4.6 Article

Combined value of exhaled nitric oxide and blood eosinophils in chronic airway disease: the Copenhagen General Population Study

期刊

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
卷 52, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY SOC JOURNALS LTD
DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00616-2018

关键词

-

资金

  1. Lundbeck Foundation
  2. Dept of Internal iMedicine
  3. Dept of Clinical Biochemistry at Herlev
  4. Gentofte Hospital
  5. Danish Lung Association

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated whether the combination of increased exhaled nitric oxide fraction (FeNO) level and blood eosinophil count had an additive value in chronic airway disease in the general population. We included 4677 individuals aged 20-100 years from the Copenhagen General Population Study. Based on pre-and post-bronchodilator spirometry, self-reported asthma and smoking history, participants were subdivided into healthy never-smokers (n=1649), healthy ever-smokers (n=1581), asthma (n=449), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (n=404), asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) (n=138) and nonspecific airflow limitation (n=456). Compared to individuals with FeNO < 25 ppb and blood eosinophils < 0.3x10(9) cells.L-1, age-and sex-adjusted odds ratios (95% CI) for wheezing were 1.54 (1.29-1.84) for individuals with FeNO >= 25 ppb or blood eosinophils >= 0.3x10(9) cells.L-1 and 2.14 (1.47-3.10) for individuals with FeNO >= 25 ppb and blood eosinophils >= 0.3x10(9) cells.L-1. Corresponding odds ratios were 1.13 (0.91-1.41) and 1.83 (1.20-2.79) for sputum production, 1.54 (1.22-1.94) and 3.26 (2.16-4.94) for asthma, 1.03 (0.80-1.32) and 0.67 (0.36-1.27) for COPD and 1.32 (0.88-1.96) and 2.14 (1.05-4.36) for ACO. Among individuals reporting respiratory symptoms, predicting the type of chronic airway disease did not differ between the two biomarkers and did not improve by combining them. Combination of FeNO and blood eosinophils may have an additive value in characterising chronic airway disease in the general population but still needs to be investigated further with regard to clinical application.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据