Study Objectives Sleep and circadian phenotypes are associated with several diseases. The present study aimed to investigate whether sleep and circadian phenotypes were causally linked with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related outcomes. Methods Habitual sleep duration, insomnia, excessive daytime sleepiness, daytime napping, and chronotype were selected as exposures. Key outcomes included positivity and hospitalization for COVID-19. In the observation cohort study, multivariable risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses were conducted to estimate the causal effects of the significant findings in the observation analyses. Beta values and the corresponding 95% CIs were calculated and compared using the inverse variance weighting, weighted median, and MR-Egger methods. Results In the UK Biobank cohort study, both often excessive daytime sleepiness and sometimes daytime napping were associated with hospitalized COVID-19 (excessive daytime sleepiness [often vs. never]: RR=1.24, 95% CI=1.02-1.5; daytime napping [sometimes vs. never]: RR=1.12, 95% CI=1.02-1.22). In addition, sometimes daytime napping was also associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 susceptibility (sometimes vs. never: RR= 1.04, 95% CI=1.01-1.28). In the MR analyses, excessive daytime sleepiness was found to increase the risk of hospitalized COVID-19 (MR IVW method: OR = 4.53, 95% CI = 1.04-19.82), whereas little evidence supported a causal link between daytime napping and COVID-19 outcomes. Conclusions Observational and genetic evidence supports a potential causal link between excessive daytime sleepiness and an increased risk of COVID-19 hospitalization, suggesting that interventions targeting excessive daytime sleepiness symptoms might decrease severe COVID-19 rate.
Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severely hindered the timely receipt of health care for patients with cancer, especially female patients. Depression and anxiety were more pronounced in female patients than their male counterparts with cancer during treatment wait-time intervals. Herein, investigating the impact of treatment delays on the survival outcomes of female patients with early-stage cancers can enhance the rational and precise clinical decisions of physicians. Methods We analyzed five types of cancers in women from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program between Jan 2010 and Dec 2015. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to determine the impacts of treatment delays on the overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) of the patients. Results A total of 241,661 females with early-stage cancer were analyzed (12,617 cases of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), 166,051 cases of infiltrating breast cancer, 31,096 cases of differentiated thyroid cancer, 23,550 cases of colorectal cancer, and 8347 cases of cervical cancer). Worse OS rates were observed in patients with treatment delays ≥ 3 months in stage I NSCLC (adjustedHazard ratio (HR) = 1.11, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.01–1.23, p = 0.044) and stage I infiltrating breast cancer (adjustedHR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.11–1.37, p < 0.001). When the treatment delay intervals were analyzed as continuous variables, similar results were observed in patients with stage I NSCLC (adjustedHR = 1.04, 95% CI 1.01–1.06, p = 0.010) and in those with stage I breast cancer (adjustedHR = 1.03, 95% CI 1.00–1.06, p = 0.029). However, treatment delays did not reduce the OS of patients with differentiated thyroid cancer, cervical cancer, or colorectal cancer in the early-stage. Only intermediate treatment delays impaired the CSS of patients with cervical cancer in stage I (adjustedHR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.02–1.68, p = 0.032). Conclusion After adjusting for confounders, the prolonged time from diagnosis to the initiation of treatment (< 6 months) showed limited negative effects on the survival of most of the patients with early-stage female cancers. Whether our findings serve as evidence supporting the treatment deferral decisions of clinicians for patients with different cancers in resource-limited situations needs further validation.
Background: Statin use for cancer prevention has raised wide attention but the conclusions are still controversial. Whether statins use have exact causal effects on cancer prevention remains unclear.Methods: Based on the Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) datasets from the large prospective UK Biobank and other consortium databases, two-sample mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was conducted to explore the causal effects of statins use on varied site-specific cancer risks. Five MR methods were applied to investigate the causality. The stability, heterogeneity, and pleiotropy of MR results were also evaluated.Results: The atorvastatin use could increase the risk of colorectal cancer (odd ratio (OR) = 1.041, p = 0.035 by fixed-effects inverse variance weighted (IVW) method (IVWFE), OR = 1.086, p = 0.005 by weighted median; OR = 1.101, p = 0.048 by weighted mode, respectively). According to the weighted median and weighted mode, atorvastatin could modestly decrease the risk of liver cell cancer (OR = 0.989, p = 0.049, and OR = 0.984, p = 0.004, respectively) and head and neck cancer (OR = 0.972, p = 0.020). Besides, rosuvastatin use could reduce the bile duct cancer risk by 5.2% via IVWEF method (OR = 0.948, p = 0.031). No significant causality was determined in simvastatin use and pan-cancers via the IVWFE or multiplicative random-effects IVW (IVWMRE) method if applicable (p > 0.05). There was no horizontal pleiotropy observed in the MR analysis and the leave-one-out analysis proved the stability of the results.Conclusion: The causalities between statin use and cancer risk were only observed in colorectal cancer and bile duct cancer in the European ancestry population. Future works are warranted to provide more robust evidence for supporting statin repurposing for cancer prevention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.