Informing the public health response to COVID-19: a systematic review of risk factors for disease, severity, and mortality

Funding: HRS and MF are supported by the Medical Research Council [MR/R008345/1]. CJ’s salary came through MRC core funding MC_UU_12023/26. SJS is funded by the Wellcome Trust [WT 209560/Z/17/Z]. CRS has received funding from the Medical Research Council [MR/R008345/1], the National Institute for Health Research [11/46/23] and the New Zealand Health Research Council [20/1018] and Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment. EV is funded by the Medical Research Council [MR/R008345/1] through the EAVE II grant and supported by the Scottish Government. We also acknowledge the support of HDR UK. The views and opinions expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Health Technology Assessment programme, NIHR, NHS, or the UK Department of Health.Background Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has challenged public health agencies globally. In order to effectively target government responses, it is critical to identify the individuals most at risk of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), developing severe clinical signs, and mortality. We undertook a systematic review of the literature to present the current status of scientific knowledge in these areas and describe the need for unified global approaches, moving forwards, as well as lessons learnt for future pandemics. Methods Medline, Embase and Global Health were searched to the end of April 2020, as well as the Web of Science. Search terms were specific to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and COVID-19. Comparative studies of risk factors from any setting, population group and in any language were included. Titles, abstracts and full texts were screened by two reviewers and extracted in duplicate into a standardised form. Data were extracted on risk factors for COVID-19 disease, severe disease, or death and were narratively and descriptively synthesised. Results One thousand two hundred and thirty-eight papers were identified post-deduplication. Thirty-three met our inclusion criteria, of which 26 were from China. Six assessed the risk of contracting the disease, 20 the risk of having severe disease and ten the risk of dying. Age, gender and co-morbidities were commonly assessed as risk factors. The weight of evidence showed increasing age to be associated with severe disease and mortality, and general comorbidities with mortality. Only seven studies presented multivariable analyses and power was generally limited. A wide range of definitions were used for disease severity. Conclusions The volume of literature generated in the short time since the appearance of SARS-CoV-2 has been considerable. Many studies have sought to document the risk factors for COVID-19 disease, disease severity and mortality; age was the only risk factor based on robust studies and with a consistent body of evidence. Mechanistic studies are required to understand why age is such an important risk factor. At the start of pandemics, large, standardised, studies that use multivariable analyses are urgently needed so that the populations most at risk can be rapidly protected.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Policy assessment and policy development for physical activity promotion: results of an exploratory intervention study in 15 European Nations

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Purpose of the study was to test a theoretical model to assess and develop policies for the promotion of physical activity among older people as part of an international intervention study.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>248 semi-standardized interviews with policy-makers were conducted in 15 European nations. The questionnaire assessed policy-makers' perceptions of organizational goals, resources, obligations, as well as organizational, political and public opportunities in the area of physical activity promotion among older people. In order to develop policies, workshops with policy-makers were conducted. Workshop outputs and outcomes were assessed for four nations nine months after the workshops.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Policy assessment: Results of the policy assessment were diverse across nations and policy sectors. For example, organizational goals regarding actions for physical activity promotion were perceived as being most favorably by the sports sector. Organizational obligations for the development of such policies were perceived as being most favorably by the health sector.</p> <p>Policy development: The workshops resulted in different outputs: a national intersectoral action plan (United Kingdom), a national alliance (Sweden), an integrated policy (the Netherlands), and a continuing dialogue (Germany).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Theory-driven policy assessment and policy-maker workshops might be an important means of scientific engagement in policy development for health promotion.</p

CT colonography standards

Computed tomography (CT) colonography is the established successor to the barium enema for the detection of colonic neoplasia due to superior performance and patient experience. Consequently, CT colonography is widely disseminated across Western populations and increasingly provided by both subspecialist and general radiologists alike. As a result, CT colonography is now part of the core training curriculum for radiology in the UK. However, study data shows wide performance gaps between centres and between individuals of differing experience, which is perhaps unsurprising given the complexity of the CT colonography technique and interpretation. This article summarizes the background, evolution and recommendations of the CT colonography standards document (Appendix) developed by the International CT Colonography Standards Collaboration, which included highly experienced radiologists, radiographers, gastroenterologists, and screening experts. These standards are intended to guide and support radiology teams across the world by promoting methods for improving the quality of CT colonography technique and the patient experience

Mendelian randomisation identifies alternative splicing of the FAS death receptor as a mediator of severe COVID-19

Severe COVID-19 is characterised by immunopathology and epithelial injury. Proteomic studies have identified circulating proteins that are biomarkers of severe COVID-19, but cannot distinguish correlation from causation. To address this, we performed Mendelian randomisation (MR) to identify proteins that mediate severe COVID-19. Using protein quantitative trait loci (pQTL) data from the SCALLOP consortium, involving meta-analysis of up to 26,494 individuals, and COVID-19 genome-wide association data from the Host Genetics Initiative, we performed MR for 157 COVID-19 severity protein biomarkers. We identified significant MR results for five proteins: FAS, TNFRSF10A, CCL2, EPHB4 and LGALS9. Further evaluation of these candidates using sensitivity analyses and colocalization testing provided strong evidence to implicate the apoptosis-associated cytokine receptor FAS as a causal mediator of severe COVID-19. This effect was specific to severe disease. Using RNA-seq data from 4,778 individuals, we demonstrate that the pQTL at the FAS locus results from genetically influenced alternate splicing causing skipping of exon 6. We show that the risk allele for very severe COVID-19 increases the proportion of transcripts lacking exon 6, and thereby increases soluble FAS. Soluble FAS acts as a decoy receptor for FAS-ligand, inhibiting apoptosis induced through membrane-bound FAS. In summary, we demonstrate a novel genetic mechanism that contributes to risk of severe of COVID-19, highlighting a pathway that may be a promising therapeutic target