Effectiveness of community-based DOTS strategy on tuberculosis treatment success rates in Namibia.

DOTS is a key pillar of the global strategy to end tuberculosis (TB). To assess the effectiveness of community-based compared with facility-based DOTS on TB treatment success rates in Namibia. Annual TB treatment success, cure, completion and case notification rates were compared between 1996 and 2015 using interrupted time series analysis. The intervention was the upgrading by the Namibian government of the TB treatment strategy from facility-based to community-based DOTS in 2005. The mean annual treatment success rate during the pre-intervention period was 58.9% (range 46-66) and increased significantly to 81.3% (range 69-87) during the post-intervention period. Before the intervention, there was a non-significant increase (0.3%/year) in the annual treatment success rate. After the intervention, the annual treatment success rate increased abruptly by 12.9% (P < 0.001) and continued to increase by 1.1%/year thereafter. The treatment success rate seemed to have stagnated at ∼85% at the end of the observation period. Expanding facility-based DOTS to community-based DOTS increased annual treatment success rates significantly. However, the treatment success rate at the end of the observation period had stagnated below the targeted 95% success rate. .

A randomized double-blind crossover trial to investigate the efficacy of screening for adult hypothyroidism.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the value of population screening for adult hypothyroidism. SETTING: Healthy people attending for a general health assessment. METHODS: A thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) measurement was performed on people attending for a general health assessment (women aged 50-79 [35-49 with a family history of thyroid disease] and men aged 65-79). Those with TSH levels above 4.0 mU/L were invited to join a randomized double-blind crossover trial of thyroxine and placebo, each given in random order for four months. On entry a second blood sample was collected for a TSH measurement after the end of the trial to determine whether this would help select individuals for thyroxine treatment. The daily thyroxine dose started at 50 µg and if necessary was increased to achieve a TSH level of 0.6-2.0 mU/L. RESULTS: There were 341 (8%) people with a TSH level above 4.0 mU/L, 110 met eligibility criteria (64 agreed to participate), and 56 (49 women, 7 men) completed the trial. Among the 15 individuals with a repeat TSH measurement above 4.5 mU/L, 11 reported feeling better on thyroxine than placebo and none reported feeling better on placebo (P = 0.001; four felt no different), indicating that in this group 73% benefitted (i.e. 11/15; 95% CI 45-92%). The main symptoms relieved were tiredness and loss of memory. There was no indication of harm. In the 41 individuals with a repeat serum TSH of 4.5 mU/L or less: 10 reported feeling better on thyroxine than placebo and 16 better on placebo (P = 0.42, 15 felt no different). Thus about 8% of men and women in the specified age groups had a TSH above 4.0 mU/L, and of these about a quarter had a repeat TSH above 4.5 mU/L, of whom about half would benefit from thyroxine treatment. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that screening for hypothyroidism would be worthwhile. Approximately 1% of people screened would have a better quality of life. Pilot screening programmes for adult hypothyroidism are justified.

Use of blood pressure lowering drugs in the prevention of cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis of 147 randomised trials in the context of expectations from prospective epidemiological studies.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the quantitative efficacy of different classes of blood pressure lowering drugs in preventing coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke, and who should receive treatment. DESIGN: Meta-analysis. Data source Medline (1966-2007). STUDY SELECTION: Randomised trials of blood pressure lowering drugs recording CHD events and strokes. 108 trials studied differences in blood pressure between study drug and placebo (or control group not receiving the study drug) ("blood pressure difference trials"), and 46 trials compared drugs ("drug comparison trials"). Seven trials with three randomised groups fell into both categories. The results were interpreted in the context of those expected from the largest published meta-analysis of cohort studies, totalling 958 000 people. PARTICIPANTS: 464 000 people defined into three mutually exclusive categories: participants with no history of vascular disease, a history of CHD, or a history of stroke. RESULTS: In the blood pressure difference trials beta blockers had a special effect over and above that due to blood pressure reduction in preventing recurrent CHD events in people with a history of CHD: risk reduction 29% (95% confidence interval 22% to 34%) compared with 15% (11% to 19%) in trials of other drugs. The extra effect was limited to a few years after myocardial infarction, with a risk reduction of 31% compared with 13% in people with CHD with no recent infarct (P=0.04). In the other blood pressure difference trials (excluding CHD events in trials of beta blockers in people with CHD), there was a 22% reduction in CHD events (17% to 27%) and a 41% (33% to 48%) reduction in stroke for a blood pressure reduction of 10 mm Hg systolic or 5 mm Hg diastolic, similar to the reductions of 25% (CHD) and 36% (stroke) expected for the same difference in blood pressure from the cohort study meta-analysis, indicating that the benefit is explained by blood pressure reduction itself. The five main classes of blood pressure lowering drugs (thiazides, beta blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and calcium channel blockers) were similarly effective (within a few percentage points) in preventing CHD events and strokes, with the exception that calcium channel blockers had a greater preventive effect on stroke (relative risk 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 0.98). The percentage reductions in CHD events and stroke were similar in people with and without cardiovascular disease and regardless of blood pressure before treatment (down to 110 mm Hg systolic and 70 mm Hg diastolic). Combining our results with those from two other studies (the meta-analyses of blood pressure cohort studies and of trials determining the blood pressure lowering effects of drugs according to dose) showed that in people aged 60-69 with a diastolic blood pressure before treatment of 90 mm Hg, three drugs at half standard dose in combination reduced the risk of CHD by an estimated 46% and of stroke by 62%; one drug at standard dose had about half this effect. The present meta-analysis also showed that drugs other than calcium channel blockers (with the exception of non-cardioselective beta blockers) reduced the incidence of heart failure by 24% (19% to 28%) and calcium channel blockers by 19% (6% to 31%). CONCLUSIONS: With the exception of the extra protective effect of beta blockers given shortly after a myocardial infarction and the minor additional effect of calcium channel blockers in preventing stroke, all the classes of blood pressure lowering drugs have a similar effect in reducing CHD events and stroke for a given reduction in blood pressure so excluding material pleiotropic effects. The proportional reduction in cardiovascular disease events was the same or similar regardless of pretreatment blood pressure and the presence or absence of existing cardiovascular disease. Guidelines on the use of blood pressure lowering drugs can be simplified so that drugs are offered to people with all levels of blood pressure. Our results indicate the importance of lowering blood pressure in everyone over a certain age, rather than measuring it in everyone and treating it in some.

The prevention of neonatal group B streptococcal disease: a report by a working group of the Medical Screening Society.

Streptococcus agalactiae, or Lancefield group B streptococcus (GBS), is the most frequent cause of serious bacterial sepsis, including neonatal meningitis, in UK neonates. Early-onset neonatal GBS infection, but not late-onset, can be prevented by screening to identify high-risk pregnancies and administering penicillin during delivery. A vaccine has been developed as an alternative means of prevention but it is awaiting a randomized trial before being available for general use. In this review we examine the published literature to assess the morbidity and mortality attributable to neonatal GBS infection, quantify the screening performance of the two alternative modes of screening (microbiological and risk factor based), review the evidence on the efficacy of the vaccine, and estimate the numbers of deaths and cases of serious disability that each strategy in turn might prevent in the UK, in order to assess the most effective means of prevention for the UK.

Is cascade testing a sensible method of screening a population for autosomal recessive disorders?

Our aim was to evaluate "cascade testing" as a method of screening a population for autosomal recessive disorders. We used computer simulations to estimate screening performance according to carrier frequency, whether testing would extend to siblings, first or second cousins of identified carriers and family size. Cascade testing in populations with the distribution of family size current in England and Wales would require locating and testing a small proportion of the population as expected, but would detect few cases. For cystic fibrosis (carrier frequency of 4%), testing all siblings and first cousins of all identified carriers would require locating and testing only 1.9% of the whole population, but would detect only 15% of all new cases. Similarly for congenital adrenal hyperplasia (carrier frequency of 1%), testing all siblings and first cousins of all identified carriers would require locating and testing only 0.1% of the whole population, but would detect only 3.1% of all new cases. The detection rate increases with increasing carrier frequency, family size and extending the testing to second cousins of identified carriers, but at the cost of greater increases in the proportion of the population located and tested. The performance of cascade testing is too poor to justify its introduction into practice as a screening test for any autosomal recessive disorder.

The performance of blood pressure and other cardiovascular risk factors as screening tests for ischaemic heart disease and stroke.

This paper summarises the main evidence and conclusions relating to using blood pressure measurement as a screening test to identify people who will develop ischaemic heart disease (IHD) or stroke, as recently published in a Health Technology Assessment report. While blood pressure is recognised as an important cause of stroke and IHD, and lowering blood pressure can substantially lower the risk of these diseases, the measurement of blood pressure is a poor screening test. It is not good in distinguishing those who will and will not develop these diseases. The poor screening performance is illustrated by the findings that in the largest cohort study, persons in the top 10% of the distribution of systolic blood pressure experienced only 21% of all IHD events and 28% of all strokes at a given age. Using several cardiovascular risk factors in combination does not add materially to the poor screening performance of blood pressure alone. Among persons in a specified age group, the 5% at highest risk experience 17% of all heart disease deaths with risk computation based on blood pressure alone, 22% when based on blood pressure and apolipoprotein B (or LDL cholesterol) in combination, and only 28% using these two, smoking and three other cardiovascular risk factors all in combination. Identifying patients at the time of hospital discharge following myocardial infarction or stroke is the most effective screening test to identify those who will die of cardiovascular disease. In patients with a history of myocardial infarction or stroke the cardiovascular death rate in the absence of treatment is about 5% per year, a risk that persists for at least 15 years. In the absence of treatment, about half of all deaths from heart disease in a population occur after hospital discharge following the first infarct. Among persons with no history of cardiovascular disease, age is a better screening test than the reversible risk factors, and the best policy is to offer treatment to all persons above a specified age such as 55 years.

A strategy to reduce cardiovascular disease by more than 80%.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the combination of drugs and vitamins, and their doses, for use in a single daily pill to achieve a large effect in preventing cardiovascular disease with minimal adverse effects. The strategy was to simultaneously reduce four cardiovascular risk factors (low density lipoprotein cholesterol, blood pressure, serum homocysteine, and platelet function) regardless of pretreatment levels. DESIGN: We quantified the efficacy and adverse effects of the proposed formulation from published meta-analyses of randomised trials and cohort studies and a meta-analysis of 15 trials of low dose (50-125 mg/day) aspirin. OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportional reduction in ischaemic heart disease (IHD) events and strokes; life years gained; and prevalence of adverse effects. RESULTS: The formulation which met our objectives was: a statin (for example, atorvastatin (daily dose 10 mg) or simvastatin (40 mg)); three blood pressure lowering drugs (for example, a thiazide, a beta blocker, and an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor), each at half standard dose; folic acid (0.8 mg); and aspirin (75 mg). We estimate that the combination (which we call the Polypill) reduces IHD events by 88% (95% confidence interval 84% to 91%) and stroke by 80% (71% to 87%). One third of people taking this pill from age 55 would benefit, gaining on average about 11 years of life free from an IHD event or stroke. Summing the adverse effects of the components observed in randomised trials shows that the Polypill would cause symptoms in 8-15% of people (depending on the precise formulation). CONCLUSION: The Polypill strategy could largely prevent heart attacks and stroke if taken by everyone aged 55 and older and everyone with existing cardiovascular disease. It would be acceptably safe and with widespread use would have a greater impact on the prevention of disease in the Western world than any other single intervention.

Quantifying effect of statins on low density lipoprotein cholesterol, ischaemic heart disease, and stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine by how much statins reduce serum concentrations of low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and incidence of ischaemic heart disease (IHD) events and stroke, according to drug, dose, and duration of treatment. DESIGN: Three meta-analyses: 164 short term randomised placebo controlled trials of six statins and LDL cholesterol reduction; 58 randomised trials of cholesterol lowering by any means and IHD events; and nine cohort studies and the same 58 trials on stoke. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reductions in LDL cholesterol according to statin and dose; reduction in IHD events and stroke for a specified reduction in LDL cholesterol. RESULTS: Reductions in LDL cholesterol (in the 164 trials) were 2.8 mmol/l (60%) with rosuvastatin 80 mg/day, 2.6 mmol/l (55%) with atorvastatin 80 mg/day, 1.8 mmol/l (40%) with atorvastatin 10 mg/day, lovastatin 40 mg/day, simvastatin 40 mg/day, or rosuvastatin 5 mg/day, all from pretreatment concentrations of 4.8 mmol/l. Pravastatin and fluvastatin achieved smaller reductions. In the 58 trials, for an LDL cholesterol reduction of 1.0 mmol/l the risk of IHD events was reduced by 11% in the first year of treatment, 24% in the second year, 33% in years three to five, and by 36% thereafter (P < 0.001 for trend). IHD events were reduced by 20%, 31%, and 51% in trials grouped by LDL cholesterol reduction (means 0.5 mmol/l, 1.0 mmol/l, and 1.6 mmol/l) after results from first two years of treatment were excluded (P < 0.001 for trend). After several years a reduction of 1.8 mmol/l would reduce IHD events by an estimated 61%. Results from the same 58 trials, corroborated by results from the nine cohort studies, show that lowering LDL cholesterol decreases all stroke by 10% for a 1 mmol/l reduction and 17% for a 1.8 mmol/l reduction. Estimates allow for the fact that trials tended to recruit people with vascular disease, among whom the effect of LDL cholesterol reduction on stroke is greater because of their higher risk of thromboembolic stroke (rather than haemorrhagic stroke) compared with people in the general population. CONCLUSIONS: Statins can lower LDL cholesterol concentration by an average of 1.8 mmol/l which reduces the risk of IHD events by about 60% and stroke by 17%.

Value of low dose combination treatment with blood pressure lowering drugs: analysis of 354 randomised trials.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the average reduction in blood pressure, prevalence of adverse effects, and reduction in risk of stroke and ischaemic heart disease events produced by the five main categories of blood pressure lowering drugs according to dose, singly and in combination. DESIGN: Meta-analysis of 354 randomised double blind placebo controlled trials of thiazides, beta blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, and calcium channel blockers in fixed dose. SUBJECTS: 40,000 treated patients and 16,000 patients given placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Placebo adjusted reductions in systolic and diastolic blood pressure and prevalence of adverse effects, according to dose expressed as a multiple of the standard (recommended) doses of the drugs. RESULTS: All five categories of drug produced similar reductions in blood pressure. The average reduction was 9.1 mm Hg systolic and 5.5 mm Hg diastolic at standard dose and 7.1 mm Hg systolic and 4.4 mm Hg diastolic (20% lower) at half standard dose. The drugs reduced blood pressure from all pretreatment levels, more so from higher levels; for a 10 mm Hg higher blood pressure the reduction was 1.0 mm Hg systolic and 1.1 mm Hg diastolic greater. The blood pressure lowering effects of different categories of drugs were additive. Symptoms attributable to thiazides, beta blockers, and calcium channel blockers were strongly dose related; symptoms caused by ACE inhibitors (mainly cough) were not dose related. Angiotensin II receptor antagonists caused no excess of symptoms. The prevalence of symptoms with two drugs in combination was less than additive. Adverse metabolic effects (such as changes in cholesterol or potassium) were negligible at half standard dose. CONCLUSIONS: Combination low dose drug treatment increases efficacy and reduces adverse effects. From the average blood pressure in people who have strokes (150/90 mm Hg) three drugs at half standard dose are estimated to lower blood pressure by 20 mm Hg systolic and 11 mm Hg diastolic and thereby reduce the risk of stroke by 63% and ischaemic heart disease events by 46% at age 60-69.

Quantifying the effect of folic acid.

BACKGROUND: Folic acid is known to prevent neural-tube defects (NTDs) but the size of the effect for a given dose is unclear. We aimed to quantify such an effect. METHODS: We used published data from 13 studies of folic acid supplementation on serum folate concentrations and results from a large cohort study of the risk of NTDs according to serum folate, to measure the preventive effect of specified increases in intake of folic acid. FINDINGS: Serum folate concentrations increase by 0.94 ng/mL (95% CI 0.77-1.10) for every 0.1 mg/day increase in folic acid intake in women aged 20-35 years, and about double that in people aged 40-65. Every doubling of serum folate concentration roughly halves the risk of an NTD. These two effects can be combined to predict the reduction in risk according to intake of extra folic acid and background serum folate concentration. Such results predict that the preventive effect is greater in women with low serum folate than in those with higher concentrations. The results have also been used to predict direct observations from large randomised trials and the effect of food fortification. From a typical western background serum folate of 5 ng/mL, about 0.2 mg/day (the US level of folic acid fortification) would be expected to reduce NTDs by about 20%; a similar effect can be expected from the current British recommendation (0.24 mg/day). An increase of 0.4 mg/day would reduce risk by about 36%, of 1 mg/day by 57%, and taking a 5-mg tablet daily would reduce risk by about 85%. INTERPRETATION: Folic acid fortification levels should be increased. Additionally women planning a pregnancy should take 5 mg folic acid tablets daily, instead of the 0.4 mg dose presently recommended.

Chlamydia pneumoniae infection and mortality from ischaemic heart disease: large prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there is an independent association between infection with Chlamydia pneumoniae and ischaemic heart disease. DESIGN: Prospective study using a nested case-control design. SETTING: Medical centre in London run by BUPA, a private medical organisation. PARTICIPANTS: 21 520 professional men aged 35-64 who attended for a medical examination in London between 1975 and 1982. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Death from ischaemic heart disease. RESULTS: The distributions of concentrations of IgG and IgA antibodies to C pneumoniae were similar in the 647 men who subsequently died of ischaemic heart disease and in 1294 age matched controls who did not. There was no material association with heart disease irrespective of the cut-off point chosen to define seropositivity. At a cut-off point that defines 15% of controls as positive, for example, the odds ratios were 1.26 (95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.68) for IgG and 1.09 (0.82 to 1.43) for IgA. CONCLUSIONS: No material association was found between infection with C pneumoniae and ischaemic heart disease. The size and prospective design of the study and the socioeconomic homogeneity of the cohort minimise both random and systematic error.

The importance of age in screening for cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To derive a rational method of selecting the age range over which screening tests for cancer should be offered (that is, over which they would be most effective in saving life). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The number of person-years of life that are lost through deaths occurring at each year of age from each of six cancers. RESULTS: For each cancer the number of years of life lost to age 80, plotted against age at death, showed a rise followed by a fall. The peak indicates the age at which deaths from the cancer result in most years of life lost. Special screening tests, such as mammography for breast cancer, will be most effective in saving life shortly before that age. The peak (as a five year age span) occurs at age 55-59 for breast cancer (189 years of life lost per 10,000 women per year), 70-74 for prostate cancer (114), 65-69 for colorectal cancer (96), 55-59 for ovarian cancer (61), 50-54 for cervical cancer (47), and 45-50 for melanoma (8). The precise interval by which special screening tests should precede the peak age is not critical; five years would be appropriate. Given current evidence on the efficacy of cancer screening, if it were stipulated that screening could only be performed when at least 50 years of life were to be gained per 10,000 persons screened, only mammography for breast cancer would be conducted, between the ages of 50 and 59. If the stipulation was 25 or more years of life gained mammography would be offered to women aged 40-69 and cervical smears to women aged 35-59. With only 10 or more years of life gained (unlikely to be worthwhile) mammography would be extended to women aged 30-74, cervical smears to 25-69, and faecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer offered to those aged 45-74. Extending cervical cancer screening to age 69 would save more years of life than the present policy of screening women aged 20-29. Extending breast cancer screening to the age of 74 would be more effective than cervical screening at any age. CONCLUSIONS: Determining the number of years of life lost through deaths from a particular cancer at each age is useful in public health screening policy, both in selecting the age range over which special screening tests of proven efficacy should be offered and in quantitatively comparing the value of screening for different cancers.

Why is mortality higher in poorer areas and in more northern areas of England and Wales?

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To identify and quantify the factors responsible for the differences in mortality between affluent and deprived areas, the north and the south, and urban and rural areas in England and Wales. DESIGN: A multiple Poisson regression analysis of cause specific mortality in the 403 local authority districts, each classified by deprivation (using the Jarman Index), latitude (from 50 degrees to 55 degrees north) and urbanisation, adjusting for age, sex, and proportion of ethnic minorities. SETTING: England and Wales 1992. MAIN RESULTS: All cause mortality was 15% higher in the districts comprising the most compared with the least deprived tenth of the population, 23% higher in the most northern (55 degrees) than in the most southern (50 degrees) districts, and 4% higher in metropolitan (within large cities) than rural districts. Nationally these differences were associated with 40,000, 65,000, and 15,000 excess deaths respectively. More than two thirds of the overall excess mortality with deprivation, latitude, and urbanisation was from three diseases--ischaemic heart disease, lung cancer, and chronic bronchitis and emphysema. The excess mortality from these and other diseases closely matched that predicted from differences according to deprivation and latitude in smoking, heavy alcohol consumption, Helicobacter pylori infection, and temperature, and thus could be attributed to these causes. About 85% of the overall excess mortality with deprivation was attributable to heavier smoking and 6% to heavier alcohol consumption, but diet varied little. Deaths more directly related to deprivation (such as those caused by H pylori infection, drug misuse, psychoses) accounted for an estimated 12% of the excess deaths, but variation in provision and uptake of healthcare services only 1%. The direct effects of deprivation are more strongly related to morbidity than mortality. Of the difference in mortality with latitude, about 45% was attributable to differences in smoking, and 25% to climate (mainly the association of cardiovascular and respiratory disease with cold). The differences with urbanisation were mainly because of smoking. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the prevalence of smoking account for much of the variation in mortality between areas. Alcohol accounts for some, diet little. The more direct material effect of deprivation contributes to the variation in mortality but is particularly important with respect to differences in morbidity.