Association between oral fluoroquinolones and seizures: A self-controlled case series study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the association and to estimate the crude absolute risk of seizure among patients exposed to fluoroquinolones (FQs) in Hong Kong and the United Kingdom. METHODS: A self-controlled case series study was conducted. Data were collected from the Hong Kong Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System database and the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Patients who were prescribed any oral FQ and had an incident seizure diagnosis from 2001 to 2013 were included. The risk windows were defined as pre-FQ start, FQ-exposed, and post-FQ completion. Incidence rate ratios were estimated in all risk windows and compared with baseline periods. A post hoc subgroup analysis was conducted to examine the effect of patients with a history of seizure. RESULTS: An increased incidence rate ratio was found in the pre-FQ start periods and no association was found in the post-FQ completion periods in both databases. The crude absolute risk of an incident seizure in 10,000 oral FQ prescriptions was 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.47-1.10) in the Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System and 0.40 (95% confidence interval 0.30-0.54) in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. The rate ratio during treatment was not higher than pre-FQ start periods among patients with a history of seizure, therefore the results did not raise serious concerns. CONCLUSIONS: This study does not support a causal association between the use of oral FQs and the subsequent occurrence of seizure. An increased risk before the FQ exposure period suggests that the clinical indication for which FQ was prescribed may have contributed to the development of seizure rather than the drug itself

Association of Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics and Oral Antipsychotics With Disease Relapse, Health Care Use, and Adverse Events Among People With Schizophrenia

IMPORTANCE: Evidence for improved clinical outcomes with long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIAs) vs oral antipsychotics (OAs) is limited in Asian populations and special patient groups, including older people (>65 years), people with substance use, and early initiators of LAIAs. OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk of disease relapse, health care use, and adverse events associated with the use of LAIAs vs OAs among people in Hong Kong with schizophrenia. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this self-controlled case series study, individuals with a diagnosis of schizophrenia who were prescribed LAIAs and OAs between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2019, were identified from the Clinical Database Analysis and Reporting System of the Hong Kong Hospital Authority. Data analysis was conducted from May to August in 2021. EXPOSURES: Use of LAIAs vs OAs. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Risk of disease relapse (hospitalizations for psychiatric disorders, hospitalizations for schizophrenia, and suicide attempts), health care use (all-cause emergency department visits and hospitalizations), and adverse events (hospitalizations for somatic disorders, hospitalizations for cardiovascular diseases, and extrapyramidal symptoms) between the period in which patients were treated with LAIAs and the period in which patients were treated with OAs were compared using Poisson regression. RESULTS: Of the 70 396 individuals with schizophrenia (37 200 women [52.8%]; mean [SD] age, 44.2 [15.8] years), 23 719 (33.7%) were prescribed both LAIAs and OAs. Compared with OAs, LAIAs were associated with a lower risk of hospitalizations for any cause (n = 20 973; incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.63 [95% CI, 0.61-0.65]), hospitalizations for psychiatric disorders (n = 19 283; IRR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.50-0.53]), hospitalizations for schizophrenia (n = 18 385; IRR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.51-0.55]), and incident suicide attempts (n = 1453; IRR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.44-0.71]). During full treatment with LAIAs, there was a reduction in hospitalizations for somatic disorders (n = 15 396; IRR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.85-0.91]), hospitalizations for cardiovascular diseases (n = 3710; IRR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.81-0.96]), and extrapyramidal symptoms (n = 22 182; IRR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.82-0.91]) compared with full treatment with OAs. No significant difference was found for emergency department visits. Similar associations were observed during the subsequent treatment periods (beyond 90 days) and among older people and those with substance use, except for an increased risk of extrapyramidal symptoms among older people when initiating LAIAs (first 90 days). Compared with late initiators, early LAIA initiators had a greater reduction in these outcome events. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This self-controlled case series study of people in Hong Kong with schizophrenia suggests that LAIAs were associated with a lower risk of disease relapse and hospitalization than OAs, without an increased risk of adverse events. Clinicians should more broadly consider the long-term use of LAIAs for Chinese people with schizophrenia, especially early in the course of illness

Proton pump inhibitors and myocardial infarction: an application of active comparators in a self-controlled case series.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies investigating potential cardiovascular adverse events of acid-suppressing drugs are susceptible to protopathic bias and confounding. We aimed to investigate the association between short-term risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) using a self-controlled case series (SCCS) with an active comparator. METHODS: We conducted a SCCS using a population-wide database from Hong Kong from 2003-2014. Adult with ≥1 outpatient oral PPI prescription or H2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) and MI during the observation period were included. We used both simple ratio and effect modifier approaches to SCCS with active comparators to obtain comparator adjusted estimates. RESULTS: A total of 2802 and 1889 people with MI who had exposure to PPIs and H2RA were included respectively. We observed a higher risk of MI during days 1-14 following the start of PPI prescription (Incidence rate ratio (IRR): 2.30, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.76-3.00) versus baseline. Similarly, we observed a higher risk of MI during days 1-14 following the start of H2RA prescription (IRR: 2.46, 95%CI: 1.92-3.16) versus baseline. In the novel SCCS analyses, comparator adjusted estimates were 0.93 (95%CI: 0.57-1.30) and 0.83 (95%CI: 0.58-1.20) during days 1-14 in simple ratio and effect modifier approach, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We observed no difference in risk of MI associated with PPIs compared with baseline using H2RA as the active comparator. The elevated risk of MI associated with PPIs is likely due to protopathic bias. More studies are required to explore the feasibility of using active comparators in SCCS to address protopathic bias in addition to confounding

Association Between Acute Neuropsychiatric Events and Helicobacter pylori Therapy Containing Clarithromycin.

IMPORTANCE: There is a concern that Helicobacter pylori therapy containing clarithromycin might be associated with acute neuropsychiatric events. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between H pylori therapy containing clarithromycin and acute neuropsychiatric events. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A self-controlled case series study was conducted using the Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System database in Hong Kong to explore any association. The exposure of interest was H pylori therapy containing clarithromycin in the outpatient setting. Study patients, 18 years or older at cohort entry, must have had both exposure to H pylori therapy containing clarithromycin and their first recorded neuropsychiatric events between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2012. A post hoc nested case-control analysis was also performed in patients receiving H pylori therapy containing clarithromycin. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was composite neuropsychiatric events, while secondary outcomes were psychotic events and cognitive impairment. Risk periods in the self-controlled case series analysis were defined as 14-day preexposure period, current use (days 1-14 since prescription start date) and recent use (days 15-30). Age-adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRR) were estimated using the conditional Poisson regression. RESULTS: Of 66 559 patients who had at least 1 outpatient prescription of H pylori therapy containing clarithromycin. Their mean (SD) age at cohort entry was 50.8 (14.8 years); their mean age at first exposure was 55.4 (14.8) years, and 30 910 were male (46.4%). A total of 1824 patients had their first recorded composite neuropsychiatric events during the study period. An increased IRR of 4.12 (35 composite neuropsychiatric events during 72 person-years; 95% CI, 2.94-5.76) during current use was observed but not in recent use (9 events during 82 person-years; IRR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.49-1.83) and 14-day preexposure period (14 events during 72 person-years; IRR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.96-2.77) vs baseline (1766 events during 16 665 person-years). Similarly, both the risk of psychotic events and cognitive impairment increased during current use vs baseline, although this subsequently returned to baseline incidence levels during recent use. The crude absolute risks of composite neuropsychiatric events, psychotic events, and cognitive impairment during current use were 0.45, 0.12, and 0.12 per 1000 prescriptions, respectively. The nested case-control analysis also gave similar results to that of the self-controlled case series analysis. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study shows evidence of a short-term increased risk of neuropsychiatric events associated with H pylori therapy containing clarithromycin

Safety of two-dose COVID-19 vaccination (BNT162b2 and CoronaVac) in adults with cancer: a territory-wide cohort study

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization has defined a list of adverse events of special interest (AESI) for safety surveillance of vaccines. AESI have not been adequately assessed following COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer contributing to vaccine hesitancy in this population. We aimed to evaluate the association between BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccines and the risk of AESI in adults with active cancer or a history of cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a territory-wide cohort study using electronic health records managed by the Hong Kong Hospital Authority and vaccination records provided by the Department of Health. Patients with a cancer diagnosis between January 1, 2018, and September 30, 2021, were included and stratified into two cohorts: active cancer and history of cancer. Within each cohort, patients who received two doses of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac were 1:1 matched to unvaccinated patients using the propensity score. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for AESI 28 days after the second vaccine dose. RESULTS: A total of 74,878 patients with cancer were included (vaccinated: 25,789 [34%]; unvaccinated: 49,089 [66%]). Among patients with active cancer, the incidence of AESI was 0.31 and 1.02 per 10,000 person-days with BNT162b2 versus unvaccinated patients and 0.13 and 0.88 per 10,000 person-days with CoronaVac versus unvaccinated patients. Among patients with history of cancer, the incidence was 0.55 and 0.89 per 10,000 person-days with BNT162b2 versus unvaccinated patients and 0.42 and 0.93 per 10,000 person-days with CoronaVac versus unvaccinated patients. Neither vaccine was associated with a higher risk of AESI for patients with active cancer (BNT162b2: HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.08-1.09; CoronaVac: 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-1.18) or patients with history of cancer (BNT162b2: 0.62, 95% CI 0.30-1.28; CoronaVac: 0.45, 95% CI 0.21-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: In this territory-wide cohort study of patients with cancer, the incidence of AESI following vaccination with two doses of either BNT162b2 or CoronaVac vaccines was low. The findings of this study can reassure clinicians and patients with cancer about the overall safety of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in patients with cancer, which could increase the COVID-19 vaccination rate in this vulnerable group of patients

BNT162b2 or CoronaVac Vaccinations Are Associated With a Lower Risk of Myocardial Infarction and Stroke After SARS‐CoV‐2 Infection Among Patients With Cardiovascular Disease

Background: COVID‐19 vaccines have demonstrated effectiveness against SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, hospitalization, and mortality. The association between vaccination and risk of cardiovascular complications shortly after SARS‐CoV‐2 infection among patients with cardiovascular disease remains unknown. Methods and Results: A case–control study was conducted with cases defined as patients who had myocardial infarction or stroke within 28 days after SARS‐CoV‐2 infection between January 1, 2022 and August 15, 2022. Controls were defined as all other patients who attended any health services and were not cases. Individuals without history of cardiovascular disease were excluded. Each case was randomly matched with 10 controls according to sex, age, Charlson comorbidity index, and date of hospital admission. Adjusted odds ratio with 95% CI was estimated using conditional logistic regression. We identified 808 cases matched with 7771 controls among all patients with cardiovascular disease. Results showed that vaccination with BNT162b2 or CoronaVac was associated with a lower risk of myocardial infarction or stroke after SARS‐CoV‐2 infection with a dose–response relationship. For BNT162b2, risk decreased from 0.49 (95% CI, 0.29–0.84) to 0.30 (95% CI, 0.20–0.44) and 0.17 (95% CI, 0.08–0.34) from 1 to 3 doses, respectively. Similar trends were observed for CoronaVac, with risk decreased from 0.69 (95% CI, 0.57–0.85) to 0.42 (95% CI, 0.34–0.52) and 0.32 (95% CI, 0.21–0.49) from 1 to 3 doses, respectively. Conclusions: Vaccination with BNT162b2 or CoronaVac is associated with a lower risk of myocardial infarction or stroke after SARS‐CoV‐2 infection among patients with cardiovascular disease

Safety of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac COVID-19 vaccines in patients with heart failure: A self-controlled case series study

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines are important for patients with heart failure (HF) to prevent severe outcomes but the safety concerns could lead to vaccine hesitancy. This study aimed to investigate the safety of two COVID-19 vaccines, BNT162b2 and CoronaVac, in patients with HF. METHODS: We conducted a self-controlled case series analysis using the data from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority and the Department of Health. The primary outcome was hospitalization for HF and the secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and all hospitalization. We identified patients with a history of HF before February 23, 2021 and developed the outcome event between February 23, 2021 and March 31, 2022 in Hong Kong. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) were estimated using conditional Poisson regression to evaluate the risks following the first three doses of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac. FINDINGS: We identified 32,490 patients with HF, of which 3035 were vaccinated and had a hospitalization for HF during the observation period (BNT162b2 = 755; CoronaVac = 2280). There were no increased risks during the 0–13 days (IRR 0.64 [95% confidence interval 0.33–1.26]; 0.94 [0.50–1.78]; 0.82 [0.17–3.98]) and 14–27 days (0.73 [0.35–1.52]; 0.95 [0.49–1.84]; 0.60 [0.06–5.76]) after the first, second and third doses of BNT162b2. No increased risks were observed for CoronaVac during the 0–13 days (IRR 0.60 [0.41–0.88]; 0.71 [0.45–1.12]; 1.64 [0.40–6.77]) and 14–27 days (0.91 [0.63–1.32]; 0.79 [0.46–1.35]; 1.71 [0.44–6.62]) after the first, second and third doses. We also found no increased risk of MACE or all hospitalization after vaccination. INTERPRETATION: Our results showed no increased risk of hospitalization for HF, MACE or all hospitalization after receiving BNT162b2 or CoronaVac vaccines in patients with HF. FUNDING: The project was funded by a Research Grant from the Food and Health Bureau, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Ref. No. COVID19F01). F.T.T.L. (Francisco T.T. Lai) and I.C.K.W. (Ian C.K. Wong)'s posts were partly funded by the D24H; hence this work was partly supported by AIR@InnoHK administered by Innovation and Technology Commission

COVID-19 Vaccination Preferences of University Students and Staff in Hong Kong

IMPORTANCE: COVID-19 has required universities to rapidly develop vaccination policies for students and staff, yet little is known about the preferences of these individuals toward vaccination. OBJECTIVE: To quantify student and staff preferences for COVID-19 vaccination at a university in Hong Kong. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional online survey study was conducted from July 20 to September 21, 2021, before the announcement of a campus-wide vaccine mandate. A survey of 42 451 eligible university students and staff used discrete-choice experiment methods to quantify 7 attributes of COVID-19 vaccination: risk of a mild or moderate adverse event after vaccination, risk of a severe adverse event after vaccination, efficacy against COVID-19 infection, efficacy against severe manifestation of COVID-19 infection, duration of protection after vaccination, incentive for completing vaccination, and out-of-pocket costs. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: A mixed logit regression model was used to estimate the preferences of attributes for COVID-19 vaccines and marginal willingness to pay (mWTP) adjusted for background characteristics, role, vaccination, and COVID-19 infection status of family or friends, adverse event status after vaccination among family and friends of participants, and scenario block. RESULTS: Among 42 451 eligible university students and staff invited, 3423 individuals completed the survey (mean [SD] age, 27.1 [9.9] years; 2053 [60.0%] women). Participants included 2506 students (73.2%) and 917 staff (26.8%), with a response rate of 8.1%. Quarantine-free travel was preferred (β = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72-0.99; mWTP: $235.9; 95$190.3-$294.2), followed by efficacy against any COVID-19 infection (β = 0.30; 95$84.1; 95% CI, $71.8-$100.8), against severe manifestation of COVID-19 infection (β = 0.25; 95% CI, 0.24-0.27; mWTP: $69.7; 95$465-$653), and risk of severe adverse events following vaccination (β = −0.24; 95$66.8; 95% CI, −$81.5 to −$55.3). Participants were less concerned about protection duration (β = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.15-0.18; mWTP: $46.0; 95$38.6-$56.2) and risk of mild to moderate adverse events (β = −0.12; 95$32.7; 95% CI, −$41.2 to −$26.4). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Preference of all attributes were significant and were considered important by the participants for vaccine decision-making. Insights drawn could assist policy makers in future vaccination decisions, such as campus vaccine mandate and requirement of a third dose

Psychotropic medicine consumption in 65 countries and regions, 2008–19: a longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: The WHO Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan 2013–2030 encourages routine collection and reporting of a set of essential mental health indicators, including the availability of psychotropic medicines. The global monitoring of country-level psychotropic medicine consumption trends can provide information on the extent of the availability of psychotropic medicines. The primary objective of this study was to investigate global trends in psychotropic medicines consumption from 2008 to 2019 across 65 countries and regions according to country income level and geographical region. METHODS: In this longitudinal trends study, we used pharmaceutical sales data from the IQVIA-Multinational Integrated Data Analysis System (IQVIA-MIDAS). We analysed monthly sales data of psychotropic medicines between Jan 1, 2008, and Dec 31, 2019. Total psychotropic medicine consumption included sales of antidepressants, antipsychotics, tranquilisers, sedatives or hypnotics, and mood stabilisers. Population estimates of each country or region (eight lower-middle-income countries, 19 upper-middle-income countries, and 38 high-income countries) were based on the UN World Population Prospects 2019 report. Average annual sales trends of psychotropic medicines, expressed as defined daily dose (DDD) per 1000 inhabitants per day, were estimated using a random-effects model adjusted for income level and region. Relative changes in the annual consumption of psychotropic medicines by income, expressed as DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day, were assessed as percentage change for each medicine class. FINDINGS: Psychotropic medicine sales increased from 28·54 DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day in 2008 to 34·77 DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day in 2019, corresponding to a 4·08% (95% CI 2·96–5·21) relative average increase annually. The absolute annual increase was greater in high-income countries (3·31 DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day, 95% CI 3·01–3·61) compared with upper-middle-income countries (1·94 DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day, 1·45–2·44) and low-middle-income countries (0·88 DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day, 0·62–1·13; p<0·0001). The relative average annual increase in psychotropic medicine sales from 2008 to 2019 was greater in upper-middle-income countries (7·88%, 95% CI 6·99–8·77) than in lower-middle-income countries (2·90%, 2·40–3·39) and high-income countries (1·02%, 0·80–1·24). In 2019, the regional consumption of psychotropic medicines varied greatly, with the highest sales of all psychotropic medicine classes reported in northern America (167·54 DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day) and lowest sales reported in Asia (5·59 DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day). 17 countries had very low consumption of psychotropic medicines in 2019, including high-income countries and countries with a high prevalence of mental disorders. INTERPRETATION: The consumption of psychotropic medicines has increased over a 12-year period, and although the absolute growth rate was highest in high-income countries, the relative growth is highest in middle-income countries and especially upper-middle-income countries. Disparities in psychotropic medicine consumption of countries can only partly be explained by geographical location and income. Greater efforts are needed to increase the availability of psychotropic medicines in countries with very low consumption, which is probably due to financial or cultural reasons as well as scarcity of trained health-care professionals to prescribe psychotropic medicines

The impact of childhood pneumococcal conjugate vaccine immunisation on all-cause pneumonia admissions in Hong Kong: A 14-year population-based interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Nine years after the introduction of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) in the United States, Hong Kong (HK) introduced the vaccine to its universal childhood immunisation programme in 2009. We aimed to assess the impact of childhood PCV immunisation on all-cause pneumonia (ACP) admissions among the overall population of HK. METHODS: In this population-based interrupted time series analysis, we used territory-wide population-representative electronic health records in HK to evaluate the vaccine impact. We identified hospitalised patients with a diagnosis of pneumonia from any cause between 2004 and 2017. We applied segmented Poisson regression to assess the gradual change in the monthly incidence of ACP admissions between pre- and post-vaccination periods. Negative outcome control, subgroup and sensitivity analyses were used to test the robustness of the main analysis. FINDINGS: Over the 14-year study period, a total of 587,607 ACP episodes were identified among 357,950 patients. The monthly age-standardised incidence of ACP fluctuated between 33.42 and 87.44 per 100,000-persons. There was a marginal decreasing trend in pneumonia admissions after PCV introduction among overall population (incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 0·9965, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0·9932-0·9998), and older adults (≥65 years, IRR: 0·9928, 95% CI: 0·9904-0·9953) but not in younger age groups. INTERPRETATION: There was a marginally declining trend of overall ACP admissions in HK up to eight years after childhood PCV introduction. The significance disappeared when fitting sensitivity analyses. The results indicate the complexities of using non-specific endpoints for measuring vaccine effect and the necessity of enhancing serotype surveillance systems for replacement monitoring. FUNDING: Health and Medical Research Fund, Food and Health Bureau of the Government of Hong Kong (Reference number: 18171272)