Inhaled anti-asthma therapies following hormone therapy in women:a nationwide cohort study

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does menopausal hormone therapy (HT) with exogenous oestrogens and progestogens change the use of inhaled anti-asthma medications in women with asthma? METHODS: In a population-based matched cohort study using the Danish registries, we included women with asthma aged 45–65 years from 1 June 1995 to 30 June 2018. We investigated whether HT with oestrogen and/or progestogens was associated with changes in use of inhaled anti-asthma therapies in the 12 months following initiation. We used exposure density matching to match exposed subjects with unexposed subjects on age, household income and level of education. An exposed subject was defined as receiving HT. We calculated mean dose of medications and odds ratios of increases in the 12 months following HT initiation. RESULTS: We included 139 483 women with asthma, of whom 116 014 (83.2%) were unexposed subjects and 23 469 (16.8%) exposed subjects. Mean±sd age was 53.0±5.2 years. Initiation of HT was not consistently associated with increased mean doses of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), or long- and short-acting β(2)-agonists. Women receiving systemic oestrogens had increased odds ratios of large increases (>100 µg) in ICS at 6 months (OR 1.09; 95% CI 1.04–1.13; p<0.001) and 9 months (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.03–1.12; p<0.001). Progestogens were protective against increases in ICS at 6 and 9 months (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.82–0.93; p<0.001; and OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.81–0.91; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Initiation of HT did not change the use of inhaled medications in asthma. However, detrimental effects of oestrogen, as well as beneficial effects of progestogens, cannot be excluded

Symptom presentation of SARS-CoV-2-positive and negative patients: a nested case–control study among patients calling the emergency medical service and medical helpline

Objective Currently effective symptom-based screening of patients suspected of COVID-19 is limited. We aimed to investigate age-related differences in symptom presentations of patients tested positive and negative for SARS-CoV-2.Design Setting Calls to the medical helpline (1-8-1-3) and emergency number (1-1-2) in Copenhagen, Denmark. At both medical services all calls are recorded.Participants We included calls for patients who called for help/guidance at the medical helpline or emergency number prior to receiving a test for SARS-CoV-2 between April 1st and 20th 2020 (8423 patients). Among these calls, we randomly sampled recorded calls from 350 patients who later tested positive and 250 patients tested negative and registered symptoms described in the call.Outcome Results After exclusions, 544 calls (312 SARS-CoV-2 positive and 232 negative) were included in the analysis. Fever and cough remained the two most common of COVID-19 symptoms across all age groups and approximately 42% of SARS-CoV-2 positive and 20% of negative presented with both fever and cough. Symptoms including nasal congestion, irritation/pain in throat, muscle/joint pain, loss of taste and smell, and headache were common symptoms of COVID-19 for patients younger than 60 years; whereas loss of appetite and feeling unwell were more commonly seen among patients over 60 years. Headache and loss of taste and smell were rare symptoms of COVID-19 among patients over 60 years.Conclusion Our study identified age-related differences in symptom presentations of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients calling for help or medical advice. The specific symptoms of loss of smell or taste almost exclusively reported by patients younger than 60 years. Differences in symptom presentation across age groups must be considered when screening for COVID-19

Behavioral factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection

OBJECTIVE: To study the association between behavioural factors and incidence rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: Case–control web-based questionnaire study. SETTING: Questionnaire data were collected in the Capital Region of Denmark in December 2020 when limited restrictions were in place, while the number of daily SARS-CoV-2 cases increased rapidly. PARTICIPANTS: 8913 cases of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with two groups of controls: (1) 34 063 individuals with a negative SARS-CoV-2 test from the same date (negative controls, NCs) and 2) 25 989 individuals who had never been tested for a SARS-CoV-2 infection (untested controls, UC). Controls were matched on sex, age, test date and municipality. EXPOSURE: Activities during the 14 days prior to being tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 or during the same period for matched controls and precautions taken during the entire pandemic. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence rate ratios (IRR). RESULTS: Response rate was 41.4% (n=93 121). Using public transportation, grocery shopping (IRR: NC: 0.52; UC: 0.63) and outdoor sports activities (NC: 0.75; UC: 0.96) were not associated with increased rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most precautions, for example, using hand sanitizer (NC: 0.79; UC: 0.98), physical distancing (NC: 0.79; UC: 0.82) and avoiding handshakes (NC: 0.74; UC: 0.77), were associated with a lower rate of infection. Activities associated with many close contacts, especially indoors, increased rate of infection. Except for working from home, all types of occupation were linked to increased rate of infection. CONCLUSIONS: In a community setting with moderate restrictions, activities such as using public transportation and grocery shopping with the relevant precautions were not associated with an increased rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Exposures and activities where safety measures are difficult to maintain might be important risk factors for infection. These findings may help public health authorities tailor their strategies for limiting the spread of SARS-CoV-2