Summary Background Data for front-line health-care workers and risk of COVID-19 are limited. We sought to assess risk of COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers compared with the general community and the effect of personal protective equipment (PPE) on risk. Methods We did a prospective, observational cohort study in the UK and the USA of the general community, including front-line health-care workers, using self-reported data from the COVID Symptom Study smartphone application (app) from March 24 (UK) and March 29 (USA) to April 23, 2020. Participants were voluntary users of the app and at first use provided information on demographic factors (including age, sex, race or ethnic background, height and weight, and occupation) and medical history, and subsequently reported any COVID-19 symptoms. We used Cox proportional hazards modelling to estimate multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of our primary outcome, which was a positive COVID-19 test. The COVID Symptom Study app is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04331509 . Findings Among 2 035 395 community individuals and 99 795 front-line health-care workers, we recorded 5545 incident reports of a positive COVID-19 test over 34 435 272 person-days. Compared with the general community, front-line health-care workers were at increased risk for reporting a positive COVID-19 test (adjusted HR 11·61, 95% CI 10·93–12·33). To account for differences in testing frequency between front-line health-care workers and the general community and possible selection bias, an inverse probability-weighted model was used to adjust for the likelihood of receiving a COVID-19 test (adjusted HR 3·40, 95% CI 3·37–3·43). Secondary and post-hoc analyses suggested adequacy of PPE, clinical setting, and ethnic background were also important factors. Interpretation In the UK and the USA, risk of reporting a positive test for COVID-19 was increased among front-line health-care workers. Health-care systems should ensure adequate availability of PPE and develop additional strategies to protect health-care workers from COVID-19, particularly those from Black, Asian, and minority ethnic backgrounds. Additional follow-up of these observational findings is needed. Funding Zoe Global, Wellcome Trust, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institutes of Health Research, UK Research and Innovation, Alzheimer's Society, National Institutes of Health, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness.

BackgroundWeight misperception might preclude the adoption of healthful weight-related attitudes and behaviors among overweight and obese individuals, yet limited research exists in this area. We examined associations between weight misperception and several weight-related attitudes and behaviors among a nationally representative sample of overweight and obese US adults.MethodsData from the 2003-2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) were used. Analyses included non-pregnant, overweight and obese (measured body mass index ≥ 25) adults aged 20 and older. Weight misperception was identified among those who reported themselves as "underweight" or "about the right weight". Outcome variables and sample sizes were: weight-loss attitudes/behaviors (wanting to weigh less and having tried to lose weight; n = 4,784); dietary intake (total energy intake; n = 4,894); and physical activity (meets 2008 US physical activity recommendations, insufficiently active, and sedentary; n = 5,401). Multivariable regression models were stratified by gender and race/ethnicity. Analyses were conducted in 2009-2010.ResultsThese overweight/obese men and women who misperceived their weight were 71% (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.25-0.34) and 65% (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.29-0.42) less likely to report that they want to lose weight and 60% (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.30-0.52) and 56% (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32-0.59) less likely to have tried to lose weight within the past year, respectively, compared to those who accurately perceived themselves as overweight. Blacks were particularly less likely to have tried to lose weight. Weight misperception was not a significant predictor of total energy intake among most subgroups, but was associated with lower total energy intake among Hispanic women (change -252.72, 95% CI -433.25, -72.18). Men who misperceived their weight were less likely (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.89) to be insufficiently active (the strongest results were among Black men) and women who misperceived their weight were less likely (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.54, 1.00, p = 0.047) to meet activity recommendations compared to being sedentary.ConclusionOverall, weight misperception among overweight and obese adults was associated with less likelihood of interest in or attempts at weight loss and less physical activity. These associations varied by gender and race/ethnicity. This study highlights the importance of focusing on inaccurate weight perceptions in targeted weight loss efforts.

The effect of age on survival of women with early breast cancer seems to vary by breast cancer subtype. Young age seems to be particularly prognostic in women with luminal breast cancers.

Purpose To evaluate the relationship between race/ethnicity and breast cancer–specific survival according to subtype and explore mediating factors. Patients and Methods Participants were women presenting with stage I to III breast cancer between January 2000 and December 2007 at National Comprehensive Cancer Network centers with survival follow-up through December 2009. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compare breast cancer–specific survival among Asians (n = 533), Hispanics (n = 1,122), and blacks (n = 1,345) with that among whites (n = 14,268), overall and stratified by subtype (luminal A like, luminal B like, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 type, and triple negative). Model estimates were used to derive mediation proportion and 95% CI for selected risk factors. Results In multivariable adjusted models, overall, blacks had 21% higher risk of breast cancer–specific death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.45). For estrogen receptor–positive tumors, black and white survival differences were greatest within 2 years of diagnosis (years 0 to 2: HR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.34 to 5.24; year 2 to end of follow-up: HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.12 to 2.00). Blacks were 76% and 56% more likely to die as a result of luminal A–like and luminal B–like tumors, respectively. No disparities were observed for triple-negative or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–type tumors. Asians and Hispanics were less likely to die as a result of breast cancer compared with whites (Asians: HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.85; Hispanics: HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.95). For blacks, tumor characteristics and stage at diagnosis were significant disparity mediators. Body mass index was an important mediator for blacks and Asians. Conclusion Racial disparities in breast cancer survival vary by tumor subtype. Interventions are needed to reduce disparities, particularly in the first 2 years after diagnosis among black women with estrogen receptor–positive tumors.

Background Few evidence-based weight loss treatment options exist for medically vulnerable patients in the primary care setting. Methods We conducted a 2-arm, 24-month randomized effectiveness trial in 3 Boston community health centers (from February 1, 2008, through May 2, 2011). Participants were 365 obese patients receiving hypertension treatment (71.2% black, 13.1% Hispanic, 68.5% female, and 32.9% with less than a high school educational level). We randomized participants to usual care or a behavioral intervention that promoted weight loss and hypertension self-management using eHealth components. The intervention included tailored behavior change goals, self-monitoring, and skills training, available via a website or interactive voice response; 18 telephone counseling calls; primary care provider endorsement; 12 optional group support sessions; and links with community resources. Results At 24 months, weight change in the intervention group compared with that in the usual care group was −1.03 kg (95% CI, −2.03 to −0.03 kg). Twenty-four-month change in body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) in the intervention group compared with that in the usual care group was −0.38 (95% CI, −0.75 to −0.004). Intervention participants had larger mean weight losses during the 24 months compared with that in the usual care group (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, −1.07 kg; 95% CI, −1.94 to −0.22). Mean systolic blood pressure was not significantly lower in the intervention arm compared with the usual care arm. Conclusion The intervention produced modest weight losses, improved blood pressure control, and slowed systolic blood pressure increases in this high-risk, socioeconomically disadvantaged patient population.

Objectives-We examined the impact of metropolitan racial residential segregation on stage at diagnosis and all-cause and breast cancer-specific survival between and within black and white women diagnosed with breast cancer in California between 1996 and 2004.Methods-We merged data from the California Cancer Registry with Census indices of five dimensions of racial residential segregation, quantifying segregation among Blacks relative to Whites; block group ("neighborhood") measures of the percentage of Blacks and a composite measure of socioeconomic status. We also examined simultaneous segregation on at least two measures ("hypersegregation"). Using logistic regression we examined effects of these measures on stage at diagnosis and Cox proportional hazards regression for survival.Results-For all-cause and breast-cancer specific mortality, living in neighborhoods with more Blacks was associated with lower mortality among black women, but higher mortality among Whites. However, neighborhood racial composition and metropolitan segregation did not explain differences in stage or survival between Black and White women.Conclusions-Future research should identify mechanisms by which these measures impact breast cancer diagnosis and outcomes among Black women.

Background: Racial and ethnic minorities have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. In the initial phase of population-based vaccination in the United States (U.S.) and United Kingdom (U.K.), vaccine hesitancy and limited access may result in disparities in uptake. Methods: We performed a cohort study among U.S. and U.K. participants in the smartphone-based COVID Symptom Study (March 24, 2020-February 16, 2021). We used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (unsure/not willing) and receipt. Results: In the U.S. (n=87,388), compared to White non-Hispanic participants, the multivariable ORs of vaccine hesitancy were 3.15 (95% CI: 2.86 to 3.47) for Black participants, 1.42 (1.28 to 1.58) for Hispanic participants, 1.34 (1.18 to 1.52) for Asian participants, and 2.02 (1.70 to 2.39) for participants reporting more than one race/other. In the U.K. (n=1,254,294), racial and ethnic minorities had similarly elevated hesitancy: compared to White participants, their corresponding ORs were 2.84 (95% CI: 2.69 to 2.99) for Black participants, 1.66 (1.57 to 1.76) for South Asian participants, 1.84 (1.70 to 1.98) for Middle East/East Asian participants, and 1.48 (1.39 to 1.57) for participants reporting more than one race/other. Among U.S. participants, the OR of vaccine receipt was 0.71 (0.64 to 0.79) for Black participants, a disparity that persisted among individuals who specifically endorsed a willingness to obtain a vaccine. In contrast, disparities in uptake were not observed in the U.K. Conclusions: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was greater among racial and ethnic minorities, and Black participants living in the U.S. were less likely to receive a vaccine than White participants. Lower uptake among Black participants in the U.S. during the initial vaccine rollout is attributable to both hesitancy and disparities in access.

Worldwide, racial and ethnic minorities have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 with increased risk of infection, its related complications, and death. In the initial phase of population-based vaccination in the United States (U.S.) and United Kingdom (U.K.), vaccine hesitancy may result in differences in uptake. We performed a cohort study among U.S. and U.K. participants who volunteered to take part in the smartphone-based COVID Symptom Study (March 2020-February 2021) and used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios of vaccine hesitancy and uptake. In the U.S. (n = 87,388), compared to white participants, vaccine hesitancy was greater for Black and Hispanic participants and those reporting more than one or other race. In the U.K. (n = 1,254,294), racial and ethnic minority participants showed similar levels of vaccine hesitancy to the U.S. However, associations between participant race and ethnicity and levels of vaccine uptake were observed to be different in the U.S. and the U.K. studies. Among U.S. participants, vaccine uptake was significantly lower among Black participants, which persisted among participants that self-reported being vaccine-willing. In contrast, statistically significant racial and ethnic disparities in vaccine uptake were not observed in the U.K sample. In this study of self-reported vaccine hesitancy and uptake, lower levels of vaccine uptake in Black participants in the U.S. during the initial vaccine rollout may be attributable to both hesitancy and disparities in access.