scholarly journals RISK OF HOSPITALISATION WITH COVID-19 AMONG TEACHERS COMPARED TO HEALTHCARE WORKERS AND OTHER WORKING-AGE ADULTS. A NATIONWIDE CASE-CONTROL STUDY

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fenton Lynda ◽  
Gribben Ciara ◽  
Caldwell David ◽  
Colville Sam ◽  
Bishop Jen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
General Population ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Positive Test ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Working Age ◽  
Household Members ◽  
Control Study

AbstractObjectiveTo determine the risk of hospitalisation with COVID-19 and severe COVID-19 among teachers and their household members, overall and compared to healthcare workers and the general working-age population.DesignPopulation-based nested case-control study.SettingsScotland, March 2020 to January 2021. Before and after schools re-opened in early August 2020.ParticipantsAll cases of COVID-19 in Scotland in adults ages 21 to 65 (n = 83,817) and a random sample of controls matched on age, sex and general practice (n = 841,708).ExposureIndividuals identified as actively teaching in a Scottish school by the General Teaching Council for Scotland, and household members of such individuals identified via the Unique Property Reference Number.ComparatorIndividuals identified as healthcare workers in Scotland, their household members, and the remaining “general population” of working-age adults.Main outcomesThe primary outcome was hospitalisation with COVID-19 defined in anyone testing positive with COVID-19 in hospital, admitted to hospital within 28 days of a positive test, and/or diagnosed with COVID-19 on discharge from hospital. Severe COVID-19 was defined as individuals admitted to intensive care or dying within 28 days of a positive test or assigned COVID-19 as a cause of death.ResultsMost teachers were young (mean age 42), female (80%) and had no underlying conditions (84%). The cumulative incidence (risk) of hospitalisation with COVID-19 was below 1% for all of the working age adults. In the period after school re-opening, compared to the general population, in conditional logistic regression models adjusting for age, sex, general practice, deprivation, underlying conditions and number of adults in the household, the relative risk in teachers (among 18,479 cases and controls) for hospitalisation was rate ratio (RR) 0.97 (95%CI 0.72-1.29) and for severe COVID-19 was RR 0.27 (95%CI 0.09-0.77). Equivalent rate ratios for household members of teachers were 0.97 (95%CI 0.74-1.27) and 0.67 (95%CI 0.36-1.24), and for healthcare workers were 1.82 (95%CI 1.55-2.14) and 1.76 (95%CI 1.22-2.56), respectively.ConclusionCompared to working-age adults who are otherwise similar, teachers and their household members are not at increased risk of hospitalisation with COVID-19 and are at lower risk of severe COVID-19. These findings are broadly reassuring for adults engaged in face to face teaching.

scholarly journals Risk of hospital admission with covid-19 among teachers compared with healthcare workers and other adults of working age in Scotland, March 2020 to July 2021: population based case-control study

BMJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. n2060
Author(s):  
Lynda Fenton ◽  
Ciara Gribben ◽  
David Caldwell ◽  
Sam Colville ◽  
Jen Bishop ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Hospital Admission ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Positive Test ◽  
Positive Test Result ◽  
Working Age ◽  
Household Members ◽  
Test Result ◽  
Control Study

Abstract Objective To determine the risk of hospital admission with covid-19 and severe covid-19 among teachers and their household members, overall and compared with healthcare workers and adults of working age in the general population. Design Population based nested case-control study. Setting Scotland, March 2020 to July 2021, during defined periods of school closures and full openings in response to covid-19. Participants All cases of covid-19 in adults aged 21 to 65 (n=132 420) and a random sample of controls matched on age, sex, and general practice (n=1 306 566). Adults were identified as actively teaching in a Scottish school by the General Teaching Council for Scotland, and their household members were identified through the unique property reference number. The comparator groups were adults identified as healthcare workers in Scotland, their household members, and the remaining general population of working age. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was hospital admission with covid-19, defined as having a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2 during hospital admission, being admitted to hospital within 28 days of a positive test result, or receiving a diagnosis of covid-19 on discharge from hospital. Severe covid-19 was defined as being admitted to intensive care or dying within 28 days of a positive test result or assigned covid-19 as a cause of death. Results Most teachers were young (mean age 42), were women (80%), and had no comorbidities (84%). The risk (cumulative incidence) of hospital admission with covid-19 was <1% for all adults of working age in the general population. Over the study period, in conditional logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, general practice, race/ethnicity, deprivation, number of comorbidities, and number of adults in the household, teachers showed a lower risk of hospital admission with covid-19 (rate ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.92) and of severe covid-19 (0.56, 0.33 to 0.97) than the general population. In the first period when schools in Scotland reopened, in autumn 2020, the rate ratio for hospital admission in teachers was 1.20 (0.89 to 1.61) and for severe covid-19 was 0.45 (0.13 to 1.55). The corresponding findings for household members of teachers were 0.91 (0.67 to 1.23) and 0.73 (0.37 to 1.44), and for patient facing healthcare workers were 2.08 (1.73 to 2.50) and 2.26 (1.43 to 3.59). Similar risks were seen for teachers in the second period, when schools reopened in summer 2021. These values were higher than those seen in spring/summer 2020, when schools were mostly closed. Conclusion Compared with adults of working age who are otherwise similar, teachers and their household members were not found to be at increased risk of hospital admission with covid-19 and were found to be at lower risk of severe covid-19. These findings should reassure those who are engaged in face-to-face teaching.

scholarly journals Use of antibiotics and colorectal cancer risk: a primary care nested case–control study in Belgium

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e053511
Author(s):  
Johannes Van der Meer ◽  
Pavlos Mamouris ◽  
Vahid Nassiri ◽  
Bert Vaes ◽  
Marjan van den Akker
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Conditional Logistic Regression ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Risk ◽  
Oral Antibiotics ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Control Study

ObjectivesTo examine the association between the use of oral antibiotics and subsequent colorectal cancer risk.DesignMatched case–control study.SettingGeneral practice centres participating in the Integrated Computerised Network database in Flanders, Belgium.ParticipantsIn total, 1705 cases of colorectal cancer diagnosed between 01 January 2010 and 31 December 2015 were matched to 6749 controls by age, sex, comorbidity and general practice centre.Primary outcome measureThe association between the number of prescriptions for oral antibiotics and the incidence of colorectal cancer over a period of 1–10 years, estimated by a conditional logistic regression model.ResultsA significantly increased risk of colorectal cancer (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.44) was found in subjects with one or more prescriptions compared with those with none after correction for diabetes mellitus. No dose-response relationship was found.ConclusionsThis study resulted in a modestly higher risk of having colorectal cancer diagnosed after antibiotic exposure. The main limitation was missing data on known risk factors, in particular smoking behaviour. This study did not allow us to examine the causality of the relationship, indicating the need of further investigation.

Comparing and assessing the reported penetrance of cancer susceptibility genes for breast cancer.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1520-1520
Author(s):  
Kanhua Yin ◽  
Danielle Braun ◽  
Ankur Tiwari ◽  
Jin Wang ◽  
Preeti Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
General Population ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility ◽  
Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Cancer Risks ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Control Study

1520 Background: It is critical for oncologists to be aware of unbiased and interpretable cancer risks (i.e., penetrance) in carriers with germline pathogenic variants in cancer susceptibility genes. However, relevant literature is large and varies significantly in study design, patient ascertainment, and types of risk estimates reported. This heterogeneity can cause inconsistent conclusions between studies and create barriers for clinicians to understand and apply them in practice. To further understand the current literature, we assessed penetrance studies associated with non-BRCA breast cancer susceptibility genes based on study design and ascertainment adjustment. Methods: We used a validated natural language processing-based abstract classifier to identify all penetrance studies regarding eleven genes: ATM, BARD1, CDH1, CHEK2, NBN, NF1, PALB2, PTEN, RECQL, STK11, and TP53. Relevant studies were then manually annotated as “with ascertainment adjustment” if a study was based on: (1) a general population; (2) a pedigree analysis or a family-based study with appropriate ascertainment adjustment; or (3) a hospital-based study or a panel testing analysis with well-matched cases and controls. Results: A total of 49 penetrance studies were identified, with a median of nine studies for each gene (range: 4-16). The case-control study was the dominant study type, accounting for over 80% in five genes, 50% in two genes, and 18% to 43% in the other four genes. The proportion of studies with ascertainment adjustment was generally low (mean: 33%) and varied widely between different genes (7% to 80%). Contradictory breast cancer risks (no increased risk vs. significantly increased risk) were found in eight genes (73%) (Table). The most common ascertainment bias identified was a case-control study with cases (patients) who had a strong family history but using general population controls. Conclusions: Ascertainment bias is common in penetrance studies, but few studies adjust for it appropriately. Clinicians should be aware of this issue, and new methods are warranted to select unbiased risk estimates, synthesize them, and provide the accurate general-population penetrance. [Table: see text]

Increased Risk of Breast Cancer Associated With CHEK2*1100delC

2007 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maren Weischer ◽  
Stig Egil Bojesen ◽  
Anne Tybjærg-Hansen ◽  
Christen Kirk Axelsson ◽  
Børge Grønne Nordestgaard
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
General Population ◽  
Prospective Study ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Chek2 1100Delc ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Risk Of Cancer ◽  
Control Study

Purpose CHEK2*1100delC heterozygosity has been associated with increased risk of breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer in case-control studies. We tested the hypothesis that CHEK2*1100delC heterozygosity in the general population increases the risk of cancer in general, and breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer in particular. Patients and Methods We performed a prospective study of 9,231 individuals from the Danish general population, who were observed for 34 years, and we performed a case-control study including 1,101 cases of breast cancer and 4,665 controls. Results Of the general population, 0.5% were heterozygotes and 99.5% were noncarriers. In the prospective study, multifactorially adjusted hazard ratios by CHEK2*1100delC heterozygosity versus noncarriers were 1.2 (95% CI, 0.7 to 2.1) for all cancers, 3.2 (95% CI, 1.0 to 9.9) for breast cancer, 2.3 (95% CI, 0.6 to 9.5) for prostate cancer, and 1.6 (95% CI, 0.4 to 6.5) for colorectal cancer. In the case-control study, age-matched odds ratio for breast cancer by CHEK2*1100delC heterozygosity versus noncarriers was 2.6 (95% CI, 1.3 to 5.4). The absolute 10-year risk of breast cancer in CHEK2*1100delC heterozygotes amounted to 24% in women older than 60 years undergoing hormone replacement therapy, with a body mass index of 25 kg/m2 or higher. Conclusion CHEK2*1100delC heterozygosity is associated with a three-fold risk of breast cancer in women in the general population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document