Search

If schools are part of our caring infrastructure, then a diminished arts curriculum is an assault on the possibilities for justice and affective equality for students and teachers. Tracing the intimate relationship between the arts and care, I argue that an art-less school environment is indicative of a care-less society. The arts engage both rationalities of, and ‘aesthetics of difference’, enabling an ethics of care. While it retains and critically examines traditional artistic canons, this contemporary notion of aesthetics is non-hierarchical and broader than Kantian variants (the beautiful and the ugly). Transcending paltry modes of moral reasoning around curriculum, it interrogates the “culture of neglect” surrounding the liberal individual imposed by 40 years of miserable neoliberal governmentality, and, through recognising and celebrating the signifying power of the arts, advocates for a rich, inclusive resistance which is vital when our judgment is deeply challenged by virtual and simulated worlds.

Elizabeth I Adesanya,1 Alasdair D Henderson,1 Julian Matthewman,1 Ketaki Bhate,1 Joseph F Hayes,2 Amy Mulick,1 Rohini Mathur,1 Catherine Smith,3 Helena Carreira,1 Sujit D Rathod,4 Sinéad M Langan,1 Kathryn E Mansfield1 1Department of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK; 2Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK; 3St John’s Institute of Dermatology, Guys and St Thomas’ Foundation Trust and King’s College London, London, UK; 4Department of Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UKCorrespondence: Elizabeth I Adesanya, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK, Email elizabeth.adesanya@lshtm.ac.ukBackground: Existing research exploring associations between atopic eczema (AE) or psoriasis, and severe mental illness (SMI – ie, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, other psychoses) is limited, with longitudinal evidence particularly scarce. Therefore, temporal directions of associations are unclear. We aimed to investigate associations between AE or psoriasis and incident SMI among adults.Methods: We conducted matched cohort studies using primary care electronic health records (January 1997 to January 2020) from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD. We identified two cohorts: 1) adults (≥ 18 years) with and without AE and 2) adults with and without psoriasis. We matched (on age, sex, general practice) adults with AE or psoriasis with up to five adults without. We used Cox regression, stratified by matched set, to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) comparing incident SMI among adults with and without AE or psoriasis.Results: We identified 1,023,232 adults with AE and 4,908,059 without, and 363,210 with psoriasis and 1,801,875 without. After adjusting for matching variables (age, sex, general practice) and potential confounders (deprivation, calendar period) both AE and psoriasis were associated with at least a 17% increased hazard of SMI (AE: HR=1.17,95% CI=1.12– 1.22; psoriasis: HR=1.26,95% CI=1.18– 1.35). After additionally adjusting for potential mediators (comorbidity burden, harmful alcohol use, smoking status, body mass index, and, in AE only, sleep problems and high-dose glucocorticoids), associations with SMI did not persist for AE (HR=0.98,95% CI=0.93– 1.04), and were attenuated for psoriasis (HR=1.14,95% CI=1.05– 1.23).Conclusion: Our findings suggest adults with AE or psoriasis are at increased risk of SMI compared to matched comparators. After adjusting for potential mediators, associations with SMI did not persist for AE, and were attenuated for psoriasis, suggesting that the increased risk may be explained by mediating factors (eg, sleep problems). Our research highlights the importance of monitoring mental health in adults with AE or psoriasis.Keywords: epidemiology, dermatology, psychology

BackgroundThe inappropriate use of antibiotics is understood to contribute to antimicrobial resistance. Oral antibiotics are regularly used to treat moderate-to-severe acne vulgaris. In practice, we do not know the typical length of oral antibiotic treatment courses for acne in routine primary care and what proportion of people receive more than one course of treatment following a new acne diagnosis.ObjectivesTo describe how oral antibiotics are prescribed for acne over time in UK primary care.MethodsWe conducted a descriptive longitudinal drug utilization study using routinely collected primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD (2004–2019). We included individuals (8–50 years) with a new acne diagnosis recorded between 1 January 2004 and 31 July 2019.ResultsWe identified 217 410 people with a new acne diagnosis. The median age was 17 years [interquartile range (IQR) 15–25] and median follow-up was 4.3 years (IQR 1.9–7.6). Among people with a new acne diagnosis, 96 703 (44.5%) received 248 560 prescriptions for long-term oral antibiotics during a median follow-up of 5.3 years (IQR 2.8–8.5). The median number of continuous courses of antibiotic therapy (≥ 28 days) per person was four (IQR 2–6). The majority (n = 59 010, 61.0%) of first oral antibiotic prescriptions in those with a recorded acne diagnosis were between the ages of 12 and 18. Most (n = 71 544, 74.0%) first courses for oral antibiotics were for between 28 and 90 days. The median duration of the first course of treatment was 56 days (IQR 50–93 days) and 18 127 (18.7%) of prescriptions of ≥ 28 days were for < 6 weeks. Among people who received a first course of oral antibiotic for ≥ 28 days, 56 261 (58.2%) received a second course after a treatment gap of ≥ 28 days. The median time between first and second courses was 135 days (IQR 67–302). The cumulative duration of exposure to oral antibiotics during follow-up was 255 days (8.5 months).ConclusionsFurther work is needed to understand the consequences of using antibiotics for shorter periods than recommended. Suboptimal treatment duration may result in reduced clinical effectiveness or repeated exposures, potentially contributing to antimicrobial resistance.

Dept of Mathematics and Statistical SciencesGroup Theory and Numerical Analysis 39

Lymphocyte skin homing in atopic eczema (AE) may induce lymphopenia.To determine if AE is associated with lymphopenia.We used UK primary care electronic health records (Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD) for a matched cohort study in adults (18yrs+) (1997-2015) with at least 1 recorded lymphocyte count. We matched people with AE to up to 5 people without. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the association between AE and lymphopenia (two low lymphocyte counts within 3 months) and linear mixed effects regression to estimate the association with absolute lymphocyte counts using all available counts. Cox proportional hazard models were used to investigate the effect of lymphopenia on common infections. We replicated the study using US survey data (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey [NHANES]).Amongst 71,731 adults with AE and 126,349 adults without AE, we found an adjusted odds ratio (OR) for lymphopenia of 1.16 (95%CI: 1.09-1.23), the strength of association increased with increasing eczema severity. When comparing all recorded lymphocyte counts from adults with AE(n=1,497,306) to those of people without AE(n=4,035,870) we saw a lower mean lymphocyte (adjusted mean difference -0.047*10AE, including increasing AE severity, is associated with a decreasing lymphocyte count, regardless of immunosuppressive drug use.. Whether the decreasing lymphocyte count has wider health implications for people with severe eczema warrants further investigation.

BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence suggests an association between common inflammatory skin diseases and chronic kidney disease (CKD). OBJECTIVES: To explore the association between CKD stages 3-5 (CKD3-5) and atopic eczema, psoriasis, rosacea and hidradenitis suppurativa. METHODS: We undertook two complementary analyses; a prevalent case-control study and a cohort study using routinely collected primary care data [UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)]. We matched individuals with CKD3-5 in CPRD in March 2018 with up to five individuals without CKD for general practitioner practice, age and sex. We compared the prevalence of CKD3-5 among individuals with and without each inflammatory skin disease. We included individuals in CPRD with diabetes mellitus (2004-2018) in a cohort analysis to compare the incidence of CKD3-5 among people with and without atopic eczema and psoriasis. RESULTS: Our study included 56 602 cases with CKD3-5 and 268 305 controls. Cases were more likely than controls to have a history of atopic eczema [odds ratio (OR) 1·14, 99% confidence interval (CI) 1·11-1·17], psoriasis (OR 1·13, 99% CI 1·08-1·19) or hidradenitis suppurativa (OR 1·49, 99% CI 1·19-1·85), but were slightly less likely to have been diagnosed with rosacea (OR 0·92, 99% CI 0·87-0·97), after adjusting for age, sex, practice (matching factors), index of multiple deprivation, diabetes, smoking, harmful alcohol use and obesity. Results remained similar after adjusting for hypertension and cardiovascular disease. In the cohort with diabetes (N = 335 827), there was no evidence that CKD3-5 incidence was associated with atopic eczema or psoriasis. CONCLUSIONS: Atopic eczema, psoriasis and hidradenitis suppurativa are weakly associated with CKD3-5. Future research is needed to elucidate potential mechanisms and the clinical significance of our findings.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) disease activity and severity is highly variable during childhood. Early attempts to identify subtypes based on disease trajectory have assessed AD presence over time without incorporating severity. OBJECTIVES: To identify childhood AD subtypes from symptom severity and trajectories, and determine associations with genetic risk factors, comorbidities and demographic and environmental variables. METHODS: We split data from children in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children birth cohort into development and validation sets. To identify subtypes, we ran latent class analyses in the development set on AD symptom reports up to age 14 years. We regressed identified subtypes on nongenetic variables in mutually adjusted, multiply imputed (genetic: unadjusted, complete case) multinomial regression analyses. We repeated analyses in the validation set and report confirmed results. RESULTS: There were 11 866 children who contributed to analyses. We identified one Unaffected/Rare class (66% of children) and four AD subtypes: Severe-Frequent (4%), Moderate-Frequent (7%), Moderate-Declining (11%) and Mild-Intermittent (12%). Symptom patterns within the first two subtypes appeared more homogeneous than the last two. Filaggrin (FLG) null mutations, an AD polygenic risk score (PRS), being female, parental AD and comorbid asthma were associated with higher risk for some or all subtypes; FLG, AD-PRS and asthma associations were stronger along a subtype gradient arranged by increasing severity and frequency; FLG and AD-PRS further differentiated some phenotypes from each other. CONCLUSIONS: Considering severity and AD trajectories leads to four well-defined and recognizable subtypes. The differential associations of risk factors among and between subtypes is novel and requires further research.

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.

Atopic eczema is a common chronic inflammatory skin disease. Research suggests an association between atopic eczema and obesity, with inconsistent evidence from European populations.To explore the association between diagnosed atopic eczema and being overweight or obese, and whether increased atopic eczema severity was associated with higher body mass index.We undertook a cross-sectional analysis within a cohort of adults (matched by age, sex and general practice) with and without a diagnosis of atopic eczema. We used primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink Gold) and linked hospital admissions data (1998-2016). We used conditional logistic regression to compare the odds of being overweight or obese (adjusting for confounders and potential mediators) in those with atopic eczema (mild, moderate and severe, and all eczema) vs. those without.We identified 441 746 people with atopic eczema, matched to 1 849 722 without. People with atopic eczema had slightly higher odds of being overweight or obese vs. those without [odds ratio (OR) 1·08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1·07-1·09] after adjusting for age, asthma and socioeconomic deprivation. Adjusting for potential mediators (high-dose glucocorticoids, harmful alcohol use, anxiety, depression, smoking) had a minimal impact on effect estimates (OR 1·07, 95% CI 1·06-1·08). We saw no evidence that odds of being overweight or obese increased with increasing atopic eczema severity, and there was no association in people with severe eczema.We found evidence of a small overall association between atopic eczema and being overweight or obese. However, there was no association with obesity among those with the most severe eczema. Our findings are largely reassuring for this prevalent patient group who may already have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease.

This paper is a systematic research review examining the best treatment intervention for children experiencing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or PTSD-like symptoms after a natural disaster e...

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.

BackgroundIt is unclear if people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) (joint, bowel and skin) and on immune modifying therapy have increased risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes.MethodsWith the approval of NHS England we conducted a cohort study, using OpenSAFELY, analysingroutinely-collected primary care data linked to hospital admission, death and previously unavailable hospital prescription data. We used Cox regression (adjusting for confounders) to estimate hazard ratios (HR) comparing risk of COVID-19-death, death/critical care admission, and hospitalisation (March to September 2020) in: 1) people with IMIDs compared to the general population; and 2) people with IMIDs on targeted immune modifying drugs (e.g., biologics) compared to standard systemic treatment (e.g., methotrexate).FindingsWe identified 17,672,065 adults; of 1,163,438 (7%) with IMIDs, 19,119 people received targeted immune modifying drugs, and 200,813 received standard systemics. We saw evidence of increased COVID-19-death (HR 1.23, 95%CI 1.20, 1.27), and COVID-19 hospitalisation (HR 1.32, 95%CI 1.29, 1.35) in individuals with IMIDs overall compared to individuals without IMIDs of the same age, sex, deprivation and smoking status. We saw no evidence of increased COVID-19 deaths with targeted compared to standard systemic treatments (HR 1.03, 95%CI 0.80, 1.33). There was no evidence of increased COVID-19-related death in those prescribed TNF inhibitors, IL-12/23, IL7, IL-6 or JAK inhibitors compared to standard systemics. Rituximab was associated with increased COVID-19 death (HR 1.68, 95%CI 1.11, 2.56); however, this finding may relate to confounding.InterpretationCOVID-19 death and hospitalisation was higher in people with IMIDs. We saw no increased risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes in those on most targeted immune modifying drugs for IMIDs compared to standard systemics.RESEARCH IN CONTEXTEvidence before this studyWe searched PubMed on May 19th, 2021, using the terms “COVID-19”, “SARS-CoV-2” and “rheumatoid arthritis”, “psoriatic arthritis” “ankylosing spondylitis”, “Crohn’s disease” “ulcerative colitis” “hidradenitis suppurativa” and “psoriasis”, to identify primary research articles examining severe COVID-19 outcome risk in individuals with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) and those on immune modifying therapy. The studies identified (including matched cohort studies and studies in disease-specific registries) were limited by small sample sizes and number of outcomes. Most studies did not show a signal of increased adverse COVID-19 outcomes in those on targeted therapies, with the exception of rituximab. Additionally, disease-specific registries are subject to selection bias and lack denominator populations.Added value of the studyIn our large population-based study of 17 million individuals, including 1 million people with IMIDs and just under 200,000 receiving immune modifying medications, we saw evidence that people with IMIDs had an increased risk of COVID-19-related death compared to the general population after adjusting for potential confounders (age, sex, deprivation, smoking status) (HR 1.23, 95%CI 1.20, 1.27). We saw differences by IMID type, with COVID-19-related death being increased by the most in people with inflammatory joint disease (HR 1.47, 95%CI 1.40, 1.54). We also saw some evidence that those with IMIDs were more likely, compared to the general population, to have COVID-19-related critical care admission/death (HR 1.24, 95%CI 1.21, 1.28) and hospitalisation (HR 1.32, 95%CI 1.29, 1.35).Compared to people with IMIDs taking standard systemics, we saw no evidence of differences in severe COVID-19-related outcomes with TNF inhibitors, IL-17 inhibitors, IL-12/23 inhibitors, IL-6 inhibitors and JAK inhibitors. However, there was some evidence that rituximab was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19-related death (HR 1.68, 95%CI 1.11, 2.56) and death/critical care admission (HR 1.92, 95%CI 1.31, 2.81). We also saw evidence of an increase in COVID-19-related hospital admissions in people prescribed rituximab (HR 1.59, 95%CI 1.16, 2.18) or JAK inhibition (HR 1.81, 95%CI 1.09, 3.01) compared to those on standard systemics, although this could be related to worse underlying health rather than the drugs themselves, and numbers of events were small.This is the first study to our knowledge to use high-cost drug data on medicines supplied by hospitals at a national scale in England (to identify targeted therapies). The availability of these data fills an important gap in the medication record of those with more specialist conditions treated by hospitals creating an important opportunity to generate insights to these conditions and these medicationsImplications of all of the available evidenceOur study offers insights into future risk mitigation strategies and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination priorities for individuals with IMIDs, as it highlights that those with IMIDs and those taking rituximab may be at risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. Critically, our study does not show a link between most targeted immune modifying medications compared to standard systemics and severe COVID-19 outcomes. However, the increased risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes that we saw in people with IMIDs and those treated with rituximab merits further study.

Missing data is a common issue in research using observational studies to investigate the effect of treatments on health outcomes. When missingness occurs only in the covariates, a simple approach is to use missing indicators to handle the partially observed covariates. The missing indicator approach has been criticized for giving biased results in outcome regression. However, recent papers have suggested that the missing indicator approach can provide unbiased results in propensity score analysis under certain assumptions. We consider assumptions under which the missing indicator approach can provide valid inferences, namely, (1) no unmeasured confounding within missingness patterns; either (2a) covariate values of patients with missing data were conditionally independent of treatment or (2b) these values were conditionally independent of outcome; and (3) the outcome model is correctly specified: specifically, the true outcome model does not include interactions between missing indicators and fully observed covariates. We prove that, under the assumptions above, the missing indicator approach with outcome regression can provide unbiased estimates of the average treatment effect. We use a simulation study to investigate the extent of bias in estimates of the treatment effect when the assumptions are violated and we illustrate our findings using data from electronic health records. In conclusion, the missing indicator approach can provide valid inferences for outcome regression, but the plausibility of its assumptions must first be considered carefully.

Objective Tiotropium is a long-acting muscarinic antagonist approved for maintenance treatment of asthma in children, adolescents, and adults in the United States, and recommended as add-on treatment for uncontrolled asthma despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids and/or long-acting beta-2 agonists. This review traces the journey of tiotropium from its historical origins through early preclinical testing to human clinical trials and real-life studies. Data sources A search was performed in PubMed using search terms ‘tiotropium’ and ‘asthma.’ Relevant references cited in those articles were reviewed. Study selections English language articles published from December 2008–December 2018 were screened. Articles evaluating the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, real-life evidence, and steroid-sparing effect of tiotropium with inadequately controlled asthma were included. Results Anticholinergics have a long history of use in the treatment of obstructive airway diseases. Evidence indicates that tiotropium's mechanism of action consists of bronchodilation and diminished mucus secretion, with preclinical evidence suggesting an anti-inflammatory effect as well. Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials have demonstrated that tiotropium is efficacious and safe, resulting in significant improvements in lung function in adults, adolescents, and children across asthma severities. Emerging evidence suggests that add-on tiotropium might potentially enable reductions in inhaled corticosteroid dose in patients with uncontrolled asthma. Further, tiotropium is a cost-effective treatment option that is also effective in the clinical practice setting. Conclusions An increasing body of evidence indicates that tiotropium can play a significant role in the treatment of patients with uncontrolled asthma.

Cancer survivors have a higher risk for developing cardiovascular diseases than the general population.The aim of this study was to investigate whether cardiovascular mortality overtakes cancer-specific mortality during cancer survivorship and, if so, at what point cardiovascular disease becomes the dominant cause of death.This cohort study used linked English electronic health records, including death registration data. The study population included 104,028 adults ≥40 years of age whose first cancer diagnosis was for 1 of 9 common cancers and who were alive and followed up at least 1 year after diagnosis. Age-stratified mortality rates were estimated from cardiovascular disease or cancer by predicting from Poisson models incorporating categorical age at diagnosis and time since diagnosis. Where cardiovascular disease mortality overtook cancer mortality, the crossover point was estimated using interpolation.Mortality from cardiovascular causes overtook mortality due to the primary cancer at 2 to 11 years after cancer diagnosis in survivors of all 9 cancer types ≥80 years of age at diagnosis and after 5 to 17 years in survivors of 7 cancer types 60 to 79 years of age at diagnosis. Cardiovascular mortality overtook all cancer mortality for 6 and 2 cancer sites in the ≥80-year and 60- to 79-year age groups, respectively, over a longer time period. Cardiovascular mortality did not overtake cancer mortality during the observation period in patients aged 40 to 59 years, except among survivors of uterine cancer.In older survivors of 9 common cancers, cardiovascular mortality becomes dominant over mortality from the primary cancer, though not always over total cancer mortality, as time passes since cancer diagnosis.

AIMS: To determine whether initiation of treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ACEI/ARBs) is associated with a subsequent reduction in haemoglobin in the general population. METHODS: We undertook a national cohort study over a thirteen-year period (2004 to 2016), using routine primary healthcare data from the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We compared ACEI/ARB initiation with calcium channel blocker (CCB) initiation, to minimise confounding by indication. We included all first ACEI/ARB or CCB prescriptions in adults with at least one haemoglobin result in the 12 months before and six months after drug initiation. Our primary outcome was a ≥1g/dL haemoglobin reduction in the six months after drug initiation. RESULTS: We examined 146,610 drug initiation events in 136,655 patients. Haemoglobin fell by ≥1g/dL after drug initiation in 19.5% (16,936/86,652) of ACEI/ARB initiators and 15.9% (9,521/59,958) of CCB initiators. The adjusted odds ratio of a ≥1g/dL haemoglobin reduction in ACEI/ARB initiators vs. CCB initiators was 1.15 (95%CI 1.12-1.19). CONCLUSIONS: ACEI/ARBs are associated with a modest increase in the risk of a haemoglobin reduction. For every 100 patients in our study that initiated a CCB, 16 experienced a ≥1g/dL haemoglobin decline. If the effect is causal, three additional patients would have experienced this outcome if they had received an ACEI/ARB. This may have implications for drug choice and monitoring for many patients in primary care. Further research could identify patients at higher risk of this outcome, who may benefit from closer monitoring.

Summary Background There are concerns that the response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK might have worsened physical and mental health, and reduced use of health services. However, the scale of the problem is unquantified, impeding development of effective mitigations. We aimed to ascertain what has happened to general practice contacts for acute physical and mental health outcomes during the pandemic. Methods Using de-identified electronic health records from the Clinical Research Practice Datalink (CPRD) Aurum (covering 13% of the UK population), between 2017 and 2020, we calculated weekly primary care contacts for selected acute physical and mental health conditions: anxiety, depression, self-harm (fatal and non-fatal), severe mental illness, eating disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, acute alcohol-related events, asthma exacerbation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation, acute cardiovascular events (cerebrovascular accident, heart failure, myocardial infarction, transient ischaemic attacks, unstable angina, and venous thromboembolism), and diabetic emergency. Primary care contacts included remote and face-to-face consultations, diagnoses from hospital discharge letters, and secondary care referrals, and conditions were identified through primary care records for diagnoses, symptoms, and prescribing. Our overall study population included individuals aged 11 years or older who had at least 1 year of registration with practices contributing to CPRD Aurum in the specified period, but denominator populations varied depending on the condition being analysed. We used an interrupted time-series analysis to formally quantify changes in conditions after the introduction of population-wide restrictions (defined as March 29, 2020) compared with the period before their introduction (defined as Jan 1, 2017 to March 7, 2020), with data excluded for an adjustment-to-restrictions period (March 8–28). Findings The overall population included 9 863 903 individuals on Jan 1, 2017, and increased to 10 226 939 by Jan 1, 2020. Primary care contacts for almost all conditions dropped considerably after the introduction of population-wide restrictions. The largest reductions were observed for contacts for diabetic emergencies (odds ratio 0·35 [95% CI 0·25–0·50]), depression (0·53 [0·52–0·53]), and self-harm (0·56 [0·54–0·58]). In the interrupted time-series analysis, with the exception of acute alcohol-related events (0·98 [0·89–1·10]), there was evidence of a reduction in contacts for all conditions (anxiety 0·67 [0·66–0·67], eating disorders 0·62 [0·59–0·66], obsessive-compulsive disorder [0·69 [0·64–0·74]], self-harm 0·56 [0·54–0·58], severe mental illness 0·80 [0·78–0·83], stroke 0·59 [0·56–0·62], transient ischaemic attack 0·63 [0·58–0·67], heart failure 0·62 [0·60–0·64], myocardial infarction 0·72 [0·68–0·77], unstable angina 0·72 [0·60–0·87], venous thromboembolism 0·94 [0·90–0·99], and asthma exacerbation 0·88 [0·86–0·90]). By July, 2020, except for unstable angina and acute alcohol-related events, contacts for all conditions had not recovered to pre-lockdown levels. Interpretation There were substantial reductions in primary care contacts for acute physical and mental conditions following the introduction of restrictions, with limited recovery by July, 2020. Further research is needed to ascertain whether these reductions reflect changes in disease frequency or missed opportunities for care. Maintaining health-care access should be a key priority in future public health planning, including further restrictions. The conditions we studied are sufficiently severe that any unmet need will have substantial ramifications for the people with the conditions as well as health-care provision. Funding Wellcome Trust Senior Fellowship, Health Data Research UK.

Aim: To investigate the association between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and both all-cause and cause-specific mortality. Methods: We conducted a cohort study using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD database. We compared 733 885 new users of PPIs to 124 410 new users of H2 receptor antagonists (H2Ras). In a secondary analysis we compared 689 602 PPI new users to 1 361 245 nonusers of acid suppression therapy matched on age, sex and calendar year. Hazard ratios for all-cause and cause-specific mortality were estimated using propensity score (PS) weighted Cox models. Results: PPI prescription was associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality, with hazard ratios decreasing considerably by increasing adjustment (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.62-1.69; PS-weighted HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.33-1.44; high-dimensional PS-weighted HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.26-1.37). Short-term associations were observed with mortality from causes where a causal short-term association is unexpected (eg, lung cancer mortality: PS-weighted HR at 6 months 1.77, 95% CI 1.39-2.25). Adjusted hazard ratios were substantially higher when compared to nonusers (PS-weighted HR all-cause mortality 1.96, 95% CI 1.94-1.99) rather than H2RA users. Conclusions: PPI prescription was strongly associated with all-cause and cause-specific mortality. However, the change in hazard ratios (a) by increasing adjustment and (b) between comparator groups indicates that residual confounding is likely to explain the association between poor health outcomes and PPI use, and fully accounting for this using observational data may not be possible.

IntroductionEvidence indicates that people with the common inflammatory skin diseases atopic eczema or psoriasis are at increased risk of mental illness. However, the reasons for the relationship between skin disease and common mental disorders (ie, depression and anxiety) or severe mental illnesses (ie, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and other psychoses) are unclear. Therefore, we aim to synthesise the available evidence regarding the risk factors for mental illness in adults with atopic eczema or psoriasis.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review of randomised controlled trials, cohort, case–control and cross-sectional studies. We will search the following databases from inception to March 2020: Medline, Embase, Global Health, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Base, PsycInfo, the Global Resource of Eczema Trials, and the grey literature databases Open Grey, PsycExtra and the New York Academy of Medicine Grey Literature Report. We will also search the bibliographies of eligible studies and relevant systematic reviews to identify additional relevant studies. Citation searching of large summary papers will be used to further identify relevant publications. Two reviewers will initially review study titles and abstracts for eligibility, followed by full text screening. We will extract data using a standardised data extraction form. We will assess the risk of bias of included studies using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. We will synthesise data narratively, and if studies are sufficiently homogenous, we will consider a meta-analysis. We will assess the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for a systematic review. Results of the review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated through conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020163941.

BackgroundConcerns have been raised that the response to the UK COVID-19 pandemic may have worsened physical and mental health, and reduced use of health services. However, the scale of the problem is unquantified, impeding development of effective mitigations. We asked what has happened to general practice contacts for acute physical and mental health outcomes during the pandemic?MethodsUsing electronic health records from the Clinical Research Practice Datalink (CPRD) Aurum (2017-2020), we calculated weekly primary care contacts for selected acute physical and mental health conditions (including: anxiety, depression, acute alcohol-related events, asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] exacerbations, cardiovascular and diabetic emergencies). We used interrupted time series (ITS) analysis to formally quantify changes in conditions after the introduction of population-wide restrictions (‘lockdown’) compared to the period prior to their introduction in March 2020.FindingsThe overall population included 9,863,903 individuals on 1st January 2017. Primary care contacts for all conditions dropped dramatically after introduction of population-wide restrictions. By July 2020, except for unstable angina and acute alcohol-related events, contacts for all conditions had not recovered to pre-lockdown levels. The largest reductions were for contacts for: diabetic emergencies (OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.25-0.50), depression (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.52-0.53), and self-harm (OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.54-0.58).InterpretationThere were substantial reductions in primary care contacts for acute physical and mental conditions with restrictions, with limited recovery by July 2020. It is likely that much of the deficit in care represents unmet need, with implications for subsequent morbidity and premature mortality. The conditions we studied are sufficiently severe that any unmet need will have substantial ramifications for the people experiencing the conditions and healthcare provision. Maintaining access must be a key priority in future public health planning (including further restrictions).FundingWellcome Trust Senior Fellowship (SML), Health Data Research UK.RESULTS IN CONTEXTEvidence before this studyA small study in 47 GP practices in a largely deprived, urban area of the UK (Salford) reported that primary care consultations for four broad diagnostic groups (circulatory disease, common mental health problems, type 2 diabetes mellitus and malignant cancer) declined by 16-50% between March and May 2020, compared to what was expected based on data from January 2010 to March 2020. We searched Medline for other relevant evidence of the indirect effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on physical and mental health from inception to September 25th 2020, for articles published in English, with titles including the search terms (“covid*” or “coronavirus” or “sars-cov-2”), and title or abstracts including the search terms (“indirect impact” or “missed diagnos*” or “missing diagnos*” or “delayed diagnos*” or ((“present*” or “consult*” or “engag*” or “access*”) AND (“reduction” or “decrease” or “decline”)). We found no further studies investigating the change in primary care contacts for specific physical- and mental-health conditions indirectly resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic or its control measures. There has been a reduction in hospital admissions and presentations to accident and emergency departments in the UK, particularly for myocardial infarctions and cerebrovascular accidents. However, there is no published evidence specifically investigating the changes in primary care contacts for severe acute physical and mental health conditions.Added value of this studyTo our knowledge this is the first study to explore changes in healthcare contacts for acute physical and mental health conditions in a large population representative of the UK. We used electronic primary care health records of nearly 10 million individuals across the UK to investigate the indirect impact of COVID-19 on primary care contacts for mental health, acute alcohol-related events, asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations, and cardiovascular and diabetic emergencies up to July 2020. For all conditions studied, we found primary care contacts dropped dramatically following the introduction of population-wide restriction measures in March 2020. By July 2020, with the exception of unstable angina and acute alcohol-related events, primary care contacts for all conditions studied had not recovered to pre-lockdown levels. In the general population, estimates of the absolute reduction in the number of primary care contacts up to July 2020, compared to what we would expect from previous years varied from fewer than 10 contacts per million for some cardiovascular outcomes, to 12,800 per million for depression and 6,600 for anxiety. In people with COPD, we estimated there were 43,900 per million fewer contacts for COPD exacerbations up to July 2020 than what we would expect from previous years.Implicatins of all the available evidenceWhile our results may represent some genuine reduction in disease frequency (e.g. the restriction measures may have improved diabetic glycaemic control due to more regular daily routines at home), it is more likely the reduced primary care conatcts we saw represent a substantial burden of unmet need (particularly for mental health conditions) that may be reflected in subsequent increased mortality and morbidity. Health service providers should take steps to prepare for increased demand in the coming months and years due to the short and longterm ramifications of reduced access to care for severe acute physical and mental health conditions. Maintaining access to primary care is key to future public health planning in relation to the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Psychological stress is commonly cited as a risk factor for melanoma, but clinical evidence is limited. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the association between partner bereavement and (i) first-time melanoma diagnosis and (ii) mortality in patients with melanoma. METHODS: We conducted two cohort studies using data from the U.K. Clinical Practice Research Datalink (1997-2017) and Danish nationwide registries (1997-2016). In study 1, we compared the risk of first melanoma diagnosis in bereaved vs. matched nonbereaved people using stratified Cox regression. In study 2 we estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for death from melanoma in bereaved compared with nonbereaved individuals with melanoma using Cox regression. We estimated HRs separately for the U.K. and for Denmark, and then pooled the data to perform a random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: In study 1, the pooled adjusted HR for the association between partner bereavement and melanoma diagnosis was 0·88 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0·84-0·92] across the entire follow-up period. In study 2, we observed increased melanoma-specific mortality in people experiencing partner bereavement across the entire follow-up period (HR 1·17, 95% CI 1·06-1·30), with the peak occurring during the first year of follow-up (HR 1·31, 95% CI 1·07-1·60). CONCLUSIONS: We found decreased risk of melanoma diagnosis, but increased mortality associated with partner bereavement. These findings may be partly explained by delayed detection resulting from the loss of a partner who could notice skin changes. Stress may play a role in melanoma progression. Our findings indicate the need for a low threshold for skin examination in individuals whose partners have died. What is already known about this topic? Psychological stress has been proposed as a risk factor for the development and progression of cancer, including melanoma, but evidence is conflicting. Clinical evidence is limited by small sample sizes, potential recall bias associated with self-report, and heterogeneous stress definitions. What does this study add? We found a decreased risk of melanoma diagnosis, but increased mortality associated with partner bereavement. While stress might play a role in the progression of melanoma, an alternative explanation is that bereaved people no longer have a close person to help notice skin changes, leading to delayed melanoma detection. Linked Comment: Talaganis et al. Br J Dermatol 2020; 183:607-608.

Background The safety of restarting angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) after acute kidney injury (AKI) is unclear. There is concern that previous users do not restart ACEI/ARB despite ongoing indications. We sought to determine the risk of adverse events after an episode of AKI, comparing prior ACEI/ARB users who stop treatment to those who continue. Methods We conducted two parallel cohort studies in English and Swedish primary and secondary care, 2006–2016. We used multivariable Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios (HR) for hospital admission with heart failure (primary analysis), AKI, stroke, or death within 2 years after hospital discharge following a first AKI episode. We compared risks of admission between people who stopped ACEI/ARB treatment to those who were prescribed ACEI/ARB within 30 days of AKI discharge. We undertook sensitivity analyses, including propensity score-matched samples, to explore the robustness of our results. Results In England, we included 7303 people with AKI hospitalisation following recent ACEI/ARB therapy for the primary analysis. Four thousand three (55%) were classified as stopping ACEI/ARB based on no prescription within 30 days of discharge. In Sweden, we included 1790 people, of whom 1235 (69%) stopped treatment. In England, no differences were seen in subsequent risk of heart failure (HR 1.10; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.93–1.30), AKI (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.77–1.05), or stroke (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.71–1.38), but there was an increased risk of death (HR 1.27; 95% CI 1.15–1.41) in those who stopped ACEI/ARB compared to those who continued. Results were similar in Sweden: no differences were seen in risk of heart failure (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.73–1.13) or AKI (HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.54–1.21). However, no increased risk of death was seen (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.78–1.13) and stroke was less common in people who stopped ACEI/ARB (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.34–0.93). Results were similar across all sensitivity analyses. Conclusions Previous ACEI/ARB users who continued treatment after an episode of AKI did not have an increased risk of heart failure or subsequent AKI compared to those who stopped the drugs.

Two large matched cohort studies using health care data from England and Denmark investigate cancer risk in people with and without atopic eczema, including variation in risk associated with eczema severity and activity., Key Points Question Is atopic eczema associated with increased cancer risk? Findings In 2 large cohort studies conducted in England (471 970 and 2 239 775 individuals with and without atopic eczema, respectively) and Denmark (44 945 and 445 673 individuals with and without atopic eczema, respectively), no evidence was found of an increased risk of most cancers among people with atopic eczema compared with those without eczema. However, atopic eczema was associated with an increased risk of lymphoma, particularly non-Hodgkin lymphoma, with risk increasing with greater eczema severity. Meaning The findings in this study did not support an association between atopic eczema and most cancers; however, there was evidence of higher lymphoma risk with increasing eczema severity., Importance Associations between atopic eczema and cancer are unclear, with competing theories that increased immune surveillance decreases cancer risk and that immune stimulation increases cancer risk. Establishing baseline cancer risk in people with atopic eczema is important before exploring the association between new biologic drugs for atopic eczema and cancer risk. Objective To investigate whether atopic eczema is associated with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants Matched cohort studies were conducted from January 2, 1998, to March 31, 2016, in England and from January 1, 1982, to June 30, 2016, in Denmark. We conducted our analyses between July 2018 and July 2019. The setting was English primary care and nationwide Danish data. Participants with atopic eczema (adults only in England and any age in Denmark) were matched on age, sex, and calendar period (as well as primary care practice in England only) to those without atopic eczema. Exposure Atopic eczema. Main Outcomes and Measures Overall cancer risk and risk of specific cancers were compared in people with and without atopic eczema. Results In England, matched cohorts included 471 970 individuals with atopic eczema (median [IQR] age, 41.1 [24.9-60.7] years; 276 510 [58.6%] female) and 2 239 775 individuals without atopic eczema (median [IQR] age, 39.8 [25.9-58.4] years; 1 301 074 [58.1%] female). In Denmark, matched cohorts included 44 945 individuals with atopic eczema (median [IQR] age, 13.7 [1.7-21.1] years; 22 826 [50.8%] female) and 445 673 individuals without atopic eczema (median [IQR] age, 13.5 [1.7-20.8] years; 226 323 [50.8%] female). Little evidence was found of associations between atopic eczema and overall cancer (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.04; 99% CI, 1.02-1.06 in England and 1.05; 99% CI, 0.95-1.16 in Denmark) or for most specific cancers. However, noncutaneous lymphoma risk was increased in people with atopic eczema in England (adjusted HR, 1.19; 99% CI, 1.07-1.34 for non-Hodgkin lymphoma [NHL] and 1.48; 99% CI, 1.07-2.04 for Hodgkin lymphoma). Lymphoma risk was increased in people with greater eczema severity vs those without atopic eczema (NHL adjusted HR, 1.06; 99% CI, 0.90-1.25 for mild eczema; 1.24; 99% CI, 1.04-1.48 for moderate eczema; and 2.08; 99% CI, 1.42-3.04 for severe eczema). Danish point estimates also showed increased lymphoma risk in people with moderate to severe eczema compared with those without atopic eczema (minimally adjusted HR, 1.31; 99% CI, 0.76-2.26 for NHL and 1.35; 99% CI, 0.65-2.82 for Hodgkin lymphoma), but the 99% CIs were wide. Conclusions and Relevance The findings from 2 large population-based studies performed in different settings do not support associations between atopic eczema and most cancers. However, an association was observed between atopic eczema and lymphoma, particularly NHL, that increased with eczema severity. This finding warrants further study as new immunomodulatory systemic therapeutics are brought to market that may alter cancer risk.

Objectives: Following detection of the first virologically-confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Great Britain, an enhanced surveillance study was initiated by Public Health England to describe the clinical presentation, course of disease and identify risk factors for infection of the first few hundred cases. Methods: Information was collected on the first COVID-19 cases according to the First Few X WHO protocol. Case-control analyses of the sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of symptoms and risk factors for infection were conducted. Point prevalences of underlying health conditions among the UK general population were presented. Findings: The majority of FF100 cases were imported (51.4%), of which the majority had recent travel to Italy (71.4%). 24.7% were secondary cases acquired mainly through household contact (40.4%). Children had lower odds of COVID-19 infection compared with the general population. The clinical presentation of cases was dominated by cough, fever and fatigue. Non-linear relationships with age were observed for fever, and sensitivity and specificity of symptoms varied by age. Conditions associated with higher odds of COVID-19 infection (after adjusting for age and sex) were chronic heart disease, immunosuppression and multimorbidity. Conclusion: This study presents the first epidemiological and clinical summary of COVID-19 cases in Great Britain. The FFX study design enabled systematic data collection. The study was able to characterize the risk factors for infection with population prevalence estimates setting these relative risks into a public health context. It also provides important evidence for generating case definitions to support public health risk assessment, clinical triage and diagnostic algorithms.

Background: Mice receiving angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) drugs show increased susceptibility to infection by Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus). We sought to investigate whether humans using ACEI were at increased risk of S. aureus infection, comparing them to users of Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers (ARB) with multiple control outcomes to assess the potential for residual confounding. Methods: Using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics between 1997 and 2017, we identified adults starting ACEI or ARB (as an active comparator drug). We regarded prescription of ACEI or ARB as time-dependent exposure and used a Cox regression model to compare incidence of first hospitalisation with infection due to S. aureus in periods with ACEI to periods with ARB prescriptions. We repeated the analysis using control outcomes that we did not expect to be associated with use of ACEI versus ARB (Gram-negative sepsis, hip fracture and herpes zoster) and one that we did (dry cough). Results: We identified 445,341 new users of ACEI (mean age 64.0±14.0, male 51.7%) and 41,824 new users of ARB (mean age 64.1±14.0, male 45.5%). The fully adjusted hazard ratio for S. aureus infection (ACEI vs. ARB) was 1.18 (95% CI 1.10–1.27), consistent across sensitivity analyses. However, we also found associations with all control outcomes; rates of Gram-negative sepsis, hip fracture and dry cough were also increased during periods of time treated with ACEI compared to ARB while herpes zoster was more common during time treated with ARB. Conclusions: Our results suggest that although ARB users appear an ideal control for analyses of ACEI effects, there is residual confounding even after multivariable adjustment. This has implications for observational analyses comparing users of these drug classes, in particular the effect of these drugs in relation to COVID-19 infection.

The pathogeneses of skin diseases are not fully understood. Psychological stress has been proposed to be associated with skin diseases, but the epidemiological evidence is limited [1, 2]. We have recently reported the associations between partner bereavement (an extreme life stressor) and psoriasis, atopic eczema and melanoma [3, 4]. In this study, we further investigated whether partner bereavement was associated with urticaria, alopecia areata, or vitiligo.

BACKGROUND: Atopic eczema affects up to 10% of adults and is becoming more common globally. Few studies have assessed whether atopic eczema increases the risk of death.OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine whether adults with atopic eczema were at increased risk of death overall and by specific causes and to assess whether the risk varied by atopic eczema severity and activity.METHODS: The study was a population-based matched cohort study using UK primary care electronic health care records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink with linked hospitalization data from Hospital Episode Statistics and mortality data from the Office for National Statistics from 1998 to 2016.RESULTS: A total of 526,736 patients with atopic eczema were matched to 2,567,872 individuals without atopic eczema. The median age at entry was 41.8 years, and the median follow-up time was 4.5 years. There was limited evidence of increased hazard for all-cause mortality in those with atopic eczema (hazard ratio = 1.04; 99% CI = 1.03-1.06), but there were somewhat stronger associations (8%-14% increased hazard) for deaths due to infectious, digestive, and genitourinary causes. Differences on the absolute scale were modest owing to low overall mortality rates. Mortality risk increased markedly with eczema severity and activity. For example, patients with severe atopic eczema had a 62% increased hazard (hazard ratio = 1.62; 99% CI = 1.54-1.71) for mortality compared with those without eczema, with the strongest associations for infectious, respiratory, and genitourinary causes.CONCLUSION: The increased hazards for all-cause and cause-specific mortality were largely restricted to those with the most severe or predominantly active atopic eczema. Understanding the reasons for these increased hazards for mortality is an urgent priority.

BACKGROUND: Peanut allergy, for which there are no approved treatment options, affects patients who are at risk for unpredictable and occasionally life-threatening allergic reactions.METHODS: In a phase 3 trial, we screened participants 4 to 55 years of age with peanut allergy for allergic dose-limiting symptoms at a challenge dose of 100 mg or less of peanut protein (approximately one third of a peanut kernel) in a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. Participants with an allergic response were randomly assigned, in a 3:1 ratio, to receive AR101 (a peanut-derived investigational biologic oral immunotherapy drug) or placebo in an escalating-dose program. Participants who completed the regimen (i.e., received 300 mg per day of the maintenance regimen for approximately 24 weeks) underwent a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge at trial exit. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of participants 4 to 17 years of age who could ingest a challenge dose of 600 mg or more, without dose-limiting symptoms.RESULTS: Of the 551 participants who received AR101 or placebo, 496 were 4 to 17 years of age; of these, 250 of 372 participants (67.2%) who received active treatment, as compared with 5 of 124 participants (4.0%) who received placebo, were able to ingest a dose of 600 mg or more of peanut protein, without dose-limiting symptoms, at the exit food challenge (difference, 63.2 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 53.0 to 73.3; PCONCLUSIONS: In this phase 3 trial of oral immunotherapy in children and adolescents who were highly allergic to peanut, treatment with AR101 resulted in higher doses of peanut protein that could be ingested without dose-limiting symptoms and in lower symptom severity during peanut exposure at the exit food challenge than placebo. (Funded by Aimmune Therapeutics; PALISADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02635776 .).

Background: Evidence suggests adults with atopic eczema have increased fracture risk. However, it is unclear whether oral corticosteroids explain the association. Objective: To assess to what extent oral corticosteroids mediate the relationship between atopic eczema and fractures. Methods: We conducted a cohort study using English primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) and hospital admissions (Hospital Episode Statistics) records (1998-2016) including adults (18+) with atopic eczema matched (age, sex, and general practice) with up to five adults without atopic eczema. We used Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for specific major osteoporotic fractures (hip, spine, pelvis, wrist) and for any-site fracture comparing individuals with atopic eczema to those without, adjusting for six different definitions of time-updated oral corticosteroid use (ever any prescription, ever high dose, and recent, cumulative, current or peak dose). Results: We identified 526,808 individuals with atopic eczema and 2,569,030 without. We saw evidence of an association between atopic eczema and major osteoporotic fractures (e.g., spine HR 1.15 99%CI 1.08–1.22; hip HR 1.11 99%CI 1.08–1.15) that remained after additionally adjusting for oral corticosteroids (e.g., cumulative corticosteroid dose: spine HR 1.09 99%CI 1.03–1.16; hip HR 1.09 99%CI 1.06–1.12). Fracture rates were higher in people with severe atopic eczema compared to people without even after adjusting for oral corticosteroids (e.g., spine HR [99%CI]: confounder adjusted 2.31 [1.91–2.81]; additionally adjusted for cumulative dose 1.71 [1.40–2.09]). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that little of the association between atopic eczema and major osteoporotic fractures is explained by oral corticosteroid use.