Objective To examine the association between plasma levels of the soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) and the incidence of severe complications of COVID-19. Methods 403 RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients were recruited and prospectively followed-up at a major hospital in the United Arab Emirates. The primary endpoint was time from admission until the development of a composite outcome, including acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or death from any cause. Patients discharged alive were considered as competing events to the primary outcome. Competing risk regression was used to quantify the association between suPAR and the incidence of the primary outcome. Results 6.2% of patients experienced ARDS or ICU admission, but none died. Taking into account competing risk, the incidence of the primary outcome was 11.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.7–16.3) in patients with suPAR levels >3.91 ng/mL compared to 2.9% (95% CI, 0.4–5.5) in those with suPAR ≤3.91 ng/mL. Also, an increase by 1 ng/mL in baseline suPAR resulted in 58% rise in the hazard of developing the primary outcome (hazard ratio 1.6, 95% CI, 1.2–2.1, p =  0.003). Conclusion suPAR has an excellent prognostic utility in predicting severe complications in hospitalised COVID-19 patients.

Background A plethora of studies on COVID-19 investigating mortality and recovery have used the Cox Proportional Hazards (Cox PH) model without taking into account the presence of competing risks. We investigate, through extensive simulations, the bias in estimating the hazard ratio (HR) and the absolute risk reduction (ARR) of death when competing risks are ignored, and suggest an alternative method. Methods We simulated a fictive clinical trial on COVID-19 mimicking studies investigating interventions such as Hydroxychloroquine, Remdesivir, or convalescent plasma. The outcome is time from randomization until death. Six scenarios for the effect of treatment on death and recovery were considered. The HR and the 28-day ARR of death were estimated using the Cox PH and the Fine and Gray (FG) models. Estimates were then compared with the true values, and the magnitude of misestimation was quantified. Results The Cox PH model misestimated the true HR and the 28-day ARR of death in the majority of scenarios. The magnitude of misestimation increased when recovery was faster and/or chance of recovery was higher. In some scenarios, this model has shown a harmful treatment effect when it was beneficial. Estimates obtained from the FG model were all consistent and showed no misestimation or changes in direction. Conclusion There is a substantial risk of misleading results in COVID-19 research if recovery and death due to COVID-19 are not considered as competing risk events. We strongly recommend the use of a competing risk approach to re-analyze relevant published data that have used the Cox PH model. Keywords COVID-19, competing risk, in-hospital mortality, survival analysis, recovery

Background Data on breast cancer survival and its prognostic factors are lacking in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Sociodemographic and pathologic factors have been studied widely in western populations but are very limited in this region. This study is the first to report breast cancer survival and investigate prognostic factors associated with its survival in the UAE. Methods This is a retrospective cohort study involving 988 patients who were diagnosed and histologically confirmed with breast cancer between January 2008 and December 2012 at Tawam hospital, Al Ain, UAE. Patient were followed from the date of initial diagnosis until the date of death from any cause, lost-to-follow up or the end of December 2018. The primary outcome is overall survival (OS). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the survival curve along with the 2- and 5-year survivals. Different group of patients categorized according to prognostic factors were compared using the log-rank test. Multiple Cox proportional hazards models was used to examine the impact of several prognostic factors on the overall survival. Results The median study follow-up was 35 months. Of the 988 patients, 62 had died during their follow-up, 56 were lost to follow-up and 870 were still alive at the end of the study. The average age of patients was 48 years. The majority of patients presented to the hospital with grade II or III, 24% with at least stage 3 and 9.2% had metastasis. The 2-year and 5-year survivals were estimated to 97% and 89% respectively. Results of the multiple Cox proportional hazard model show that tumor grade, and stage of cancer at presentation are jointly significantly associated with survival. Conclusion The 2- and 5-year survival are within the norms compared to other countries. Significant clinical and pathological prognostic factors associated with survival were tumor grade, and the stage of cancer at presentation.

(1) Background: The present study aimed to assess the changes in blood pressure (BP) within the first 6 months of treatment initiation in a newly treated hypertensive cohort and to identify the factors that are associated with achieving the target BP recommended by the American (ACC/AHA, 2017), European (ESC/ESH, 2018), United Kingdom (NICE, 2019), and International Society of Hypertension (ISH, 2020) guidelines. (2) Methods: We analyzed 5308 incident hypertensive outpatients across Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (UAE), in 2017; each patient was followed up for 6 months. Hypertension was defined as a BP of 130/80 mmHg according to the ACC/AHA guidelines and 140/90 mmHg according to the ESC/ESH, NICE, and ISH guidelines. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with achieving the guideline-recommended BP targets. (3) Results: At baseline, the mean BP was 133.9 ± 72.9 mmHg and 132.7 ± 72.5 mmHg at 6 months. The guideline-recommended BP targets were 39.5%, 43%, 65.6%, and 40.8%, according to the ACC/AHA, ESC/ESH, NICE, and ISH guidelines, respectively. A BMI of <25 kg/m2 was associated with better BP control according to the ACC/AHA (odds ratio (OR) = 1.26; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.07–1.49), ESC/ESH (OR = 1.27; 95% CI = 1.08–1.50), and ISH guidelines (OR = 1.22; 95% CI = 1.03–1.44). Hypertension treated in secondary care settings was more likely to achieve the BP targets recommended by the ACC/AHA (1.31 times), ESC/ESH (1.32 times), NICE (1.41 times), and ISH (1.34 times) guidelines. (4) Conclusions: BP goal achievement was suboptimal. BP control efforts should prioritize improving cardiometabolic goals and lifestyle modifications.

Introduction Evidence regarding the performance of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment tools is limited in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Therefore, we assessed the agreement between various externally validated CVD risk assessment tools in the UAE. Methods A secondary analysis of the Abu Dhabi Screening Program for Cardiovascular Risk Markers (AD-SALAMA) data, a large population-based cross-sectional survey conducted in Abu Dhabi, UAE during the period 2009 until 2015, was performed in July 2019. The analysis included 2,621 participants without type 2 Diabetes and without history of cardiovascular diseases. The CVD risk assessment tools included in the analysis were the World Health Organization for Middle East and North Africa Region (WHO-MENA), the systematic coronary risk evaluation for high risk countries (SCORE-H), the pooled cohort risk equations for white (PCRE-W) and African Americans (PCRE-AA), the national cholesterol education program Framingham risk score (FRAM-ATP), and the laboratory Framingham risk score (FRAM-LAB). Results The overall concordance coefficient was 0.50. The agreement between SCORE-H and PCRE-W, PCRE-AA, FRAM-LAB, FRAM-ATP and WHO-MENA, were 0.47, 0.39, 0.0.25, 0.42 and 0.18, respectively. PCRE-AA classified the highest proportion of participants into high-risk category of CVD (16.4%), followed by PCRE-W (13.6%), FRAM-LAB (6.9%), SCORE-H (4.5%), FRAM-ATP (2.7%), and WHO-MENA (0.4%).