Search

Supplementary Figure S1; Supplementary Table S1.

CCR Translation for This Article from Durable Complete Responses in Heavily Pretreated Patients with Metastatic Melanoma Using T-Cell Transfer Immunotherapy

Supplementary Figures S1-S2; Supplementary Tables S1-S2.

Purpose: Tumor‐infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) and interleukin (IL)-2 administered following lymphodepletion can cause the durable complete regression of bulky metastatic melanoma in patients refractory to approved treatments. However, the generation of a unique tumor-reactive TIL culture for each patient may be prohibitively difficult. We therefore investigated the clinical and immunologic impact of unscreened, CD8+ enriched “young” TIL.Experimental Design: Methods were developed for generating TIL that minimized the time in culture and eliminated the individualized tumor-reactivity screening step. Thirty-three patients were treated with these CD8+ enriched young TIL and IL-2 following nonmyeloablative lymphodepletion (NMA). Twenty-three additional patients were treated with CD8+ enriched young TIL and IL-2 after lymphodepletion with NMA and 6 Gy of total body irradiation.Results: Young TIL cultures for therapy were successfully established from 83% of 122 consecutive melanoma patients. Nineteen of 33 patients (58%) treated with CD8+ enriched young TIL and NMA had an objective response (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) including 3 complete responders. Eleven of 23 patients (48%) treated with TIL and 6 Gy total body irradiation had an objective response including 2 complete responders. At 1 month after TIL infusion the absolute CD8+ cell numbers in the periphery were highly correlated with response.Conclusions: This study shows that a rapid and simplified method can be used to reliably generate CD8+ enriched young TIL for administration as an individualized therapy for advanced melanoma, and may allow this potentially effective treatment to be applied at other institutions and to reach additional patients. Clin Cancer Res; 16(24); 6122–31. ©2010 AACR.

Purpose: Most treatments for patients with metastatic melanoma have a low rate of complete regression and thus overall survival in these patients is poor. We investigated the ability of adoptive cell transfer utilizing autologous tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) to mediate durable complete regressions in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic melanoma.Experimental Design: Ninety-three patients with measurable metastatic melanoma were treated with the adoptive transfer of autologous TILs administered in conjunction with interleukin-2 following a lymphodepleting preparative regimen on three sequential clinical trials. Ninety-five percent of these patients had progressive disease following a prior systemic treatment. Median potential follow-up was 62 months.Results: Objective response rates by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) in the 3 trials using lymphodepleting preparative regimens (chemotherapy alone or with 2 or 12 Gy irradiation) were 49%, 52%, and 72%, respectively. Twenty of the 93 patients (22%) achieved a complete tumor regression, and 19 have ongoing complete regressions beyond 3 years. The actuarial 3- and 5-year survival rates for the entire group were 36% and 29%, respectively, but for the 20 complete responders were 100% and 93%. The likelihood of achieving a complete response was similar regardless of prior therapy. Factors associated with objective response included longer telomeres of the infused cells, the number of CD8+CD27+ cells infused, and the persistence of the infused cells in the circulation at 1 month (all P2 < 0.001).Conclusions: Cell transfer therapy with autologous TILs can mediate durable complete responses in patients with metastatic melanoma and has similar efficacy irrespective of prior treatment. Clin Cancer Res; 17(13); 4550–7. ©2011 AACR.

STFC are acknowledged for supporting the “Curation and Preliminary Examination of the Winchcombe Carbonaceous Chondrite Fall” project (ST/V000799/1), and Natural History Museum staff for curatorial support. Oxygen isotope studies at the Open University are funded by a consolidated grant from the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), UK GRANT NUMBER: ST/T000228/1 (IAF, RCG, JM, MA), and STFC studentship NUMBER: ST/S505614/1 (RF). As part of an integrated consortium study, we have undertaken O, Cd, Cr, Si, Te, Ti, and Zn whole rock isotopic measurements of the Winchcombe CM2 meteorite. δ66Zn values determined for two Winchcombe aliquots are +0.29 ± 0.05‰ (2SD) and +0.45 ± 0.05‰ (2SD). The difference between these analyses likely reflects sample heterogeneity. Zn isotope compositions for Winchcombe show excellent agreement with published CM2 data. δ114Cd for a single Winchcombe aliquot is +0.29 ± 0.04‰ (2SD), which is close to a previous result for Murchison. δ130Te values for three aliquots gave indistinguishable results, with a mean value of +0.62 ± 0.01‰ (2SD) and are essentially identical to published values for CM2s. ε53Cr and ε54Cr for Winchcombe are 0.319 ± 0.029 (2SE) and 0.775 ± 0.067 (2SE), respectively. Based on its Cr isotopic composition, Winchcombe plots close to other CM2 chondrites. ε50Ti and ε46Ti values for Winchcombe are 3.21 ± 0.09 (2SE) and 0.46 ± 0.08 (2SE), respectively, and are in line with recently published data for CM2s. The δ30Si composition of Winchcombe is −0.50 ± 0.06‰ (2SD, n = 11) and is essentially indistinguishable from measurements obtained on other CM2 chondrites. In conformity with petrographic observations, oxygen isotope analyses of both bulk and micromilled fractions from Winchcombe clearly demonstrate that its parent body experienced extensive aqueous alteration. The style of alteration exhibited by Winchcombe is consistent with relatively closed system processes. Analysis of different fractions within Winchcombe broadly support the view that, while different lithologies within an individual CM2 meteorite can be highly variable, each meteorite is characterized by a predominant alteration type. Mixing of different lithologies within a regolith environment to form cataclastic matrix is supported by oxygen isotope analysis of micromilled fractions from Winchcombe. Previously unpublished bulk oxygen isotope data for 12 CM2 chondrites, when combined with published data, define a well‐constrained regression line with a slope of 0.77. Winchcombe analyses define a more limited linear trend at the isotopically heavy, more aqueously altered, end of the slope 0.77 CM2 array. The CM2 slope 0.77 array intersects the oxygen isotope field of CO3 falls, indicating that the unaltered precursor material to the CMs was essentially identical in oxygen isotope composition to the CO3 falls. Our data are consistent with earlier suggestions that the main differences between the CO3s and CM2s reflect differing amounts of water ice that co‐accreted into their respective parent bodies, being high in the case of CM2s and low in the case of CO3s. The small difference in Si isotope compositions between the CM and CO meteorites can be explained by different proportions of matrix versus refractory silicates. CMs and COs may also be indistinguishable with respect to Ti and Cr isotopes; however, further analysis is required to test this possibility. The close relationship between CO3 and CM2 chondrites revealed by our data supports the emerging view that the snow line within protoplanetary disks marks an important zone of planetesimal accretion. Publisher PDF

Bullying victimization is a prevalent concern for neurodivergent (e.g., autistic, ADHD) youth. Bullying assessment methods vary widely and there is currently no questionnaire specific to neurodivergent youth. The Assessment of Bullying Experiences (ABE) was created to fill this gap. The ABE questionnaire was completed by 335 parents of school-age youth characterized as autistic, having ADHD, or community comparison. Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis identified a four-factor solution, aligning with verbal, physical, relational, and cyber victimization. Construct validity analyses indicate the ABE converges with an existing bullying questionnaire and diverges from disruptive behavior or internalizing symptoms. The ABE questionnaire is a valid measure of bullying that furthers understanding of nuance in peer victimization for neurodivergent youth and informs group-specific intervention.

Background The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) alpha variant (B.1.1.7) is associated with higher transmissibility than wild-type virus, becoming the dominant variant in England by January 2021. We aimed to describe the severity of the alpha variant in terms of the pathway of disease from testing positive to hospital admission and death. Methods With the approval of NHS England, we linked individual-level data from primary care with SARS-CoV-2 community testing, hospital admission, and Office for National Statistics all-cause death data. We used testing data with S-gene target failure as a proxy for distinguishing alpha and wild-type cases, and stratified Cox proportional hazards regression to compare the relative severity of alpha cases with wild-type diagnosed from 16 November 2020 to 11 January 2021. Results Using data from 185 234 people who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the community (alpha = 93 153; wild-type = 92 081), in fully adjusted analysis accounting for individual-level demographics and comorbidities as well as regional variation in infection incidence, we found alpha associated with 73% higher hazards of all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.41–2.13; P Conclusions The SARS-CoV-2 alpha variant is associated with an increased risk of both hospitalization and mortality than wild-type virus.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on delivery of NHS care. We have developed the OpenSAFELY Service Restoration Observatory (SRO) to describe this impact on primary care activity and monitor its recovery.ObjectivesTo develop key measures of primary care activity and describe the trends in these measures throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWith the approval of NHS England we developed an open source software framework for data management and analysis to describe trends and variation in clinical activity across primary care electronic health record (EHR) data on 48 million adults.We developed SNOMED-CT codelists for key measures of primary care clinical activity selected by a expert clinical advisory group and conducted a population cohort-based study to describe trends and variation in these measures January 2019-December 2021, and pragmatically classified their level of recovery one year into the pandemic using the percentage change in the median practice level rate.ResultsWe produced 11 measures reflective of clinical activity in general practice. A substantial drop in activity was observed in all measures at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic. By April 2021, the median rate had recovered to within 15% of the median rate in April 2019 in six measures. The remaining measures showed a sustained drop, ranging from a 18.5% reduction in medication reviews to a 42.0% reduction in blood pressure monitoring. Three measures continued to show a sustained drop by December 2021.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a substantial change in primary care activity across the measures we developed, with recovery in most measures. We delivered an open source software framework to describe trends and variation in clinical activity across an unprecedented scale of primary care data. We will continue to expand the set of key measures to be routinely monitored using our publicly available NHS OpenSAFELY SRO dashboards with near real-time data.

Background Priority patients in England were offered COVID-19 vaccination by mid-April 2021. Codes in clinical record systems can denote the vaccine being declined. Aim We describe records of COVID-19 vaccines being declined, according to clinical and demographic factors. Methods With the approval of NHS England, we conducted a retrospective cohort study between 8 December 2020 and 25 May 2021 with primary care records for 57.9 million patients using OpenSAFELY, a secure health analytics platform. COVID-19 vaccination priority patients were those aged ≥ 50 years or ≥ 16 years clinically extremely vulnerable (CEV) or ’at risk’. We describe the proportion recorded as declining vaccination for each group and stratified by clinical and demographic subgroups, subsequent vaccination and distribution of clinical code usage across general practices. Results Of 24.5 million priority patients, 663,033 (2.7%) had a decline recorded, while 2,155,076 (8.8%) had neither a vaccine nor decline recorded. Those recorded as declining, who were subsequently vaccinated (n = 125,587; 18.9%) were overrepresented in the South Asian population (32.3% vs 22.8% for other ethnicities aged ≥ 65 years). The proportion of declining unvaccinated patients was highest in CEV (3.3%), varied strongly with ethnicity (black 15.3%, South Asian 5.6%, white 1.5% for ≥ 80 years) and correlated positively with increasing deprivation. Conclusions Clinical codes indicative of COVID-19 vaccinations being declined are commonly used in England, but substantially more common among black and South Asian people, and in more deprived areas. Qualitative research is needed to determine typical reasons for recorded declines, including to what extent they reflect patients actively declining.

This study systematically reviewed evidence regarding health program and service evaluations in Indigenous contexts. Following the PRISMA guidelines and combining terms for ‘Indigenous populations’ and ‘health programs and services’. Eight principles emerged: Principle 1: Adopting Indigenous led or co-led approaches is vital to balance power relationships by prioritizing self-determination, Principle 2: Evaluation team should include local Indigenous community members, Principle 3: Indigenous community knowledge and practice should be foundational, Principle 4: Evaluations must be responsive and flexible to meet the needs of the local community, Principle 5: Evaluations should respect and adhere to local Indigenous protocols, culture, wisdom and language, Principle 6: Evaluations should emphasize reciprocity, shared learnings and capacity building, Principle 7: It is important to build strong relationships and trust between and within researcher teams, evaluators and communities, and Principle 8: The evaluation team must acknowledge community capacity and resources by investing in time and relationships.

BackgroundLong COVID describes new or persistent symptoms at least 4 weeks after onset of acute COVID-19. Clinical codes to describe this phenomenon were recently created.AimTo describe the use of long-COVID codes, and variation of use by general practice, demographic variables, and over time.Design and settingPopulation-based cohort study in English primary care.MethodWorking on behalf of NHS England, OpenSAFELY data were used encompassing 96% of the English population between 1 February 2020 and 25 May 2021. The proportion of people with a recorded code for long COVID was measured overall and by demographic factors, electronic health record software system (EMIS or TPP), and week.ResultsLong COVID was recorded for 23 273 people. Coding was unevenly distributed among practices, with 26.7% of practices having never used the codes. Regional variation ranged between 20.3 per 100 000 people for East of England (95% confidence interval [CI] = 19.3 to 21.4) and 55.6 per 100 000 people in London (95% CI = 54.1 to 57.1). Coding was higher among females (52.1, 95% CI = 51.3 to 52.9) than males (28.1, 95% CI = 27.5 to 28.7), and higher among practices using EMIS (53.7, 95% CI = 52.9 to 54.4) than those using TPP (20.9, 95% CI = 20.3 to 21.4).ConclusionCurrent recording of long COVID in primary care is very low, and variable between practices. This may reflect patients not presenting; clinicians and patients holding different diagnostic thresholds; or challenges with the design and communication of diagnostic codes. Increased awareness of diagnostic codes is recommended to facilitate research and planning of services, and also surveys with qualitative work to better evaluate clinicians’ understanding of the diagnosis.

On March 11th 2020, the World Health Organization characterised COVID-19 as a pandemic. Responses to containing the spread of the virus have relied heavily on policies involving restricting contact between people. Evolving policies regarding shielding and individual choices about restricting social contact will rely heavily on perceived risk of poor outcomes from COVID-19. In order to make informed decisions, both individual and collective, good predictive models are required. For outcomes related to an infectious disease, the performance of any risk prediction model will depend heavily on the underlying prevalence of infection in the population of interest. Incorporating measures of how this changes over time may result in important improvements in prediction model performance. This protocol reports details of a planned study to explore the extent to which incorporating time-varying measures of infection burden over time improves the quality of risk prediction models for COVID-19 death in a large population of adult patients in England. To achieve this aim, we will compare the performance of different modelling approaches to risk prediction, including static cohort approaches typically used in chronic disease settings and landmarking approaches incorporating time-varying measures of infection prevalence and policy change, using COVID-19 related deaths data linked to longitudinal primary care electronic health records data within the OpenSAFELY secure analytics platform.

Research on substance use challenges in First Nations communities is often deficit-focused and can reinforce paternalistic stereotypes that lead to further discrimination. In this article, we report on findings of a strengths-based Photovoice project done in collaboration with a First Nations’ community in southern Ontario, Canada to better understand experiences with substance use challenges in the community. We analyzed interview data collected with seventeen individuals who have lived experience or are supporting a loved one with lived experience with a substance use challenge. Participants described sources of strength that characterized their path to wellness, including strong family and social connections, cultural practices, identity, spirituality, day-to-day activities, and helpful supports and services. Furthermore, participants made several suggestions for improving services, including the need for integrated and flexible systems of care and trustful client-provider relationships. At its core, nurturing wellness involved a transformative process involving social and/or cultural connections. The stories shared by participants demonstrate the unique and varied strengths drawn from by individuals dealing with a substance use challenge.

ObjectiveTo estimate waning of covid-19 vaccine effectiveness over six months after second dose.DesignCohort study, approved by NHS England.SettingLinked primary care, hospital, and covid-19 records within the OpenSAFELY-TPP database.ParticipantsAdults without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were eligible, excluding care home residents and healthcare professionals.ExposuresPeople who had received two doses of BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 (administered during the national vaccine rollout) were compared with unvaccinated people during six consecutive comparison periods, each of four weeks.Main outcome measuresAdjusted hazard ratios for covid-19 related hospital admission, covid-19 related death, positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and non-covid-19 related death comparing vaccinated with unvaccinated people. Waning vaccine effectiveness was quantified as ratios of adjusted hazard ratios per four week period, separately for subgroups aged ≥65 years, 18-64 years and clinically vulnerable, 40-64 years, and 18-39 years.Results1 951 866 and 3 219 349 eligible adults received two doses of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1, respectively, and 2 422 980 remained unvaccinated. Waning of vaccine effectiveness was estimated to be similar across outcomes and vaccine brands. In the ≥65 years subgroup, ratios of adjusted hazard ratios for covid-19 related hospital admission, covid-19 related death, and positive SARS-CoV-2 test ranged from 1.19 (95% confidence interval 1.14 to 1.24)to 1.34 (1.09 to 1.64) per four weeks. Despite waning vaccine effectiveness, rates of covid-19 related hospital admission and death were substantially lower among vaccinated than unvaccinated adults up to 26 weeks after the second dose, with estimated vaccine effectiveness ≥80% for BNT162b2, and ≥75% for ChAdOx1. By weeks 23-26, rates of positive SARS-CoV-2 test in vaccinated people were similar to or higher than in unvaccinated people (adjusted hazard ratios up to 1.72 (1.11 to 2.68) for BNT162b2 and 1.86 (1.79 to 1.93) for ChAdOx1).ConclusionsThe rate at which estimated vaccine effectiveness waned was consistent for covid-19 related hospital admission, covid-19 related death, and positive SARS-CoV-2 test and was similar across subgroups defined by age and clinical vulnerability. If sustained to outcomes of infection with the omicron variant and to booster vaccination, these findings will facilitate scheduling of booster vaccination.

Background Indigenous Peoples are impacted by industrial resource development that takes place on, or near, their communities. Existing literature on impacts of industrial resource development on Indigenous Peoples primarily focus on physical health outcomes and rarely focus on the mental health impacts. To understand the full range of long-term and anticipated health impacts of industrial resource development on Indigenous communities, mental health impacts must be examined. It is well-established that there is a connection between the environment and Indigenous wellbeing, across interrelated dimensions of mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual health. Methods This paper identifies how the Community Advisory Team and a team of Indigenous and settler scholars will conduct the review. The literature search will use the OVID interface to search Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Global Health databases. Non-indexed peer-reviewed journals related to Indigenous health or research will be scanned. Books and book chapters will be identified in the Scopus and PsycINFO databases. The grey literature search will also include Google and be limited to reports published by government, academic, and non-profit organizations. Reference lists of key publications will be checked for additional relevant publications, including theses, dissertations, reports, and other articles not retrieved in the online searches. Additional sources may be recommended by team members. Included documents will focus on Indigenous Peoples in North America, South America, Australia, Aotearoa New Zealand, and Circumpolar regions, research that reports on mental health, and research that is based on land loss connected to dams, mines, agriculture, or petroleum development. Literature that meets the inclusion criteria will be screened at the title/abstract and full-text stages by two team members in Covidence. The included literature will be rated with a quality appraisal tool and information will be extracted by two team members; a consensus of information will be reached and be submitted for analysis. Discussion The synthesized evidence from this review is relevant for land use policy, health impact assessments, economic development, mental health service planning, and communities engaging in development projects. Systematic review registration Registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; Registration number CRD42021253720)

Background: The risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and on immune-modifying drugs might not be fully mediated by comorbidities and might vary by factors such as ethnicity. We aimed to assess the risk of severe COVID-19 in adults with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and in those on immune-modifying therapies. Methods: We did a cohort study, using OpenSAFELY (an analytics platform for electronic health records) and TPP (a software provider for general practitioners), analysing routinely collected primary care data linked to hospital admission, death, and previously unavailable hospital prescription data. We included people aged 18 years or older on March 1, 2020, who were registered with TPP practices with at least 12 months of primary care records before March, 2020. We used Cox regression (adjusting for confounders and mediators) to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) comparing the risk of COVID-19-related death, critical care admission or death, and hospital admission (from March 1 to Sept 30, 2020) in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases compared with the general population, and in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases on targeted immune-modifying drugs (eg, biologics) compared with those on standard systemic treatment (eg, methotrexate). Findings: We identified 17 672 065 adults; 1 163 438 adults (640 164 [55·0%] women and 523 274 [45·0%] men, and 827 457 [71·1%] of White ethnicity) had immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, and 16 508 627 people (8 215 020 [49·8%] women and 8 293 607 [50·2%] men, and 10 614 096 [64·3%] of White ethnicity) were included as the general population. Of 1 163 438 adults with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, 19 119 (1·6%) received targeted immune-modifying therapy and 181 694 (15·6%) received standard systemic therapy. Compared with the general population, adults with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases had an increased risk of COVID-19-related death after adjusting for confounders (age, sex, deprivation, and smoking status; HR 1·23, 95% CI 1·20-1·27) and further adjusting for mediators (body-mass index [BMI], cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and current glucocorticoid use; 1·15, 1·11-1·18). Adults with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases also had an increased risk of COVID-19-related critical care admission or death (confounder-adjusted HR 1·24, 95% CI 1·21-1·28; mediator-adjusted 1·16, 1·12-1·19) and hospital admission (confounder-adjusted 1·32, 1·29-1·35; mediator-adjusted 1·20, 1·17-1·23). In post-hoc analyses, the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases was higher in non-White ethnic groups than in White ethnic groups (as it was in the general population). We saw no evidence of increased COVID-19-related death in adults on targeted, compared with those on standard systemic, therapy after adjusting for confounders (age, sex, deprivation, BMI, immune-mediated inflammatory diseases [bowel, joint, and skin], cardiovascular disease, cancer [excluding non-melanoma skin cancer], stroke, and diabetes (HR 1·03, 95% CI 0·80-1·33), and after additionally adjusting for current glucocorticoid use (1·01, 0·78-1·30). There was no evidence of increased COVID-19-related death in adults prescribed tumour necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin (IL)-12/IL‑23 inhibitors, IL-17 inhibitors, IL-6 inhibitors, or Janus kinase inhibitors compared with those on standard systemic therapy. Rituximab was associated with increased COVID-19-related death (HR 1·68, 95% CI 1·11-2·56), with some attenuation after excluding people with haematological malignancies or organ transplants (1·54, 0·95-2·49). Interpretation: COVID-19 deaths and hospital admissions were higher in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. We saw no increased risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes in those on most targeted immune-modifying drugs for immune-mediated inflammatory diseases compared with those on standard systemic therapy. Funding: UK Medical Research Council, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at King's College London and Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, and Wellcome Trust.

BackgroundThe UK COVID-19 vaccination programme delivered its first “booster” doses in September 2021, initially in groups at high risk of severe disease then across the adult population. The BNT162b2 Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was used initially, with Moderna mRNA-1273 subsequently also used.MethodsWe used the OpenSAFELY-TPP database, covering 40% of English primary care practices and linked to national coronavirus surveillance, hospital episodes, and death registry data, to estimate the effectiveness of boosting with BNT162b2 compared with no boosting in eligible adults who had received two primary course vaccine doses between 16 September and 16 December 2021 when the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 was dominant. Follow up was for up to 10 weeks. Each booster recipient was matched with an unboosted control on factors relating to booster priority status and prior immunisation. Additional factors were adjusted for in Cox models estimating hazard ratios (HRs). Outcomes were positive SARS-CoV-2 test, COVID-19 hospitalisation, COVID-19 death and non-COVID-9 death. Booster vaccine effectiveness was defined as 1−HR.ResultsAmong 4,352,417 BNT162b2 booster recipients matched with unboosted controls, estimated effectiveness of a booster dose compared with two doses only was 50.7% (95% CI 50.1-51.3) for positive SARS-CoV-2 test, 80.1% (78.3-81.8) for COVID-19 hospitalisation, 88.5% (85.0-91.1) for COVID-19 death, and 80.3% (79.0-81.5) for non-COVID-19 death.Estimated effectiveness was similar among those who had received a BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1-S two-dose primary vaccination course, but effectiveness against severe COVID-19 was slightly lower in those classified as clinically extremely vulnerable (76.3% (73.1-79.1) for COVID-19 hospitalisation, and 85.1% (79.6-89.1) for COVID-19 death). Estimated effectiveness against each outcome was lower in those aged 18-65 years than in those aged 65 and over.ConclusionOur findings are consistent with strong protection of BNT162b2 boosting against positive SARS-CoV-2 test, COVID-19 hospitalisation, and COVID-19 death.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare activity across a broad range of clinical services. The NHS stopped non-urgent work in March 2020, later recommending services be restored to near-normal levels before winter where possible.AimsUsing routinely collected data, our aim was to describe changes in the volume and variation of coded clinical activity in general practice in: (i) cardiovascular disease, (ii) diabetes, (iii) mental health, (iv) female and reproductive health, (v) screening, and (vi) processes related to medication.Design and settingWith the approval of NHS England, we conducted a cohort study of 23.8 million patient records in general practice, in-situ using OpenSAFELY.MethodsWe selected common primary care activity using CTV3 codes and keyword searches from January 2019 - December 2020, presenting median and deciles of code usage across practices per month.ResultsWe identified substantial and widespread changes in clinical activity in primary care since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, with generally good recovery by December 2020. A few exceptions showed poor recovery and warrant further investigation, such as mental health, e.g. “Depression interim review” (median across practices in December 2020 -41.6% compared to December 2019).ConclusionsGranular NHS GP data at population-scale can be used to monitor disruptions to healthcare services and guide the development of mitigation strategies. The authors are now developing real-time monitoring dashboards for key measures identified here as well as further studies, using primary care data to monitor and mitigate the indirect health impacts of Covid-19 on the NHS.How this fits inDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, routine healthcare services in England faced significant disruption, and NHS England recommended restoring NHS services to near-normal levels before winter 2020. Our previous report covered the disruption and recovery in pathology tests and respiratory activity: here we describe an additional six areas of common primary care activity. We found most activities exhibited significant reductions during pandemic wave 1 (with most recovering to near-normal levels by December); however many important aspects of care - especially those of a more time-critical nature - were maintained throughout the pandemic. We recommend key measures for ongoing monitoring and further investigation of the impacts on health inequalities, to help measure and mitigate the ongoing indirect health impacts of COVID-19 on the NHS.

ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of sotrovimab (a neutralising monoclonal antibody) vs. molnupiravir (an antiviral) in preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes in non-hospitalised high-risk COVID-19 adult patients.DesignWith the approval of NHS England, we conducted a real-world cohort study using the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform.SettingPatient-level electronic health record data were obtained from 24 million people registered with a general practice in England that uses TPP software. The primary care data were securely linked with data on COVID-19 infection and therapeutics, hospital admission, and death within the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform, covering a period where both medications were frequently prescribed in community settings.ParticipantsNon-hospitalised adult COVID-19 patients at high risk of severe outcomes treated with sotrovimab or molnupiravir since December 16, 2021.InterventionsSotrovimab or molnupiravir administered in the community by COVID-19 Medicine Delivery Units.Main outcome measureCOVID-19 related hospitalisation or COVID-19 related death within 28 days after treatment initiation.ResultsBetween December 16, 2021 and February 10, 2022, 3331 and 2689 patients were treated with sotrovimab and molnupiravir, with no substantial differences in their baseline characteristics. The mean age of all 6020 patients was 52 (SD=16) years; 59% were female, 89% White and 88% had three or more COVID-19 vaccinations. Within 28 days after treatment initiation, 87 (1.4%) COVID-19 related hospitalisations/deaths were observed (32 treated with sotrovimab and 55 with molnupiravir). Cox proportional hazards models stratified by area showed that after adjusting for demographics, high-risk cohort categories, vaccination status, calendar time, body mass index and other comorbidities, treatment with sotrovimab was associated with a substantially lower risk than treatment with molnupiravir (hazard ratio, HR=0.54, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.88; P=0.014). Consistent results were obtained from propensity score weighted Cox models (HR=0.50, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.81; P=0.005) and when restricted to fully vaccinated people (HR=0.53, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.90; P=0.019). No substantial effect modifications by other characteristics were detected (all P values for interaction>0.10). Findings were similar in an exploratory analysis of patients treated between February 16 and May 1, 2022 when the Omicron BA.2 variant was dominant in England.ConclusionIn routine care of non-hospitalised high-risk adult patients with COVID-19 in England, those who received sotrovimab were at lower risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes than those receiving molnupiravir.

ObjectiveTo describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on safe prescribing, using the PINCER prescribing indicators; to implement complex prescribing indicators at national scale using GP data.DesignPopulation based cohort study, with the approval of NHS England using the OpenSAFELY platform.SettingElectronic health record data from 56.8 million NHS patients’ general practice records.ParticipantsAll NHS patients registered at a GP practice using TPP or EMIS computer systems and recorded as at risk of at least one potentially hazardous PINCER indicator between September 2019 and September 2021.Main outcome measureMonthly trends and between-practice variation for compliance with 13 PINCER measures between September 2019 and September 2021.ResultsThe indicators were successfully implemented across GP data in OpenSAFELY. Hazardous prescribing remained largely unchanged during the COVID-19 pandemic, with only small reductions in achievement of the PINCER indicators. There were transient delays in blood test monitoring for some medications, particularly ACE inhibitors. All indicators exhibited substantial recovery by September 2021. We identified 1,813,058 patients at risk of at least one hazardous prescribing event.ConclusionGood performance was maintained during the COVID-19 pandemic across a diverse range of widely evaluated measures of safe prescribing.Summary boxWHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THIS TOPICPrimary care services were substantially disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic.Disruption to safe prescribing during the pandemic has not previously been evaluated.PINCER is a nationally adopted programme of activities that aims to identify and correct hazardous prescribing in GP practices, by conducting manual audit on subgroups of practices.WHAT THIS STUDY ADDSFor the first time, we were able to successfully generate data on PINCER indicators for almost the whole population of England, in a single analysis.Our study is the most comprehensive assessment of medication safety during the COVID-19 pandemic in England, covering 95% of the population using well-validated measures.Good performance was maintained across many PINCER indicators throughout the pandemic.Delays in delivering some medication-related blood test monitoring were evident though considerable recovery was made by the end of the study period.

The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is increasing in prevalence around the world. Accurate estimation of disease severity associated with Omicron is critical for pandemic planning. We found lower risk of accident and emergency (AE) attendance following SARS-CoV-2 infection with Omicron compared to Delta (HR: 0.39 (95% CI: 0.30 – 0.51; PConflicts of InterestsNothing to declare.Funding statementThis work was supported by the Medical Research Council MR/V015737/1. TPP provided technical expertise and infrastructure within their data centre pro bono in the context of a national emergency. Rosalind Eggo is funded by HDR UK (grant: MR/S003975/1), MRC (grant: MC_PC 19065), NIHR (grant: NIHR200908).

Objectives To assess the association between routinely prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and deaths from COVID-19 using OpenSAFELY, a secure analytical platform.Methods We conducted two cohort studies from 1 March to 14 June 2020. Working on behalf of National Health Service England, we used routine clinical data in England linked to death data. In study 1, we identified people with an NSAID prescription in the last 3 years from the general population. In study 2, we identified people with rheumatoid arthritis/osteoarthritis. We defined exposure as current NSAID prescription within the 4 months before 1 March 2020. We used Cox regression to estimate HRs for COVID-19 related death in people currently prescribed NSAIDs, compared with those not currently prescribed NSAIDs, accounting for age, sex, comorbidities, other medications and geographical region.Results In study 1, we included 536 423 current NSAID users and 1 927 284 non-users in the general population. We observed no evidence of difference in risk of COVID-19 related death associated with current use (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.14) in the multivariable-adjusted model. In study 2, we included 1 708 781 people with rheumatoid arthritis/osteoarthritis, of whom 175 495 (10%) were current NSAID users. In the multivariable-adjusted model, we observed a lower risk of COVID-19 related death (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.94) associated with current use of NSAID versus non-use.Conclusions We found no evidence of a harmful effect of routinely prescribed NSAIDs on COVID-19 related deaths. Risks of COVID-19 do not need to influence decisions about the routine therapeutic use of NSAIDs.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-219517

The growing body of literature on bullying in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) suggests individuals with ASD are bullied more frequently than their non-ASD peers. However, there is no gold standard assessment tool for bullying in ASD, and the use of differing methodologies generates varying prevalence estimates. This systematic review evaluates the assessment methods for bullying in ASD and summarizes the participant characteristics in this literature. None of the identified measures meet literature recommendations for bullying assessment in ASD. Additionally, there is a need for increased sample diversity regarding the gender, race, and cognitive ability of ASD participants. Recommendations for researchers and practitioners are discussed, including the need for a gold standard assessment tool and consistency in the operationalization of bullying.

Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) or Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) are at increased risk for bullying victimization. School refusal is a 'red flag' for identification of bullying in children with ASD and/or ADHD. This study examined the impact of diagnoses, demographics, and school variables on school refusal due to bullying. Participants were 97 parents of 154 children with ASD, ADHD, ASD + ADHD, other diagnoses, or no diagnosis. Children with ASD + ADHD were most likely to refuse school due to bullying. Classroom aides and behavior problems were protective and risk factors, respectively. In the final regression model, child diagnosis no longer predicted school refusal. School refusal and problem behavior warrant consideration as a marker of distress for victimized children.

Purpose: To investigate the association between common infections and post-stroke dementia in a UK population-based cohort. Materials and Methods: A total of 60,392 stroke survivors (51.2% male, median age 74.3 years, IQR 63.9-82.4 years) were identified using primary care records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) linked to Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) with no history of dementia. Primary exposure was any GP-recorded infection (lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI), urinary tract infection (UTI) requiring antibiotics, skin and soft tissue infection requiring antibiotics) occurring after stroke. The primary outcome was incident all-cause dementia recorded in primary care records. In sensitivity analyses, we restricted to individuals with linked hospital records and expanded definitions to include ICD-10 coded hospital admissions. We used multivariable Cox regression to investigate the association between common infections and dementia occurring from 3 months to 5 years after stroke. Results: Of 60,392 stroke survivors, 20,969 (34.7%) experienced at least one infection and overall 4512 (7.5%) developed dementia during follow-up. Early dementia (3 months to 1-year post-stroke) risk was increased in those with at least one GP-recorded infection (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.21-1.71), with stronger associations when hospitalised infections were included (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.58-2.14). Late dementia (1-5 years) was only associated with hospitalised, but not with GP-recorded, infections. Conclusion: There was evidence of an association between common infections and post-stroke dementia, strongest in the 3-12 months following stroke. Better understanding of this relationship could help inform knowledge of pathways to dementia post-stroke and targeting of preventive interventions.

Cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) facilitates the net transfer of cholesteryl esters (CEs) and TGs between lipoproteins, impacting the metabolic fate of these lipoproteins. Previous studies have shown that a CETP antibody can alter CETP's preference for CE versus TG as transfer substrate, suggesting that CETP substrate preference can be manipulated in vivo. Hamster and human CETPs have very different preferences for CE and TG. To assess the effect of altering CETP's substrate preference on lipoproteins in vivo, here, we expressed human CETP in hamsters. Chow-fed hamsters received adenoviruses expressing no CETP, hamster CETP, or human CETP. Plasma CETP mass increased 2-fold in both the hamster and human CETP groups. Although the animals expressing human CETP still had low levels of hamster CETP, the CE versus TG preference of their plasma CETP was similar to that of the human ortholog. Hamster CETP overexpression had little impact on lipoproteins. However, expression of human CETP reduced HDL up to 50% and increased VLDL cholesterol 2.5-fold. LDL contained 20% more CE, whereas HDL CE was reduced 40%, and TG increased 6-fold. The HDL3:HDL2 ratio increased from 0.32 to 0.60. Hepatic expression of three cholesterol-related genes (LDLR, SCARB1, and CYP7A1) was reduced up to 40%. However, HDL-associated CE excretion into feces was unchanged. We conclude that expression of human CETP in hamsters humanizes their lipoprotein profile with respect to the relative concentrations of VLDL, LDL, HDL, and the HDL3:HDL2 ratio. Altering the lipid substrate preference of CETP provides a novel approach for modifying plasma lipoproteins.

Cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) exists as full-length (FL) and exon 9 (E9)-deleted isoforms. The function of E9-deleted CETP is poorly understood. Here, we investigated the role of E9-deleted CETP in regulating the secretion of FL-CETP by cells and explored its possible role in intracellular lipid metabolism. CETP overexpression in cells that naturally express CETP confirmed that E9-deleted CETP is not secreted, and showed that cellular FL- and E9-deleted CETP form an isolatable complex. Coexpression of CETP isoforms lowered cellular levels of both proteins and impaired FL-CETP secretion. These effects were due to reduced synthesis of both isoforms; however, the predominate consequence of FL- and E9-deleted CETP coexpression is impaired FL-CETP synthesis. We reported previously that reducing both CETP isoforms or overexpressing FL-CETP impairs cellular triglyceride (TG) storage. To investigate this further, E9-deleted CETP was expressed in SW872 cells that naturally synthesize CETP and in mouse 3T3-L1 cells that do not. E9-deleted CETP overexpression stimulated SW872 triglyceride synthesis and increased stored TG 2-fold. Expression of E9-deleted CETP in mouse 3T3-L1 cells produced a similar lipid phenotype. In vitro, FL-CETP promotes the transfer of TG from ER-enriched membranes to lipid droplets. E9-deleted CETP also promoted this transfer, although less effectively, and it inhibited the transfer driven by FL-CETP. We conclude that FL- and E9-deleted CETP isoforms interact to mutually decrease their intracellular levels and impair FL-CETP secretion by reducing CETP biosynthesis. E9-deleted CETP, like FL-CETP, alters cellular TG metabolism and storage but in a contrary manner.

Over the years, there has been a substantial effort to improve patient health and reduce healthcare costs through preventive medicine. Regular dental care prevents tooth decay; published research shows how oral health can impact other organs, such as the heart. Heart disease is the leading cause of death in Mississippi, with almost 8,000 people dying from it each year. Problems that affect oral health are also common in Mississippi. The purpose of this study was to test if a relationship exists between oral and heart health in Mississippi patients. De-identified patient data from 2012 through 2020 was gathered by using a data warehouse from an electronic health record at a Medical Center in Mississippi and was analyzed with SAS. The results from this study identified a strong association between oral and heart health, which suggests there may be opportunities for improvements in healthcare in Mississippi through improvements in dental health.

Supplementary Files: Enhanced T-Cell Priming and Improved Anti-Tumor Immunity through Lymphatic Delivery of Checkpoint Blockade Immunotherapy

SummaryBackgroundThe rate at which COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness wanes over time is crucial for vaccination policies, but is incompletely understood with conflicting results from different studies.MethodsThis cohort study, using the OpenSAFELY-TPP database and approved by NHS England, included individuals without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection assigned to vaccines priority groups 2-12 defined by the UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation. We compared individuals who had received two doses of BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 with unvaccinated individuals during six 4-week comparison periods, separately for subgroups aged 65+ years; 16-64 years and clinically vulnerable; 40-64 years and 18-39 years. We used Cox regression, stratified by first dose eligibility and geographical region and controlled for calendar time, to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) comparing vaccinated with unvaccinated individuals, and quantified waning vaccine effectiveness as ratios of aHRs per-4-week period. The outcomes were COVID-19 hospitalisation, COVID-19 death, positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and non-COVID-19 death.FindingsThe BNT162b2, ChAdOx1 and unvaccinated groups comprised 1,773,970, 2,961,011 and 2,433,988 individuals, respectively. Waning of vaccine effectiveness was similar across outcomes and vaccine brands: e.g. in the 65+ years subgroup ratios of aHRs versus unvaccinated for COVID-19 hospitalisation, COVID-19 death and positive SARS-CoV-2 test ranged from 1.23 (95% CI 1.15-1.32) to 1.27 (1.20-1.34) for BNT162b2 and 1.16 (0.98-1.37) to 1.20 (1.14-1.27) for ChAdOx1. Despite waning, rates of COVID-19 hospitalisation and COVID-19 death were substantially lower among vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated individuals up to 26 weeks after second dose, with estimated aHRs 80% vaccine effectiveness) for BNT162b2, and 74%) for ChAdOx1. By weeks 23-26, rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection in fully vaccinated individuals were similar to or higher than those in unvaccinated individuals: aHRs ranged from 0.85 (0.78-0.92) to 1.53 (1.07-2.18) for BNT162b2, and 1.21 (1.13-1.30) to 1.99 (1.94-2.05) for ChAdOx1.InterpretationThe rate at which estimated vaccine effectiveness waned was strikingly consistent for COVID-19 hospitalisation, COVID-19 death and positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and similar across subgroups defined by age and clinical vulnerability. If sustained to outcomes of infection with the Omicron variant and to booster vaccination, these findings will facilitate scheduling of booster vaccination doses.

Background Residents in care homes have been severely impacted by COVID-19. We describe trends in the mortality risk among residents of care homes compared to private homes. Methods On behalf of NHS England we used OpenSAFELY-TPP to calculate monthly age-standardised risks of death due to all causes and COVID-19 among adults aged >=65 years between 1/2/2019 and 31/03/2021. Care home residents were identified using linkage to Care and Quality Commission data. Findings We included 4,340,648 people aged 65 years or older on the 1st of February 2019, 2.2% of whom were classified as residing in a care or nursing home. Age-standardised mortality risks were approximately 10 times higher among care home residents compared to those in private housing in February 2019: comparative mortality figure (CMF) = 10.59 (95%CI = 9.51, 11.81) among women, and 10.87 (9.93, 11.90) among men. By April 2020 these relative differences had increased to more than 17 times with CMFs of 17.57 (16.43, 18.79) among women and 18.17 (17.22, 19.17) among men. CMFs did not increase during the second wave, despite a rise in the absolute age-standardised COVID-19 mortality risks. Interpretation COVID-19 has had a disproportionate impact on the mortality of care home residents in England compared to older residents of private homes, but only in the first wave. This may be explained by a degree of acquired immunity, improved protective measures or changes in the underlying frailty of the populations. The care home population should be prioritised for measures aimed at controlling COVID-19. Funding Medical Research Council MR/V015737/1

An infusion of checkpoint blockade immunotherapy (CBI) has revolutionized cancer treatments for some patients, but the majority of patients experience disappointing responses. Because adaptive immune responses are mounted by the concentrated assembly of antigens, immune cells, and mediators in the secluded and protective environment of draining lymph nodes (dLNs), we hypothesize that lymphatic delivery of CBI (αCTLA-4 and αPD-1) to tumor dLNs (tdLNs) improves anti-tumor responses over intravenous (i.v.) administration, and that vaccination against tumor associated antigen (TAA) further enhances these responses. Mono- and combination CBI were administered i.v. or through image-guided intradermal (i.d.) injection to reach tdLNs in vaccinated and unvaccinated animals bearing either primary or orthotopically metastasizing B16F10 melanoma. Vaccination and boost against TAA, Melan-A, was accomplished with virus-like particles (VLP) directed to tdLNs followed by VLP boost after CBI administration. Lymphatic delivery of CBIs reduced primary tumor size and metastatic tumor burden, alleviated the pro-tumorigenic immune environment, and improved survival over systemic administration of CBIs. Animals receiving CBIs lymphatically exhibited significantly enhanced survival over those receiving therapies administered partially or completely through systemic routes. By combining vaccination and CBI for effective T-cell priming in the protected environment of dLNs, anti-tumor responses may be improved.

Apolipoprotein F (ApoF) modulates lipoprotein metabolism by selectively inhibiting cholesteryl ester transfer protein activity on LDL. This ApoF activity requires that it is bound to LDL. How hyperlipidemia alters total plasma ApoF and its binding to LDL are poorly understood. In this study, total plasma ApoF and LDL-bound ApoF were quantified by ELISA (n = 200). Plasma ApoF was increased 31% in hypercholesterolemic plasma but decreased 20% in hypertriglyceridemia. However, in donors with combined hypercholesterolemia and hypertriglyceridemia, the elevated triglyceride ameliorated the rise in ApoF caused by hypercholesterolemia alone. Compared with normolipidemic LDL, hypercholesterolemic LDL contained ∼2-fold more ApoF per LDL particle, whereas ApoF bound to LDL in hypertriglyceridemia plasma was

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.

While perinatal mental health concerns are common, little attention is paid to noticing or addressing these concerns. Midwives and obstetricians are uniquely positioned to universally screen their patients for mental health conditions during the perinatal period, and provide referrals for additional mental health supports if relevant. Previous studies on perinatal mental health care have focused primarily on midwifery care, excluding perinatal healthcare providers such as obstetricians. This rapid review aims to examine the barriers to accessing mental health care during the perinatal period as experienced by obstetricians, midwives, and their patients.A rapid review of literature was conducted on barriers to perinatal mental health care as experienced by patients, midwives, and obstetricians. The search strategy included published literature from PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science published between 2000 and 2020. All documents were screened by two researchers and disagreements were resolved through consensus with a third reviewer. After data from all included articles were extracted, thematic analysis was conducted, and findings were compared with related reviews that focused on mental health access for individuals who accessed midwifery care.Of the 539 references and documents that were screened, 31 articles met the inclusion criteria. In the extraction phase, country, study objective(s), study design, perspective(s), barriers, and the dimension(s) impacted along the pathway to accessing care were retrieved from the 31 included articles. After all barriers were classified using the Supply-Side Dimensions of Access, we developed a classification framework to further examine stigma at the societal, institutional, and individual levels.While midwives utilize a more holistic approach to care as compared with obstetricians, the barriers identified through this rapid review indicate that obstetricians and their patients face similar struggles to accessing and providing mental health care. Moreover, stigma plays a large role in the barriers experienced by patients, midwives, and obstetricians - at individual and institutional levels.Obstetricians encounter similar stigma-related barriers as midwives in detecting mental health concerns, as well as connecting clients to available mental health resources and supports. Therefore, to effectively eliminate barriers to accessing perinatal mental health care, a systemic change must be enacted throughout all three layers to address the deep-rooted stigma associated with accessing mental health care during the perinatal period.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated the potential association of COVID-19 vaccination with three acute neurological events: Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), transverse myelitis and Bell's palsy. METHODS: With the approval of NHS England we analysed primary care data from >17 million patients in England linked to emergency care, hospital admission and mortality records in the OpenSAFELY platform. Separately for each vaccine brand, we used a self-controlled case series design to estimate the incidence rate ratio for each outcome in the period following vaccination (4-42 days for GBS, 4-28 days for transverse myelitis and Bell's palsy) compared to a within-person baseline, using conditional Poisson regression. RESULTS: Among 7,783,441 ChAdOx1 vaccinees, there was an increased rate of GBS (N = 517; incidence rate ratio 2·85; 95% CI2·33-3·47) and Bell's palsy (N = 5,350; 1·39; 1·27-1·53) following a first dose of ChAdOx1 vaccine, corresponding to 11.0 additional cases of GBS and 17.9 cases of Bell's palsy per 1 million vaccinees if causal. For GBS this applied to the first, but not the second, dose. There was no clear evidence of an association of ChAdOx1 vaccination with transverse myelitis (N = 199; 1·51; 0·96-2·37). Among 5,729,152 BNT162b2 vaccinees, there was no evidence of any association with GBS (N = 283; 1·09; 0·75-1·57), transverse myelitis (N = 109; 1·62; 0·86-3·03) or Bell's palsy (N = 3,609; 0·89; 0·76-1·03). Among 255,446 mRNA-1273 vaccine recipients there was no evidence of an association with Bell's palsy (N = 78; 0·88, 0·32-2·42). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccines save lives, but it is important to understand rare adverse events. We observed a short-term increased rate of Guillain-Barré syndrome and Bell's palsy after first dose of ChAdOx1 vaccine. The absolute risk, assuming a causal effect attributable to vaccination, was low.

Background On December 8th 2020, NHS England administered the first COVID-19 vaccination as part of an ambitious vaccination programme during a global health emergency. Aims To develop a framework for detailed near-real-time monitoring of COVID-19 vaccine roll-out; to describe trends and variation in coverage by geographic area, and between key clinical and demographic patient groups. Methods Working on behalf of NHS England we used routine clinical data from 23.4 million patients to conduct a retrospective cohort study of comprehensive electronic health record data in NHS England, using the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform which covers approximately 40% of the general population in England with weekly data updates. We developed algorithms to identify key demographic and clinical sub-groups within this population and generated descriptive statistics on proportion of eligible patients receiving the vaccine among key Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) target groups. Results Between December 8th and January 13th 961,580 people out of 23.4m in our dataset received a COVID-19 vaccine. Of 1,160,062 patients aged 80 or over and not living in a care home (currently targeted by JCVI) 476,375 had been vaccinated in total (41.1%). We observed a substantial divergence in vaccination by ethnicity within this group (White 42.5% vaccinated, Black 20.5%) and across rankings of deprivation (least deprived 44.7%, most deprived 37.9%). Patients with pre-existing medical conditions were equally likely, or more likely, to have received a vaccine across most co-morbidity groups with two exceptions: severe mental illness (30.3% vaccinated) and learning disability (28.1%). We identify substantial variation in vaccination among the over-80s between Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships (STPs; Range 12%-74%); lower vaccination rates among ethnic minority and deprived groups was observed in most but not all STPs. In the 70-79 age cohort 74,108 people (3.6%) had been vaccinated. 378,921 vaccine recipients under 70 and not identifiably resident in a care home were presumed to be health or social care workers; 32,174 recipients were identified as older aged care home residents (33.2% coverage). Of all those vaccinated, 169,472 had received a second dose (17.6%). Conclusions The NHS in England has rapidly delivered mass vaccination. We were able to deploy a data monitoring framework across small clinical subgroups using linked patient-level NHS data on 23.4 million people with very short delays from vaccine administration to completed analysis. Targeted activity may be needed to address lower vaccination rates observed among certain key groups: ethnic minorities, people living in areas of higher deprivation, and those with severe mental illness or learning disabilities. However we note that this data is only from the first preliminary weeks of the vaccination programme. Variation in vaccination coverage between groups and regions will have many complex drivers, the figures presented in this manuscript require thoughtful interpretation to support a rapidly evolving NHS vaccination campaign; we are sharing local level data with national and regional NHS teams on request.

Background: At the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was no routine comprehensive hospital medicines data from the UK available to researchers. These records can be important for many analyses including the effect of certain medicines on the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. With the approval of NHS England, we set out to obtain data on one specific group of medicines, “high-cost drugs” (HCD) which are typically specialist medicines for the management of long-term conditions, prescribed by hospitals to patients. Additionally, we aimed to make these data available to all approved researchers in OpenSAFELY-TPP. This report is intended to support all studies carried out in OpenSAFELY-TPP, and those elsewhere, working with this dataset or similar data. Methods: Working with the North East Commissioning Support Unit and NHS Digital, we arranged for collation of a single national HCD dataset to help inform responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. The dataset was developed from payment submissions from hospitals to commissioners. Results: In the financial year (FY) 2018/19 there were 2.8 million submissions for 1.1 million unique patient IDs recorded in the HCD. The average number of submissions per patient over the year was 2.6. In FY 2019/20 there were 4.0 million submissions for 1.3 million unique patient IDs. The average number of submissions per patient over the year was 3.1. Of the 21 variables in the dataset, three are now available for analysis in OpenSafely-TPP: Financial year and month of drug being dispensed; drug name; and a description of the drug dispensed. Conclusions: We have described the process for sourcing a national HCD dataset, making these data available for COVID-19-related analysis through OpenSAFELY-TPP and provided information on the variables included in the dataset, data coverage and an initial descriptive analysis.

BackgroundEarly evidence has shown that anticoagulant reduces the risk of thrombotic events in those infected with COVID-19. However, evidence of the role of routinely prescribed oral anticoagulants (OACs) in COVID-19 outcomes is limited.AimTo investigate the association between OACs and COVID-19 outcomes in those with atrial fibrillation and a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 2.Design and settingOn behalf of NHS England, a population-based cohort study was conducted.MethodThe study used primary care data and pseudonymously-linked SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing data, hospital admissions, and death records from England. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for COVID-19 outcomes comparing people with current OAC use versus non-use, accounting for age, sex, comorbidities, other medications, deprivation, and general practice.ResultsOf 71 103 people with atrial fibrillation and a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 2, there were 52 832 current OAC users and 18 271 non-users. No difference in risk of being tested for SARS-CoV-2 was associated with current use (adjusted HR [aHR] 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95 to 1.04) versus non-use. A lower risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (aHR 0.77, 95% CI = 0.63 to 0.95) and a marginally lower risk of COVID-19-related death (aHR, 0.74, 95% CI = 0.53 to 1.04) were associated with current use versus non-use.ConclusionAmong those at low baseline stroke risk, people receiving OACs had a lower risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and severe COVID-19 outcomes than non-users; this might be explained by a causal effect of OACs in preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes or unmeasured confounding, including more cautious behaviours leading to reduced infection risk.

To assess the potential epidemiological association between various possible risk factors and healthcare disparities specifically related to the access, use and/or quality of speech language pathology services for individuals with voice and upper airway disorders.A systematic review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Full text journal articles were identified through PubMed, PsycINFO and Web of Science. The reference sections of included articles were also manually screened and identified four additional studies for consideration of inclusion. Included articles specifically addressed healthcare disparities in voice and upper airway disorders related to speech pathology care. International literature was excluded. Eligible studies were reviewed and data extracted. Risk of bias of each eligible study was performed using the quality assessment tool from National Institute of Health for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies. Data from eligible studies were synthesized thematically.A total of 1,101 resources were retrieved from the search; of these, 133 were duplicates. Titles and abstracts of 968 articles were screened, with 14 selected for full-text review. Eleven articles were considered eligible for inclusion. Voice disorders were the condition most frequently examined followed by only one article addressing upper airways disorders. There was considerable heterogeneity in the methodology and statistical analyses among the eligible papers. There was a lack of standard methodology for collecting and accurately determining patient characteristics as well as variability in measuring confounding variables and providing statistical analyses for such adjustments that may have impacted the findings. The information extracted from these articles revealed healthcare disparities related to sex/gender, age, insurance status/coverage, race/ethnicity, among others including etiology and preferred language.This systematic review highlights the limited research on speech language pathology-specific healthcare disparities for individuals with voice and upper airway disorders. There was significant clinical and methodological heterogeneity between studies which may have contributed to varied results between studies. There is a need for greater methodological rigor and prospectively designed studies to better characterize the impact of disparities in the access to, use of, and quality of speech pathology care for this patient population.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare activity globally. The NHS in England stopped most non-urgent work by March 2020, but later recommended that services should be restored to near-normal levels before winter where possible. The authors are developing the OpenSAFELY NHS Service Restoration Observatory , using data to describe changes in service activity during COVID-19, and reviewing signals for action with commissioners, researchers and clinicians. Here we report phase one: generating, managing, and describing the data. Objective To describe the volume and variation of coded clinical activity in English primary care across 23.8 million patients’ records, taking respiratory disease and laboratory procedures as key examples. Methods Working on behalf of NHS England we developed an open source software framework for data management and analysis to describe trends and variation in clinical activity across primary care EHR data on 23.8 million patients; and conducted a population cohort-based study to describe activity using CTV3 coding hierarchy and keyword searches from January 2019-September 2020. Results Much activity recorded in general practice declined to some extent during the pandemic, but largely recovered by September 2020, with some exceptions. There was a large drop in coded activity for commonly used laboratory tests, with broad recovery to pre-pandemic levels by September. One exception was blood coagulation tests such as International Normalised Ratio (INR), with a smaller reduction (median tests per 1000 patients in 2020: February 8.0; April 6.2; September 7.0). The overall pattern of recording for respiratory symptoms was less affected, following an expected seasonal pattern and classified as “no change” from the previous year. Respiratory tract infections exhibited a sustained drop compared with pre-pandemic levels, not returning to pre-pandemic levels by September 2020. Various COVID-19 codes increased through the period. We observed a small decline associated with high level codes for long-term respiratory conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma. Asthma annual reviews experienced a small drop but since recovered, while COPD annual reviews remain below baseline. Conclusions We successfully delivered an open source software framework to describe trends and variation in clinical activity across an unprecedented scale of primary care data. The COVD-19 pandemic led to a substantial change in healthcare activity. Most laboratory tests showed substantial reduction, largely recovering to near-normal levels by September 2020, with some important tests less affected. Records of respiratory infections decreased with the exception of codes related to COVID-19, whilst activity of other respiratory disease codes was mixed. We are expanding the NHS Service Restoration Observatory in collaboration with clinicians, commissioners and researchers and welcome feedback.

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.