Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration Slide deck.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The results of the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP)
Advertisements

Protecting the heart and the kidney: Implications from the SHARP trial Dr. Christina Reith University of Oxford United Kingdom.
The results of the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP) Colin Baigent, Martin Landray on behalf of the SHARP Investigators Disclosure: SHARP was.
P H Y S I C I A N S ’ A C A D E M Y F O R C A R D I O V A S C U L A R E D U C A T I O N Insights from clinical trials: The unassailable case for LDL-c.
HPS2-THRIVE: Randomized placebo-controlled trial of ER niacin and laropiprant in 25,673 patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. Jane Armitage.
Lipid Disorders and Management in Diabetes
The efFects of Pharmacological management of lipids in patients with CKD Andrew Monson FY1 18/9/14.
On-Treatment LDL and CHD Events in Statin Trials 2 Adapted from Rosenson RS. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs. 2004;9: LaRosa JC et al. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:
The Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID) The LIPID Study Group N Engl J Med 1998;339:
IHS SDPI COMPETITIVE GRANT PROGRAM CVD RISK REDUCTION DEMONSTRATION PROJECT WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE? HOW ARE WE DOING? HOW CAN WE DO BETTER? Karl Hammermeister,
Economic evaluation of MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group University of Oxford UK.
Lancet : doi: /S (08)60104-X Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from.
Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials Ungroup once.
Diabetes Trials Unit University of Oxford WebSite: Lipids in Diabetes Study.
HYPERLIPIDAEMIA. 4S 4444 patients –Hx angina or MI –Cholesterol Simvastatin 20mg (10-40) vs. placebo FU 5 years  total cholesterol 25%;  LDL.
Who should have statins 18 th March Nonfatal MI CHD death Any major coronary event CABG PTCA Unspecified Any coronary revascularisation.
Lipid Lowering Substudy Trial of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial JAMA 2002;288: ALLHAT- LLT.
Slide Source: Lipids Online Slide Library Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT-LLT)
VBWG HPS. Lancet. 2003;361: Gæde P et al. N Engl J Med. 2003;348: Recent statin trials: Reduction in primary outcome in patients with diabetes.
The concept of Diabetes & CV risk: A lifetime risk challenge The Clinical Significance of LDL-Cholesterol: No Longer a Hypothesis? John J.P. Kastelein,
Cholesterol Lowering and CV Risk: Meta-analyses. On-Treatment LDL and CHD Events in Statin Trials 2 Adapted from Rosenson RS. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs.
ELIGIBILITY: MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study Increased risk of CHD death due to prior disease: Myocardial infarction or other coronary heart disease; Occlusive.
HPS: Heart Protection Study Purpose To determine whether simvastatin reduces mortality and vascular events in patients with and without coronary disease,
The Prospective Pravastatin Pooling Project L I P I D CARECARE PPP Project Investigators Am J Cardiol 1995; 76:899–905.
Antithrombotic Trialists’ (ATT) Collaboration. Lancet 2009;373:
LIPID: Long-term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease Purpose To determine whether pravastatin will reduce coronary mortality and morbidity.
Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study CARDS Dr Sachin Kadoo.
4S: Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study
Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration. Lancet 2010;epub 9 Nov.
Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration Slide deck
ELIGIBILITY: MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study Increased risk of CHD death due to prior disease: Myocardial infarction or other coronary heart disease; Occlusive.
Number of participants with diabetes by trial Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaborators Lancet 2008;371:
Baseline characteristics and eligibility criteria of participating trials Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaborators Lancet 2005;366:
Baseline characteristics of HPS participants by prior cerebrovascular disease.
Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from participants in 26 randomised trials Lancet 2010;
US cost-effectiveness of simvastatin in 20,536 people at different levels of vascular disease risk: randomised placebo-controlled trial UK Medical Research.
Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials Ungroup once.
Title slide.
Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration Slide deck
Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170 000 participants in 26 randomised trials  Cholesterol.
Economic evaluation of MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study
The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with statin therapy in people at low risk of vascular disease: meta-analysis of individual data from 27 randomised.
Cholesterol Lowering and CV Risk: Meta-analyses
Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration Slide deck
REVEAL: Randomized placebo-controlled trial of anacetrapib in 30,449 patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease Louise Bowman on behalf of the HPS.
The Anglo Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial
ELIGIBILITY: MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study
HDL cholesterol and cardiovascular risk Epidemiological evidence
First time a CETP inhibitor shows reduction of serious CV events
HDL cholesterol and cardiovascular risk
Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S)
Introduction to: 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults BLUF: -Shift from.
Introduction to: 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults BLUF: -Shift from.
Jane Armitage on behalf of the HPS2-THRIVE Collaborative Group
Baseline characteristics of HPS participants by prior diabetes
Introduction to: 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults BLUF: -Shift from.
The results of the SHARP trial
Insights from the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial (ASCOT)
Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170 000 participants in 26 randomised trials  Cholesterol.
Introduction to: 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults BLUF: -Shift from.
The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with statin therapy in people at low risk of vascular disease: meta-analysis of individual data from 27 randomised.
ELIGIBILITY: MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study
Lipid-Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA): Results in the Subgroup of Patients with Diabetes Peter S. Sever, Bjorn Dahlöf, Neil Poulter, Hans Wedel, for the.
These slides highlight a presentation from a Special Session of the Late-Breaking Clinical Trials sessions during the American College of Cardiology 2005.
Introduction to: 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults BLUF: -Shift from.
Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170 000 participants in 26 randomised trials  Cholesterol.
Cause of death Treatment-arm events, % (n=45 054)
The results of the SHARP trial
PROSPER: trial design                                                                                                                                                                 
Simvastatin in Patients With Prior Cerebrovascular Disease: HPS
Presentation transcript:

Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration Slide deck

CTT Collaboration: Background* History: Founded in 1993 (prior to publication of 4S trial in 1994) Original protocol published in 1995 Trial eligibility for inclusion in CTT: Randomized Principal effects of treatment is modification of blood lipids Unconfounded (i.e. treatment arms differ only by lipid intervention) Recruited at least 1000 participants Scheduled study treatment duration of at least 2 years *American Journal of Cardiology 1995; 75:

CTT Collaboration: Analyses* Based on individual participant data (as opposed to tabular data) Intention-to-treat analyses Main results standardised per mmol/L LDL-cholesterol reduction *American Journal of Cardiology 1995; 75:

CTT Lancet 2005*: included 14 trials of statin vs control StudyTreatment comparison NTarget populationEntry lipid criteria 4SS20-40 vs. placebo4444Angina or previous MITotal cholesterol mmol/L WOSCOPSP40 vs. placebo6595Primary preventionLDL-C at least 4.0 mmol/L CAREP40 vs. placebo4159Previous MITotal cholesterol <6.2 mmol/L; LDL-C 3.0 to 4.5 mmol/L Post-CABGL40–80 vs. L2·5–51351Previous bypass surgeryLDL-C mmol/L AFCAPS/TexCAPSL20–40 vs. placebo6605Primary preventionTotal cholesterol mmol/L; LDL-C mmol/L LIPIDP40 vs. placebo9014Previous MI or hospitalization for unstable angina Total cholesterol mmol/L GISSI-PP20 vs. no treatment4271Recent MITotal cholesterol ≥ 5.2 mmol/L LIPSF80 vs. placebo1677Previous PCITotal cholesterol mmol/L HPSS40 vs. placebo20,536CHD, other occlusive arterial disease or DM Non-fasting total cholesterol ≥ 3·5 mmol/L PROSPERP40 vs. placebo5804History of or risk factors for vascular disease Total cholesterol 4·0-9·0 mmol/L ALLHAT-LLTP40 vs. usual care10,355Hypertension + at least 1 additional CHD risk factor Fasting LDL-C mmol/L (no known CHD); 2.6 to 3.3 mmol/L (known CHD; upper limit 4.1 mmol/L) ASCOT-LLAA10 vs. placebo10,305Hypertension CVD risk factors Non-fasting total cholesterol ≤6·5 mmol/L ALERTF40 vs. placebo2102Renal transplant patientsTotal cholesterol 4·0-9·0 mmol/L. CARDSA10 vs. placebo2838Type 2 DMLDL-C ≤ 4.14 mmol/L *Lancet 2005; 366: 1267–78

Relation between the proportional reduction in MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS and mean absolute LDL-C reduction in 14 statin trials Lancet 2005; 366: Reduction in LDL cholesterol (mmol/L) Proportional reduction in MVE rate (±1 SE) -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

CTT Lancet 2010*: additional trials of statin vs control StudyTreatment comparison NTarget populationEntry lipid criteria MEGAP vs. usual care8214Primary preventionTC mg/dL JUPITERR 20 vs. placebo17 802Primary prevention (but CRP>2 mg/dL) LDL-C <130 mg/dL, TG <500 mg/dL 4DA 20 vs. placebo1255Type 2 DM + haemodialysis LDL-C mg/dL TG <1000 mg/dL AURORAR 10 vs. placebo2773HaemodialysisNone ALLIANCEA (until LDL <80 mg/dL) vs. usual care 2442Prior CHDLDL-C mg/dL on lipid lowering drugs, mg/dL if not ASPENA 10 vs. placebo2410Type 2 DM + CHD or risk factors LDL-C <150, TG ≤445 mg/dL with CHD; LDL-C <159, TG ≤600 mg/dL without GISSI-HFR 10 vs. placebo4574CHFNone *Lancet 2010; 376:

CTT Lancet 2010*: more vs less intensive statin therapy StudyTreatment comparison NTarget populationEntry lipid criteria PROVE-ITA 80 vs. P ACSTC ≤240 mg/dL A to ZS 40 then S 80 vs. placebo then S ACSTC ≤250 mg/dL TNTA 80 vs. A 1010,001Prior CHDLDL-C mg/dL TG ≤600 mg/dL IDEALA 80 vs. S Prior CHDTG ≤600 mg/dL SEARCHS 80 vs. S 2012,064Prior CHDTC ≥4.5 mmol/L or ≥3.5 if on statins *Lancet 2010; 376:

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% More vs. Less (5 trials) Statin vs. control (21 trials) PROVE-IT TNT IDEAL SEARCH A to Z CTT meta analysis: Proportional reduction in MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS versus absolute LDL-C reduction Proportional reduction in MVE rate (95% CI) Mean LDL cholesterol difference between treatment groups (mmol/L) 22% (20%-24%) risk reduction per mmol/L P< Lancet 2010; 376:

Statin vs control trials: Proportional effects on MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS per mmol/L LDL-C reduction Lancet 2010; 376: Outcome Statin Control RR (CI) per mmol/L LDL-C reduction Control betterStatin better Non-fatal MI CHD death Any major coronary event CABG PTCA Unspecified Any coronary revascularisation Ischaemic stroke Haemorrhagic stroke Unknown stroke Any stroke Any major vascular event No. of events (% per annum) 2310 (0.9) 1242 (0.5) 3380 (1.3) 816 (0.3) 601 (0.2) 1686 (0.6) 3103 (1.2) 987 (0.4) 188 (0.1) 555 (0.2) 1730 (0.7) 7136 (2.8) 3213 (1.2) 1587 (0.6) 4539 (1.7) 1126 (0.4) 775 (0.3) 2165 (0.8) 4066 (1.6) 1225 (0.5) 163 (0.1) 629 (0.2) 2017 (0.8) 8934 (3.6) 0.74 ( ) 0.80 ( ) 0.76 ( ) 0.76 ( ) 0.78 ( ) 0.76 ( ) 0.76 ( ) 0.80 ( ) 1.10 ( ) 0.88 ( ) 0.85 ( ) 0.79 ( ) 99% or 95% CI

More vs less statin trials: Proportional effects on MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS per mmol/L LDL-C reduction Outcome More statin Less statin RR (CI) per mmol/L LDL-C reduction Less statin better More statin better Non-fatal MI CHD death Any major coronary event CABG PTCA Unspecified Any coronary revascularisation Ischaemic stroke Haemorrhagic stroke Unknown stroke Any stroke Any major vascular event No. of events (% per annum) 1175 (1.3) 645 (0.7) 1725 (1.9) 637 (0.7) 1166 (1.3) 447 (0.5) 2250 (2.6) 440 (0.5) 69 (0.1) 63 (0.1) 572 (0.6) 3837 (4.5) 1380 (1.5) 694 (0.7) 1973 (2.2) 731 (0.9) 1508 (1.8) 502 (0.6) 2741 (3.2) 526 (0.6) 57 (0.1) 80 (0.1) 663 (0.7) 4416 (5.3) 0.71 ( ) 0.85 ( ) 0.74 ( ) 0.72 ( ) 0.60 ( ) 0.78 ( ) 0.66 ( ) 0.69 ( ) 1.39 ( ) 0.63 ( ) 0.74 ( ) 0.72 ( ) Lancet 2010; 376: % or 95% CI

More vs less trials: Proportional effects on MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS per mmol/L reduction in LDL-C, by baseline LDL cholesterol More statinLess statin RR (CI) per mmol/L LDL-C reduction Less statin better More statin better < 2.0 ≥ 2.0,<2.5 ≥ 2.5, <3.0 ≥ 3.0, <3.5 ≥ 3.0 No. of events (% per annum) 704 (4.6) 795 (5.2)0.71 ( ) 1189 (4.2) 1317 (4.8)0.77 ( ) 1065 (4.5) 1203 (5.0)0.81 ( ) 517 (4.5) 633 (5.8)0.61 ( ) 303 (5.7) 398 (7.8)0.64 ( ) Total 3837 (4.5) 4416 (5.3)0.72 ( ) 99% or 95% CI Lancet 2010; 376: Baseline LDL-C (mmol/L)

All trials (statin vs control OR more vs less statin): Proportional effects on MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS per mmol/L reduction in LDL-C Lancet 2010; 376:

Expected reduction in MAJOR VASCULAR EVENT risk from lowering LDL-C with STATIN therapy LDL cholesterol, mmol/L Five year risk of a major vascular event, % Control Combined evidence: 34% relative risk reduction per 1.5 mmol/L (since 0.78 x 0.85 = 0.66) 22% relative risk reduction per mmol/L Statin 15% relative risk reduction per 0.5 mmol/L More statin Or: ~40% relative risk reduction per 2 mmol/L (0.78 x 0.78)

LATEST ANALYSES Including individual data from the CORONA trial and minor updates to other trials (27 trials involving participants)

Effect of statin therapy on MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS by age and sex Baseline subgroup Statin/ more statin Control/ less statin RR (CI) per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C p-value for heterogeneity or trend 99% or 95% CI LDL-C lowering worse LDL-C lowering better Events (% p.a.) All patients11284 (3.3)13673 (4.0)0.79 ( ) Male 8943 (3.5)10979 (4.4)0.78 ( ) Female 2341 (2.6) 2694 (3.0)0.84 ( ) Gender p=0.02  (2.9) 7510 (3.6)0.78 ( ) > 65,  (3.7) 5050 (4.6)0.79 ( ) > (4.9) 1113 (5.5)0.87 ( ) Age (years) p=0.14

Effect of statin therapy on MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS by baseline LDL-C and prior vascular disease Baseline subgroup Statin/ more statin Control/ less statin RR (CI) per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C p-value for heterogeneity or trend 99% or 95% CI LDL-C lowering worse LDL-C lowering better Events (% p.a.) All patients11284 (3.3)13673 (4.0)0.79 ( ) < (3.8) 2773 (4.3)0.78 ( )  2.5, < (3.4) 2276 (4.0)0.77 ( )  3, < (3.2) 2533 (4.1)0.76 ( )  (3.0) 5895 (3.9)0.80 ( ) Pre-treatment LDL-C (mmol/L) p=0.22 CHD 8671 (4.6)10426 (5.6)0.79 ( ) Non-CHD vascular 707 (3.1) 822 (3.7)0.83 ( ) None 1906 (1.4) 2425 (1.8)0.75 ( ) History of vascular disease p=0.18

Effect of statin therapy on MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS by diabetes, treated hypertension and smoking status Baseline subgroup Statin/ more statin Control/ less statin RR (CI) per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C p-value for heterogeneity or trend 99% or 95% CI LDL-C lowering worse LDL-C lowering better Events (% p.a.) All patients11284 (3.3)13673 (4.0)0.79 ( ) Type 1 diabetes 145 (4.5) 192 (6.0)0.77 ( ) Type 2 diabetes 2593 (4.2) 3028 (5.1)0.80 ( ) No diabetes 8484 (3.2)10378 (4.0)0.78 ( ) Yes 6374 (3.7) 7565 (4.5)0.80 ( ) No 4656 (2.8) 5815 (3.5)0.77 ( ) Current smokers 2303 (3.7) 2922 (4.7)0.79 ( ) Non-smokers 8979 (3.2)10749 (3.9)0.79 ( ) Diabetes p=0.78 Treated hypertension p=0.11 Smoking status p=0.88

Effect of statin therapy on MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS by 5-year predicted MVE risk Baseline subgroup Statin/ more statin Control/ less statin RR (CI) per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C p-value for trend 99% or 95% CI LDL-C lowering worse LDL-C lowering better Events (% p.a.) All patients11284 (3.3)13673 (4.0)0.79 ( ) < 5% 167 (0.4) 254 (0.6)0.62 ( )  5, < 10% 606 (1.1) 847 (1.6)0.69 ( )  10, < 20% 3615 (3.0) 4195 (3.5)0.79 ( )  20, < 30% 4109 (4.7) 4919 (5.8)0.81 ( )  30% 2787 (7.6) 3458 (9.8)0.79 ( ) 5-year MVE risk p=0.04

Effect of statin therapy on MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS Mean 1-year LDL cholesterol difference between treatment groups (mmol/L) Proportional reduction in major vascular event rate (95% CI) 0% 10% 20% 30% trials with further LDL-c reduction (average: 0.5 mmol/L) 17 trials with LDL-c reduction at 1 year <1.1 mmol/L (average: 0.9 mmol/L) 5 trials with LDL-c reduction at 1 year >1.1 mmol/L (average: 1.4 mmol/L)

Effect of statin therapy on MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS : 22 trials of statin vs control Year StatinControl RR (CI) per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C 99% or 95% CI LDL-C lowering worse LDL-C lowering better Events (% p.a.) 0-1 year 2221 (3.4)2459 (3.8)0.91 ( ) 1-2 years 1567 (2.6)2013 (3.4)0.78 ( ) 2-3 years 1347 (2.7)1777 (3.6)0.76 ( ) 3-4 years 1046 (2.6)1437 (3.6)0.72 ( ) 4-5 years 810 (2.9)1009 (3.7)0.78 ( ) 5+ years 456 (3.0) 562 (3.9)0.76 ( ) All years 7447 (2.9)9257 (3.6)0.80 ( ) Years (2.7)6798 (3.6)0.76 ( ) Test for heterogeneity between RR in first year and RR in years 1-5+: p<0.0001

Effect of statin therapy on MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS: 5 trials of more vs. less statin Year More statinLess statin RR (CI) per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C 99% or 95% CI LDL-C lowering worse LDL-C lowering better Events (% p.a.) 0-1 year 1-2 years 2-3 years 3-4 years 4-5 years 5+ years All years Years 1-5+ Test for heterogeneity between RR in first year and RR in years 1-5+: NS 1396 (7.4)1641 (8.8) 645 (3.8) 741 (4.4) 499 (3.6) 603 (4.4) 470 (3.6) 522 (4.1) 414 (3.7) 476 (4.4) 413 (3.9) 433 (4.1) 3837 (4.5)4416 (5.3) 2441 (3.7)2775 (4.3) 0.72 ( ) 0.72 ( ) 0.66 ( ) 0.75 ( ) 0.69 ( ) 0.83 ( ) 0.72 ( ) 0.72 ( )

Absolute effect of statin therapy on MAJOR VASCULAR EVENTS

Effect of statin therapy on MORTALITY Cause-specific mortality Statin/ more statin Control/ less statin RR (CI) per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C 99% or 95% CI LDL-C lowering worse LDL-C lowering better Deaths (% p.a.) 1902 (0.5)2290 (0.6) Coronary 0.80 ( ) 1955 (0.5)2121 (0.6) Other cardiac 0.92 ( ) 521 (0.1) 533 (0.1) Stroke 0.98 ( ) 420 (0.1) 435 (0.1) Other vascular 0.95 ( ) 4798 (1.3)5379 (1.5) Any vascular 0.88 ( ) 1834 (0.5)1849 (0.5) Cancer 0.99 ( ) 257 (0.1) 281 (0.1) Respiratory 0.86 ( ) 137 (0.0) 138 (0.0) Trauma 0.97 ( ) 856 (0.2) 892 (0.2) Other non-vascular 0.94 ( ) 3084 (0.8)3160 (0.9) Any non-vascular 0.96 ( ) 488 (0.1) 548 (0.1) Unknown 0.87 ( ) 8370 (2.3)9087 (2.5) Any death 0.91 ( )

Effect of statin therapy on SITE-SPECIFIC CANCER Site-specific cancer Statin/ more statin Control/ less statin RR (CI) per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C 99% or 95% CI LDL-C lowering worse LDL-C lowering better Events (% p.a.) 549 (0.2) 567 (0.2)Large bowel/intestine0.95 ( ) 665 (0.2) 678 (0.2) Other GI 0.99 ( ) 923 (0.3) 954 (0.4) Prostate 0.97 ( ) 315 (0.1) 331 (0.1) Bladder 0.94 ( ) 406 (0.1) 391 (0.1) Other GU 1.05 ( ) 845 (0.2) 847 (0.2) Respiratory 1.00 ( ) 273 (0.3) 244 (0.3) Female breast 1.09 ( ) 313 (0.1) 301 (0.1) Haematological 1.03 ( ) 932 (0.3) 897 (0.2)Other/unspecified1.05 ( ) 5221 (1.5)5210 (1.5) Any cancer 1.00 ( )

Thank you to our funders: