Search

Purpose: Preclinical studies show statins inhibit pathways involved in gastric cancer progression, with observational studies demonstrating reduced gastric cancer risk in statin users. However, few studies have investigated statin use and survival in gastric cancer. We investigated statin use and survival in two large population-based gastric cancer cohorts., Methods: Patients diagnosed with gastric cancer from 1998 to 2012 were identified from English and Scottish cancer registries. Statin prescriptions were identified from linkages to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink in England and the Prescribing Information System in Scotland, and deaths identified from national mortality records. Time-dependent Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for cancer-specific mortality by statin use in multivariate analysis. Meta-analysis techniques pooled results across the cohorts., Results: The combined cohorts contained 3833 patients with gastric cancer and 2392 cancer-specific deaths. Statin use after diagnosis was associated with reduced cancer-specific mortality (adjusted HR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.92). HRs for less than 1 year and over 1 year of statin use were similar (adjusted HR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73-0.94 and adjusted HR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64-1.01, respectively). Statin use prior to diagnosis was also associated with reduced cancer-specific mortality (adjusted HR 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.98)., Conclusions: In two independent UK cohorts, there was some evidence that statin use was associated with reduced cancer-specific mortality. However, these associations were weak in magnitude and did not follow a clear dose response, and we cannot rule out confounding by stage., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Excessive lower oesophageal sphincter relaxation increases gastro-oesophageal acid reflux, an oesophageal adenocarcinoma risk factor. Medications that relax this sphincter (benzodiazepines, calcium channel blockers, nitrates, β2 agonists and xanthines) could promote cancer. These medications were investigated in two independent datasets. In the Scottish Primary Care Clinical Informatics Unit (PCCIU) database, a nested case-control study of oesophageal cancer was performed using GP prescription records. Conditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for medication use and oesophageal cancer. In UK Biobank, a cohort study was conducted using self-reported medication use. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for medication use and oesophageal cancer, and by tumour subtype. Overall, 1,979 oesophageal cancer patients were matched to 9,543 controls in PCCIU, and 355 of 475,768 participants developed oesophageal cancer in UK Biobank. None of the medications investigated were significantly associated with oesophageal cancer risk apart from β2 agonists, which were associated with increased oesophageal cancer risk in PCCIU (adjusted OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.12, 1.70) but not in UK Biobank (adjusted HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.70, 2.08). Medications that relax the lower oesophageal sphincter were not associated with oesophageal cancer, apart from β2 agonists. This increased cancer risk in β2 agonist users merits further investigation., (© 2018 UICC.)

Objective: We report the uptake, length of stay and vascular readmission rates of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and CAS among patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid artery disease in the English National Health Service (NHS)., Methods: Retrospective cohort study based on routinely collected Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) inpatient data. We identified individual admissions for CEA (n = 15996) or CAS (n = 632) between 2006 and 2009. Summary data were used to describe procedure volumes between 2009 and 2012. We analysed trends in procedure use over time and used ordinary least squares regression to evaluate patient, clinical and organisational characteristics associated with longer length of stay for revascularisation., Results: CAS made up less than 5% of carotid revascularisation procedures; there was no trend for increasing use between 2006 and 2012. Patients treated with CAS were on average younger, lived in areas of higher deprivation and were more likely to have amaurosis fugax or a comorbidity of heart disease. CAS patients had a 19% (95% CI 14-24) shorter stay in hospital than CEA patients., Conclusion: Despite the early promise of CAS and numerous randomised controlled trials evaluating efficacy, it has not been rapidly adopted in England. Cautious adoption may be appropriate given the higher periprocedural risk of stroke or death after CAS, particularly in recently symptomatic patients., (Copyright © 2013 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Laboratory tests are extensively used for diagnosis and monitoring in UK primary care. Test usage by GPs, and associated costs, have grown substantially in recent years., Aim: This study aimed to quantify temporal growth and geographic variation in utilisation of laboratory tests., Design and Setting: Retrospective cohort study using data from general practices in the UK., Method: Data from the General Practice Research Database, including patient demographics, clinical details, and laboratory test results, were used to estimate rates of change in utilisation between 2005 and 2009, and identify tests with greatest inter-regional variation, by fitting random-effects Poisson regression models. The study also investigated indications for test requests, using diagnoses and symptoms recorded in the 2 weeks before each test., Results: Around 660 000 tests were recorded in 230 000 person-years of follow-up. Test use increased by 24.2%, from 23 872 to 29 644 tests per 10 000 person-years, between 2005 and 2009. Tests with the largest increases were faecal occult blood (121%) and C-reactive protein (86%). There was substantial geographic variation in test utilisation; GPs in some regions requested tests such as plasma viscosity and cardiac enzymes at a rate more than three times the national average., Conclusion: Increases in the use of laboratory tests have substantial resource implications. Rapid increases in particular tests may be supported by evidence-based guidelines, but these are often vague about who should be tested, how often, and for how long. Substantial regional variation in test use may reflect uncertainty about diagnostic accuracy and appropriate indications for the laboratory test. There is a need for further research on the diagnostic accuracy, therapeutic impact, and effect on patient health outcomes of the most rapidly increasing and geographically variable tests.

Background: As a result of long delays for physiotherapy for musculoskeletal problems, several areas in the UK have introduced PhysioDirect services in which patients telephone a physiotherapist for initial assessment and treatment advice. However, there is no robust evidence about the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness or acceptability to patients of PhysioDirect., Objective: To investigate whether or not PhysioDirect is equally as clinically effective as and more cost-effective than usual care for patients with musculoskeletal (MSK) problems in primary care., Design: Pragmatic randomised controlled trial to assess equivalence, incorporating economic evaluation and nested qualitative research. Patients were randomised in 2 : 1 ratio to PhysioDirect or usual care using a remote automated allocation system at the level of the individual, stratifying by physiotherapy site and minimising by sex, age group and site of MSK problem. For the economic analysis, cost consequences included NHS and patient costs, and the cost of lost production. Cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out from the perspective of the NHS. Interviews were conducted with patients, physiotherapists and their managers., Setting: Four community physiotherapy services in England., Participants: Adults referred by general practitioners or self-referred for physiotherapy for a MSK problem., Interventions: Patients allocated to PhysioDirect were invited to telephone a senior physiotherapist for initial assessment and advice using a computerised template, followed by face-to-face care when necessary. Patients allocated to usual care were put on to a waiting list for face-to-face care., Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome was the Short Form questionnaire-36 items, version 2 (SF-36v2) Physical Component Score (PCS) at 6 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes included other measures of health outcome [Measure Yourself Medical Outcomes Profile, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EuroQol health utility measure, EQ-5D), global improvement, response to treatment], wait for treatment, time lost from work and usual activities, patient satisfaction. Data were collected by postal questionnaires at baseline, 6 weeks and 6 months, and from routine records by researchers blind to allocation., Results: A total of 1506 patients were allocated to PhysioDirect and 743 to usual care. Patients allocated to PhysioDirect had a shorter wait for treatment than those allocated to usual care [median 7 days vs 34 days; arm-time ratio 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.35] and had fewer non-attended face-to-face appointments [incidence rate ratio 0.55 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.73)]. The primary outcome at 6 months' follow-up was equivalent between PhysioDirect and usual care [mean PCS 43.50 vs 44.18, adjusted difference in means -0.01 (95% CI -0.80 to 0.79)]. The secondary measures of health outcome all demonstrated equivalence at 6 months, with slightly greater improvement in the PhysioDirect arm at 6 weeks' follow-up. Patients were equally satisfied with access to care but slightly less satisfied overall with PhysioDirect compared with usual care. NHS costs (physiotherapy plus other relevant NHS costs) per patient were similar in the two arms [PhysioDirect £ 198.98 vs usual care £ 179.68, difference in means £ 19.30 (95% CI -£ 37.60 to £ 76.19)], while QALYs gained were also similar [difference in means 0.007 (95% CI -0.003 to 0.016)]. Incremental cost per QALY gained was £ 2889. The probability that PhysioDirect was cost-effective at a £ 20,000 willingness-to-pay threshold was 88%. These conclusions about cost-effectiveness were robust to sensitivity analyses. There was no evidence of difference between trial arms in cost to patients or value of lost production. No adverse events were detected., Conclusions: Providing physiotherapy via PhysioDirect is equally clinically effective compared with usual waiting list-based care, provides faster access to treatment, appears to be safe, and is broadly acceptable to patients. PhysioDirect is probably cost-effective compared with usual care.