ABSTRACT
Background: The Global Burden of Disease study has provided key evidence to inform clinicians, researchers, and policy makers across common diseases, but no similar effort with single study design exists for hundreds of rare diseases. Consequently, many rare conditions lack population-level evidence including prevalence and clinical vulnerability. This has led to the absence of evidence-based care for rare diseases, prominently in the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: This study used electronic health records (EHRs) of more than 58 million people in England, linking nine National Health Service datasets spanning healthcare settings for people alive on Jan 23, 2020. Starting with all rare diseases listed in Orphanet, we quality assured and filtered down to analyse 331 conditions with ICD-10 or SNOMED-CT mappings clinically validated in our dataset. We report 1) population prevalence, clinical and demographic details of rare diseases, and 2) investigate differences in mortality with SARs-CoV-2. Findings: Among 58,162,316 individuals, we identified 894,396 with at least one rare disease. Prevalence data in Orphanet originates from various sources with varying degrees of precision. Here we present reproducible age and gender-adjusted estimates for all 331 rare diseases, including first estimates for 186 (56.2%) without any reported prevalence estimate in Orphanet. We identified 49 rare diseases significantly more frequent in females and 62 in males. Similarly we identified 47 rare diseases more frequent in Asian as compared to White ethnicity and 22 with higher Black to white ratios as compared to similar ratios in population controls. 37 rare diseases were overrepresented in the white population as compared to both Black and Asian ethnicities. In total, 7,965 of 894,396 (0.9%) of rare-disease patients died from COVID-19, as compared to 141,287 of 58,162,316 (0.2%) in the full study population. Eight rare diseases had significantly increased risks for COVID-19-related mortality in fully vaccinated individuals, with bullous pemphigoid (8.07[3.01-21.62]) being worst affected. Interpretation: Our study highlights that National-scale EHRs provide a unique resource to estimate detailed prevalence, clinical and demographic data for rare diseases. Using COVID-19-related mortality analysis, we showed the power of large-scale EHRs in providing insights to inform public health decision-making for these often neglected patient populations.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pemphigoid, Bullous , Rare Diseases , DiseaseABSTRACT
Background Emerging data-driven technologies in healthcare, such as risk prediction models, hold great promise but also pose challenges regarding potential bias and exacerbation of existing health inequalities, which have been observed across diseases such as cardiovascular disease (CVD) and COVID-19. This study addresses the impact of ethnicity in risk prediction modelling for cardiovascular events following SARS-CoV-2 infection and explores the potential of ethnicity-specific models to mitigate disparities. Methods This retrospective cohort study utilises six linked datasets accessed through National Health Service (NHS) England's Secure Data Environment (SDE) service for England, via the BHF Data Science Centre's CVD-COVID-UK/COVID-IMPACT Consortium. Inclusion criteria were established, and demographic information, risk factors, and ethnicity categories were defined. Four feature selection methods (LASSO, Random Forest, XGBoost, QRISK) were employed and ethnicity-specific prediction models were trained and tested using logistic regression. Discrimination (AUROC) and calibration performance were assessed for different populations and ethnicity groups. Findings Several differences were observed in the models trained on the whole study cohort vs ethnicity-specific groups. At the feature selection stage, ethnicity-specific models yielded different selected features. AUROC discrimination measures showed consistent performance across most ethnicity groups, with QRISK-based models performing relatively poorly. Calibration performance exhibited variation across ethnicity groups and age categories. Ethnicity-specific models demonstrated the potential to enhance calibration performance for certain ethnic groups. Interpretation This research highlights the importance of considering ethnicity in risk prediction modelling to ensure equitable healthcare outcomes. Differences in selected features and asymmetric calibration across ethnicities underscore the necessity of tailored approaches. Ethnicity-specific models offer a pathway to addressing disparities and improving model performance. The study emphasises the role of data-driven technologies in either alleviating or exacerbating existing health inequalities. Keywords Prediction, machine learning, electronic health records, bias, ethnicity.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiovascular DiseasesABSTRACT
Vaccination rates against SARS-CoV-2 in children aged five to 11 years remain low in many countries. The current benefit of vaccination in this age group has been questioned given that the large majority of children have now experienced at least one SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, protection from infection, vaccination or both wanes over time. National decisions on offering vaccines to this age group have tended to be made without considering time since infection. There is an urgent need to evaluate the additional benefits of vaccination in previously infected children and under what circumstances those benefits accrue. We present a novel methodological framework for estimating the potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination in previously infected children aged five to 11, accounting for waning. We apply this framework to the UK context and for two adverse outcomes: hospitalisation related to SARS-CoV-2 infection and Long Covid. We show that the most important drivers of benefit are: the degree of protection provided by previous infection; the protection provided by vaccination; the time since previous infection; and future attack rates. Vaccination can be very beneficial for previously infected children if future attack rates are high and several months have elapsed since the previous major wave in this group. Benefits are generally larger for Long Covid than hospitalisation, because Long Covid is both more common than hospitalisation and previous infection offers less protection against it. Our framework provides a structure for policy makers to explore the additional benefit of vaccination across a range of adverse outcomes and different parameter assumptions. It can be easily updated as new evidence emerges.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background The link between ethnicity and healthcare inequity, and the urgency for better data is well-recognised. This study describes ethnicity data in nation-wide electronic health records in England, UK. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using de-identified person-level records for the England population available in the National Health Service (NHS) Digital trusted research environment. Primary care records (GDPPR) were linked to hospital and national mortality records. We assessed completeness, consistency, and granularity of ethnicity records using all available SNOMED-CT concepts for ethnicity and NHS ethnicity categories. Findings From 61.8 million individuals registered with a primary care practice in England, 51.5 (83.3%) had at least one ethnicity record in GDPPR, increasing to 93·9% when linked with hospital records. Approximately 12·0% had at least two conflicting ethnicity codes in primary care records. Women were more likely to have ethnicity recorded than men. Ethnicity was missing most frequently in individuals from 18 to 39 years old and in the southern regions of England. Individuals with an ethnicity record had more comorbidities recorded than those without. Of 489 SNOMED-CT ethnicity concepts available, 255 were used in primary care records. Discrepancies between SNOMED-CT and NHS ethnicity categories were observed, specifically within “Other-” ethnicity groups. Interpretation More than 250 ethnicity sub-groups may be found in health records for the English population, although commonly categorised into “White”, “Black”, “Asian”, “Mixed”, and “Other”. One in ten individuals do not have ethnicity information recorded in primary care or hospital records. SNOMED-CT codes represent more diversity in ethnicity groups than the NHS ethnicity classification. Improved recording of self-reported ethnicity at first point-of-care and consistency in ethnicity classification across healthcare settings can potentially improve the accuracy of ethnicity in research and ultimately care for all ethnicities. Funding British Heart Foundation Data Science Centre led by Health Data Research UK. Research in context Evidence before this study Ethnicity has been highlighted as a significant factor in the disproportionate impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality. Better knowledge of ethnicity data recorded in real clinical practice is required to improve health research and ultimately healthcare. We searched PubMed from database inception to 14 th July 2022 for publications using the search terms “ethnicity” and “electronic health records” or “EHR,” without language restrictions. 228 publications in 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic, and 304 publications between 2020 and 2022 were identified. However, none of these publications used or reported any of over 400 available SNOMED-CT concepts for ethnicity to account for more granularity and diversity than captured by traditional high-level classification limited to 5 to 9 ethnicity groups. Added value of this study We provide a comprehensive study of the largest collection of ethnicity records from a national-level electronic health records trusted research environment, exploring completeness, consistency, and granularity. This work can serve as a data resource profile of ethnicity from routinely-collected EHR in England. Implications of all the available evidence To achieve equity in healthcare, we need to understand the differences between individuals, as well as the influence of ethnicity both on health status and on health interventions, including variation in the behaviour of tests and therapies. Thus, there is a need for measurements, thresholds, and risk estimates to be tailored to different ethnic groups. This study presents the different medical concepts describing ethnicity in routinely collected data that are readily available to researchers and highlights key elements for improving their accuracy in research. We aim to encourage researchers to use more granular ethnicity than the than typical approaches which aggregate ethnicity into a limited number of categories, failing to reflect the diversity of underlying populations. Accurate ethnicity data will lead to a better understanding of individual diversity, which will help to address disparities and influence policy recommendations that can translate into better, fairer health for all.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Deep learning (DL) and machine learning (ML) models trained on long-term patient trajectories held as medical codes in electronic health records (EHR) have the potential to improve disease prediction. Anticoagulant prescribing decisions in atrial fibrillation (AF) offer a use case where the benchmark stroke risk prediction tool (CHA2DS2-VASc) could be meaningfully improved by including more information from a patient's medical history. In this study, we design and build the first DL and ML pipeline that uses the routinely updated, linked EHR data for 56 million people in England accessed via NHS Digital to predict first ischaemic stroke in people with AF, and as a secondary outcome, COVID-19 death. Our pipeline improves first stroke prediction in AF by 17% compared to CHA2DS2-VASc (0.61 (0.57-0.65) vs 0.52 (0.52-0.52) area under the receiver operating characteristics curves, 95% confidence interval) and provides a generalisable, opensource framework that other researchers and developers can build on.
Subject(s)
Cerebral Infarction , Death , COVID-19 , Stroke , Atrial FibrillationABSTRACT
Importance: The long-term effects of COVID-19 on the incidence of vascular diseases are unclear. Objective: To quantify the association between time since diagnosis of COVID-19 and vascular disease, overall and by age, sex, ethnicity, and pre-existing disease. Design: Cohort study based on population-wide linked electronic health records, with follow up from January 1st to December 7th 2020. Setting and participants: Adults registered with an NHS general practice in England or Wales and alive on January 1st 2020. Exposures: Time since diagnosis of COVID-19 (categorised as 0-6 days, 1-2 weeks, 3-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-26 and 27-49 weeks since diagnosis), with and without hospitalisation within 28 days of diagnosis. Main outcomes and measures: Primary outcomes were arterial thromboses (mainly acute myocardial infarction and ischaemic stroke) and venous thromboembolic events (VTE, mainly pulmonary embolism and lower limb deep vein thrombosis). We also studied other vascular events (transient ischaemic attack, haemorrhagic stroke, heart failure and angina). Hazard ratios were adjusted for demographic characteristics, previous disease diagnoses, comorbidities and medications. Results: Among 48 million adults, 130,930 were and 1,315,471 were not hospitalised within 28 days of COVID-19. In England, there were 259,742 first arterial thromboses and 60,066 first VTE during 41.6 million person-years follow-up. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for first arterial thrombosis compared with no COVID-19 declined rapidly from 21.7 (95% CI 21.0-22.4) to 3.87 (3.58-4.19) in weeks 1 and 2 after COVID-19, 2.80 (2.61-3.01) during weeks 3-4 then to 1.34 (1.21-1.48) during weeks 27-49. aHRs for first VTE declined from 33.2 (31.3-35.2) and 8.52 (7.59-9.58) in weeks 1 and 2 to 7.95 (7.28-8.68) and 4.26 (3.86-4.69) during weeks 3-4 and 5-8, then 2.20 (1.99-2.44) and 1.80 (1.50-2.17) during weeks 13-26 and 27-49 respectively. aHRs were higher, for longer after diagnosis, after hospitalised than non-hospitalised COVID-19. aHRs were also higher among people of Black and Asian than White ethnicity and among people without than with a previous event. Across the whole population estimated increases in risk of arterial thromboses and VTEs were 2.5% and 0.6% respectively 49 weeks after COVID-19, corresponding to 7,197 and 3,517 additional events respectively after 1.4 million COVID-19 diagnoses. Conclusions and Relevance: High rates of vascular disease early after COVID-19 diagnosis decline more rapidly for arterial thromboses than VTEs but rates remain elevated up to 49 weeks after COVID-19. These results support continued policies to avoid COVID-19 infection with effective COVID-19 vaccines and use of secondary preventive agents in high-risk patients.
Subject(s)
Pulmonary Embolism , Myocardial Infarction , Ischemic Attack, Transient , Heart Failure , Venous Thromboembolism , Angina Pectoris , Vascular Diseases , Cerebral Infarction , Thrombosis , COVID-19 , Stroke , Venous ThrombosisABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Objective Evaluate antithrombotic (AT) use in individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF) and high stroke risk (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score>=2) and investigate whether pre-existing AT use may improve COVID-19 outcomes. Methods Individuals with AF and a CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score>=2 on January 1 st 2020 were identified using pseudonymised, linked electronic health records for 56 million people in England and followed-up until May 1 st 2021. Factors associated with pre-existing AT use were analysed using logistic regression. Differences in COVID-19 related hospitalisation and death were analysed using logistic and Cox regression for individuals exposed to pre-existing AT use vs no AT use, anticoagulants (AC) vs antiplatelets (AP) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs warfarin. Results From 972,971 individuals with AF and a CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score>=2, 88.0% (n=856,336) had pre-existing AT use, 3.8% (n=37,418) had a COVID-19 related hospitalisation and 2.2% (n=21,116) died. Factors associated with no AT use included comorbidities that may contraindicate AT use (liver disease and history of falls) and demographics (socioeconomic status and ethnicity). Pre-existing AT use was associated with lower odds of death (OR=0.92 [0 . 87-0 . 96 at 95% CI] ), but higher odds of hospitalisation OR=1.20 [1 . 15-1 . 26 at 95% CI] ). The same pattern was observed for AC vs AP (death (OR=0.93 [0.87-0.98]), hospitalisation (OR=1.17 [1.11-1.24])) but not for DOACs vs warfarin (death (OR=1.00 [0.95-1.05]), hospitalisation (OR=0.86 [0.82-0.89]). Conclusions Pre-existing AT use may offer marginal protection against COVID-19 death, with AC offering more protection than AP. Although this association may not be causal, it provides further incentive to improve AT coverage for eligible individuals with AF. KEY QUESTIONS What is already known about this subject? Anticoagulants (AC), a sub-class of antithrombotics (AT), reduce the risk of stroke and are recommended for individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF) and at high risk of stroke (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score>=2, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold). However, previous evaluations suggest that up to one third of these individuals may not be taking AC. Over estimation of bleeding and fall risk in elderly patients have been identified as potential factors in this under medicating. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, several observational studies have observed correlations between pre-existing AT use, particularly anticoagulants (AC), and lower risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes such as hospitalisation and death. However, these correlations are inconsistent across studies and have not compared all major sub-types of AT in one study. What does this study add? This study uses datasets covering primary care, secondary care, pharmacy dispensing, death registrations, multiple COVID-19 diagnoses routes and vaccination records for 56 million people in England and is the largest scale evaluation of AT use to date. This provides the statistical power to robustly analyse targeted sub-types of AT and control for a wide range of potential confounders. All code developed for the study is opensource and an updated nationwide evaluation can be rapidly created for future time points. In 972,971 individuals with AF and a CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score>=2, we observed 88.0% (n=856,336) with pre-existing AT use which was associated with marginal protection against COVID-19 death (OR=0.92 [0 . 87-0 . 96 at 95% CI] ). How might this impact on clinical practice? These findings can help shape global AT medication policy and provide population-scale, observational analysis results alongside gold-standard randomised control trials to help assess whether a potential beneficial effect of pre-existing AT use on COVID-19 death alters risk to benefit assessments in AT prescribing decisions.