scholarly journals Meta-Analysis of Heterogeneity in the Effects of Wildfire Smoke Exposure on Respiratory Health in North America

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 960 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Kondo ◽  
Anneclaire De Roos ◽  
Lauren White ◽  
Warren Heilman ◽  
Miranda Mockrin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Respiratory Health ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Health Impact ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Geographic Region ◽  
Smoke Exposure ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Wildfire Smoke

Epidemiological studies consistently show an association between wildfire-related smoke exposure and adverse respiratory health. We conducted a systematic review of evidence in published literature pertaining to heterogeneity of respiratory effects from this exposure in North America. We calculated the within-study ratio of relative risks (RRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to examine heterogeneity of effect by population subgroup, and then summarized the RRRs using meta-analysis. We found evidence of a greater effect of wildfire smoke on respiratory health among females relative to males for asthma (RRR: 1.035, 95% CI: 1.013, 1.057) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (RRR: 1.018, 95% CI: 1.003, 1.032). There was evidence of a lower relative risk for all respiratory outcomes among youth compared to adults (RRR: 0.976, 95% CI: 0.963, 0.989). We also found wildfire smoke effects stratified by income, race, education, health behaviors, access to care, housing occupancy, geographic region, and urban/rural status. However, data were insufficient to quantitatively evaluate effect modification by these characteristics. While we found evidence that certain demographic subgroups of the population are more susceptible to respiratory health outcomes from wildfire smoke, it is unclear whether this information can be used to inform policy aimed to reduce health impact of wildfires.

scholarly journals Prevalence of Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Epidemiological Studies

2012 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 355-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria B Ospina ◽  
Donald C Voaklander ◽  
Michael K Stickland ◽  
Malcolm King ◽  
Ambikaipakan Senthilselvan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Native Americans ◽  
Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Asthma Prevalence ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Aboriginal Populations

BACKGROUND: Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have considerable potential for inequities in diagnosis and treatment, thereby affecting vulnerable groups.OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences in asthma and COPD prevalence between adult Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal populations.METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, specialized databases and the grey literature up to October 2011 were searched to identify epidemiological studies comparing asthma and COPD prevalence between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal adult populations. Prevalence ORs (PORs) and 95% CIs were calculated in a random-effects meta-analysis.RESULTS: Of 132 studies, eight contained relevant data. Aboriginal populations included Native Americans, Canadian Aboriginals, Australian Aboriginals and New Zealand Maori. Overall, Aboriginals were more likely to report having asthma than non-Aboriginals (POR 1.41 [95% CI 1.23 to 1.60]), particularly among Canadian Aboriginals (POR 1.80 [95% CI 1.68 to 1.93]), Native Americans (POR 1.41 [95% CI 1.13 to 1.76]) and Maori (POR 1.64 [95% CI 1.40 to 1.91]). Australian Aboriginals were less likely to report asthma (POR 0.49 [95% CI 0.28 to 0.86]). Sex differences in asthma prevalence between Aboriginals and their non-Aboriginal counterparts were not identified. One study compared COPD prevalence between Native and non-Native Americans, with similar rates in both groups (POR 1.08 [95% CI 0.81 to 1.44]).CONCLUSIONS: Differences in asthma prevalence between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal populations exist in a variety of countries. Studies comparing COPD prevalence between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal populations are scarce. Further investigation is needed to identify and account for factors associated with respiratory health inequalities among Aboriginal peoples.

CRISPR/Cas9 Genome Editing Tool: A Promising Tool for Therapeutic Applications on Respiratory Diseases

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 333-346
Author(s):  
Sadiya Bi Shaikh ◽  
Yashodhar Prabhakar Bhandary
Keyword(s):  
Respiratory Diseases ◽  
Gene Editing ◽  
Epithelial Mesenchymal Transition ◽  
Respiratory Health ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Therapeutic Tool ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Mesenchymal Transition ◽  
Chronic Respiratory Diseases ◽  
Promising Tool

Respiratory diseases are one of the prime topics of concern in the current era due to improper diagnostics tools. Gene-editing therapy, like Clustered regularly interspaced palindromic repeats- associated nuclease 9 (CRISPR/Cas9), is gaining popularity in pulmonary research, opening up doors to invaluable insights on underlying mechanisms. CRISPR/Cas9 can be considered as a potential gene-editing tool with a scientific community that is helping in the advancement of knowledge in respiratory health and therapy. As an appealing therapeutic tool, we hereby explore the advanced research on the application of CRISPR/Cas9 tools in chronic respiratory diseases such as lung cancer, Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and cystic fibrosis (CF). We also address the urgent need to establish this gene-editing tool in various other lung diseases such as asthma, Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). The present review introduces CRISPR/Cas9 as a worthy application in targeting epithelial-mesenchymal transition and fibrinolytic system via editing specific genes. Thereby, based on the efficiency of CRISPR/Cas9, it can be considered as a promising therapeutic tool in respiratory health research.

scholarly journals Safety and efficacy of inpatient pulmonary rehabilitation for patients hospitalised with an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e043377
Author(s):  
Kai Zhu ◽  
Jagdeep Gill ◽  
Ashley Kirkham ◽  
Joel Chen ◽  
Amy Ellis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Acute Exacerbation ◽  
Pulmonary Rehabilitation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Safety And Efficacy

IntroductionPulmonary rehabilitation (PR) following an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) reduces the risk of hospital admissions, and improves physical function and health-related quality of life. However, the safety and efficacy of in-hospital PR during the most acute phase of an AECOPD is not well established. This paper describes the protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis to determine the safety and efficacy of inpatient acute care PR during the hospitalisation phase.Methods and analysisMedical literature databases and registries MEDLINE, EMBASE, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, CENTRAL, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, WHO trials portal and ClinicalTrials.gov will be searched for articles from inception to June 2021 using a prespecified search strategy. We will identify randomised controlled trials that have a comparison of in-hospital PR with usual care. PR programmes had to commence during the hospitalisation and include a minimum of two sessions. Title and abstract followed by full-text screening will be conducted independently by two reviewers. A meta-analysis will be performed if there is sufficient homogeneity across selected studies or groups of studies. The Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes and Study characteristics framework will be used to standardise the data collection process. The quality of the cumulative evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework.Ethics and disseminationAECOPD results in physical limitations which are amenable to PR. This review will assess the safety and efficacy of in-hospital PR for AECOPD. The results will be presented in a peer-reviewed publication and at research conferences. Ethical review is not required for this study.

scholarly journals Blood eosinophil count-guided corticosteroid therapy and as a prognostic biomarker of exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 204062232110287
Author(s):  
Tao Liu ◽  
Zi-Jian Xiang ◽  
Xiao-Meng Hou ◽  
Jing-Jing Chai ◽  
Yan-Li Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Prognostic Biomarker ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Blood Eosinophil ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Copd Patients ◽  
The Stability

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by persistent respiratory symptoms and dyspnea, as well as an increase in the number of leukocytes in the airways, lungs, and pulmonary vessels. A ‘One size fits all’ approach to COPD patients with different clinical features may be considered outdated. The following are the two major objectives of this meta-analysis: the first is to determine if blood eosinophil counts (BEC) can serve as a prognostic biomarker of COPD outcomes, and the second is to determine which level of BEC is effective for inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) treatment. Methods: We searched articles published before 15 May 2021 in the following four electronic databases: Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed. Results: A total of 42 studies, comprising a sampling of 188,710 subjects, were summarized and compared in this meta-analysis. The rate ratio (RR) of exacerbations of COPD (ECOPD) between ICS and non-ICS treatment was statistically significant for the COPD patients with a baseline BEC ⩾ 2% or ⩾ 200 cells/μl, RR = 0.82 (0.73, 0.93) or 0.79 (0.70, 0.89) respectively, while the RR of ECOPD between ICS and non-ICS treatment was statistically insignificant for the COPD patients with baseline BEC < 2% or <200 cells/μl, RR = 0.97 (0.87, 1.08) or 0.97 (0.86, 1.08), suggested that ICS therapy was beneficial to the improvement of ECOPD in patients with a baseline BEC ⩾ 2% or BEC ⩾ 200 cells/μl. Conclusion: Our research shows that a BEC ⩾ 200 cells/μl or ⩾2% is likely to become the cutoff value of ICS treatment for ECOPD. Moreover, we believe that the baseline BEC can be used as a biomarker for predicting ECOPD. The stability of BEC requires special attention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document