and non-US based databases with type 2 diabetes mellitus who had received metformin monotherapy and had initiated second line treatments.
Exposure: The exposure used to evaluate each database was calendar year trends, with the years in the study that were specific to each cohort.
Main outcomes measures: The outcome was the incidence of second line antihyperglycaemic drug use (ie, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, and sulfonylureas) among individuals who were already receiving treatment with metformin. The relative drug class level uptake across cardiovascular risk groups was also evaluated.
Results: 4.6 million patients were identified in US databases, 61 382 from Spain, 32 442 from Germany, 25 173 from the UK, 13 270 from France, 5580 from Scotland, 4614 from Hong Kong, and 2322 from Australia. During 2011-21, the combined proportional initiation of the cardioprotective antihyperglycaemic drugs (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors) increased across all data sources, with the combined initiation of these drugs as second line drugs in 2021 ranging from 35.2% to 68.2% in the US databases, 15.4% in France, 34.7% in Spain, 50.1% in Germany, and 54.8% in Scotland. From 2016 to 2021, in some US and non-US databases, uptake of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors increased more significantly among populations with no cardiovascular disease compared with patients with established cardiovascular disease. No data source provided evidence of a greater increase in the uptake of these two drug classes in populations with cardiovascular disease compared with no cardiovascular disease.
Conclusions: Despite the increase in overall uptake of cardioprotective antihyperglycaemic drugs as second line treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus, their uptake was lower in patients with cardiovascular disease than in people with no cardiovascular disease over the past decade. A strategy is needed to ensure that medication use is concordant with guideline recommendations to improve outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
{"title":"Multinational patterns of second line antihyperglycaemic drug initiation across cardiovascular risk groups: federated pharmacoepidemiological evaluation in LEGEND-T2DM.","authors":"Rohan Khera, Lovedeep Singh Dhingra, Arya Aminorroaya, Kelly Li, Jin J Zhou, Faaizah Arshad, Clair Blacketer, Mary G Bowring, Fan Bu, Michael Cook, David A Dorr, Talita Duarte-Salles, Scott L DuVall, Thomas Falconer, Tina E French, Elizabeth E Hanchrow, Scott Horban, Wallis Cy Lau, Jing Li, Yuntian Liu, Yuan Lu, Kenneth Kc Man, Michael E Matheny, Nestoras Mathioudakis, Michael F McLemore, Evan Minty, Daniel R Morales, Paul Nagy, Akihiko Nishimura, Anna Ostropolets, Andrea Pistillo, Jose D Posada, Nicole Pratt, Carlen Reyes, Joseph S Ross, Sarah Seager, Nigam Shah, Katherine Simon, Eric Yf Wan, Jianxiao Yang, Can Yin, Seng Chan You, Martijn J Schuemie, Patrick B Ryan, George Hripcsak, Harlan Krumholz, Marc A Suchard","doi":"10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000651","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000651","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the uptake of second line antihyperglycaemic drugs among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are receiving metformin.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Federated pharmacoepidemiological evaluation in LEGEND-T2DM.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>10 US and seven non-US electronic health record and administrative claims databases in the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics network in eight countries from 2011 to the end of 2021.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>4.8 million patients (≥18 years) across US and non-US based databases with type 2 diabetes mellitus who had received metformin monotherapy and had initiated second line treatments.</p><p><strong>Exposure: </strong>The exposure used to evaluate each database was calendar year trends, with the years in the study that were specific to each cohort.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes measures: </strong>The outcome was the incidence of second line antihyperglycaemic drug use (ie, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, and sulfonylureas) among individuals who were already receiving treatment with metformin. The relative drug class level uptake across cardiovascular risk groups was also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>4.6 million patients were identified in US databases, 61 382 from Spain, 32 442 from Germany, 25 173 from the UK, 13 270 from France, 5580 from Scotland, 4614 from Hong Kong, and 2322 from Australia. During 2011-21, the combined proportional initiation of the cardioprotective antihyperglycaemic drugs (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors) increased across all data sources, with the combined initiation of these drugs as second line drugs in 2021 ranging from 35.2% to 68.2% in the US databases, 15.4% in France, 34.7% in Spain, 50.1% in Germany, and 54.8% in Scotland. From 2016 to 2021, in some US and non-US databases, uptake of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors increased more significantly among populations with no cardiovascular disease compared with patients with established cardiovascular disease. No data source provided evidence of a greater increase in the uptake of these two drug classes in populations with cardiovascular disease compared with no cardiovascular disease.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite the increase in overall uptake of cardioprotective antihyperglycaemic drugs as second line treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus, their uptake was lower in patients with cardiovascular disease than in people with no cardiovascular disease over the past decade. A strategy is needed to ensure that medication use is concordant with guideline recommendations to improve outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.</p>","PeriodicalId":72433,"journal":{"name":"BMJ medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":"e000651"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f3/09/bmjmed-2023-000651.PMC10565313.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41221741","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000579
Lucy K Smith, Emily van Blankenstein, Grenville Fox, Sarah E Seaton, Mario Martínez-Jiménez, Stavros Petrou, Cheryl Battersby
Objectives To explore the effect of changes in national clinical recommendations in 2019 that extended provision of survival focused care to babies born at 22 weeks’ gestation in England and Wales. Design Population based cohort study. Setting England and Wales, comprising routine data for births and hospital records. Participants Babies alive at the onset of care in labour at 22 weeks+0 days to 22 weeks+6 days and at 23 weeks+0 days to 24 weeks+6 days for comparison purposes between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2021. Main outcome measures Percentage of babies given survival focused care (active respiratory support after birth), admitted to neonatal care, and surviving to discharge in 2018-19 and 2020-21. Results For the 1001 babies alive at the onset of labour at 22 weeks' gestation, a threefold increase was noted in: survival focused care provision from 11.3% to 38.4% (risk ratio 3.41 (95% confidence interval 2.61 to 4.45)); admissions to neonatal units from 7.4% to 28.1% (3.77 (2.70 to 5.27)), and survival to discharge from neonatal care from 2.5% to 8.2% (3.29 (1.78 to 6.09)). More babies of lower birth weight and early gestational age received survival focused care in 2020-21 than 2018-19 (46% to 64% at <500g weight; 19% to 31% at 22 weeks+0 days to 22 weeks+3 days). Conclusions A change in national guidance to recommend a risk based approach was associated with a threefold increase in 22 weeks’ gestation babies receiving survival focused care. The number of babies being admitted to neonatal units and those surviving to discharge increased.
{"title":"Effect of national guidance on survival for babies born at 22 weeks’ gestation in England and Wales: population based cohort study","authors":"Lucy K Smith, Emily van Blankenstein, Grenville Fox, Sarah E Seaton, Mario Martínez-Jiménez, Stavros Petrou, Cheryl Battersby","doi":"10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000579","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000579","url":null,"abstract":"Objectives To explore the effect of changes in national clinical recommendations in 2019 that extended provision of survival focused care to babies born at 22 weeks’ gestation in England and Wales. Design Population based cohort study. Setting England and Wales, comprising routine data for births and hospital records. Participants Babies alive at the onset of care in labour at 22 weeks+0 days to 22 weeks+6 days and at 23 weeks+0 days to 24 weeks+6 days for comparison purposes between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2021. Main outcome measures Percentage of babies given survival focused care (active respiratory support after birth), admitted to neonatal care, and surviving to discharge in 2018-19 and 2020-21. Results For the 1001 babies alive at the onset of labour at 22 weeks' gestation, a threefold increase was noted in: survival focused care provision from 11.3% to 38.4% (risk ratio 3.41 (95% confidence interval 2.61 to 4.45)); admissions to neonatal units from 7.4% to 28.1% (3.77 (2.70 to 5.27)), and survival to discharge from neonatal care from 2.5% to 8.2% (3.29 (1.78 to 6.09)). More babies of lower birth weight and early gestational age received survival focused care in 2020-21 than 2018-19 (46% to 64% at <500g weight; 19% to 31% at 22 weeks+0 days to 22 weeks+3 days). Conclusions A change in national guidance to recommend a risk based approach was associated with a threefold increase in 22 weeks’ gestation babies receiving survival focused care. The number of babies being admitted to neonatal units and those surviving to discharge increased.","PeriodicalId":72433,"journal":{"name":"BMJ medicine","volume":"127 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136199165","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-21eCollection Date: 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000352
Karima Madi, Clara Flumian, Pascale Olivier, Agnès Sommet, François Montastruc
Objective To assess the quality of reporting of adverse events in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs based on the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) harms extension and according to clinical trial design, and to examine reporting of serious adverse events in drug trials published on PubMed versus clinical trial summaries on ClinicalTrials.gov. Design Systematic review. Data sources PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov registries were searched from 1 December 2019 to 17 February 2022. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of drugs used to treat covid-19 disease in participants of all ages with suspected, probable, or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Clinical trials were screened on title, abstract, and text by two authors independently. Only articles published in French and English were selected. The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) was used to assess risk of bias. Results The search strategy identified 1962 randomised clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of drugs used to treat covid-19, published in the PubMed database; 1906 articles were excluded after screening and 56 clinical trials were included in the review. Among the 56 clinical trials, no study had a high score for quality of reporting of adverse events, 60.7% had a moderate score, 33.9% had a low score, and 5.4% had a very low score. All clinical trials with a very low score for quality of reporting of adverse events were randomised open label trials. For reporting of serious adverse events, journal articles published on PubMed under-reported 51% of serious adverse events compared with clinical trial summaries published on ClinicalTrials.gov. Conclusions In one in three published clinical trials on covid-19 drugs, the quality of reporting of adverse events was low or very low. Differences were found in the number of serious adverse events reported in journal articles versus clinical trial summaries. During the covid-19 pandemic, risk assessment of drugs in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs did not comply with good practice recommendations for publication of results. Systematic review registration European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (ENCePP) EUPAS45959.
{"title":"Quality of reporting of adverse events in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs: systematic review.","authors":"Karima Madi, Clara Flumian, Pascale Olivier, Agnès Sommet, François Montastruc","doi":"10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000352","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000352","url":null,"abstract":"Objective To assess the quality of reporting of adverse events in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs based on the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) harms extension and according to clinical trial design, and to examine reporting of serious adverse events in drug trials published on PubMed versus clinical trial summaries on ClinicalTrials.gov. Design Systematic review. Data sources PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov registries were searched from 1 December 2019 to 17 February 2022. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of drugs used to treat covid-19 disease in participants of all ages with suspected, probable, or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Clinical trials were screened on title, abstract, and text by two authors independently. Only articles published in French and English were selected. The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) was used to assess risk of bias. Results The search strategy identified 1962 randomised clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of drugs used to treat covid-19, published in the PubMed database; 1906 articles were excluded after screening and 56 clinical trials were included in the review. Among the 56 clinical trials, no study had a high score for quality of reporting of adverse events, 60.7% had a moderate score, 33.9% had a low score, and 5.4% had a very low score. All clinical trials with a very low score for quality of reporting of adverse events were randomised open label trials. For reporting of serious adverse events, journal articles published on PubMed under-reported 51% of serious adverse events compared with clinical trial summaries published on ClinicalTrials.gov. Conclusions In one in three published clinical trials on covid-19 drugs, the quality of reporting of adverse events was low or very low. Differences were found in the number of serious adverse events reported in journal articles versus clinical trial summaries. During the covid-19 pandemic, risk assessment of drugs in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs did not comply with good practice recommendations for publication of results. Systematic review registration European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (ENCePP) EUPAS45959.","PeriodicalId":72433,"journal":{"name":"BMJ medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":"e000352"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/48/02/bmjmed-2022-000352.PMC10537984.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41124522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}