| 1. |
- Johansson, Anna L., V, et al.
(author)
-
Were cancer patients worse off than the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic? : A population-based study from Norway, Denmark and Iceland during the pre-vaccination era
- 2023
-
In: The Lancet Regional Health. - : Elsevier. - 2666-7762. ; 31
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background In a population-based setting, we investigated the risks of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and developing severe COVID-19 outcomes among cancer patients compared with the general population.Methods In nationwide cohorts, we identified all individuals in Norway, Denmark and Iceland who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 or had a severe COVID-19 outcome (hospitalisation, intensive care, and death) from March until December 2020, using data from national health registries. We estimated standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing cancer patients with the general population.Findings During the first wave of the pandemic, cancer patients in Norway and Denmark had higher risks of testing SARS-CoV-2 positive compared to the general population. Throughout 2020, recently treated cancer patients were more likely to test SARS-CoV-2 positive. In Iceland, cancer patients experienced no increased risk of testing positive. The risk of COVID-19-related hospitalisation was higher among cancer patients diagnosed within one year of hospitalisation (Norway: SIR = 2.43, 95% CI 1.89-3.09; Denmark: 2.23, 1.96-2.54) and within five years (Norway: 1.58, 1.35-1.83; Denmark: 1.54, 1.42-1.66). Risks were higher in recently treated cancer patients and in those diagnosed with haematologic malignancies, colorectal or lung cancer. Risks of COVID-19-related intensive care and death were higher among cancer patients. Interpretation Cancer patients were at increased risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the first pandemic wave when testing availability was limited, while relative risks of severe COVID-19 outcomes remained increased in cancer patients throughout 2020. Recent cancer treatment and haematologic malignancy were the strongest risk factors.
|
|
| 2. |
- Visvanathan, Kala, et al.
(author)
-
Circulating vitamin D and breast cancer risk : an international pooling project of 17 cohorts
- 2023
-
In: European Journal of Epidemiology. - : Springer Science+Business Media B.V.. - 0393-2990 .- 1573-7284. ; 38, s. 11-29
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Laboratory and animal research support a protective role for vitamin D in breast carcinogenesis, but epidemiologic studies have been inconclusive. To examine comprehensively the relationship of circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] to subsequent breast cancer incidence, we harmonized and pooled participant-level data from 10 U.S. and 7 European prospective cohorts. Included were 10,484 invasive breast cancer cases and 12,953 matched controls. Median age (interdecile range) was 57 (42–68) years at blood collection and 63 (49–75) years at breast cancer diagnosis. Prediagnostic circulating 25(OH)D was either newly measured using a widely accepted immunoassay and laboratory or, if previously measured by the cohort, calibrated to this assay to permit using a common metric. Study-specific relative risks (RRs) for season-standardized 25(OH)D concentrations were estimated by conditional logistic regression and combined by random-effects models. Circulating 25(OH)D increased from a median of 22.6 nmol/L in consortium-wide decile 1 to 93.2 nmol/L in decile 10. Breast cancer risk in each decile was not statistically significantly different from risk in decile 5 in models adjusted for breast cancer risk factors, and no trend was apparent (P-trend = 0.64). Compared to women with sufficient 25(OH)D based on Institute of Medicine guidelines (50– < 62.5 nmol/L), RRs were not statistically significantly different at either low concentrations (< 20 nmol/L, 3% of controls) or high concentrations (100– < 125 nmol/L, 3% of controls; ≥ 125 nmol/L, 0.7% of controls). RR per 25 nmol/L increase in 25(OH)D was 0.99 [95% confidence intervaI (CI) 0.95–1.03]. Associations remained null across subgroups, including those defined by body mass index, physical activity, latitude, and season of blood collection. Although none of the associations by tumor characteristics reached statistical significance, suggestive inverse associations were seen for distant and triple negative tumors. Circulating 25(OH)D, comparably measured in 17 international cohorts and season-standardized, was not related to subsequent incidence of invasive breast cancer over a broad range in vitamin D status.
|
|
