@article {2020.09.22.20198754, author = {The OpenSAFELY Collaborative and Rohini Mathur and Christopher T Rentsch and Caroline E Morton and William J Hulme and Anna Schultze and Brian MacKenna and Rosalind Eggo and Krishnan Bhaskaran and Angel YS Wong and Elizabeth J Williamson and Harriet Forbes and Kevin Wing and Helen I McDonald and Chris Bates and Seb Bacon and Alex J Walker and David Evans and Peter Inglesby and Amir Mehrkar and Helen J Curtis and Nicholas J DeVito and Richard Croker and Henry Drysdale and Jonathan Cockburn and John Parry and Frank Hester and Sam Harper and Ian J Douglas and Laurie Tomlinson and Stephen JW Evans and Richard Grieve and David Harrison and Kathy Rowan and Kamlesh Khunti and Nishi Chaturvedi and Liam Smeeth and Ben Goldacre}, title = {Ethnic differences in COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation, and mortality: an OpenSAFELY analysis of 17 million adults in England}, elocation-id = {2020.09.22.20198754}, year = {2020}, doi = {10.1101/2020.09.22.20198754}, publisher = {Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press}, abstract = {Background COVID-19 has had a disproportionate impact on ethnic minority populations, both in the UK and internationally. To date, much of the evidence has been derived from studies within single healthcare settings, mainly those hospitalised with COVID-19. Working on behalf of NHS England, the aim of this study was to identify ethnic differences in the risk of COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation and mortality using a large general population cohort in England.Methods We conducted an observational cohort study using linked primary care records of 17.5 million adults between 1 February 2020 and 3 August 2020. Exposure was self-reported ethnicity collapsed into the 5 and 16 ethnicity categories of the English Census. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify ethnic differences in the risk of being tested and testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 related intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and COVID-19 mortality, adjusted for socio-demographic factors, clinical co-morbidities, geographic region, care home residency, and household size.Results A total of 17,510,002 adults were included in the study; 63\% white (n=11,030,673), 6\% south Asian (n=1,034,337), 2\% black (n=344,889), 2\% other (n=324,730), 1\% mixed (n=172,551), and 26\% unknown (n=4,602,822). After adjusting for measured explanatory factors, south Asian, black, and mixed groups were marginally more likely to be tested (south Asian HR 1.08, 95\%CI 1.07-1.09; black HR 1.08; 95\%CI 1.06-1.09, mixed HR 1.03, 95\%CI 1.01-1.05), and substantially more likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 compared with white adults (south Asian HR 2.02. 95\% CI 1.97-2.07; black HR 1.68, 95\%CI 1.61-1.76; mixed HR 1.46, 95\%CI 1.36-1.56). The risk of being admitted to ICU for COVID-19 was substantially increased in all ethnic minority groups compared with white adults (south Asian HR 2.22, 95\%CI 1.96-2.52; black HR 3.07, 95\%CI 2.61-3.61; mixed HR 2.86, 95\%CI 2.19-3.75, other HR 2.86, 95\%CI 2.31-3.63). Risk of COVID-19 mortality was increased by 25-56\% in ethnic minority groups compared with white adults (south Asian HR 1.27, 95\%CI 1.17-1.38; black HR 1.55, 95\%CI 1.38-1.75; mixed HR 1.40, 95\%CI 1.12-1.76; other HR 1.25, 95\%CI 1.05-1.49).We observed heterogeneity of associations after disaggregation into detailed ethnic groupings; Indian and African groups were at higher risk of all outcomes; Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Caribbean groups were less or equally likely to be tested for SARS-CoV-2, but at higher risk of all other outcomes, Chinese groups were less likely to be tested for and test positive for SARS-CoV-2, more likely to be admitted to ICU, and equally likely to die from COVID-19.Conclusions We found evidence of substantial ethnic inequalities in the risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, ICU admission, and mortality, which persisted after accounting for explanatory factors, including household size. It is likely that some of this excess risk is related to factors not captured in clinical records such as occupation, experiences of structural discrimination, or inequitable access to health and social services. Prioritizing linkage between health, social care, and employment data and engaging with ethnic minority communities to better understand their lived experiences is essential for generating evidence to prevent further widening of inequalities in a timely and actionable manner.Competing Interest StatementBG has received research funding from Health Data Research UK (HDR-UK), the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, the Wellcome Trust, the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, the NHS National Institute for Health Research School of Primary Care Research, the Mohn-Westlake Foundation, the Good Thinking Foundation, the Health Foundation, and the World Health Organisation; he also receives personal income from speaking and writing for lay audiences on the misuse of science. IJD has received unrestricted research grants and holds shares in GlaxoSmithKline (GSK).Funding StatementThis work was supported by the Medical Research Council MR/V015737/1. TPP provided technical expertise and infrastructure within their data centre pro bono in the context of a national emergency.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:This study was approved by the Health Research Authority (REC reference 20/LO/0651) and by the LSHTM Ethics Board (reference 21863).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.YesNHS England is the data controller; TPP is the data processor; and the key researchers on OpenSAFELY are acting on behalf of NHS England. This implementation of OpenSAFELY is hosted within the TPP environment which is accredited to the ISO 27001 information security standard and is NHS IG Toolkit compliant; patient data has been pseudonymised for analysis and linkage using industry standard cryptographic hashing techniques; all pseudonymised datasets transmitted for linkage onto OpenSAFELY are encrypted; access to the platform is via a virtual private network (VPN) connection, restricted to a small group of researchers; the researchers hold contracts with NHS England and only access the platform to initiate database queries and statistical models; all database activity is logged; only aggregate statistical outputs leave the platform environment following best practice for anonymisation of results such as statistical disclosure control for low cell counts. Detailed information on all code lists is openly shared at https://codelists.opensafely.org/ for inspection and reuse. https://github.com/opensafely/ethnicity-covid-research https://codelists.opensafely.org/}, URL = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/09/23/2020.09.22.20198754}, eprint = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/09/23/2020.09.22.20198754.full.pdf}, journal = {medRxiv} }