Search

Background Data about the clinical benefit from initial low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction with lipid lowering treatment for secondary prevention and risk of major vascular events amongst older as compared with younger individuals treated during routine clinical care are limited. We investigated this in a nationwide cohort. Methods Individuals aged ≥ 50 years with a first-time hospitalisation for a cardiovascular event (index event, including acute coronary syndrome, non-haemorrhagic stroke, transient ischaemic attack and coronary revascularisation), 1 January 2008 to 31 October 2018, who subsequently used lipid lowering treatment, and had an LDL-C measurement before and after the event were included. Hazard ratios (HRs) for major vascular events per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C were estimated for the included 21,751 older and 22,681 younger individuals (≥/<70 years old) using Cox regression. Results LDL-C lowering was associated with a 12% lower risk of major vascular events in older individuals per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C (HR 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–0.93), with no significant difference compared with the risk reduction amongst younger individuals (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.83–0.93; P -value for difference between age groups: 0.86). The risk reduction was more pronounced when post hoc restricting, as a proxy for compliance, to new users with an LDL-C reduction above the lowest decile for both older (0.81, 95% CI 0.73–0.90) and younger (0.81, 95% CI 0.72–0.91) individuals. Conclusions This study strongly supports a similar relative clinical benefit of LDL-C reduction with lipid lowering treatment for secondary prevention of major vascular events amongst individuals aged ≥70 and <70 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reducing low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol with lipid-lowering therapy has consistently been shown to lower the risk of cardiovascular disease in primary prevention trials where the majority of individuals are aged <70 years. For older individuals, however, evidence is less clear. In this study, the authors sought to compare the clinical effectiveness of lowering LDL cholesterol by means of lipid-lowering therapy for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease among older and younger individuals in a Danish nationwide cohort. We included individuals aged ≥50 years who had initiated lipid-lowering therapy from January 1, 2008, to October 31, 2017, had no history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and had a baseline and a within-1-year LDL cholesterol measurement. We assessed the associated risk of major vascular events among older individuals (≥70 years) by HRs per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol compared with younger individuals (<70 years). For both the 16,035 older and the 49,155 younger individuals, the median LDL cholesterol reduction was 1.7 mmol/L. Each 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol in older individuals was significantly associated with a 23% lower risk of major vascular events (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.71-0.83), which was equal to that of younger individuals (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.71-0.80; P value for difference = 0.79). Similar results were observed across all secondary analyses. Our study supports a relative clinical benefit of lowering LDL cholesterol for primary prevention of major vascular events in individuals aged ≥70 years similarly as in individuals aged <70 years. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recommendations for statin use for primary or secondary prevention are based on studies that underrepresent persons older than 75 years. This Danish, national, register-based cohort study compares the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol response to different-intensity statin use in older versus younger persons. Visual Abstract. The Association Between Age and Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Response to Statins: Recommendations for statin use for primary or secondary prevention are based on studies that underrepresent persons older than 75 years. This Danish, national, register-based cohort study compares the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol response to different-intensity statin use in older versus younger persons. Background: There is large patient-to-patient variability in the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) response to statin treatment. The reduction in LDL-C may depend on the age of the patient treated—particularly in older adults, who have been substantially underrepresented in randomized controlled trials. Objective: To investigate the association between age and the LDL-C reduction by statins. Design: Nationwide, register-based cohort study. Setting: Denmark, 2008 to 2018. Participants: 82 958 simvastatin or atorvastatin initiators with LDL-C measurements before and during statin use. Measurements: Statin response, defined as percentage reduction in prestatin LDL-C level, and percentage reduction differences (PRDs) according to age and simvastatin or atorvastatin dose based on a longitudinal model for LDL-C. Results: Among 82 958 statin initiators, 10 388 (13%) were aged 75 years or older. With low- to moderate-intensity statins, initiators aged 75 years or older had greater mean LDL-C percentage reductions than initiators younger than 50 years—for example, 39.0% versus 33.8% for simvastatin, 20 mg, and 44.2% versus 40.2% for atorvastatin, 20 mg. The adjusted PRD for initiators aged 75 years compared with initiators aged 50 years was 2.62 percentage points. This association was consistent for primary prevention (2.54 percentage points) and secondary prevention (2.32 percentage points) but smaller for initiators of high-intensity statins (atorvastatin, 40 mg: 1.36 percentage points; atorvastatin, 80 mg: −0.58 percentage point). Limitation: Use of administrative data, observational pre–post comparison with a moderately high proportion of missing data, lack of information on body mass index, and the mainly White study population may limit generalizability. Conclusion: Low- to moderate-intensity statins were associated with a greater reduction in LDL-C levels in older persons than younger persons and may be more appealing as initial treatment in older adults who are at increased risk for adverse events. Primary Funding Source: The Independent Research Fund Denmark, Brødrene Hartmanns Fond, and Fonden til Lægevidenskabens Fremme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) normally onsets in childhood and mostly resolves before adolescences. Disease persistence is known to be difficult to study properly, and current predictors are insufficient to identify more than a small fraction of patients at risk. Objective: To study personal AD medicine history as a retrospective marker of persistent AD. Methods: The study population included all Danish first hospital contacts with a diagnosis of AD (ICD‐10, L20) between 1995 and 2012. National register data following the diagnosis were used to define persistent AD activity until 2017 according to personal AD medicine history before diagnosis. Activity was defined as filled prescriptions for topical corticosteroids (TCS) or calcineurin inhibitors (TCI), dermatologist contacts or hospital re‐contacts for AD. Risk ratios (RR) for persistent activity (defined as activity >4 of the most recent 5 years) were estimated according to AD medicine history (prescriptions filled prior to diagnosis) adjusted for age at onset, parental AD and basic covariates. Results: A total of 13 628 patients were diagnosed at ages 0‐16 years and had up to 21 years of follow‐up. 10 years after diagnosis, 67% showed activity (9.5% persistent). Among prior TCS users (69%), the RR10y of persistent activity increased 1‐ to 6‐fold with increasing strength of strongest TCS/TCI ever, and with number of TCS courses. Prior use of antibiotics (RR10y 1.32, 95% CI 1.09‐1.59) and antihistamines (RR10y 1.65, 95% CI 1.42‐1.91) increased the RR10y in a dose‐dependent manner. In >90% of patients, prior medication use occurred <4 years before diagnosis. Conclusions and clinical relevance: The strength and type of AD medication used in the previous 4 years may predict 10‐year persistence of AD. Since children may be misjudged as having milder disease when seen between flares of skin lesions, this information may improve physicians' ability to determine the correct prognosis independently of current AD severity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multiple sclerosis is a disease with a highly variable incidence worldwide. While knowledge about multiple sclerosis risk factors has grown over the years, the aetiology of multiple sclerosis has still not been fully established. We examined multiple sclerosis incidence rates among first-generation immigrants in Denmark, a high-incidence country, and their Danish-born children (second-generation immigrants), to evaluate the importance and timing of exposure to environmental factors in the aetiology of multiple sclerosis. By means of the Danish Civil Registration System we identified 9 121 187 individuals living in Denmark between 1968 and 2015, including 1 176 419 first-generation and 184 282 second-generation immigrants. Study participants were followed for multiple sclerosis in the Danish Multiple Sclerosis Registry from 1968 to 2015. The relative risk (RR) of multiple sclerosis according to immigration status was estimated by means of multiple sclerosis incidence rate ratios obtained in log-linear Poisson regression analysis. Altogether, 16 905 cases of multiple sclerosis were identified in the study cohort, 578 among first-generation and 106 among second-generation immigrants. Multiple sclerosis risk among first-generation immigrants whose parents were born in low, intermediate and high multiple sclerosis risk areas were 21% (RR = 0.21; 95% CI: 0.16-0.28), 43% (RR = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.36-0.50) and 75% (RR = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.67-0.83), respectively, of that among ethnic Danes (test for trend P < 0.0001). First-generation immigrants arriving in Denmark before age 15 years had a multiple sclerosis risk higher than that in their country of birth but lower than that in Denmark, reaching on average 69% of the multiple sclerosis risk among ethnic Danes (RR = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.55-0.87). Multiple sclerosis risk among individuals who came to Denmark at a later age remained closer to that of their country of birth, corresponding to 45% of the multiple sclerosis risk among ethnic Danes (RR = 0.45; 95% CI: 0.41-0.49). Our study supports the idea that environmental factors exerting their role in childhood or adolescence may be of aetiological relevance in multiple sclerosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pre-pregnancy diabetes is a strong risk factor for congenital heart defects (CHDs), suggesting a role for glucose in the causal pathway. Oral corticosteroids may cause hyperglycemia and maternal use could affect embryonic heart development. The objective of this study was to determine the association between maternal intake of oral corticosteroids 0-8 weeks after conception and CHDs in offspring.Methods: A register-based nationwide prevalence study including all live singleton births in Denmark, 1996-2016, was conducted. In total, 1 194 687 individuals and their mothers were identified and linked with information on offspring CHDs and the mothers' use of oral corticosteroids in early pregnancy. Corticosteroid use was defined as a filled prescription for maternal use of oral corticosteroid 0-8 weeks after conception. CHDs were identified through International Classification of Diseases codes. The association was estimated by prevalence (odds) ratios using logistic regression and propensity score-matched analyses.Results: Among 1 194 687 live births, 2032 had a mother who had used oral corticosteroids 0-8 weeks from conception. Of these offspring, 32 had a heart defect. Among the offspring of never-users of oral corticosteroids, 10 534 had a heart defect. The adjusted prevalence ratio was 1.29 (95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.84) comparing offspring prevalence of heart defects in oral corticosteroid users with that in oral corticosteroid never-users. Propensity score-matched analysis yielded similar results (prevalence ratio 1.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-2.02).Conclusions: This study supports that there is no association between maternal use of oral corticosteroids in the first 8 weeks after conception and CHDs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies investigating the prevalence and risk factors for postpartum depression (PPD) have used different definitions. Some studies have used a high score on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) to define PPD, whereas others have used information on antidepressant medication use and/or diagnostic information on treatment for depression at a psychiatric hospital. We wanted to compare results using these two approaches to evaluate to what degree results can be compared. Moreover we wanted to evaluate, whether use of EPDS or PPAT (defined below) leads to identification of different risk factor profiles. Methods: We identified women who delivered a child between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2016 in Copenhagen or in one of the municipalities that were part of the Danish Health Visitors' Child Health Database. The potential risk factors were demographic factors and pregnancy- and obstetrical events. Outcomes of interest were an EPDS score ≥ 13, use of antidepressants (ATC: N06A) and/or a diagnosis of depression (F32) within six months after birth. Use of antidepressants and/or diagnosis of depression will be referred to as postpartum antidepressant treatment (PPAT). Agreement between EPDS ≥ 13 and PPAT was evaluated by the kappa coefficient. Associations between risk factors and the two outcomes (EPDS ≥ 13 and PPAT) were estimated by risk ratios (RR) using log-linear binomial regression. Presence of a systematic difference between RRs based on EPDS ≥ 13 (RREPDS≥13) and PPAT (RRPPAT) was evaluated in a meta-regression approach weighted by inverse-variance and with logarithm of the RRs as outcome. Results: The estimated PPD prevalence using EPDS ≥ 13 was 3.2% and of PPAT 0.4%. The agreement between the two measures was small (Kappa = 0.08), but their risk factor profile was very similar with no systematic difference between them. Conclusions: Using the two different methods of case identification produced different prevalence estimates, but a similar risk factor profile. The differences in estimated prevalence and low agreement suggest that the two measures identify different potential PPD cases and using only one of the methods in defining PPD would underestimate PPD prevalence. The similar risk factor profile suggests that the considered risk factors are involved in the general development of PPD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Assessing the risk factors for and consequences of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) during pregnancy is essential to guide clinical care. Previous studies on SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in pregnancy have been among hospitalized patients, which may have exaggerated risk estimates of severe outcomes because all cases of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in the pregnant population were not included. The objectives of this study were to identify risk factors for and outcomes after SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in pregnancy independent of severity of infection in a universally tested population, and to identify risk factors for and outcomes after severe infection requiring hospital admission. Material and methods: This was a prospective population‐based cohort study in Denmark using data from the Danish National Patient Register and Danish Microbiology Database and prospectively registered data from medical records. We included all pregnancies between March 1 and October 31, 2020 and compared women with a positive SARS‐CoV‐2 test during pregnancy to non‐infected pregnant women. Cases of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in pregnancy were both identified prospectively and through register linkage to ensure that all cases were identified and that cases were pregnant during infection. Main outcome measures were pregnancy, delivery, maternal, and neonatal outcomes. Severe infection was defined as hospital admission due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) symptoms. Results: Among 82 682 pregnancies, 418 women had SARS‐CoV‐2 infection during pregnancy, corresponding to an incidence of 5.1 per 1000 pregnancies, 23 (5.5%) of which required hospital admission due to COVID‐19. Risk factors for infection were asthma (odds ratio [OR] 2.19, 95% CI 1.41–3.41) and being foreign born (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.70–2.64). Risk factors for hospital admission due to COVID‐19 included obesity (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.00–7.51), smoking (OR 4.69, 95% CI 1.58–13.90), infection after gestational age (GA) 22 weeks (GA 22–27 weeks: OR 3.77, 95% CI 1.16–12.29; GA 28–36 weeks: OR 4.76, 95% CI 1.60–14.12), and having asthma (OR 4.53, 95% CI 1.39–14.79). We found no difference in any obstetrical or neonatal outcomes. Conclusions: Only 1 in 20 women with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection during pregnancy required admission to hospital due to COVID‐19. Risk factors for admission comprised obesity, smoking, asthma, and infection after GA 22 weeks. Severe adverse outcomes of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in pregnancy were rare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]