PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Shamil Haroon AU - Anuradhaa Subramanian AU - Jennifer Cooper AU - Astha Anand AU - Krishna Gokhale AU - Nathan Byne AU - Samir Dhalla AU - Dionisio Acosta-Mena AU - Thomas Taverner AU - Kelvin Okoth AU - Jingya Wang AU - Joht Singh Chandan AU - Christopher Sainsbury AU - Dawit Tefra Zemedikun AU - G. Neil Thomas AU - Dhruv Parekh AU - Tom Marshall AU - Elizabeth Sapey AU - Nicola J Adderley AU - Krishnarajah Nirantharakumar TI - Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors and susceptibility to COVID-19 in patients with hypertension: a propensity score-matched cohort study in primary care AID - 10.1101/2020.09.17.20196469 DP - 2020 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2020.09.17.20196469 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/09/18/2020.09.17.20196469.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/09/18/2020.09.17.20196469.full AB - Introduction A significant proportion of patients with Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) have hypertension and are treated with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, namely angiotensin-converting enzyme I inhibitors (ACE inhibitors) or angiotensin II type-1 receptor blockers (ARBs). These medications have been postulated to influence susceptibility to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). The objective of this study was to assess a possible association between prescription of RAS inhibitors and the incidence of COVID-19 and all-cause mortality.Methods We conducted a propensity-score matched cohort study to assess the incidence of COVID-19 among patients with hypertension who were prescribed ACE inhibitors or ARBs compared to patients treated with calcium channel blockers (CCBs) in a large UK-based primary care database (The Health Improvement Network). We estimated crude incidence rates for confirmed/suspected COVID-19 among those prescribed ACE inhibitors, ARBs and CCBs. We used a Cox proportional hazards model to produce adjusted hazard ratios for COVID-19 comparing patients prescribed ACE inhibitors or ARBs to those prescribed CCBs. We further assessed all-cause mortality as a secondary outcome and a composite of accidents, trauma or fractures as a negative control outcome to assess for residual confounding.Results In the propensity score matched analysis, 83 of 18,895 users (0.44%) of ACE inhibitors developed COVID-19 over 8,923 person-years, an incidence rate of 9.3 per 1000 person-years. 85 of 18,895 (0.45%) users of CCBs developed COVID-19 over 8,932 person-years, an incidence rate of 9.5 per 1000 person-years. The adjusted hazard ratio for suspected/confirmed COVID-19 for users of ACE inhibitors compared to CCBs was 0.92 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.26). 79 out of 10,623 users (0.74%) of ARBs developed COVID-19 over 5010 person-years, an incidence rate of 15.8 per 1000 person-years, compared to 11.6 per 1000 person-years among users of CCBs. The adjusted hazard ratio for suspected/confirmed COVID-19 for users of ARBs compared to CCBs was 1.38 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.95). There were no significant associations between use of ACE inhibitors or ARBs and all-cause mortality, compared to use of CCBs. We found no evidence of significant residual confounding with the negative control analysis.Conclusion Current use of ACE inhibitors was not associated with the risk of suspected or confirmed COVID-19 whereas use of ARBs was associated with a statistically non-significant 38% relative increase in risk compared to use of CCBs. However, no significant associations were observed between prescription of either ACE inhibitors or ARBs and all-cause mortality during the peak of the pandemic.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols http://www.encepp.eu/encepp/viewResource.htm?id=35329 Funding StatementThis study was not externally funded. ES reports receiving funding from HDR-UK (PIONEER Hub), Wellcome, MRC, British Lung Foundation and NIHR. DP reports receiving funding from NIHR and MRC.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The THIN data collection scheme and research carried out using THIN data were approved by the NHS South-East Multicentre Research Ethic Committee in 2003. Under the terms of the approval, studies must undergo independent scientific review. Approval for this study was obtained from the THIN Scientific Review Committee in June 2020 (SRC protocol reference 20-003-R2).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe study protocol can be accessed at the European Union electronic Register of Post-Authorisation Studies (EU PAS) register.