Projections of U.S. Edentulism Prevalence Following 5 Decades of Decline

After decades of decline in prevalence of complete tooth loss (edentulism), the trend continues to be misinterpreted, producing flawed projections and misdirected health goals. We investigated population trends in edentulism among U.S. adults aged ≥15 yr by creating time-series data from 5 national cross-sectional health surveys: 1957-1958 (n ≈ 100,000 adults), 1971-1975 (n = 14,655 adults), 1988-1998 (n = 18,011 adults), 1999-2002 (n = 12,336 adults), and 2009-2012 (n = 10,522 adults). Birth cohort analysis was used to isolate age and cohort effects. Geographic and sociodemographic variation in prevalence was investigated with a sixth U.S. survey of 432,519 adults conducted in 2010. Prevalence through 2050 was projected with age-cohort regression models using Monte-Carlo simulation of prediction intervals. Across the 5-decade observation period, edentulism prevalence declined from 18.9% in 1957-1958 (95% confidence limits: 18.4%, 19.4%) to 4.9% in 2009-2012 (95% confidence limits: 4.0%, 5.8%). The most influential determinant of the decline was the passing of generations born before the 1940s, whose rate of edentulism incidence (5%-6% per decade of age) far exceeded later cohorts (1%-3% per decade of age). High-income households experienced a greater relative decline, although a smaller absolute decline, than low-income households. By 2010, edentulism was a rare condition in high-income households, and it had contracted geographically to states with disproportionately high poverty. With the passing of generations born in the mid-20th century, the rate of decline in edentulism is projected to slow, reaching 2.6% (95% prediction limits: 2.1%, 3.1%) by 2050. The continuing decline will be offset only partially by population growth and population aging such that the predicted number of edentulous people in 2050 (8.6 million; 95% prediction limits: 6.8 million, 10.3 million) will be 30% lower than the 12.2 million edentulous people in 2010

Response to letter to the Editor, "directed acyclic graphs for oral disease research"

We thank Dr. Schwan and colleagues (2016) for their comments on our paper (Akinkugbe et al. 2016)

Periodontitis and Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease, a population-based cohort investigation in the Study of Health in Pomerania

Background: Non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) affects 20%–30% of adults with risk factors like obesity and insulin resistance putatively acting through chronic low‐grade inflammation. Because periodontitis elicits low‐grade inflammation, we hypothesized that it could contribute to NAFLD occurrence. Objective: To investigate epidemiologic associations between periodontitis and the incidence of NAFLD among 2,623 participants of the Study of Health in Pomerania. Methods: Periodontitis at baseline was defined as the percentage of sites (0%, <30%, ≥30%) with (i) clinical attachment level (CAL) ≥3 mm; (ii) probing pocket depth (PD) ≥4 mm. Incident NAFLD was defined as a significant increase in liver echogenicity on ultrasound relative to the kidneys, with the diaphragm indistinct or the echogenic walls of the portal veins invisible.Results: After a median 7.7 years of follow‐up, 605 incident NAFLD cases occurred at a rate of 32.5 cases per 1,000 person‐years. Relative to participants without CAL ≥3 mm, NAFLD incidence was elevated slightly in participants with <30% of sites affected and moderately in participants with ≥30% of sites affected (multivariable‐adjusted incidence rate ratio = 1.28, 95% CI, 0.84, 1.95 and 1.60, 95% CI, 1.05–2.43), respectively. A similar dose–response relationship was not observed for PD. Conclusion: History of periodontitis may be a risk factor for NAFLD

Tocilizumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of tocilizumab in adult patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 with both hypoxia and systemic inflammation. Methods: This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. Those trial participants with hypoxia (oxygen saturation &lt;92% on air or requiring oxygen therapy) and evidence of systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein ≥75 mg/L) were eligible for random assignment in a 1:1 ratio to usual standard of care alone versus usual standard of care plus tocilizumab at a dose of 400 mg–800 mg (depending on weight) given intravenously. A second dose could be given 12–24 h later if the patient's condition had not improved. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ISRCTN (50189673) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04381936). Findings: Between April 23, 2020, and Jan 24, 2021, 4116 adults of 21 550 patients enrolled into the RECOVERY trial were included in the assessment of tocilizumab, including 3385 (82%) patients receiving systemic corticosteroids. Overall, 621 (31%) of the 2022 patients allocated tocilizumab and 729 (35%) of the 2094 patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0·85; 95% CI 0·76–0·94; p=0·0028). Consistent results were seen in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including those receiving systemic corticosteroids. Patients allocated to tocilizumab were more likely to be discharged from hospital within 28 days (57% vs 50%; rate ratio 1·22; 1·12–1·33; p&lt;0·0001). Among those not receiving invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, patients allocated tocilizumab were less likely to reach the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (35% vs 42%; risk ratio 0·84; 95% CI 0·77–0·92; p&lt;0·0001). Interpretation: In hospitalised COVID-19 patients with hypoxia and systemic inflammation, tocilizumab improved survival and other clinical outcomes. These benefits were seen regardless of the amount of respiratory support and were additional to the benefits of systemic corticosteroids. Funding: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background: Many patients with COVID-19 have been treated with plasma containing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Methods: This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]) is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 177 NHS hospitals from across the UK. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either usual care alone (usual care group) or usual care plus high-titre convalescent plasma (convalescent plasma group). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936. Findings: Between May 28, 2020, and Jan 15, 2021, 11558 (71%) of 16287 patients enrolled in RECOVERY were eligible to receive convalescent plasma and were assigned to either the convalescent plasma group or the usual care group. There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality between the two groups: 1399 (24%) of 5795 patients in the convalescent plasma group and 1408 (24%) of 5763 patients in the usual care group died within 28 days (rate ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·93–1·07; p=0·95). The 28-day mortality rate ratio was similar in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including in those patients without detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at randomisation. Allocation to convalescent plasma had no significant effect on the proportion of patients discharged from hospital within 28 days (3832 [66%] patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 3822 [66%] patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·94–1·03; p=0·57). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at randomisation, there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients meeting the composite endpoint of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death (1568 [29%] of 5493 patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 1568 [29%] of 5448 patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·93–1·05; p=0·79). Interpretation: In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, high-titre convalescent plasma did not improve survival or other prespecified clinical outcomes. Funding: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research

Familial systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease in Nigerians: a case series

Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases (SARD) are chronic disorders affecting multiple organs. Most SARDs have a female preponderance. SARDs have rarely been reported in African blacks, although there is increasing reportage of recent. Different SARDs are believed to have genetic predisposition and familial clustering.SARDs occasionally run in families - among mothers and daughters, among siblings. Such clustering has however not been documented among black Africans. We present four Nigerian families with clustering of systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease.Keywords: Systemic autoimmune disease, Familial clustering, Nigerian

Whole-genome sequencing reveals host factors underlying critical COVID-19

Altres ajuts: Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC); Illumina; LifeArc; Medical Research Council (MRC); UKRI; Sepsis Research (the Fiona Elizabeth Agnew Trust); the Intensive Care Society, Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellowship (223164/Z/21/Z); BBSRC Institute Program Support Grant to the Roslin Institute (BBS/E/D/20002172, BBS/E/D/10002070, BBS/E/D/30002275); UKRI grants (MC_PC_20004, MC_PC_19025, MC_PC_1905, MRNO2995X/1); UK Research and Innovation (MC_PC_20029); the Wellcome PhD training fellowship for clinicians (204979/Z/16/Z); the Edinburgh Clinical Academic Track (ECAT) programme; the National Institute for Health Research, the Wellcome Trust; the MRC; Cancer Research UK; the DHSC; NHS England; the Smilow family; the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health (CTSA award number UL1TR001878); the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania; National Institute on Aging (NIA U01AG009740); the National Institute on Aging (RC2 AG036495, RC4 AG039029); the Common Fund of the Office of the Director of the National Institutes of Health; NCI; NHGRI; NHLBI; NIDA; NIMH; NINDS.Critical COVID-19 is caused by immune-mediated inflammatory lung injury. Host genetic variation influences the development of illness requiring critical care or hospitalization after infection with SARS-CoV-2. The GenOMICC (Genetics of Mortality in Critical Care) study enables the comparison of genomes from individuals who are critically ill with those of population controls to find underlying disease mechanisms. Here we use whole-genome sequencing in 7,491 critically ill individuals compared with 48,400 controls to discover and replicate 23 independent variants that significantly predispose to critical COVID-19. We identify 16 new independent associations, including variants within genes that are involved in interferon signalling (IL10RB and PLSCR1), leucocyte differentiation (BCL11A) and blood-type antigen secretor status (FUT2). Using transcriptome-wide association and colocalization to infer the effect of gene expression on disease severity, we find evidence that implicates multiple genes-including reduced expression of a membrane flippase (ATP11A), and increased expression of a mucin (MUC1)-in critical disease. Mendelian randomization provides evidence in support of causal roles for myeloid cell adhesion molecules (SELE, ICAM5 and CD209) and the coagulation factor F8, all of which are potentially druggable targets. Our results are broadly consistent with a multi-component model of COVID-19 pathophysiology, in which at least two distinct mechanisms can predispose to life-threatening disease: failure to control viral replication; or an enhanced tendency towards pulmonary inflammation and intravascular coagulation. We show that comparison between cases of critical illness and population controls is highly efficient for the detection of therapeutically relevant mechanisms of disease