An Evaluation of the Dual Diagnosis (substance use and mental health )Strategy in the South Eastern Trust Workers and Service Users Perceptions of Dual Diagnosis Issues

In the UK it is estimated that over 33% of psychiatric patients with enduring mental illness have a substance misuse problem, whilst over 50 % of clients currently accessing drug and alcohol services have a mental health problem. Between 2003 and 2013 in Northern Ireland, there were 741 recorded suicides by patients who were in contact with mental health services. Of this number, 68% (n=501) had a history of either alcohol or drug misuse or both, resulting in an average of 46 patient suicides per year associated with dual diagnosis (University of Manchester 2015).
The current evaluation examined staff attitudes towards working with dual diagnosis (co-existing difficulties) issues, staff confidence in working with clients with dual diagnosis, workers’ perceptions of the South Eastern dual diagnosis strategy and service user perspectives of dual diagnosis service provision.
The purpose of the evaluation was to provide evidence regarding the following in accordance with the current dual diagnosis strategy;
Staff understanding of the concept of dual diagnosis,
Staff attitudes towards working with dual diagnosis,
Staff confidence in working with individuals, who present with dual diagnosis,
Service users’ perspectives of SE Trust provision for dual diagnosis.
Staff views on the South Eastern Trust Dual Diagnosis Strategy.

Urinary thrombomodulin levels were significantly higher following occupational exposure to chemicals, in the presence of dipstick protein, but not in the presence of dipstick blood

Currently, there are no biomarkers which can identify patients with an increased risk of developing urothelial cancer as a result of occupational chemical exposure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationships between final diagnosis and 22 biomarkers measured in urine, serum and plasma collected from 156 hematuric patients. Fourteen of the 80 patients (17.5%) with urothelial cancer and 13/76 (17.1%) of the controls were deemed to have a history of chemical exposure. We applied Fisher's exact tests to explore associations between chemical exposure and final diagnosis, and tumor stage and grade, where applicable; ANOVA and t-test to compare age across patients with and without chemical exposure; and Zelen's exact test to evaluate relationships across final diagnosis, chemical exposure and smoking. Following pre-selection of biomarkers using Lasso, we identified biomarkers with differential levels across patients with and without chemical exposure using Welch's t-test. Using a one-sided t-test and considering multiple testing using FDR, we observed that TM levels in urine were significantly higher in samples from patients with a history of chemical exposure regardless of their diagnosis as control or urothelial cancer (one-sided t-test, p_UC = 0.014 and p_CTL = 0.043); in the presence of dipstick protein and when urinary pH levels ≤ 6 (p = 0.003), but not in the presence of dipstick blood (p = 0.115). Urothelial cancer patients with a history of chemical exposure were significantly younger (64.1 years) than those without chemical exposure (70.2 years) (one-sided t-test p-value = 0.012); and their tumors were higher grade (Fisher's exact test; p = 0.008). There was a strong association between a history of chemical exposure and smoking in urothelial cancer patients (Zelen's exact test; p = 0.025). Elevated urinary thrombomodulin levels could have the potential to identify chemical exposure in hematuric patients at high risk of developing urothelial cancer.

Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D and insulin resistance in people at high risk of cardiovascular disease: a euglycaemic hyperinsulinaemic clamp study

CONTEXT: In observational studies low serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OHD) concentration is associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). Increasing serum 25-OHD may have beneficial effects on insulin resistance or beta-cell function. Cross-sectional studies utilising sub-optimal methods for assessment of insulin sensitivity and serum 25-OHD concentration provide conflicting results.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the relationship between serum 25-OHD concentration and insulin resistance in healthy overweight individuals at increased risk of cardiovascular disease, using optimal assessment techniques.

METHODS: 92 subjects (mean age 56.0, SD 6.0 years), who were healthy but overweight (mean BMI 30.9, SD 2.3 kg/m(2) ) underwent assessments of insulin sensitivity (two-step euglycaemic hyperinsulinaemic clamp, HOMA2-IR), beta-cell function (HOMA2%B), serum 25-OHD concentration and body composition (DEXA).

RESULTS: Mean total 25-OHD concentration was 32.2, range 21.8 - 46.6 nmol/L. No association was demonstrated between serum 25-OHD concentration and insulin resistance.

CONCLUSIONS: In this study using optimal assessment techniques to measure 25-OHD concentration, insulin sensitivity and body composition, there was no association between serum 25-OHD concentration and insulin resistance in healthy, overweight individuals at high risk of developing cardiovascular disease. This study suggests the documented inverse association between serum 25-OHD concentration and risk of type 2 DM is not mediated by a relationship between serum 25-OHD concentration and insulin resistance. 

Statin use after diagnosis of breast cancer and survival: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies have shown that statins, particularly simvastatin, can prevent growth in breast cancer cell lines and animal models. We investigated whether statins used after breast cancer diagnosis reduced the risk of breast cancer-specific, or all-cause, mortality in a large cohort of breast cancer patients.

METHODS: A cohort of 17,880 breast cancer patients, newly diagnosed between 1998 and 2009, was identified from English cancer registries (from the National Cancer Data Repository). This cohort was linked to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, providing prescription records, and to the Office of National Statistics mortality data (up to 2013), identifying 3694 deaths, including 1469 deaths attributable to breast cancer. Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for breast cancer-specific, and all-cause, mortality in statin users after breast cancer diagnosis were calculated using time-dependent Cox regression models. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using multiple imputation methods, propensity score methods and a case-control approach.

RESULTS: There was some evidence that statin use after a diagnosis of breast cancer had reduced mortality due to breast cancer and all causes (fully adjusted HR = 0.84 [95% confidence interval = 0.68-1.04] and 0.84 [0.72-0.97], respectively). These associations were more marked for simvastatin 0.79 (0.63-1.00) and 0.81 (0.70-0.95), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: In this large population-based breast cancer cohort, there was some evidence of reduced mortality in statin users after breast cancer diagnosis. However, these associations were weak in magnitude and were attenuated in some sensitivity analyses.

Low-Dose Aspirin Use After Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer Does Not Increase Survival: A Case–Control Analysis of a Population-Based Cohort

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Individuals who began taking low-dose aspirin before they were diagnosed with colorectal cancer were reported to have longer survival times than patients who did not take this drug. We investigated survival times of patients who begin taking low-dose aspirin after a diagnosis of colorectal cancer in a large population-based cohort study.

METHODS: We performed a nested case-control analysis using a cohort of 4794 patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer from 1998 through 2007, identified from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and confirmed by cancer registries. There were 1559 colorectal cancer-specific deaths, recorded by the Office of National Statistics; these were each matched with up to 5 risk-set controls. Conditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), based on practitioner-recorded aspirin usage.

RESULTS: Overall, low-dose aspirin use after a diagnosis of colorectal cancer was not associated with colorectal cancer-specific mortality (adjusted OR = 1.06; 95% CI: 0.92-1.24) or all-cause mortality (adjusted OR = 1.06; 95% CI: 0.94-1.19). A dose-response association was not apparent; for example, low-dose aspirin use for more than 1 year after diagnosis was not associated with colorectal cancer-specific mortality (adjusted OR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.82-1.19). There was also no association between low-dose aspirin usage and colon cancer-specific mortality (adjusted OR = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.83-1.25) or rectal cancer-specific mortality (adjusted OR = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.88-1.38).

CONCLUSIONS: In a large population-based cohort, low-dose aspirin usage after diagnosis of colorectal cancer did not increase survival time.

Digoxin use after diagnosis of colorectal cancer and survival: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND:

Digoxin has been shown to affect a number of pathways that are of relevance to cancer, and its use has been associated with increased risks of breast and uterus cancer and, more recently, a 40% increase in colorectal cancer risk. These findings raise questions about the safety of digoxin use in colorectal cancer patients, and, therefore, we investigated whether digoxin use after colorectal cancer diagnosis increased the risk of colorectal cancer-specific mortality.

METHODS:

A cohort of 10,357 colorectal cancer patients newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2009 was identified from English cancer registries and linked to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (to provide digoxin and other prescription records) and to the Office of National Statistics mortality data (to identify 2,724 colorectal cancer-specific deaths). Using time-dependent Cox regression models, unadjusted and adjusted HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the association between postdiagnostic exposure to digoxin and colorectal cancer-specific mortality.

RESULTS:

Overall, 682 (6%) colorectal cancer patients used digoxin after diagnosis. Digoxin use was associated with a small increase in colorectal cancer-specific mortality before adjustment (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.07-1.46), but after adjustment for confounders, the association was attenuated (adjusted HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.91-1.34) and there was no evidence of a dose response.

CONCLUSIONS:

In this large population-based colorectal cancer cohort, there was little evidence of an increase in colorectal cancer-specific mortality with digoxin use after diagnosis.

IMPACT:

These results provide some reassurance that digoxin use is safe in colorectal cancer patients.