Differences in clinical presentation of primary open-angle glaucoma between African and European populations

Purpose: Primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) has been reported to occur more frequently in Africans, and to follow a more severe course compared to Europeans. We aimed to describe characteristics of POAG presentation and treatment across three ethnic groups from Africa and one from Europe. Methods: We ascertained 151 POAG patients from South African Coloured (SAC) and 94 South African Black (SAB) ethnicity from a university hospital in South Africa. In Tanzania, 310 patients were recruited from a university hospital and a referral hospital. In the Netherlands, 241 patients of European ancestry were included. All patients were over 35 years old and had undergone an extensive ophthalmic examination. Patients were diagnosed according to the ISGEO criteria. A biogeographic ancestry analysis was performed to estimate the proportion of genetic African ancestry (GAA). Results: The biogeographic ancestry analysis showed that the median proportion of GAA was 97.6% in Tanzanian, 100% in SAB, 34.2% in SAC and 1.5% in Dutch participants. Clinical characteristics at presentation for Tanzanians, SAB, SAC and Dutch participants, respectively: mean age: 63, 57, 66, 70 years (p < 0.001); visual acuity in the worse eye: 1.78, 1.78, 0.3, 0.3 LogMAR (p < 0.001); maximum intraocular pressure of both eyes: 36, 34, 29, 29 mmHg (panova < 0.001); maximum vertical cup to disc ratio (VCDR) of both eyes: 0.90, 0.90, 0.84, 0.83 (p < 0.001); mean central corneal thickness: 506, 487, 511, 528 μm (p < 0.001). Fourteen percent of Tanzanian patients presented with blindness (<3/60 Snellen) in the better eye in contrast to only 1% in the Dutch. Conclusion: In this multi-ethnic comparative study, Sub-Saharan Africans present at a younger age with lower visual acuity, higher IOP, larger VCDR, than SAC and Dutch participants. This indicates the more progressive and destructive course in Sub-Saharan Africans

Healthcare Access and Quality Index based on mortality from causes amenable to personal health care in 195 countries and territories, 1990-2015 : a novel analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015

Background National levels of personal health-care access and quality can be approximated by measuring mortality rates from causes that should not be fatal in the presence of effective medical care (ie, amenable mortality). Previous analyses of mortality amenable to health care only focused on high-income countries and faced several methodological challenges. In the present analysis, we use the highly standardised cause of death and risk factor estimates generated through the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) to improve and expand the quantification of personal health-care access and quality for 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2015. Methods We mapped the most widely used list of causes amenable to personal health care developed by Nolte and McKee to 32 GBD causes. We accounted for variations in cause of death certification and misclassifications through the extensive data standardisation processes and redistribution algorithms developed for GBD. To isolate the effects of personal health-care access and quality, we risk-standardised cause-specific mortality rates for each geography-year by removing the joint effects of local environmental and behavioural risks, and adding back the global levels of risk exposure as estimated for GBD 2015. We employed principal component analysis to create a single, interpretable summary measure-the Healthcare Quality and Access (HAQ) Index-on a scale of 0 to 100. The HAQ Index showed strong convergence validity as compared with other health-system indicators, including health expenditure per capita (r= 0.88), an index of 11 universal health coverage interventions (r= 0.83), and human resources for health per 1000 (r= 0.77). We used free disposal hull analysis with bootstrapping to produce a frontier based on the relationship between the HAQ Index and the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a measure of overall development consisting of income per capita, average years of education, and total fertility rates. This frontier allowed us to better quantify the maximum levels of personal health-care access and quality achieved across the development spectrum, and pinpoint geographies where gaps between observed and potential levels have narrowed or widened over time. Findings Between 1990 and 2015, nearly all countries and territories saw their HAQ Index values improve; nonetheless, the difference between the highest and lowest observed HAQ Index was larger in 2015 than in 1990, ranging from 28.6 to 94.6. Of 195 geographies, 167 had statistically significant increases in HAQ Index levels since 1990, with South Korea, Turkey, Peru, China, and the Maldives recording among the largest gains by 2015. Performance on the HAQ Index and individual causes showed distinct patterns by region and level of development, yet substantial heterogeneities emerged for several causes, including cancers in highest-SDI countries; chronic kidney disease, diabetes, diarrhoeal diseases, and lower respiratory infections among middle-SDI countries; and measles and tetanus among lowest-SDI countries. While the global HAQ Index average rose from 40.7 (95% uncertainty interval, 39.0-42.8) in 1990 to 53.7 (52.2-55.4) in 2015, far less progress occurred in narrowing the gap between observed HAQ Index values and maximum levels achieved; at the global level, the difference between the observed and frontier HAQ Index only decreased from 21.2 in 1990 to 20.1 in 2015. If every country and territory had achieved the highest observed HAQ Index by their corresponding level of SDI, the global average would have been 73.8 in 2015. Several countries, particularly in eastern and western sub-Saharan Africa, reached HAQ Index values similar to or beyond their development levels, whereas others, namely in southern sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and south Asia, lagged behind what geographies of similar development attained between 1990 and 2015. Interpretation This novel extension of the GBD Study shows the untapped potential for personal health-care access and quality improvement across the development spectrum. Amid substantive advances in personal health care at the national level, heterogeneous patterns for individual causes in given countries or territories suggest that few places have consistently achieved optimal health-care access and quality across health-system functions and therapeutic areas. This is especially evident in middle-SDI countries, many of which have recently undergone or are currently experiencing epidemiological transitions. The HAQ Index, if paired with other measures of health-systemcharacteristics such as intervention coverage, could provide a robust avenue for tracking progress on universal health coverage and identifying local priorities for strengthening personal health-care quality and access throughout the world. Copyright (C) The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.Peer reviewe

Measuring the health-related Sustainable Development Goals in 188 countries : a baseline analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015

Background In September, 2015, the UN General Assembly established the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDGs specify 17 universal goals, 169 targets, and 230 indicators leading up to 2030. We provide an analysis of 33 health-related SDG indicators based on the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2015 (GBD 2015). Methods We applied statistical methods to systematically compiled data to estimate the performance of 33 health-related SDG indicators for 188 countries from 1990 to 2015. We rescaled each indicator on a scale from 0 (worst observed value between 1990 and 2015) to 100 (best observed). Indices representing all 33 health-related SDG indicators (health-related SDG index), health-related SDG indicators included in the Millennium Development Goals (MDG index), and health-related indicators not included in the MDGs (non-MDG index) were computed as the geometric mean of the rescaled indicators by SDG target. We used spline regressions to examine the relations between the Socio-demographic Index (SDI, a summary measure based on average income per person, educational attainment, and total fertility rate) and each of the health-related SDG indicators and indices. Findings In 2015, the median health-related SDG index was 59.3 (95% uncertainty interval 56.8-61.8) and varied widely by country, ranging from 85.5 (84.2-86.5) in Iceland to 20.4 (15.4-24.9) in Central African Republic. SDI was a good predictor of the health-related SDG index (r(2) = 0.88) and the MDG index (r(2) = 0.2), whereas the non-MDG index had a weaker relation with SDI (r(2) = 0.79). Between 2000 and 2015, the health-related SDG index improved by a median of 7.9 (IQR 5.0-10.4), and gains on the MDG index (a median change of 10.0 [6.7-13.1]) exceeded that of the non-MDG index (a median change of 5.5 [2.1-8.9]). Since 2000, pronounced progress occurred for indicators such as met need with modern contraception, under-5 mortality, and neonatal mortality, as well as the indicator for universal health coverage tracer interventions. Moderate improvements were found for indicators such as HIV and tuberculosis incidence, minimal changes for hepatitis B incidence took place, and childhood overweight considerably worsened. Interpretation GBD provides an independent, comparable avenue for monitoring progress towards the health-related SDGs. Our analysis not only highlights the importance of income, education, and fertility as drivers of health improvement but also emphasises that investments in these areas alone will not be sufficient. Although considerable progress on the health-related MDG indicators has been made, these gains will need to be sustained and, in many cases, accelerated to achieve the ambitious SDG targets. The minimal improvement in or worsening of health-related indicators beyond the MDGs highlight the need for additional resources to effectively address the expanded scope of the health-related SDGs.Peer reviewe

Global Biobank Meta-analysis Initiative: Powering genetic discovery across human disease

Biobanks facilitate genome-wide association studies (GWASs), which have mapped genomic loci across a range of human diseases and traits. However, most biobanks are primarily composed of individuals of European ancestry. We introduce the Global Biobank Meta-analysis Initiative (GBMI)—a collaborative network of 23 biobanks from 4 continents representing more than 2.2 million consented individuals with genetic data linked to electronic health records. GBMI meta-analyzes summary statistics from GWASs generated using harmonized genotypes and phenotypes from member biobanks for 14 exemplar diseases and endpoints. This strategy validates that GWASs conducted in diverse biobanks can be integrated despite heterogeneity in case definitions, recruitment strategies, and baseline characteristics. This collaborative effort improves GWAS power for diseases, benefits understudied diseases, and improves risk prediction while also enabling the nomination of disease genes and drug candidates by incorporating gene and protein expression data and providing insight into the underlying biology of human diseases and traits.</p

Global Biobank Meta-analysis Initiative: Powering genetic discovery across human disease.

Funder: BiogenBiobanks facilitate genome-wide association studies (GWASs), which have mapped genomic loci across a range of human diseases and traits. However, most biobanks are primarily composed of individuals of European ancestry. We introduce the Global Biobank Meta-analysis Initiative (GBMI)-a collaborative network of 23 biobanks from 4 continents representing more than 2.2 million consented individuals with genetic data linked to electronic health records. GBMI meta-analyzes summary statistics from GWASs generated using harmonized genotypes and phenotypes from member biobanks for 14 exemplar diseases and endpoints. This strategy validates that GWASs conducted in diverse biobanks can be integrated despite heterogeneity in case definitions, recruitment strategies, and baseline characteristics. This collaborative effort improves GWAS power for diseases, benefits understudied diseases, and improves risk prediction while also enabling the nomination of disease genes and drug candidates by incorporating gene and protein expression data and providing insight into the underlying biology of human diseases and traits