Law and Compliance during COVID-19

The Law and Compliance during COVID-19 project sought to answer a critical question: what drove public compliance – and non-compliance – with lockdown laws across the UK during the early stages of the pandemic? Our focus was on what people thought the law was, and how they behaved in relation to it. Through surveys, interviews, and focus groups with the public during 2020, our aim was to understand how the public responded to the lockdown restrictions that they believed to be legal rules. This report sets out our key findings

Law and Compliance during COVID-19

The Law and Compliance during COVID-19 project sought to answer a critical question: what drove public compliance – and non-compliance – with lockdown laws across the UK during the early stages of the pandemic? Our focus was on what people thought the law was, and how they behaved in relation to it. Through surveys, interviews, and focus groups with the public during 2020, our aim was to understand how the public responded to the lockdown restrictions that they believed to be legal rules. This report sets out our key findings

Associations of common breast cancer susceptibility alleles with risk of breast cancer subtypes in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Improving Together: A National Framework for Quality and GP Clusters in Scotland

Improving together will complement the development of the Scottish national GP contract that sets out the role of GPs and their important contribution as clinical leaders and expert medical generalists working in a community setting. This framework will be reviewed by the Scottish Government and the Scottish General Practitioners Committee of the BMA on a periodic basis, attentive to feedback from those involved in delivering its intent. As such, it is a framework that will develop to its full potential over time, as elements of the transformation of primary care in Scotland create the capacity to do so

Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises

Witnesses convened before the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises to discuss the current conditions and future status of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Evaluation of Polygenic Risk Scores for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk Prediction in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers

$\textbf{Background:}$ Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 94 common single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with breast cancer (BC) risk and 18 associated with ovarian cancer (OC) risk. Several of these are also associated with risk of BC or OC for women who carry a pathogenic mutation in the high-risk BC and OC genes $\textit{BRCA1}$ or $\textit{BRCA2}$. The combined effects of these variants on BC or OC risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have not yet been assessed while their clinical management could benefit from improved personalized risk estimates. $\textbf{Methods:}$ We constructed polygenic risk scores (PRS) using BC and OC susceptibility SNPs identified through populationbased GWAS: for BC (overall, estrogen receptor [ER]–positive, and ER-negative) and for OC. Using data from 15 252 female $\textit{BRCA1}$ and 8211 $\textit{BRCA2}$ carriers, the association of each PRS with BC or OC risk was evaluated using a weighted cohort approach, with time to diagnosis as the outcome and estimation of the hazard ratios (HRs) per standard deviation increase in the PRS. $\textbf{Results:}$ The PRS for ER-negative BC displayed the strongest association with BC risk in $\textit{BRCA1}$ carriers (HR = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.23 to 1.31, $P$ = 8.2 $\times$ 10$^{-53}$). In $\textit{BRCA2}$ carriers, the strongest association with BC risk was seen for the overall BC PRS (HR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.28, $P$ = 7.2 $\times$ 10$^{-20}$). The OC PRS was strongly associated with OC risk for both $\textit{BRCA1}$ and $\textit{BRCA2}$ carriers. These translate to differences in absolute risks (more than 10% in each case) between the top and bottom AR deciles of the PRS distribution; for example, the OC risk was 6% by age 80 years for $\textit{BRCA2}$ carriers at the 10th percentile of the OC PRS compared with 19% risk for those at the 90th percentile of PRS. $\textbf{Conclusions:}$ BC and OC PRS are predictive of cancer risk in $\textit{BRCA1}$ and $\textit{BRCA2}$ carriers. Incorporation of the PRS into risk prediction models has promise to better inform decisions on cancer risk management.Cancer Research U

Treating Causes Not Symptoms : Basic Income as a Public Health Measure

New research funded by the National Institute for Health and Social Care Research (NIHR) has found that a Basic Income scheme could potentially save the NHS tens of billions of pounds. ‘Treating causes not symptoms: Basic Income as a public health measure’ uses a range of economic and health modelling, public opinion surveys and community consultation to present cutting-edge evidence on the impact of Basic Income schemes

Evaluation of polygenic risk scores for breast and ovarian cancer risk prediction in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Background: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 94 common single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with breast cancer (BC) risk and 18 associated with ovarian cancer (OC) risk. Several of these are also associated with risk of BC or OC for women who carry a pathogenic mutation in the high-risk BC and OC genes BRCA1 or BRCA2. The combined effects of these variants on BC or OC risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have not yet been assessed while their clinical management could benefit from improved personalized risk estimates. Methods: We constructed polygenic risk scores (PRS) using BC and OC susceptibility SNPs identified through population-based GWAS: for BC (overall, estrogen receptor [ER]-positive, and ER-negative) and for OC. Using data from 15 252 female BRCA1 and 8211 BRCA2 carriers, the association of each PRS with BC or OC risk was evaluated using a weighted cohort approach, with time to diagnosis as the outcome and estimation of the hazard ratios (HRs) per standard deviation increase in the PRS. Results: The PRS for ER-negative BC displayed the strongest association with BC risk in BRCA1 carriers (HR = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.23 to 1.31, P = 8.2 x 10(53)). In BRCA2 carriers, the strongest association with BC risk was seen for the overall BC PRS (HR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.28, P = 7.2 x 10(-20)). The OC PRS was strongly associated with OC risk for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. These translate to differences in absolute risks (more than 10% in each case) between the top and bottom deciles of the PRS distribution; for example, the OC risk was 6% by age 80 years for BRCA2 carriers at the 10th percentile of the OC PRS compared with 19% risk for those at the 90th percentile of PRS. Conclusions: BC and OC PRS are predictive of cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Incorporation of the PRS into risk prediction models has promise to better inform decisions on cancer risk management