Cirrhosis and other chronic liver diseases (collectively referred to as cirrhosis in this paper) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality globally, although the burden and underlying causes differ across locations and demographic groups. We report on results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017 on the burden of cirrhosis and its trends since 1990, by cause, sex, and age, for 195 countries and territories. We used data from vital registrations, vital registration samples, and verbal autopsies to estimate mortality. We modelled prevalence of total, compensated, and decompensated cirrhosis on the basis of hospital and claims data. Disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) were calculated as the sum of years of life lost due to premature death and years lived with disability. Estimates are presented as numbers and age-standardised or age-specific rates per 100 000 population, with 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). All estimates are presented for five causes of cirrhosis: hepatitis B, hepatitis C, alcohol-related liver disease, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), and other causes. We compared mortality, prevalence, and DALY estimates with those expected according to the Socio-demographic Index (SDI) as a proxy for the development status of regions and countries. In 2017, cirrhosis caused more than 1·32 million (95% UI 1·27-1·45) deaths (440 000 [416 000-518 000; 33·3%] in females and 883 000 [838 000-967 000; 66·7%] in males) globally, compared with less than 899 000 (829 000-948 000) deaths in 1990. Deaths due to cirrhosis constituted 2·4% (2·3-2·6) of total deaths globally in 2017 compared with 1·9% (1·8-2·0) in 1990. Despite an increase in the number of deaths, the age-standardised death rate decreased from 21·0 (19·2-22·3) per 100 000 population in 1990 to 16·5 (15·8-18·1) per 100 000 population in 2017. Sub-Saharan Africa had the highest age-standardised death rate among GBD super-regions for all years of the study period (32·2 [25·8-38·6] deaths per 100 000 population in 2017), and the high-income super-region had the lowest (10·1 [9·8-10·5] deaths per 100 000 population in 2017). The age-standardised death rate decreased or remained constant from 1990 to 2017 in all GBD regions except eastern Europe and central Asia, where the age-standardised death rate increased, primarily due to increases in alcohol-related liver disease prevalence. At the national level, the age-standardised death rate of cirrhosis was lowest in Singapore in 2017 (3·7 [3·3-4·0] per 100 000 in 2017) and highest in Egypt in all years since 1990 (103·3 [64·4-133·4] per 100 000 in 2017). There were 10·6 million (10·3-10·9) prevalent cases of decompensated cirrhosis and 112 million (107-119) prevalent cases of compensated cirrhosis globally in 2017. There was a significant increase in age-standardised prevalence rate of decompensated cirrhosis between 1990 and 2017. Cirrhosis caused by NASH had a steady age-standardised death rate throughout the study period, whereas the other four causes showed declines in age-standardised death rate. The age-standardised prevalence of compensated and decompensated cirrhosis due to NASH increased more than for any other cause of cirrhosis (by 33·2% for compensated cirrhosis and 54·8% for decompensated cirrhosis) over the study period. From 1990 to 2017, the number of prevalent cases more than doubled for compensated cirrhosis due to NASH and more than tripled for decompensated cirrhosis due to NASH. In 2017, age-standardised death and DALY rates were lower among countries and territories with higher SDI. Cirrhosis imposes a substantial health burden on many countries and this burden has increased at the global level since 1990, partly due to population growth and ageing. Although the age-standardised death and DALY rates of cirrhosis decreased from 1990 to 2017, numbers of deaths and DALYs and the proportion of all global deaths due to cirrhosis increased. Despite the availability of effective interventions for the prevention and treatment of hepatitis B and C, they were still the main causes of cirrhosis burden worldwide, particularly in low-income countries. The impact of hepatitis B and C is expected to be attenuated and overtaken by that of NASH in the near future. Cost-effective interventions are required to continue the prevention and treatment of viral hepatitis, and to achieve early diagnosis and prevention of cirrhosis due to alcohol-related liver disease and NASH. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Several countries are considering a minimum price policy for alcohol, but concerns exist about the potential effects on drinkers with low incomes. We aimed to assess the effect of a £0·45 minimum unit price (1 unit is 8 g/10 mL ethanol) in England across the income and socioeconomic distributions. We used the Sheffield Alcohol Policy Model (SAPM) version 2.6, a causal, deterministic, epidemiological model, to assess effects of a minimum unit price policy. SAPM accounts for alcohol purchasing and consumption preferences for population subgroups including income and socioeconomic groups. Purchasing preferences are regarded as the types and volumes of alcohol beverages, prices paid, and the balance between on-trade (eg, bars) and off-trade (eg, shops). We estimated price elasticities from 9 years of survey data and did sensitivity analyses with alternative elasticities. We assessed effects of the policy on moderate, hazardous, and harmful drinkers, split into three socioeconomic groups (living in routine or manual households, intermediate households, and managerial or professional households). We examined policy effects on alcohol consumption, spending, rates of alcohol-related health harm, and opportunity costs associated with that harm. Rates of harm and costs were estimated for a 10 year period after policy implementation. We adjusted baseline rates of mortality and morbidity to account for differential risk between socioeconomic groups. Overall, a minimum unit price of £0.45 led to an immediate reduction in consumption of 1.6% (-11.7 units per drinker per year) in our model. Moderate drinkers were least affected in terms of consumption (-3.8 units per drinker per year for the lowest income quintile vs 0.8 units increase for the highest income quintile) and spending (increase in spending of £0.04 vs £1.86 per year). The greatest behavioural changes occurred in harmful drinkers (change in consumption of -3.7% or -138.2 units per drinker per year, with a decrease in spending of £4.01), especially in the lowest income quintile (-7.6% or -299.8 units per drinker per year, with a decrease in spending of £34.63) compared with the highest income quintile (-1.0% or -34.3 units, with an increase in spending of £16.35). Estimated health benefits from the policy were also unequally distributed. Individuals in the lowest socioeconomic group (living in routine or manual worker households and comprising 41.7% of the sample population) would accrue 81.8% of reductions in premature deaths and 87.1% of gains in terms of quality-adjusted life-years. Irrespective of income, moderate drinkers were little affected by a minimum unit price of £0.45 in our model, with the greatest effects noted for harmful drinkers. Because harmful drinkers on low incomes purchase more alcohol at less than the minimum unit price threshold compared with other groups, they would be affected most by this policy. Large reductions in consumption in this group would however coincide with substantial health gains in terms of morbidity and mortality related to reduced alcohol consumption. UK Medical Research Council and Economic and Social Research Council (grant G1000043).

Background Deaths directly linked to COVID-19 infection may be misclassified, and the pandemic may have indirectly affected other causes of death. To overcome these measurement challenges, we estimate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mortality, life expectancy and lifespan inequality from week 10 of 2020, when the first COVID-19 death was registered, to week 47 ending 20 November 2020 in England and Wales through an analysis of excess mortality. Methods We estimated age and sex-specific excess mortality risk and deaths above a baseline adjusted for seasonality with a systematic comparison of four different models using data from the Office for National Statistics. We additionally provide estimates of life expectancy at birth and lifespan inequality defined as the SD in age at death. Results There have been 57 419 (95% prediction interval: 54 197, 60 752) excess deaths in the first 47 weeks of 2020, 55% of which occurred in men. Excess deaths increased sharply with age and men experienced elevated risks of death in all age groups. Life expectancy at birth dropped 0.9 and 1.2 years for women and men relative to the 2019 levels, respectively. Lifespan inequality also fell over the same period by 5 months for both sexes. Conclusion Quantifying excess deaths and their impact on life expectancy at birth provide a more comprehensive picture of the burden of COVID-19 on mortality. Whether mortality will return to—or even fall below—the baseline level remains to be seen as the pandemic continues to unfold and diverse interventions are put in place.

Background and Aims: The alcohol harm paradox (AHP) posits that disadvantaged groups suffer from higher rates of alcohol‐related harm compared with advantaged groups, despite reporting similar or lower levels of consumption on average. The causes of this relationship remain unclear. This study aimed to identify explanations proposed for the AHP. Secondary aims were to review the existing evidence for those explanations and investigate whether authors linked explanations to one another.Methods: This was a systematic review. We searched MEDLINE (1946–January 2021), EMBASE (1974–January 2021) and PsycINFO (1967–January 2021), supplemented with manual searching of grey literature. Included papers either explored the causes of the AHP or investigated the relationship between alcohol consumption, alcohol‐related harm and socio‐economic position. Papers were set in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development high‐income countries. Explanations extracted for analysis could be evidenced in the empirical results or suggested by researchers in their narrative. Inductive thematic analysis was applied to group explanations.Results: Seventy‐nine papers met the inclusion criteria and initial coding revealed that these papers contained 41 distinct explanations for the AHP. Following inductive thematic analysis, these explanations were grouped into 16 themes within six broad domains: individual, life‐style, contextual, disadvantage, upstream and artefactual. Explanations related to risk behaviours, which fitted within the life‐style domain, were the most frequently proposed (n = 51) and analysed (n = 21).Conclusions: While there are many potential explanations for the alcohol harm paradox, most research focuses on risk behaviours while other explanations lack empirical testing.

While evidence that alcohol pricing policies reduce alcohol-related health harm is robust, and alcohol taxation increases are a WHO “best buy” intervention, there is a lack of research comparing the scale and distribution across society of health impacts arising from alternative tax and price policy options. The aim of this study is to test whether four common alcohol taxation and pricing strategies differ in their impact on health inequalities. An econometric epidemiological model was built with England 2014/2015 as the setting. Four pricing strategies implemented on top of the current tax were equalised to give the same 4.3% population-wide reduction in total alcohol-related mortality: current tax increase, a 13.4% all-product duty increase under the current UK system; a value-based tax, a 4.0% ad valorem tax based on product price; a strength-based tax, a volumetric tax of £0.22 per UK alcohol unit (= 8 g of ethanol); and minimum unit pricing, a minimum price threshold of £0.50 per unit, below which alcohol cannot be sold. Model inputs were calculated by combining data from representative household surveys on alcohol purchasing and consumption, administrative and healthcare data on 43 alcohol-attributable diseases, and published price elasticities and relative risk functions. Outcomes were annual per capita consumption, consumer spending, and alcohol-related deaths. Uncertainty was assessed via partial probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and scenario analysis. The pricing strategies differ as to how effects are distributed across the population, and, from a public health perspective, heavy drinkers in routine/manual occupations are a key group as they are at greatest risk of health harm from their drinking. Strength-based taxation and minimum unit pricing would have greater effects on mortality among drinkers in routine/manual occupations (particularly for heavy drinkers, where the estimated policy effects on mortality rates are as follows: current tax increase, −3.2%; value-based tax, −2.9%; strength-based tax, −6.1%; minimum unit pricing, −7.8%) and lesser impacts among drinkers in professional/managerial occupations (for heavy drinkers: current tax increase, −1.3%; value-based tax, −1.4%; strength-based tax, +0.2%; minimum unit pricing, +0.8%). Results from the PSA give slightly greater mean effects for both the routine/manual (current tax increase, −3.6% [95% uncertainty interval (UI) −6.1%, −0.6%]; value-based tax, −3.3% [UI −5.1%, −1.7%]; strength-based tax, −7.5% [UI −13.7%, −3.9%]; minimum unit pricing, −10.3% [UI −10.3%, −7.0%]) and professional/managerial occupation groups (current tax increase, −1.8% [UI −4.7%, +1.6%]; value-based tax, −1.9% [UI −3.6%, +0.4%]; strength-based tax, −0.8% [UI −6.9%, +4.0%]; minimum unit pricing, −0.7% [UI −5.6%, +3.6%]). Impacts of price changes on moderate drinkers were small regardless of income or socioeconomic group. Analysis of uncertainty shows that the relative effectiveness of the four policies is fairly stable, although uncertainty in the absolute scale of effects exists. Volumetric taxation and minimum unit pricing consistently outperform increasing the current tax or adding an ad valorem tax in terms of reducing mortality among the heaviest drinkers and reducing alcohol-related health inequalities (e.g., in the routine/manual occupation group, volumetric taxation reduces deaths more than increasing the current tax in 26 out of 30 probabilistic runs, minimum unit pricing reduces deaths more than volumetric tax in 21 out of 30 runs, and minimum unit pricing reduces deaths more than increasing the current tax in 30 out of 30 runs). Study limitations include reducing model complexity by not considering a largely ineffective ban on below-tax alcohol sales, special duty rates covering only small shares of the market, and the impact of tax fraud or retailer non-compliance with minimum unit prices. Our model estimates that, compared to tax increases under the current system or introducing taxation based on product value, alcohol-content-based taxation or minimum unit pricing would lead to larger reductions in health inequalities across income groups. We also estimate that alcohol-content-based taxation and minimum unit pricing would have the largest impact on harmful drinking, with minimal effects on those drinking in moderation. People have drunk alcoholic beverages throughout history. However, harmful alcohol consumption is currently responsible for around 2.7 million deaths every year and is a leading risk factor worldwide for heart disease, liver disease, and many other health problems. It also affects the well-being and health of people around those who drink, both within the household and through alcohol-related crime and road traffic crashes. As with most products, the price of alcohol influences how much people buy and consume. Alcohol affordability is an important driver of alcohol consumption, and in many countries, including the UK and US, alcohol prices have not kept pace with inflation and rising incomes. Alcohol taxes have the dual function of raising revenues and regulating alcohol prices. Different countries employ different alcohol-specific taxation structures including taxation by beverage volume, by value, or by alcohol content. Some countries also have additional price control measures that prevent the sale of very cheap alcohol. Although research shows that increases in the price of alcohol brought about by taxation or other pricing policies reduce alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harm, little is known about how alternative tax and price policy options affect the scale and distribution of alcohol-related health impacts across society. This is important because people with lower social status and/or income are disproportionately...

The estimation of price elasticities of alcohol demand is valuable for the appraisal of price-based policy interventions such as minimum unit pricing and taxation. This study applies a pseudo-panel approach to the cross-sectional Living Cost and Food Survey 2001/2-2009 to estimate the own- and cross-price elasticities of off- and on-trade beer, cider, wine, spirits and ready-to-drinks in the UK. A pseudo-panel with 72 subgroups defined by birth year, gender and socioeconomic status is constructed. Estimated own-price elasticities from the base case fixed effect models are all negative and mostly statically significant (p<0.05). Off-trade cider and beer are most elastic (-1.27 and -0.98) and off-trade spirits and on-trade ready-to-drinks are least elastic (-0.08 and -0.19). Estimated cross-price elasticities are smaller in magnitude with a mix of positive and negative signs. The results appear plausible and robust and could be used for appraising the estimated impact of price-based interventions in the UK.