Dataset Information

We Should Pay More Attention to Sex Differences to Predict the Risk of Severe COVID-19: Men Have the Same Risk of Worse Prognosis as Women More Than 10 Years Older.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Prioritization for novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related health policies usually considers age and certain other characteristics, but sex is rarely included, despite the higher risk of severe disease in men. The aim of this study was to compare the impact of sex and age on the severity of COVID-19 by estimating the age difference in years for which the risk for men versus women is the same.

Methods

We analyzed 23,414 Japanese COVID-19 inpatients aged 20-89 years (13,360 men and 10,054 women). We graded the severity of COVID-19 (0 to 5) according to the most intensive treatment required during hospitalization. The risk of grade 2/3/4/5 (non-invasive positive pressure ventilation/invasive mechanical ventilation/extracorporeal membrane oxygenation/death), grade 3/4/5, and separately grade 5 was analyzed using a multiple logistic regression model.

Results

The odds ratio (OR) of grades 2/3/4/5, 3/4/5 (primary outcome), and 5 for men relative to women was 2.76 (95% CI, 2.44-3.12), 2.78 (95% CI, 2.42-3.19), and 2.60 (95% CI, 2.23-3.03), respectively, after adjustment for age and date of admission. These risks for men were equivalent to those for women 14.1 (95% CI, 12.3-15.8), 11.2 (95% CI, 9.7-12.8), and 7.5 (95% CI, 6.3-8.7) years older, respectively.

Conclusion

The risks of worse COVID-19 prognosis (grades 3/4/5) in men were equivalent to those of women 11.2 years older. Reanalyzing data extracted from four previous studies also revealed a large impact of sex difference on the severity of COVID-19. We should pay more attention to sex differences to predict the risk of COVID-19 severity and to formulate public health policy accordingly.

SUBMITTER: Matsushita Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9727213 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

We Should Pay More Attention to Sex Differences to Predict the Risk of Severe COVID-19: Men Have the Same Risk of Worse Prognosis as Women More Than 10 Years Older.

Matsushita Yumi Y Yokoyama Tetsuji T Hayakawa Kayoko K Matsunaga Nobuaki N Ohtsu Hiroshi H Saito Sho S Terada Mari M Suzuki Setsuko S Morioka Shinichiro S Kutsuna Satoshi S Tsuzuki Shinya S Tsuzuki Shinya S Hara Hisao H Kimura Akio A Ohmagari Norio N

Journal of epidemiology 20220930 1

<h4>Background</h4>Prioritization for novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related health policies usually considers age and certain other characteristics, but sex is rarely included, despite the higher risk of severe disease in men. The aim of this study was to compare the impact of sex and age on the severity of COVID-19 by estimating the age difference in years for which the risk for men versus women is the same.<h4>Methods</h4>We analyzed 23,414 Japanese COVID-19 inpatients aged 20-89 y ...[more]

PMID: 35851563

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePredicting the onset of bipolar disorder (BD) could facilitate preventive treatments. Among risk measures, bipolar at-risk (BAR) criteria have shown promise in predicting onset of bipolar disorder in the first year in clinical cohorts; however, it is not known whether BAR criteria are associated with the onset of BD in the longer term.ObjectiveTo assess the association of BAR criteria with onset of BD over 10 to 13 years follow-up.Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective cohort study, completed between May 1, 2020, and November 7, 2022, included consenting people seeking help for nonpsychotic major mental health difficulties, including mood, personality, and substance use disorders, who were originally recruited at ages 15 to 25 years from a tertiary youth mental health setting in metropolitan Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, from May 1, 2008, to September 30, 2010.ExposureMeeting BAR criteria at baseline. Criteria included subthreshold mania, cyclothymic features, subthreshold depression, and family history of BD. A matched clinical comparison group was recruited from the same help-seeking population.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was expert consensus diagnosis of BD I or II based on the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview, self-reported information collected through online assessments, and linked data on mental health service utilization in Victoria over 10 to 13 years of follow-up.ResultsAmong 69 eligible participants, follow-up data were available for 60 (88.2%). The mean (SD) age at the end of follow-up was 32.9 (2.8) years, and 49 (81.7%) were women. A total of 28 participants met BAR criteria, and 32 were in the comparison group. In the BAR group, 8 patients (28.6%) developed BD over a mean (SD) of 11.1 (0.7) years of follow-up, and no patients in the comparison group developed BD. The risk of developing BD was higher in the BAR group than in the non-BAR group (χ21 = 70.0; P < .001). The proportions of transitions to BD were equal in the first and second halves of the follow-up period.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of participants seeking care for mental health difficulties, patients meeting the BAR criteria were significantly more likely to transition to BD over a decade after ascertainment compared with patients not meeting the BAR criteria. The findings suggest that those meeting BAR criteria may benefit from longer-term monitoring and support. Evaluation of predictive properties in longer-term studies using a risk measure will help with implementation of BAR criteria in clinical settings.

Project description:ObjectivesThe German Pharmaceutical Market Restructuring Act (AMNOG, 2011) is a two-stage process to regulate the price of new pharmaceuticals in which price negotiations are conducted based on evidence-based medical benefit assessments using data from prior clinical trials. Although the act does not explicitly set a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold, the process itself implicitly establishes a WTP for health improvement. We evaluated the implicit WTP for prescription pharmaceuticals post-AMNOG in the German healthcare system from the decision-maker/payer perspective.MethodsWe extracted data on patient-group-specific annual treatment costs and endpoints from 2011 to 2021 from the dossiers assessed by the German Federal Joint Committee (FJC; Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss). Using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), we calculated a WTP for the indications (I) diabetes, (II) cardiovascular disease, and (III) psoriasis weighted according to patient group size, first from the perspective of the decision-maker (approach A), and second from the perspective of the industry (approach B). To put clinical outcome measures into relation to one another, minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) were derived from the literature and compared.ResultsThe annual treatment costs of newly authorized drugs were substantially higher (both pre- and post-negotiation) than that of their comparators (e.g., psoriasis, pre-negotiation: €20,601.59, post-negotiation: €16,763.57; comparators: €5178.00). However, although newly launched drugs were more expensive than their comparators, they brought greater medical benefits and were more aligned with value (r = 0.59, P < 0.001) than older drugs. We estimated WTP to vary widely by indication group [€33,814.08 per 1 percentage point hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) reduction for diabetes, €10,970.83 per life year gained for cardiovascular disease, and €663.46 per 1% PASI decrease for psoriasis; approach A]. WTP was converted to MCID thresholds: diabetes: €16,907.04; cardiovascular drugs: no MCID existent to convert; and psoriasis: €33,173.00. WTP remained constant over time for diabetes and cardiovascular drugs but increased for psoriasis drugs.ConclusionThis paper is one of the first to estimate the implicit WTP for prescription pharmaceuticals post-AMNOG and suggests that the WTP may vary between different therapeutic areas. Additionally, making different assumptions (approach A versus approach B) with regard to the assumed effectiveness in indication areas that had been declared as having no additional benefit by the FJC may explain the different perspectives of decision-makers and of the pharmaceutical industry on the value of a pharmaceutical.

Project description:The past decade has seen an explosion of articles in scientific journals involving non-genetic influences on phenotype through modulation of gene function without changes in gene sequence. The excitement in modern molecular biology surrounding the impact exerted by the environment on development of the phenotype is focused largely on mechanism and has not incorporated questions asked (and answers provided) by early philosophers, biologists, and psychologists. As such, this emergence of epigenetic studies is somewhat "old wine in new bottles" and represents a reformulation of the old debate of preformationism versus epigenesis-one resolved in the 1800s. Indeed, this tendency to always look forward, with minimal concern or regard of what has gone before, has led to the present situation in which "true" epigenetic studies are believed to consist of one of two schools. The first is primarily medically based and views epigenetic mechanisms as pathways for disease (e.g., "the epigenetics of cancer"). The second is primarily from the basic sciences, particularly molecular genetics, and regards epigenetics as a potentially important mechanism for organisms exposed to variable environments across multiple generations. There is, however, a third, and separate, school based on the historical literature and debates and regards epigenetics as more of a perspective than a phenomenon. Against this backdrop, comparative integrative biologists are particularly well-suited to understand epigenetic phenomena as a way for organisms to respond rapidly with modified phenotypes (relative to natural selection) to changes in the environment. Using evolutionary principles, it is also possible to interpret "sunsetting" of modified phenotypes when environmental conditions result in a disappearance of the epigenetic modification of gene regulation. Comparative integrative biologists also recognize epigenetics as a potentially confounding source of variation in their data. Epigenetic modification of phenotype (molecular, cellular, morphological, physiological, and behavioral) can be highly variable depending upon ancestral environmental exposure and can contribute to apparent "random" noise in collected datasets. Thus, future research should go beyond the study of epigenetic mechanisms at the level of the gene and devote additional investigation of epigenetic outcomes at the level of both the individual organism and how it affects the evolution of populations. This review is the first of seven in this special issue of Integrative and Comparative Biology that addresses in detail these and other key topics in the study of epigenetics.

Dataset Information

We Should Pay More Attention to Sex Differences to Predict the Risk of Severe COVID-19: Men Have the Same Risk of Worse Prognosis as Women More Than 10 Years Older.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

We Should Pay More Attention to Sex Differences to Predict the Risk of Severe COVID-19: Men Have the Same Risk of Worse Prognosis as Women More Than 10 Years Older.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets