GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: JAMA Network Open, American Medical Association (AMA), Vol. 6, No. 7 ( 2023-07-13), p. e2323349-
    Abstract: Current data identifying COVID-19 risk factors lack standardized outcomes and insufficiently control for confounders. Objective To identify risk factors associated with COVID-19, severe COVID-19, and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Design, Setting, and Participants This secondary cross-protocol analysis included 4 multicenter, international, randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled, COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials with harmonized protocols established by the COVID-19 Prevention Network. Individual-level data from participants randomized to receive placebo within each trial were combined and analyzed. Enrollment began July 2020 and the last data cutoff was in July 2021. Participants included adults in stable health, at risk for SARS-CoV-2, and assigned to the placebo group within each vaccine trial. Data were analyzed from April 2022 to February 2023. Exposures Comorbid conditions, demographic factors, and SARS-CoV-2 exposure risk at the time of enrollment. Main Outcomes and Measures Coprimary outcomes were COVID-19 and severe COVID-19. Multivariate Cox proportional regression models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% CIs for baseline covariates, accounting for trial, region, and calendar time. Secondary outcomes included severe COVID-19 among people with COVID-19, subclinical SARS-CoV-2 infection, and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results A total of 57 692 participants (median [range] age, 51 [18-95] years; 11 720 participants [20.3%] aged ≥65 years; 31 058 participants [53.8%] assigned male at birth) were included. The analysis population included 3270 American Indian or Alaska Native participants (5.7%), 7849 Black or African American participants (13.6%), 17 678 Hispanic or Latino participants (30.6%), and 40 745 White participants (70.6%). Annualized incidence was 13.9% (95% CI, 13.3%-14.4%) for COVID-19 and 2.0% (95% CI, 1.8%-2.2%) for severe COVID-19. Factors associated with increased rates of COVID-19 included workplace exposure (high vs low: aHR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.16-1.58]; medium vs low: aHR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.21-1.65] ; P   & amp;lt; .001) and living condition risk (very high vs low risk: aHR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.21-1.66]; medium vs low risk: aHR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.08-1.32] ; P   & amp;lt; .001). Factors associated with decreased rates of COVID-19 included previous SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.09-0.19]; P   & amp;lt; .001), age 65 years or older (aHR vs age & amp;lt;65 years, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.50-0.64]; P   & amp;lt; .001) and Black or African American race (aHR vs White race, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.67-0.91]; P  = .002). Factors associated with increased rates of severe COVID-19 included race (American Indian or Alaska Native vs White: aHR, 2.61 [95% CI, 1.85-3.69]; multiracial vs White: aHR, 2.19 [95% CI, 1.50-3.20] ; P   & amp;lt; .001), diabetes (aHR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.14-2.08]; P  = .005) and at least 2 comorbidities (aHR vs none, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.09-1.76]; P  = .008). In analyses restricted to participants who contracted COVID-19, increased severe COVID-19 rates were associated with age 65 years or older (aHR vs & amp;lt;65 years, 1.75 [95% CI, 1.32-2.31]; P   & amp;lt; .001), race (American Indian or Alaska Native vs White: aHR, 1.98 [95% CI, 1.38-2.83]; Black or African American vs White: aHR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.03-2.14] ; multiracial: aHR, 1.81 [95% CI, 1.21-2.69]; overall P  = .001), body mass index (aHR per 1-unit increase, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.01-1.04]; P  = .001), and diabetes (aHR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.37-2.49]; P   & amp;lt; .001). Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with decreased severe COVID-19 rates (aHR, 0.04 [95% CI, 0.01-0.14]; P   & amp;lt; .001). Conclusions and Relevance In this secondary cross-protocol analysis of 4 randomized clinical trials, exposure and demographic factors had the strongest associations with outcomes; results could inform mitigation strategies for SARS-CoV-2 and viruses with comparable epidemiological characteristics.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2574-3805
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Medical Association (AMA)
    Publication Date: 2023
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2931249-8
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: JAMA Cardiology, American Medical Association (AMA), Vol. 6, No. 12 ( 2021-12-01), p. 1440-
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2380-6583
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Medical Association (AMA)
    Publication Date: 2021
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: JAMA Neurology, American Medical Association (AMA), Vol. 80, No. 9 ( 2023-09-01), p. 969-
    Abstract: Knowledge is lacking on the prevalence and prognosis of individuals with a β-amyloid–negative, tau-positive (A−T+) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker profile. Objective To estimate the prevalence of a CSF A−T+ biomarker profile and investigate its clinical implications. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a retrospective cohort study of the cross-sectional multicenter University of Gothenburg (UGOT) cohort (November 2019-January 2021), the longitudinal multicenter Alzheimer Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) cohort (individuals with mild cognitive impairment [MCI] and no cognitive impairment; September 2005-May 2022), and 2 Wisconsin cohorts, Wisconsin Alzheimer Disease Research Center and Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer Prevention (WISC; individuals without cognitive impairment; February 2007-November 2020). This was a multicenter study, with data collected from referral centers in clinical routine (UGOT) and research settings (ADNI and WISC). Eligible individuals had 1 lumbar puncture (all cohorts), 2 or more cognitive assessments (ADNI and WISC), and imaging (ADNI only) performed on 2 separate occasions. Data were analyzed on August 2022 to April 2023. Exposures Baseline CSF Aβ42/40 and phosphorylated tau (p-tau)181; cognitive tests (ADNI: modified preclinical Alzheimer cognitive composite [mPACC]; WISC: modified 3-test PACC [PACC-3] ). Exposures in the ADNI cohort included [ 18 F]-florbetapir amyloid positron emission tomography (PET), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), [ 18 F]-fluorodeoxyglucose PET (FDG-PET), and cross-sectional tau-PET (ADNI: [ 18 F]-flortaucipir, WISC: [ 18 F]-MK6240). Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcomes were the prevalence of CSF AT biomarker profiles and continuous longitudinal global cognitive outcome and imaging biomarker trajectories in A−T+ vs A−T− groups. Secondary outcomes included cross-sectional tau-PET. Results A total of 7679 individuals (mean [SD] age, 71.0 [8.4] years; 4101 male [53%]) were included in the UGOT cohort, 970 individuals (mean [SD] age, 73 [7.0] years; 526 male [54%] ) were included in the ADNI cohort, and 519 individuals (mean [SD] age, 60 [7.3] years; 346 female [67%]) were included in the WISC cohort. The prevalence of an A−T+ profile in the UGOT cohort was 4.1% (95% CI, 3.7%-4.6%), being less common than the other patterns. Longitudinally, no significant differences in rates of worsening were observed between A−T+ and A−T− profiles for cognition or imaging biomarkers. Cross-sectionally, A−T+ had similar tau-PET uptake to individuals with an A−T− biomarker profile. Conclusion and Relevance Results suggest that the CSF A−T+ biomarker profile was found in approximately 5% of lumbar punctures and was not associated with a higher rate of cognitive decline or biomarker signs of disease progression compared with biomarker-negative individuals.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2168-6149
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Medical Association (AMA)
    Publication Date: 2023
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: JAMA Network Open, American Medical Association (AMA), Vol. 6, No. 7 ( 2023-07-11), p. e2321730-
    Abstract: The Colonoscopy Versus Fecal Immunochemical Test in Reducing Mortality From Colorectal Cancer (CONFIRM) randomized clinical trial sought to recruit 50 000 adults into a study comparing colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality outcomes after randomization to either an annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or colonoscopy. Objective To (1) describe study participant characteristics and (2) examine who declined participation because of a preference for colonoscopy or stool testing (ie, fecal occult blood test [FOBT]/FIT) and assess that preference’s association with geographic and temporal factors. Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional study within CONFIRM, which completed enrollment through 46 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers between May 22, 2012, and December 1, 2017, with follow-up planned through 2028, comprised veterans aged 50 to 75 years with an average CRC risk and due for screening. Data were analyzed between March 7 and December 5, 2022. Exposure Case report forms were used to capture enrolled participant data and reasons for declining participation among otherwise eligible individuals. Main Outcomes and Measures Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the cohort overall and by intervention. Among individuals declining participation, logistic regression was used to compare preference for FOBT/FIT or colonoscopy by recruitment region and year. Results A total of 50 126 participants were recruited (mean [SD] age, 59.1 [6.9] years; 46 618 [93.0%] male and 3508 [7.0%] female). The cohort was racially and ethnically diverse, with 748 (1.5%) identifying as Asian, 12 021 (24.0%) as Black, 415 (0.8%) as Native American or Alaska Native, 34 629 (69.1%) as White, and 1877 (3.7%) as other race, including multiracial; and 5734 (11.4%) as having Hispanic ethnicity. Of the 11 109 eligible individuals who declined participation (18.0%), 4824 (43.4%) declined due to a stated preference for a specific screening test, with FOBT/FIT being the most preferred method (2820 [58.5%]) vs colonoscopy (1958 [40.6%] ; P   & amp;lt; .001) or other screening tests (46 [1.0%] P   & amp;lt; .001). Preference for FOBT/FIT was strongest in the West (963 of 1472 [65.4%]) and modest elsewhere, ranging from 199 of 371 (53.6%) in the Northeast to 884 of 1543 (57.3%) in the Midwest ( P  = .001). Adjusting for region, the preference for FOBT/FIT increased by 19% per recruitment year (odds ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.14-1.25). Conclusions and Relevance In this cross-sectional analysis of veterans choosing nonenrollment in the CONFIRM study, those who declined participation more often preferred FOBT or FIT over colonoscopy. This preference increased over time and was strongest in the western US and may provide insight into trends in CRC screening preferences.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2574-3805
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Medical Association (AMA)
    Publication Date: 2023
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2931249-8
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...