| 1. |
- Timm, Signe, et al.
(författare)
-
Does parental or grandparental farm upbringing influence risk of asthma in offspring?
- 2020
-
Ingår i: European Respiratory Journal. - : ERS Publications. - 0903-1936 .- 1399-3003. ; 56:Suppl 64
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Farm upbringing has been associated with lower risk of asthma, and also with methylation of asthma-related genes. As such, farm upbringing has the potential to transfer less asthma risk across generations. We aimed to study generational effects from parental farm upbringing on offspring asthma.Methods: Our study involved three generations: 5,759 participants from the ECRHS study (born 1945-71, denoted G1), their 9,991 parents (G0) and their 8,260 offspring (G2) participating in RHINESSA. Questionnaire data on upbringing and asthma were available for all generations; direct information for G1 and G2, and via G2 for G0. Parental and grandparental place of upbringing was categorised as (1) both parents from farm (2) mother from farm, father from village/city (3) father from farm, mother from village/city (4) both parents from village or one parent from village and one from city (5) both parents from city (ref.). Data was analysed in Cox regression with G2 age as time scale.Results: Parental farm upbringing was not related to offspring asthma when compared to city upbringing (HR 1.12, 95 % CI 0.74-1.69) Findings remained similar when stratified by offspring upbringing and asthma phenotypes. Quantitative bias analyses showed similar estimates for alternative data sources. Grandparental farm upbringing was not associated with offspring asthma in either the maternal (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.67-1.65) or paternal line (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.62-1.68).Conclusion: This multi-generation analysis suggests no evidence of an association between parental or grandparental farm upbringing and offspring asthma.
|
|
| 2. |
- Toren, Kjell, et al.
(författare)
-
Vital capacity and COPD : the Swedish CArdioPulmonary bioImage Study (SCAPIS)
- 2016
-
Ingår i: The International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. - : DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD. - 1176-9106 .- 1178-2005. ; 11, s. 927-933
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Spirometric diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is based on the ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)/vital capacity (VC), either as a fixed value <0.7 or below the lower limit of normal (LLN). Forced vital capacity (FVC) is a proxy for VC. The first aim was to compare the use of FVC and VC, assessed as the highest value of FVC or slow vital capacity (SVC), when assessing the FEV1/VC ratio in a general population setting. The second aim was to evaluate the characteristics of subjects with COPD who obtained a higher SVC than FVC. Methods: Subjects (n=1,050) aged 50-64 years were investigated with FEV1, FVC, and SVC after bronchodilation. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) COPDFVC was defined as FEV1/FVC <0.7, GOLDCOPD(VC) as FEV1/VC <0.7 using the maximum value of FVC or SVC, LLNCOPDFVC as FEV1/FVC below the LLN, and LLNCOPDVC as FEV1/VC below the LLN using the maximum value of FVC or SVC. Results: Prevalence of GOLDCOPD(FVC) was 10.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.2-12.0) and the prevalence of LLNCOPDFVC was 9.5% (95% CI 7.8-11.4). When estimates were based on VC, the prevalence became higher; 16.4% (95% CI 14.3-18.9) and 15.6% (95% CI 13.5-17.9) for GOLDCOPD(VC) and LLNCOPDVC, respectively. The group of additional subjects classified as having COPD based on VC, had lower FEV1, more wheeze and higher residual volume compared to subjects without any COPD. Conclusion: The prevalence of COPD was significantly higher when the ratio FEV1/VC was calculated using the highest value of SVC or FVC compared with using FVC only. Subjects classified as having COPD when using the VC concept were more obstructive and with indications of air trapping. Hence, the use of only FVC when assessing airflow limitation may result in a considerable under diagnosis of subjects with mild COPD.
|
|
