Preferences of people living with HIV for features of tuberculosis preventive treatment regimens - a discrete choice experiment

Background

Tuberculosis (TB) preventive treatment (TPT) is recommended for people living with HIV (PLHIV) in high TB burden settings. While 6 months of daily isoniazid remains widely used, shorter regimens are now available. However, little is known about preferences of PLHIV for key features of TPT regimens.

Methods

We conducted a discrete choice experiment among adult PLHIV engaged in care at an urban HIV clinic in Kampala, Uganda. In nine random choice tasks, participants chose between two hypothetical TPT regimens with different features (pills per dose, frequency, duration, need for adjusted antiretroviral therapy [ART] dosage and side effects). We analyzed preferences using hierarchical Bayesian estimation, latent class analysis, and willingness-to-trade simulations.

Results

Of 400 PLHIV, 392 (median age 44, 72% female, 91% TPT-experienced) had high quality choice task responses. Pills per dose was the most important attribute (relative importance 32.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 31.6 - 33.2), followed by frequency (20.5% [95% CI 19.7 - 21.3]), duration (19.5% [95% CI 18.6 - 20.5]), and need for ART dosage adjustment (18.2% [95% CI 17.2 - 19.2]). Latent class analysis identified three preference groups: one prioritized less frequent, weekly dosing (N=222; 57%); another was averse to ART dosage adjustment (N=107; 27%); and the last prioritized short and tolerable regimens (N=63; 16%). All groups highly valued fewer pills per dose. Participants were willing to accept a regimen of 2.8 months' additional duration [95% CI: 2.4 - 3.2] to reduce pills per dose from five to one, 3.6 [95% CI 2.4 - 4.8] months for weekly rather than daily dosing, and 2.2 [95% CI 1.3 - 3.0] months to avoid ART dosage adjustment.

Conclusions

To align with preferences of PLHIV, decision-makers should prioritize the development and implementation of TPT regimens with fewer pills, less frequent dosing, and no need for ART dosage adjustment, rather than focus primarily on duration of treatment.

Excess Mortality With Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias as an Underlying or Contributing Cause During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the US

Importance

Adults with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) are particularly vulnerable to the direct and indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Deaths associated with ADRD increased substantially in pandemic year 1. It is unclear whether mortality associated with ADRD declined when better prevention strategies, testing, and vaccines became widely available in year 2.

Objective

To compare pandemic-era excess deaths associated with ADRD between year 1 and year 2 overall and by age, sex, race and ethnicity, and place of death.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This time series analysis used all death certificates of US decedents 65 years and older with ADRD as an underlying or contributing cause of death from January 2014 through February 2022.

Exposure

COVID-19 pandemic era.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Pandemic-era excess deaths associated with ADRD were defined as the difference between deaths with ADRD as an underlying or contributing cause observed from March 2020 to February 2021 (year 1) and March 2021 to February 2022 (year 2) compared with expected deaths during this period. Expected deaths were estimated using data from January 2014 to February 2020 fitted with autoregressive integrated moving average models.

Results

Overall, 2 334 101 death certificates were analyzed. A total of 94 688 (95% prediction interval [PI], 84 192-104 890) pandemic-era excess deaths with ADRD were estimated in year 1 and 21 586 (95% PI, 10 631-32 450) in year 2. Declines in ADRD-related deaths in year 2 were substantial for every age, sex, and racial and ethnic group evaluated. Pandemic-era ADRD-related excess deaths declined among nursing home/long-term care residents (from 34 259 [95% PI, 25 819-42 677] in year 1 to -22 050 [95% PI, -30 765 to -13 273] in year 2), but excess deaths at home remained high (from 34 487 [95% PI, 32 815-36 142] in year 1 to 28 804 [95% PI, 27 067-30 571] in year 2).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that large increases in mortality with ADRD as an underlying or contributing cause of death occurred in COVID-19 pandemic year 1 but were largely mitigated in pandemic year 2. The most pronounced declines were observed for deaths in nursing home/long-term care settings. Conversely, excess deaths at home and in medical facilities remained high in year 2.

Recovery and symptom trajectories up to two years after SARS-CoV-2 infection: population based, longitudinal cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate longer term symptoms and health outcomes associated with post-covid-19 condition within a cohort of individuals with a SARS-CoV-2 infection.

DESIGN

Population based, longitudinal cohort.

SETTING

General population of canton of Zurich, Switzerland.

PARTICIPANTS

1106 adults with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who were not vaccinated before infection and 628 adults who did not have an infection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Trajectories of self-reported health status and covid-19 related symptoms between months six, 12, 18, and 24 after infection and excess risk of symptoms at six months after infection compared with individuals who had no infection.

RESULTS

22.9% (95% confidence interval 20.4% to 25.6%) of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 did not fully recover by six months. The proportion of individuals who had an infection who reported not having recovered decreased to 18.5% (16.2% to 21.1%) at 12 months and 17.2% (14.0% to 20.8%) at 24 months after infection. When assessing changes in self-reported health status, most participants had continued recovery (68.4% (63.8% to 72.6%)) or had an overall improvement (13.5% (10.6% to 17.2%)) over time. Yet, 5.2% (3.5% to 7.7%) had a worsening in health status and 4.4% (2.9% to 6.7%) had alternating periods of recovery and health impairment. The point prevalence and severity of covid-19 related symptoms also decreased over time, with 18.1% (14.8% to 21.9%) reporting symptoms at 24 months. 8.9% (6.5% to 11.2%) of participants reported symptoms at all four follow-up time points, while in 12.5% (9.8% to 15.9%) symptoms were alternatingly absent and present. Symptom prevalence was higher among individuals who were infected compared with those who were not at six months (adjusted risk difference 17.0% (11.5% to 22.4%)). Excess risk (adjusted risk difference) for individual symptoms among those infected ranged from 2% to 10%, with the highest excess risks observed for altered taste or smell (9.8% (7.7% to 11.8%)), post-exertional malaise (9.4% (6.1% to 12.7%)), fatigue (5.4% (1.2% to 9.5%)), dyspnoea (7.8% (5.2% to 10.4%)), and reduced concentration (8.3% (6.0% to 10.7%)) and memory (5.7% (3.5% to 7.9%)).

CONCLUSIONS

Up to 18% of individuals who were not vaccinated before infection had post-covid-19 condition up to two years after infection, with evidence of excess symptom risk compared with controls. Effective interventions are needed to reduce the burden of post-covid-19 condition. Use of multiple outcome measures and consideration of the expected rates of recovery and heterogeneity in symptom trajectories are important in the design and interpretation of clinical trials.

REGISTRATIONS

ISRCTN18181860, .

Best-worst scaling preferences among patients with well-controlled epilepsy: Pilot results

Epilepsy is a common, serious condition. Fortunately, seizure risk decreases with increasing seizure-free time on antiseizure medications (ASMs). Eventually, patients may consider whether to stop ASMs, which requires weighing treatment benefit versus burden. We developed a questionnaire to quantify patient preferences relevant to ASM decision-making. Respondents rated how concerning they would finding relevant items (e.g., seizure risks, side effects, cost) on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS, 0-100) and then repeatedly chose the most and least concerning item from subsets (best-worst scaling, BWS). We pretested with neurologists, then recruited adults with epilepsy who were seizure-free at least one year. Primary outcomes were recruitment rate, and qualitative and Likert-based feedback. Secondary outcomes included VAS ratings and best-minus-worst scores. Thirty-one of 60 (52%) contacted patients completed the study. Most patients felt VAS questions were clear (28; 90%), easy to use (27; 87%), and assessed preferences well (25; 83%). Corresponding results for BWS questions were 27 (87%), 29 (97%), and 23 (77%). Physicians suggested adding a 'warmup' question showing a completed example and simplifying terminology. Patients suggested ways to clarify instructions. Cost, inconvenience of taking medication, and laboratory monitoring were the least concerning items. Cognitive side effects and a 50% seizure risk in the next year were the most concerning items. Twelve (39%) of patients made at least one 'inconsistent choice' for example ranking a higher seizure risk as lower concern compared with a lower seizure risk, though 'inconsistent choices' represented only 3% of all question blocks. Our recruitment rate was favorable, most patients agreed the survey was clear, and we describe areas for improvement. 'Inconsistent' responses may lead us to collapse seizure probability items into a single 'seizure' category. Evidence regarding how patients weigh benefits and harms may inform care and guideline development.

Dynamics of racial disparities in all-cause mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic

As research documenting disparate impacts of COVID-19 by race and ethnicity grows, little attention has been given to dynamics in mortality disparities during the pandemic and whether changes in disparities persist. We estimate age-standardized monthly all-cause mortality in the United States from January 2018 through February 2022 for seven racial/ethnic populations. Using joinpoint regression, we quantify trends in race-specific rate ratios relative to non-Hispanic White mortality to examine the magnitude of pandemic-related shifts in mortality disparities. Prepandemic disparities were stable from January 2018 through February 2020. With the start of the pandemic, relative mortality disadvantages increased for American Indian or Alaska Native (AIAN), Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (NHOPI), and Black individuals, and relative mortality advantages decreased for Asian and Hispanic groups. Rate ratios generally increased during COVID-19 surges, with different patterns in the summer 2021 and winter 2021/2022 surges, when disparities approached prepandemic levels for Asian and Black individuals. However, two populations below age 65 fared worse than White individuals during these surges. For AIAN people, the observed rate ratio reached 2.25 (95% CI = 2.14, 2.37) in October 2021 vs. a prepandemic mean of 1.74 (95% CI = 1.62, 1.86), and for NHOPI people, the observed rate ratio reached 2.12 (95% CI = 1.92, 2.33) in August 2021 vs. a prepandemic mean of 1.31 (95% CI = 1.13, 1.49). Our results highlight the dynamic nature of racial/ethnic disparities in mortality and raise alarm about the exacerbation of mortality inequities for Indigenous groups due to the pandemic.

COVID-19 mortality and excess mortality among working-age residents in California, USA, by occupational sector: a longitudinal cohort analysis of mortality surveillance data

BACKGROUND

During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, workers in essential sectors had higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 mortality than those in non-essential sectors. It is unknown whether disparities in pandemic-related mortality across occupational sectors have continued to occur during the periods of SARS-CoV-2 variants and vaccine availability.

METHODS

In this longitudinal cohort study, we obtained data from the California Department of Public Health on all deaths occurring in the state of California, USA, from Jan 1, 2016, to Dec 31, 2021. We restricted our analysis to residents of California who were aged 18-65 years at time of death and died of natural causes. We classified the occupational sector into nine essential sectors; non-essential; or unemployed or without an occupation provided on the death certificate. We calculated the number of COVID-19 deaths in total and per capita that occurred in each occupational sector. Separately, using autoregressive integrated moving average models, we estimated total, per-capita, and relative excess natural-cause mortality by week between March 1, 2020, and Nov 30, 2021, stratifying by occupational sector. We additionally stratified analyses of occupational risk into counties with high versus low vaccine uptake, categorising high-uptake regions as counties where at least 50% of the population were fully vaccinated according to US guidelines by Aug 1, 2021.

FINDINGS

From March 1, 2020, to Nov 30, 2021, 24 799 COVID-19 deaths were reported in residents of California aged 18-65 years and an estimated 28 751 (95% prediction interval 27 853-29 653) excess deaths. People working in essential sectors were associated with higher COVID-19 deaths and excess deaths than were those working in non-essential sectors, with the highest per-capita COVID-19 mortality in the agriculture (131·8 per 100 000 people), transportation or logistics (107·1 per 100 000), manufacturing (103·3 per 100 000), facilities (101·1 per 100 000), and emergency (87·8 per 100 000) sectors. Disparities were wider during periods of increased infections, including during the Nov 29, 2020, to Feb 27, 2021, surge in infections, which was driven by the delta variant (B.1.617.2) and occurred during vaccine uptake. During the June 27 to Nov 27, 2021 surge, emergency workers had higher COVID-19 mortality (113·7 per 100 000) than workers from any other sector. Workers in essential sectors had the highest COVID-19 mortality in counties with low vaccination uptake, a difference that was more pronounced during the period of the delta infection surge during Nov 29, 2020, to Feb 27, 2021.

INTERPRETATION

Workers in essential sectors have continued to bear the brunt of high COVID-19 and excess mortality throughout the pandemic, particularly in the agriculture, emergency, manufacturing, facilities, and transportation or logistics sectors. This high death toll has continued during periods of vaccine availability and the delta surge. In an ongoing pandemic without widespread vaccine coverage and with anticipated threats of new variants, the USA must actively adopt policies to more adequately protect workers in essential sectors.

FUNDING

US National Institute on Aging, Swiss National Science Foundation, and US National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Heterogenous humoral and cellular immune responses with distinct trajectories post-SARS-CoV-2 infection in a population-based cohort

To better understand the development of SARS-CoV-2-specific immunity over time, a detailed evaluation of humoral and cellular responses is required. Here, we characterize anti-Spike (S) IgA and IgG in a representative population-based cohort of 431 SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals up to 217 days after diagnosis, demonstrating that 85% develop and maintain anti-S responses. In a subsample of 64 participants, we further assess anti-Nucleocapsid (N) IgG, neutralizing antibody activity, and T cell responses to Membrane (M), N, and S proteins. In contrast to S-specific antibody responses, anti-N IgG levels decline substantially over time and neutralizing activity toward Delta and Omicron variants is low to non-existent within just weeks of Wildtype SARS-CoV-2 infection. Virus-specific T cells are detectable in most participants, albeit more variable than antibody responses. Cluster analyses of the co-evolution of antibody and T cell responses within individuals identify five distinct trajectories characterized by specific immune patterns and clinical factors. These findings demonstrate the relevant heterogeneity in humoral and cellular immunity to SARS-CoV-2 while also identifying consistent patterns where antibody and T cell responses may work in a compensatory manner to provide protection.

The persistence of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 after recovery from infection is an indicator for subsequent protection against infection. Here the authors follow recovered patients and measure antibody and T cell responses and find that these two parts of the immune response may have different longevity.

Fingolimod versus interferon beta 1-a: Benefit–harm assessment approach based on TRANSFORMS individual patient data

Background

Fingolimod is a disease-modifying drug approved for multiple sclerosis but its benefit–harm balance has never been assessed compared to other active treatments.

Objectives

Our aim was to compare the benefits and harms of fingolimod with interferon beta-1a using individual patient data from TRial Assessing injectable interferon versus FTY720 Oral in RRMS trial.

Methods

We modelled the health status of patients over time including Expanded Disability Status Scale measurements, relapses and any adverse events. We assessed the mean health status between arms and the proportion of patients whose health deteriorated or improved relatively to baseline, using a prespecified minimal important difference of 4.6. We performed sensitivity analyses to test our assumptions.

Results

Main and sensitivity analyses favoured fingolimod 0.5 mg over interferon beta-1a. The average health status difference was 1.01 (95% CI 0.93–1.08). Patients on fingolimod 0.5 mg were 0.47 (95% CI: 0.35–0.63, p < 0.001) times less likely to experience a relevant decline in health status compared to interferon beta-1a patients, with a number needed to treat of 7.10 [5.18, 11.23].

Conclusions

Fingolimod's net benefit over interferon beta-1a did not reach the clinical relevance over 1 year, but the decreased risk for health status deterioration may be more pronounced more long term and patients may prefer less treatment burden associated with fingolimod. [Formula: see text]

Excess natural-cause deaths in California by cause and setting: March 2020 through February 2021

Excess mortality has exceeded reported deaths from Covid-19 during the pandemic. This gap may be attributable to deaths that occurred among individuals with undiagnosed Covid-19 infections or indirect consequences of the pandemic response such as interruptions in medical care; distinguishing these possibilities has implications for public health responses. In the present study, we examined patterns of excess mortality over time and by setting (in-hospital or out-of-hospital) and cause of death using death certificate data from California. The estimated number of excess natural-cause deaths from 2020 March 1 to 2021 February 28 (69,182) exceeded the number of Covid-19 diagnosed deaths (53,667) by 29%. Nearly half, 47.4% (32,775), of excess natural-cause deaths occurred out of the hospital, where only 28.6% (9,366) of excess mortality was attributed to Covid-19. Over time, increases or decreases in excess natural non-Covid-19 mortality closely mirrored increases or decreases in Covid-19 mortality. The time series were positively correlated in out-of-hospital settings, particularly at time lags when excess natural-cause deaths preceded reported Covid-19 deaths; for example, when comparing Covid-19 deaths to excess natural-cause deaths in the week prior, the correlation was 0.73. The strong temporal association of reported Covid-19 deaths with excess out-of-hospital deaths from other reported natural-cause causes suggests Covid-19 deaths were undercounted during the first year of the pandemic.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Estimated Excess Mortality From External Causes in the US, March to December 2020

This cross-sectional study examines racial and ethnic disparities in estimated excess deaths from homicide, suicide, transportation, and drug overdoses during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Individual-level Evaluation of the Exposure Notification Cascade in the SwissCovid Digital Proximity Tracing App: An Observational Study

Background

Digital proximity tracing (DPT) aims to complement manual contact tracing (MCT) in identifying exposed contacts and preventing further transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the population. Although several DPT apps, including SwissCovid, have shown to have promising effects on mitigating the pandemic, several challenges have impeded them from fully achieving the desired results. A key question now relates to how the effectiveness of DPT can be improved, which requires a better understanding of factors influencing its processes.

Objective

In this study, we aim to provide a detailed examination of the exposure notification (EN) cascade and to evaluate potential contextual influences for successful receipt of an EN and subsequent actions taken by cases and contacts in different exposure settings.

Methods

We used data from 285 pairs of SARS-CoV-2-infected cases and their contacts within an observational cohort study of cases and contacts identified by MCT and enrolled between August 6, 2020, and January 17, 2021, in the canton of Zurich, Switzerland. We surveyed participants with electronic questionnaires. Data were summarized descriptively and stratified by exposure setting.

Results

We found that only 79 (58.5%) of 135 contacts using the SwissCovid app whose corresponding cases reported to have triggered the EN also received one. Of these, 18 (22.8%) received the EN before MCT. Compared to those receiving an EN after MCT (61/79, 77.2%), we observed that a higher proportion of contacts receiving an EN before MCT were exposed in nonhousehold settings (11/18, 61.1%, vs 34/61, 55.7%) and their corresponding cases had more frequently reported mild-to-moderate symptoms (14/18, 77.8%, vs 42/61, 68.9%). Of the 18 contacts receiving an EN before MCT, 14 (77.8%) took recommended measures: 12 (66.7%) were tested for SARS-CoV-2, and 7 (38.9%) called the SwissCovid Infoline. In nonhousehold settings, the proportion of contacts taking preventive actions after receiving an EN was higher compared to same-household settings (82%, vs 67%). In addition, 1 (9%) of 11 ENs received in the nonhousehold setting before MCT led to the identification of a SARS-CoV-2-infected case by prompting the contact to get tested. This corresponds to 1 in 85 exposures of a contact to a case in a nonhousehold setting, in which both were app users and the case triggered the EN.

Conclusions

Our descriptive evaluation of the DPT notification cascade provides further evidence that DPT is an important complementary tool in pandemic mitigation, especially in nonhousehold exposure settings. However, the effect of DPT apps can only be exerted if code generation processes are efficient and exposed contacts are willing to undertake preventive actions. This highlights the need to focus efforts on keeping barriers to efficient code generation as low as possible and promoting not only app adoption but also compliance with the recommended measures upon an EN.

Trial Registration

International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry 14990068; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN14990068

Mental health of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 during mandated isolation and compliance with recommendations—A population-based cohort study

Background

Isolation is an indispensable measure to contain the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but it may have a negative impact on mental health and overall wellbeing. Evidence on the isolation experience, facilitating and complicating factors is needed to mitigate negative effects.

Methods and findings

This observational, population-based cohort study enrolled 1547 adults from the general population with SARS-CoV-2 infection reported to authorities between 27 February 2020 and 19 January 2021 in Zurich, Switzerland. We assessed the proportion of individuals reporting symptoms of depression and anxiety before, during and after isolation (by DASS-21), and queried worries, positive experiences, and difficulties. We analyzed the association of these outcomes with socio-demographics using ordinal regression. Additionally, we report free-text statements by participants to capture most important aspects of isolation. The proportion of participants affected by depression or anxiety increased during isolation from 10·0% to 17·1% and 9·1% to 17·6%, respectively. Ordinal regression showed that taking care of children increased the difficulty of isolation (OR 2·10, CI 1·43–3·08) and risk of non-compliance (OR 1·63, CI 1·05–2·53), especially in younger participants. A facilitating factor that individuals commonly expressed was receiving more support during isolation.

Conclusion

Isolation due to SARS-CoV-2 presents a mental burden, especially for younger individuals and those taking care of children. Public health authorities need to train personnel and draw from community-based resources to provide targeted support, information, and guidance to individuals during isolation. Such efforts could alleviate the negative impact isolation has on the mental and physical health of individuals and ensure compliance of the population with recommendations.

Adherence and Association of Digital Proximity Tracing App Notifications With Earlier Time to Quarantine: Results From the Zurich SARS-CoV-2 Cohort Study

Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the SwissCovid digital proximity tracing (DPT) app in notifying exposed individuals and prompting them to quarantine earlier compared to individuals notified only by manual contact tracing (MCT). Methods: A population-based sample of cases and close contacts from the Zurich SARS-CoV-2 Cohort was surveyed regarding SwissCovid app use and SARS-CoV-2 exposure. We descriptively analyzed app adherence and effectiveness, and evaluated its effects on the time between exposure and quarantine among contacts using stratified multivariable time-to-event analyses. Results: We included 393 SARS-CoV-2 infected cases and 261 close contacts. 62% of cases reported using SwissCovid and among those, 88% received and uploaded a notification code. 71% of close contacts were app users, of which 38% received a warning. Non-household contacts notified by SwissCovid started quarantine 1 day earlier and were more likely to quarantine earlier than those not warned by the app (HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.15-2.03). Conclusion: These findings provide evidence that DPT may reach exposed contacts faster than MCT, with earlier quarantine and potential interruption of SARS-CoV-2 transmission chains.

Burden of post-COVID-19 syndrome and implications for healthcare service planning: A population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Longer-term consequences after SARS-CoV-2 infection are becoming an important burden to societies and healthcare systems. Data on post-COVID-19 syndrome in the general population are required for the timely planning of healthcare services and resources. The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of impaired health status and physical and mental health symptoms among individuals at least six months after SARS-CoV-2 infection, and to characterize their healthcare utilization.

METHODS

This population-based prospective cohort study (Zurich SARS-CoV-2 Cohort) enrolled 431 adults from the general population with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection reported to health authorities between 27 February 2020 and 05 August 2020 in the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland. We evaluated the proportion of individuals reporting not to have fully recovered since SARS-CoV-2 infection, and the proportion reporting fatigue (Fatigue Assessment Scale), dyspnea (mMRC dyspnea scale) or depression (DASS-21) at six to eight months after diagnosis. Furthermore, the proportion of individuals with at least one healthcare contact after their acute illness was evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess factors associated with these main outcomes.

RESULTS

Symptoms were present in 385 (89%) participants at diagnosis and 81 (19%) were initially hospitalized. At six to eight months, 111 (26%) reported not having fully recovered. 233 (55%) participants reported symptoms of fatigue, 96 (25%) had at least grade 1 dyspnea, and 111 (26%) had DASS-21 scores indicating symptoms of depression. 170 (40%) participants reported at least one general practitioner visit related to COVID-19 after acute illness, and 10% (8/81) of initially hospitalized individuals were rehospitalized. Individuals that have not fully recovered or suffer from fatigue, dyspnea or depression were more likely to have further healthcare contacts. However, a third of individuals (37/111) that have not fully recovered did not seek further care.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based study, a relevant proportion of participants suffered from longer-term consequences after SARS-CoV-2 infection. With millions infected across the world, our findings emphasize the need for the timely planning of resources and patient-centered services for post-COVID-19 care.

A Data-Driven Simulation of the Exposure Notification Cascade for Digital Contact Tracing of SARS-CoV-2 in Zurich, Switzerland

Importance

Digital contact tracing (DCT) apps have been released in several countries to help interrupt SARS-CoV-2 transmission chains. However, the effect of DCT on pandemic mitigation remains to be demonstrated.

Objective

To estimate key populations and performance indicators along the exposure notification cascade of the SwissCovid DCT app in a clearly defined regional and temporal context.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This comparative effectiveness study was based on a simulation informed by measured data from issued quarantine recommendations and positive SARS-CoV-2 test results after DCT exposure notifications in the canton of Zurich. A stochastic model was developed to re-create the DCT notification cascade for Zurich. Population sizes at each cascade step were estimated using triangulation based on publicly available administrative and observational research data for the study duration from September 1 to October 31, 2020. The resultant estimates were checked for internal consistency and consistency with upstream or downstream estimates in the cascade. Stochastic sampling from data-informed parameter distributions was performed to explore the robustness of results. Subsequently, key performance indicators were evaluated to assess the potential contribution of DCT compared with manual contact tracing.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Receiving a voluntary quarantine recommendation and/or a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result after exposure notification.

Results

In September 2020, 537 app users received a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result in Zurich, 324 of whom received and entered an upload authorization code. This code triggered an app notification for an estimated 1374 (95% simulation interval [SI], 932-2586) proximity contacts and led to 722 information hotline calls, with an estimated 170 callers (95% SI, 154-186) receiving a quarantine recommendation. An estimated 939 (95% SI, 720-1127) notified app users underwent testing for SARS-CoV-2, of whom 30 (95% SI, 23-36) had positive results after an app notification. Key indicator evaluations revealed that the DCT app triggered quarantine recommendations for the equivalent of 5% of all exposed contacts placed in quarantine by manual contact tracing. For every 10.9 (95% SI, 7.6-15.6) upload authorization codes entered in the app, 1 contact had positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 after app notification. Longitudinal indicator analyses demonstrated bottlenecks in the notification cascade, because capacity limits were reached owing to an increased incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in October 2020.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this simulation study of the notification cascade of the SwissCovid DCT app, receipt of exposure notifications was associated with quarantine recommendations and identification of SARS-CoV-2-positive cases. These findings in notified proximity contacts reflect important intermediary steps toward transmission prevention.

Global variation of risk thresholds for initiating statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a benefit-harm balance modelling study

Background

We previously showed that the 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk threshold to initiate statins for primary prevention depends on the baseline CVD risk, age, sex, and the incidence of statin-related harm outcome and competing risk for non-CVD death. As these factors appear to vary across countries, we aimed in this study to determine country-specific thresholds and provide guidelines a quantitative benefit-harm assessment method for local adaptation.

Methods

For each of the 186 countries included, we replicated the benefit-harm balance analysis using an exponential model to determine the thresholds to initiate statin use for populations aged 40 to 75 years, with no history of CVD. The analyses took data inputs from a priori studies, including statin effect estimates (network meta-analysis), patient preferences (survey), and baseline incidence of harm outcomes and competing risk for non-CVD (global burden of disease study). We estimated the risk thresholds above which the benefits of statins were more likely to outweigh the harms using a stochastic approach to account for statistical uncertainty of the input parameters.

Results

The 5^th and 95^th percentiles of the 10-year risk thresholds above which the benefits of statins outweigh the harms across 186 countries ranged between 14 and 20% in men and 19–24% in women, depending on age (i.e., 90% of the country-specific thresholds were in the ranges stated). The median risk thresholds varied from 14 to 18.5% in men and 19 to 22% in women. The between-country variability of the thresholds was slightly attenuated when further adjusted for age resulting, for example, in a 5^th and 95^th percentiles of 14–16% for ages 40–44 years and 17–21% for ages 70–74 years in men. Some countries, especially the islands of the Western Pacific Region, had higher thresholds to achieve net benefit of statins at 25–36% 10-year CVD risks.

Conclusions

This extensive benefit-harm analysis modeling shows that a single CVD risk threshold, irrespective of age, sex and country, is not appropriate to initiate statin use globally. Instead, countries need to carefully determine thresholds, considering the national or subnational contexts, to optimize benefits of statins while minimizing related harms and economic burden.

Informing Patient-Centered Care Through Stakeholder Engagement and Highly Stratified Quantitative Benefit-Harm Assessments

OBJECTIVES

In a previous project aimed at informing patient-centered care for people with multiple chronic conditions, we performed highly stratified quantitative benefit-harm assessments for 2 top priority questions. In this current work, our goal was to describe the process and approaches we developed and to qualitatively glean important elements from it that address patient-centered care.

METHODS

We engaged patients, caregivers, clinicians, and guideline developers as stakeholder representatives throughout the process of the quantitative benefit-harm assessment and investigated whether the benefit-harm balance differed based on patient preferences and characteristics (stratification). We refined strategies to select the most applicable, valid, and precise evidence.

RESULTS

Two processes were important when assessing the balance of benefits and harms of interventions: (1) engaging stakeholders and (2) stratification by patient preferences and characteristics. Engaging patients and caregivers through focus groups, preference surveys, and as co-investigators provided value in prioritizing research questions, identifying relevant clinical outcomes, and clarifying the relative importance of these outcomes. Our strategies to select evidence for stratified benefit-harm assessments considered consistency across outcomes and subgroups. By quantitatively estimating the range in the benefit-harm balance resulting from true variation in preferences, we clarified whether the benefit-harm balance is preference sensitive.

CONCLUSIONS

Our approaches for engaging patients and caregivers at all phases of the stratified quantitative benefit-harm assessments were feasible and revealed how sensitive the benefit-harm balance is to patient characteristics and individual preferences. Accordingly, this sensitivity can suggest to guideline developers when to tailor recommendations for specific patient subgroups or when to explicitly leave decision making to individual patients and their providers.

Outcome preferences of older people with multiple chronic conditions and hypertension: a cross-sectional survey using best-worst scaling

BACKGROUND

Older people with hypertension and multiple chronic conditions (MCC) receive complex treatments and face challenging trade-offs. Patients' preferences for different health outcomes can impact multiple treatment decisions. Since evidence about outcome preferences is especially scarce among people with MCC our aim was to elicit preferences of people with MCC for outcomes related to hypertension, and to determine how these outcomes should be weighed when benefits and harms are assessed for patient-centered clinical practice guidelines and health economic assessments.

METHODS

We sent a best-worst scaling preference survey to a random sample identified from a primary care network of Kaiser Permanente (Colorado, USA). The sample included individuals age 60 or greater with hypertension and at least two other chronic conditions. We assessed average ranking of patient-important outcomes using conditional logit regression (stroke, heart attack, heart failure, dialysis, cognitive impairment, chronic kidney disease, acute kidney injury, fainting, injurious falls, low blood pressure with dizziness, treatment burden) and studied variation across individuals.

RESULTS

Of 450 invited participants, 217 (48%) completed the survey, and we excluded 10 respondents who had more than two missing choices, resulting in a final sample of 207 respondents. Participants ranked stroke as the most worrisome outcome and treatment burden as the least worrisome outcome (conditional logit parameters: 3.19 (standard error 0.09) for stroke, 0 for treatment burden). None of the outcomes were always chosen as the most or least worrisome by more than 25% of respondents, indicating that all outcomes were somewhat worrisome to respondents. Predefined subgroup analyses according to age, self-reported life-expectancy, degree of comorbidity, number of medications and antihypertensive treatment did not reveal meaningful differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Although some outcomes were more worrisome to patients than others, our results indicate that none of the outcomes should be disregarded for clinical practice guidelines and health economic assessments.

Net benefit of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in people 75 years or older: a benefit-harm balance modeling study

BACKGROUND

We determined the risk thresholds above which statin use would be more likely to provide a net benefit for people over the age of 75 years without history of cardiovascular disease (CVD).

METHODS

An exponential model was used to estimate the differences in expected benefit and harms in people treated with statins over a 10-year horizon versus not treated. The analysis was repeated 100,000 times to consider the statistical uncertainty and produce a distribution of the benefit-harm balance index from which we determined the 10-year CVD risk threshold where benefits outweighed the harms. We considered treatment estimates from trials and observational studies, baseline risks, patient preferences, and competing risks of non-CVD death, and statistical uncertainty.

RESULTS

Based on average preferences, statins were more likely to provide a net benefit at a 10-year CVD risk of 24% and 25% for men aged 75-79 years and 80-84 years, respectively, and 21% for women in both age groups. However, these thresholds varied significantly depending on differences in individual patient preferences for the statin-related outcomes, with interquartile ranges of 21-33% and 23-36% for men aged 75-79 years and 80-84 years, respectively, as well as 20-32% and 21-32% for women aged 75-79 years and 80-84 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Statins would more likely provide a net benefit for primary prevention in older people taking the average preferences if their CVD risk is well above 20%. However, the thresholds could be much higher or lower depending on preferences of individual patients, which suggests more emphasis should be placed on individual-based decision-making, instead of recommending statins for everyone based on a single or a small number of thresholds.

Balance of benefits and harms of different blood pressure targets in people with multiple chronic conditions: a quantitative benefit-harm assessment

OBJECTIVE

Recent studies suggest that a systolic blood pressure (SBP) target of 120 mm Hg is appropriate for people with hypertension, but this is debated particularly in people with multiple chronic conditions (MCC). We aimed to quantitatively determine whether benefits of a lower SBP target justify increased risks of harm in people with MCC, considering patient-valued outcomes and their relative importance.

DESIGN

Highly stratified quantitative benefit-harm assessment based on various input data identified as the most valid and applicable from a systematic review of evidence and based on weights from a patient preference survey.

SETTING

Outpatient care.

PARTICIPANTS

Hypertensive patients, grouped by age, gender, prior history of stroke, chronic heart failure, chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

INTERVENTIONS

SBP target of 120 versus 140 mm Hg for patients without history of stroke.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Probability that the benefits of a SBP target of 120 mm Hg outweigh the harms compared with 140 mm Hg over 5 years (primary) with thresholds >0.6 (120 mm Hg better), <0.4 (140 mm Hg better) and 0.4 to 0.6 (unclear), number of prevented clinical events (secondary), calculated with the Gail/National Cancer Institute approach.

RESULTS

Considering individual patient preferences had a substantial impact on the benefit-harm balance. With average preferences, 120 mm Hg was the better target compared with 140 mm Hg for many subgroups of patients without prior stroke, especially in patients over 75. For women below 65 with chronic kidney disease and without diabetes and prior stroke, 140 mm Hg was better. The analyses did not include mild adverse effects, and apply only to patients who tolerate antihypertensive treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

For most patients, a lower SBP target was beneficial, but this depended also on individual preferences, implying individual decision-making is important. Our modelling allows for individualised treatment targets based on patient preferences, age, gender and co-morbidities.

A benefit-harm analysis of adding basal insulin vs. sulfonylurea to metformin to manage type II diabetes mellitus in people with multiple chronic conditions

OBJECTIVES

The benefits and harms of diabetes treatments need to be carefully weighed in people with type II diabetes mellitus (DM) and multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). Our objective was to quantitatively assess the benefits and harms of the addition of basal insulin (insulin) vs. sulfonylurea (SU) to metformin in people with DM and MCCs.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Data inputs into the benefit-harms analysis included (1) baseline risks of patient-centered outcomes (death, myocardial infarction, stroke, severe hypoglycemia, diarrhea, nausea) from cohorts and trials; (2) treatment effects for the addition of insulin vs. SU from a network meta-analysis; and (3) patient preference survey for outcome weights. Statistical analysis calculated the probability that adding insulin has greater benefits than harms, when compared with an SU, overall and by prespecified subgroups.

RESULTS

Including the six outcomes, the probability of net benefit for insulin compared with SU was similar, across subgroups by age and diabetes duration (probability range, using conditional logit weights: 0.44-0.56). Adding patient preferences for treatment burden associated with insulin injections shifted the probability to favor SU over insulin (probability range, using conditional logit weights: 0.01-0.12).

CONCLUSION

In people with DM and MCCs, we demonstrated incomplete evidence to conclude if basal insulin or SU should be added in people with DM and MCCs on metformin alone. The benefit-harm balance was sensitive to treatment preferences, that is., perceived treatment burden, indicating the importance of shared-decision making in caring for people with MCCs who are at high risk for experiencing harms associated with diabetes management.

Finding the Balance Between Benefits and Harms When Using Statins for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Modeling Study

BACKGROUND

Many guidelines use expected risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) during the next 10 years as a basis for recommendations on use of statins for primary prevention of CVD. However, how harms were considered and weighed against benefits is often unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the expected risk above which statins provide net benefit.

DESIGN

Quantitative benefit-harm balance modeling study.

DATA SOURCES

Network meta-analysis of primary prevention trials, a preference survey, and selected observational studies.

TARGET POPULATION

Persons aged 40 to 75 years with no history of CVD.

TIME HORIZON

10 years.

PERSPECTIVE

Clinicians and guideline developers.

INTERVENTION

Low- or moderate-dose statin versus no statin.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The 10-year risk for CVD at which statins provide at least a 60% probability of net benefit, with baseline risk, frequencies of and preferences for statin benefits and harms, and competing risk for non-CVD death taken into account.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

Younger men had net benefit at a lower 10-year risk for CVD than older men (14% for ages 40 to 44 years vs. 21% for ages 70 to 75 years). In women, the risk required for net benefit was higher (17% for ages 40 to 44 years vs. 22% for ages 70 to 75 years). Atorvastatin and rosuvastatin provided net benefit at lower 10-year risks than simvastatin and pravastatin.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Most alternative assumptions led to similar findings.

LIMITATION

Age-specific data for some harms were not available.

CONCLUSION

Statins provide net benefits at higher 10-year risks for CVD than are reflected in most current guidelines. In addition, the level of risk at which net benefit occurs varies considerably by age, sex, and statin type.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Swiss Government Excellence Scholarship Office, Béatrice Ederer-Weber Foundation, and North-South Cooperation at the University of Zurich.

Should statin guidelines consider patient preferences? Eliciting preferences of benefit and harm outcomes of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in the sub-Saharan African and European contexts

BACKGROUND

Patient preferences are key parameters to evaluate benefit-harm balance of statins for primary prevention but they are not readily available to guideline developers and decision makers. Our study aimed to elicit patient preferences for benefit and harm outcomes related to use of statins for primary cardiovascular disease prevention and to examine how the preferences differ across economically and socio-culturally different environments.

METHODS

We conducted preference-eliciting surveys using best-worst scaling designed with a balanced incomplete-block design (BIBD) on 13 statins-related outcomes on 220 people in Ethiopia and Switzerland. The participants made tradeoff decisions and selected the most and least worrisome outcomes concurrently from each scenario generated using the BIBD. The design yielded 34,320 implied paired-comparisons and 2860 paired-responses as unit of analysis for eliciting the preferences that were analyzed using a conditional-logit model on a relative scale and surface under the cumulative ranking curve from multivariate random-effects meta-analysis model on a scale of 0 to 1.

RESULTS

There was high internal consistency of responses and minimal amount of measurement error in both surveys. Severe stroke was the most worrisome outcome with a ceiling preference of 1 (on 0 to 1 scale) followed by severe myocardial infarction, 0.913 (95% CI, 0.889-0.943), and cancer, 0.846 (0.829-0.855); while treatment discontinuation, 0.090 (0.023-0.123), and nausea/headache, 0.060 (0.034-0.094) were the least worrisome outcomes. Preferences were similar between Ethiopia and Switzerland with overlapping uncertainty intervals and concordance correlation of 0.97 (0.90-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides much needed empirical evidence on preferences that help clinical guidelines consider for weighing the benefit and harm outcomes when recommending for or against statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. The preferences are consistent across the disparate settings; however, we recommend inclusion of more countries in future studies to ensure the generalizability of the preferences to all environments.

Kinetics of lipid bilayer permeation of a series of ionisable drugs and their correlation with human transporter-independent intestinal permeability

For low molecular weight drugs, lipid bilayer permeation is considered the major route for in vivo cell barrier passage. We recently introduced a fluorescence assay with liposomes to determine permeation kinetics of ionisable compounds across the lipid bilayer by monitoring drug-induced pH changes inside the liposomes. Here, we determined the permeability coefficients (P_FLipP, FLipP for "Fluorescence Liposomal Permeability") across 1-palmitoyl-2-oleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine (POPC) bilayers of 35 ionisable drugs at pH6.0 and compared them to available in vivo human jejunal permeability (P_eff) data. P_FLipP values were furthermore compared with published Caco-2 cell permeability coefficients (P_Caco-2), permeability coefficients determined with the parallel artificial membrane permeability assay (PAMPA) and with log D (pH6.0). The log P_FLipP, corrected for predicted para-cellular diffusion, and log P_Caco-2 correlated best with log P_eff, with similar adjusted R² (0.75 and 0.74, n=12). Our results suggest that transporter-independent intestinal drug absorption is predictable from liposomal permeability.

When barriers ignore the "rule-of-five"

Why are a few drugs with properties beyond the rule of 5 (bRo5) absorbed across the intestinal mucosa while most other bRo5 compounds are not? Are such exceptional bRo5 compounds exclusively taken up by carrier-mediated transport or are they able to permeate the lipid bilayer (passive lipoidal diffusion)? Our experimental data with liposomes indicate that tetracycline, which violates one rule of the Ro5, and rifampicin, violating three of the rules, significantly permeate a phospholipid bilayer with kinetics similar to labetalol and metoprolol, respectively. Published data from experimental work and molecular dynamics simulations suggest that the formation of intramolecular H-bonds and the possibility to adopt an elongated shape besides the presence of a significant fraction of net neutral species facilitate lipid bilayer permeation. As an alternative to lipid bilayer permeation, carrier proteins can be targeted to improve absorption, with the potential drawbacks of drug-drug interactions and non-linear pharmacokinetics.