ABSTRACT
The community reinforcement and family training (CRAFT) program provides group support for families affected by substance use disorders. During the COVID-19 pandemic traditional in-person support groups were limited and moved to online formats out of necessity and safety. This negatively impacted both recipients of group interventions as well as group facilitators. Research on the feasibility and effectiveness of a free, online CRAFT approach was limited at the time of this current study. This study attempted to measure the feasibility of the continued online application of CRAFT groups that utilized Zoom video conferencing software. A quasi-experimental, one-group posttest-only, mixed methods design was utilized in this study to obtain findings to answer these research questions. The sample of this study included data from a free, 12-week online group. These data included surveys from group participants (n=9) and group facilitators (n=8). Participant surveys utilized quantitative and qualitative data to measure group participant satisfaction and the effectiveness of the online group format. Group facilitator surveys utilized quantitative and qualitative items to measure group facilitator satisfaction, ease of access and feasibility of ongoing online group format. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (charts) in IBM SPSS as well as analyses of qualitative data conducted by the researcher. The findings concerning the effectiveness and feasibility of the ongoing application of such online groups were largely inconclusive. However, the findings of this study could inform future studies intended to measure the effectiveness and feasibility of similar ongoing, free, online CRAFT programs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has ushered in a rapid evolution of regulations surrounding telemedicine and the public's need for affordable, accessible, high-quality care at a distance. This necessity led to a rise in telemedicine demand that forced health systems to adapt, and for providers to witness the potential benefits and limitations of such services. METHODS: In this analysis, Sanford Health EMR data was evaluated from Q2 of 2019 to Q2 of 2020 to compare specialty utilization of telemedicine and quantify percentage change within the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey was conducted to evaluate provider opinion within the Sanford Health system regarding demographics, usage, perceived benefits, and perceived barriers to this rapid adoption. RESULTS: Results suggest that Sanford Health experienced a significant, 1,600 percent increase of telemedicine usage. Additionally, with this increased usage of telemedicine, provider opinion of telemedicine and its potential has improved. During the pandemic, a greater percentage of providers believe telemedicine is highly beneficial to their practice and a majority believe telemedicine will continue to play a vital role in their practice in the future. However, the barriers found within the survey included limited patient access, technical difficulties, reimbursement, and insurance coverage. CONCLUSIONS: With the rapid increase in provider usage and the subsequent approval of providers, telemedicine has the potential to facilitate higher quality healthcare going forward. The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated evolution and adoption of virtual media in medicine and has provided a unique glimpse into telemedicine's limitations and exceptional potential.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Telemedicine , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , South Dakota/epidemiology , Pandemics , DemographyABSTRACT
The community reinforcement and family training (CRAFT) program provides group support for families affected by substance use disorders. During the COVID-19 pandemic traditional in-person support groups were limited and moved to online formats out of necessity and safety. This negatively impacted both recipients of group interventions as well as group facilitators. Research on the feasibility and effectiveness of a free, online CRAFT approach was limited at the time of this current study. This study attempted to measure the feasibility of the continued online application of CRAFT groups that utilized Zoom video conferencing software. A quasi-experimental, one-group posttest-only, mixed methods design was utilized in this study to obtain findings to answer these research questions. The sample of this study included data from a free, 12-week online group. These data included surveys from group participants (n=9) and group facilitators (n=8). Participant surveys utilized quantitative and qualitative data to measure group participant satisfaction and the effectiveness of the online group format. Group facilitator surveys utilized quantitative and qualitative items to measure group facilitator satisfaction, ease of access and feasibility of ongoing online group format. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (charts) in IBM SPSS as well as analyses of qualitative data conducted by the researcher. The findings concerning the effectiveness and feasibility of the ongoing application of such online groups were largely inconclusive. However, the findings of this study could inform future studies intended to measure the effectiveness and feasibility of similar ongoing, free, online CRAFT programs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
Introduction Observational data enables large-scale vaccine safety surveillance but requires careful evaluation of potential sources of bias. One potential source of bias is an index date selection procedure for the unvaccinated cohort or unvaccinated comparison time. Here, we evaluate different index date selection procedures for two vaccines: COVID-19 and influenza. Methods For each vaccine, we extracted patient baseline characteristics on the index date and up to 450 days prior and then compared them to the characteristics of the unvaccinated patients indexed on an arbitrary date or indexed on a date of a visit. Additionally, we compared vaccinated patients indexed on the date of vaccination and the same patients indexed on a prior date or visit. Results COVID-19 vaccination and influenza vaccination differ drastically from each other in terms of populations vaccinated and their status on the day of vaccination. When compared to indexing on a visit in unvaccinated population, influenza vaccination had markedly higher covariate proportions and COVID-19 vaccination had lower proportions of most covariates on the index date. In contrast, COVID-19 vaccination had similar covariate proportions when compared to an arbitrary date. These effects attenuated but were still present with a longer lookback period. The effect of day 0 was present even when patients served as their own controls. Conclusion Patient baseline characteristics are sensitive to the choice of the index date. In vaccine safety studies, unexposed index event should represent vaccination settings. Study designs previously used to assess influenza vaccination must be reassessed for COVID-19 to account for a potentially healthier population and lack of medical activity on the day of vaccination.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Ovarian vein thrombosis (OVT) is a rare condition most frequently associated with pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), malignancy or the immediate postpartum period. This case study reports on a 56-year-old woman who developed OVT 11 days after a positive COVID-19 diagnosis. Imaging including abdominal/pelvic computed tomography, transvaginal Doppler ultrasound and transabdominal pelvic ultrasound failed to definitively diagnose the thrombotic etiology of the patient's presentation. Ultimately, laparoscopic visualization and subsequent oophorectomy were necessary for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The patient did not have underlying malignancy, recent surgical history, history of PID or any history of previous thromboembolic events. Therefore, this report contributes further evidence to the growing knowledge of systemic manifestations associated with COVID-19 that may require surgical intervention.
ABSTRACT
COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by a newly discovered type of coronavirus called SARS-CoV-2. Since the discovery of this disease in late 2019, COVID-19 has become a worldwide concern, mainly due to its high degree of contagion. As of April 2021, the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 reported to the World Health Organization has already exceeded 135 million worldwide, while the number of deaths exceeds 2.9 million. Due to the impacts of the disease, efforts in the literature have intensified in terms of studying approaches aiming to detect COVID-19, with a focus on supporting and facilitating the process of disease diagnosis. This work proposes the application of texture descriptors based on phylogenetic relationships between species to characterize segmented CT volumes, and the subsequent classification of regions into COVID-19, solid lesion or healthy tissue. To evaluate our method, we use images from three different datasets. The results are promising, with an accuracy of 99.93%, a recall of 99.93%, a precision of 99.93%, an F1-score of 99.93%, and an AUC of 0.997. We present a robust, simple, and efficient method that can be easily applied to 2D and/or 3D images without limitations on their dimensionality.
ABSTRACT
Background: Routinely collected real world data (RWD) have great utility in aiding the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic response [1,2]. Here we present the international Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) [3] Characterizing Health Associated Risks, and Your Baseline Disease In SARS-COV-2 (CHARYBDIS) framework for standardisation and analysis of COVID-19 RWD.Methods: We conducted a descriptive cohort study using a federated network of data partners in the United States, Europe (the Netherlands, Spain, the UK, Germany, France and Italy) and Asia (South Korea and China). The study protocol and analytical package were released on 11th June 2020 and are iteratively updated via GitHub [4]. Findings: We identified three non-mutually exclusive cohorts of 4,537,153 individuals with a clinical COVID-19 diagnosis or positive test, 886,193 hospitalized with COVID-19, and 113,627 hospitalized with COVID-19 requiring intensive services. All comorbidities, symptoms, medications, and outcomes are described by cohort in aggregate counts, and are available in an interactive website: https://data.ohdsi.org/Covid19CharacterizationCharybdis/. Interpretation: CHARYBDIS findings provide benchmarks that contribute to our understanding of COVID-19 progression, management and evolution over time. This can enable timely assessment of real-world outcomes of preventative and therapeutic options as they are introduced in clinical practice.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections , Leishmaniasis, CutaneousABSTRACT
PurposeWe aimed to describe the demographics, cancer subtypes, comorbidities and outcomes of patients with a history of cancer with COVID-19 from March to June 2020. Secondly, we compared patients hospitalized with COVID-19 to patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and patients hospitalized with influenza. MethodsWe conducted a cohort study using eight routinely-collected healthcare databases from Spain and the US, standardized to the Observational Medical Outcome Partnership common data model. Three cohorts of patients with a history of cancer were included: i) diagnosed with COVID-19, ii) hospitalized with COVID-19, and iii) hospitalized with influenza in 2017-2018. Patients were followed from index date to 30 days or death. We reported demographics, cancer subtypes, comorbidities, and 30-day outcomes. ResultsWe included 118,155 patients with a cancer history in the COVID-19 diagnosed and 41,939 in the COVID-19 hospitalized cohorts. The most frequent cancer subtypes were prostate and breast cancer (range: 5-19% and 1-14% in the diagnosed cohort, respectively). Hematological malignancies were also frequent, with non-Hodgkins lymphoma being among the 5 most common cancer subtypes in the diagnosed cohort. Overall, patients were more frequently aged above 65 years and had multiple comorbidities. Occurrence of death ranged from 8% to 14% and from 18% to 26% in the diagnosed and hospitalized COVID-19 cohorts, respectively. Patients hospitalized with influenza (n=242,960) had a similar distribution of cancer subtypes, sex, age and comorbidities but lower occurrence of adverse events. ConclusionPatients with a history of cancer and COVID-19 have advanced age, multiple comorbidities, and a high occurence of COVID-19-related events. Additionaly, hematological malignancies were frequent in these patients.This observational study provides epidemiologic characteristics that can inform clinical care and future etiological studies.
Subject(s)
Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin , Neoplasms , Hematologic Neoplasms , Death , Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19ABSTRACT
Objective To estimate the proportion of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who undergo dialysis, tracheostomy, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Design A network cohort study. Setting Six databases from the United States containing routinely-collected patient data: HealthVerity, Premier, IQVIA Open Claims, Optum EHR, Optum SES, and VA-OMOP. Patients Patients hospitalized with a clinical diagnosis or a positive test result for COVID-19. Interventions Dialysis, tracheostomy, and ECMO. Measurements and Main Results 240,392 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were included (22,887 from HealthVerity, 139,971 from IQVIA Open Claims, 29,061 from Optum EHR, 4,336 from OPTUM SES, 36,019 from Premier, and 8,118 from VA-OMOP). Across the six databases, 9,703 (4.04% [95% CI: 3.96% to 4.11%]) patients received dialysis, 1,681 (0.70% [0.67% to 0.73%]) had a tracheostomy, and 398 (0.17% [95% CI: 0.15% to 0.18%]) patients underwent ECMO over the 30 days following hospitalization. Use of ECMO was generally concentrated among patients who were younger, male, and with fewer comorbidities except for obesity. Tracheostomy was used for a similar proportion of patients regardless of age, sex, or comorbidity. While dialysis was used for a similar proportion among younger and older patients, it was more frequent among male patients and among those with chronic kidney disease. Conclusion Use of dialysis among those hospitalized with COVID-19 is high at around 4%. Although less than one percent of patients undergo tracheostomy and ECMO, the absolute numbers of patients who have undergone these interventions is substantial and can be expected to continue grow given the continuing spread of the COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic , ObesityABSTRACT
BackgroundFamotidine has been posited as a potential treatment for COVID-19. We compared the incidence of COVID-19 outcomes (i.e., death; and death or intensive services use) among hospitalized famotidine users vs. proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) users, hydroxychloroquine users or famotidine non-users separately. MethodsWe constructed a retrospective cohort study using data from COVID-19 Premier Hospital electronic health records. Study population were COVID-19 hospitalized patients aged 18 years or older. Famotidine, PPI and hydroxychloroquine exposure groups were defined as patients dispensed any medication containing one of the three drugs on the day of admission. The famotidine non-user group was derived from the same source population with no history of exposure to any drug with famotidine as an active ingredient prior to or on the day of admission. Time-at-risk was defined based on the intention-to-treat principle starting 1 day after admission to 30 days after admission. For each study comparison group, we fit a propensity score (PS) model through large-scale regularized B logistic regression. The outcome was modeled using a survival model. ResultsWe identified 2193 users of PPI, 5950 users of the hydroxychloroquine, 1816 users of famotidine and 26,820 non-famotidine users. After PS stratification, the hazard ratios for death were as follows: famotidine vs no famotidine HR 1.03 (0.89-1.18); vs PPIs: HR 1.14 (0.94-1.39); vs hydroxychloroquine:1.03 (0.85-1.24). Similar results were observed for the risk of death or intensive services use. ConclusionWe found no evidence of a reduced risk of COVID-19 outcomes among hospitalized COVID-19 patients who used famotidine compared to those who did not or compared to PPI or hydroxychloroquine users.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background: COVID-19 may differentially impact people with obesity. We aimed to describe and compare the demographics, comorbidities, and outcomes of obese patients with COVID-19 to those of non-obese patients with COVID-19, or obese patients with seasonal influenza. Methods: We conducted a cohort study based on outpatient/inpatient care, and claims data from January to June 2020 from the US, Spain, and the UK. We used six databases standardized to the OMOP common data model. We defined two cohorts of patients diagnosed and/or hospitalized with COVID-19. We created corresponding cohorts for patients with influenza in 2017-2018. We followed patients from index date to 30 days or death. We report the frequency of socio-demographics, prior comorbidities, and 30-days outcomes (hospitalization, events, and death) by obesity status. Findings: We included 627 044 COVID-19 (US: 502 650, Spain: 122 058, UK: 2336) and 4 549 568 influenza (US: 4 431 801, Spain: 115 224, UK: 2543) patients. The prevalence of obesity was higher among hospitalized COVID-19 (range: 38% to 54%) than diagnosed COVID-19 (30% to 47%), or diagnosed/hospitalized influenza (15% to 48%) patients. Obese hospitalized COVID-19 patients were more often female and younger than non-obese COVID-19 patients or obese influenza patients. Obese COVID-19 patients were more likely to have prior comorbidities, present with cardiovascular and respiratory events during hospitalization, require intensive services, or die compared to non-obese COVID-19 patients. Obese COVID-19 patients were also more likely to require intensive services or die compared to obese influenza patients, despite presenting with fewer comorbidities. Interpretation: We show that obesity is more common among COVID-19 than influenza patients, and that obese patients present with more severe forms of COVID-19 with higher hospitalization, intensive services, and fatality than non-obese patients. These data are instrumental for guiding preventive strategies of COVID-19 infection and complications
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Obesity , DeathABSTRACT
Recent studies have characterized the single-cell immune landscape of host immune response of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), specifically focus on the severe condition. However, the immune response in mild or even asymptomatic patients remains unclear. Here, we performed longitudinal single-cell transcriptome sequencing and T cell/B cell receptor sequencing on 3 healthy donors and 10 COVID-19 patients with asymptomatic, moderate, and severe conditions. We found asymptomatic patients displayed distinct innate immune responses, including increased CD56briCD16- NK subset, which was nearly missing in severe condition and enrichment of a new Th2-like cell type/state expressing a ciliated cell marker. Unlike that in moderate condition, asymptomatic patients lacked clonal expansion of effector CD8+ T cells but had a robust effector CD4+ T cell clonal expansion, coincide with previously detected SARS-CoV-2-reactive CD4+ T cells in unexposed individuals. Moreover, NK and effector T cells in asymptomatic patients have upregulated cytokine related genes, such as IFNG and XCL2. Our data suggest early innate immune response and type I immunity may contribute to the asymptomatic phenotype in COVID-19 disease, which could in turn deepen our understanding of severe COVID-19 and guide early prediction and therapeutics.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Objectives Concern has been raised in the rheumatological community regarding recent regulatory warnings that hydroxychloroquine used in the COVID-19 pandemic could cause acute psychiatric events. We aimed to study whether there is risk of incident depression, suicidal ideation, or psychosis associated with hydroxychloroquine as used for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods New user cohort study using claims and electronic medical records from 10 sources and 3 countries (Germany, UK and US). RA patients aged 18+ and initiating hydroxychloroquine were compared to those initiating sulfasalazine (active comparator) and followed up in the short (30-day) and long term (on treatment). Study outcomes included depression, suicide/suicidal ideation, and hospitalization for psychosis. Propensity score stratification and calibration using negative control outcomes were used to address confounding. Cox models were fitted to estimate database-specific calibrated hazard ratios (HR), with estimates pooled where I 2 <40%. Results 918,144 and 290,383 users of hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine, respectively, were included. No consistent risk of psychiatric events was observed with short-term hydroxychloroquine (compared to sulfasalazine) use, with meta-analytic HRs of 0.96 [0.79-1.16] for depression, 0.94 [0.49-1.77] for suicide/suicidal ideation, and 1.03 [0.66-1.60] for psychosis. No consistent long-term risk was seen, with meta-analytic HRs 0.94 [0.71-1.26] for depression, 0.77 [0.56-1.07] for suicide/suicidal ideation, and 0.99 [0.72-1.35] for psychosis. Conclusions Hydroxychloroquine as used to treat RA does not appear to increase the risk of depression, suicide/suicidal ideation, or psychosis compared to sulfasalazine. No effects were seen in the short or long term. Use at higher dose or for different indications needs further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION Registered with EU PAS; Reference number EUPAS34497 ( http://www.encepp.eu/encepp/viewResource.htm?id=34498 ). The full study protocol and analysis source code can be found at https://github.com/ohdsi-studies/Covid19EstimationHydroxychloroquine . WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THIS TOPIC Recent regulatory warnings have raised concerns of potential psychiatric side effects of hydroxychloroquine at the doses used to treat COVID-19, generating concern in the rheumatological community Serious psychiatric adverse events such as suicide, acute psychosis, and depressive episodes have been identified by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) adverse events reporting system and at case report level WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS This is the largest study on the neuro-psychiatric safety of hydroxychloroquine to date, including >900,000 users treated for their RA in country-level or private health care systems in Germany, the UK, and the US We find no association between the use of hydroxychloroquine and the risk of depression, suicide/suicidal ideation, or severe psychosis compared to sulfasalazine HOW MIGHT THIS IMPACT ON CLINICAL PRACTICE Our data shows no association between hydroxychloroquine treatment for RA and risk of depression, suicide or psychosis compared to sulfasalazine. These findings do not support stopping or switching hydroxychloroquine treatment as used for RA due to recent concerns based on COVID-19 treated patients.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Arthritis, Rheumatoid , Mental Disorders , Psychotic DisordersABSTRACT
Background In this study we phenotyped individuals hospitalised with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in depth, summarising entire medical histories, including medications, as captured in routinely collected data drawn from databases across three continents. We then compared individuals hospitalised with COVID-19 to those previously hospitalised with influenza. Methods We report demographics, previously recorded conditions and medication use of patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the US (Columbia University Irving Medical Center [CUIMC], Premier Healthcare Database [PHD], UCHealth System Health Data Compass Database [UC HDC], and the Department of Veterans Affairs [VA OMOP]), in South Korea (Health Insurance Review & Assessment [HIRA]), and Spain (The Information System for Research in Primary Care [SIDIAP] and HM Hospitales [HM]). These patients were then compared with patients hospitalised with influenza in 2014-19. Results 34,128 (US: 8,362, South Korea: 7,341, Spain: 18,425) individuals hospitalised with COVID-19 were included. Between 4,811 (HM) and 11,643 (CUIMC) unique aggregate characteristics were extracted per patient, with all summarised in an accompanying interactive website (http://evidence.ohdsi.org/Covid19CharacterizationHospitalization/). Patients were majority male in the US (CUIMC: 52%, PHD: 52%, UC HDC: 54%, VA OMOP: 94%,) and Spain (SIDIAP: 54%, HM: 60%), but were predominantly female in South Korea (HIRA: 60%). Age profiles varied across data sources. Prevalence of asthma ranged from 4% to 15%, diabetes from 13% to 43%, and hypertensive disorder from 24% to 70% across data sources. Between 14% and 33% were taking drugs acting on the renin-angiotensin system in the 30 days prior to hospitalisation. Compared to 81,596 individuals hospitalised with influenza in 2014-19, patients admitted with COVID-19 were more typically male, younger, and healthier, with fewer comorbidities and lower medication use. Conclusions We provide a detailed characterisation of patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Protecting groups known to be vulnerable to influenza is a useful starting point to minimize the number of hospital admissions needed for COVID-19. However, such strategies will also likely need to be broadened so as to reflect the particular characteristics of individuals hospitalised with COVID-19.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Hypertension , COVID-19ABSTRACT
BackgroundHydroxychloroquine has recently received Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA and is currently prescribed in combination with azithromycin for COVID-19 pneumonia. We studied the safety of hydroxychloroquine, alone and in combination with azithromycin. MethodsNew user cohort studies were conducted including 16 severe adverse events (SAEs). Rheumatoid arthritis patients aged 18+ and initiating hydroxychloroquine were compared to those initiating sulfasalazine and followed up over 30 days. Self-controlled case series (SCCS) were conducted to further establish safety in wider populations. Separately, SAEs associated with hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin (compared to hydroxychloroquine-amoxicillin) were studied. Data comprised 14 sources of claims data or electronic medical records from Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Spain, UK, and USA. Propensity score stratification and calibration using negative control outcomes were used to address confounding. Cox models were fitted to estimate calibrated hazard ratios (CalHRs) according to drug use. Estimates were pooled where I2<40%. ResultsOverall, 956,374 and 310,350 users of hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine, and 323,122 and 351,956 users of hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine-amoxicillin were included. No excess risk of SAEs was identified when 30-day hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine use were compared. SCCS confirmed these findings. However, when azithromycin was added to hydroxychloroquine, we observed an increased risk of 30-day cardiovascular mortality (CalHR2.19 [1.22-3.94]), chest pain/angina (CalHR 1.15 [95% CI 1.05-1.26]), and heart failure (CalHR 1.22 [95% CI 1.02-1.45]) ConclusionsShort-term hydroxychloroquine treatment is safe, but addition of azithromycin may induce heart failure and cardiovascular mortality, potentially due to synergistic effects on QT length. We call for caution if such combination is to be used in the management of Covid-19. Trial registration numberRegistered with EU PAS; Reference number EUPAS34497 (http://www.encepp.eu/encepp/viewResource.htm?id=34498). The full study protocol and analysis source code can be found at https://github.com/ohdsi-studies/Covid19EstimationHydroxychloroquine. Funding sourcesThis research received partial support from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) and Senior Research Fellowship (DPA), US National Institutes of Health, Janssen Research & Development, IQVIA, and by a grant from the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea [grant number: HI16C0992]. Personal funding included Versus Arthritis [21605] (JL), MRC-DTP [MR/K501256/1] (JL), MRC and FAME (APU). The European Health Data & Evidence Network has received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking (JU) under grant agreement No 806968. The JU receives support from the European Unions Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and EFPIA. No funders had a direct role in this study. The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Clinician Scientist Award programme, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health, England.