| Literature DB >> 18462487 |
Andrew C Collinson1, Pa Tamba Ngom, Sophie E Moore, Gareth Morgan, Andrew M Prentice.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In rural Gambia, birth season predicts infection-related adult mortality, providing evidence that seasonal factors in early life may programme immune development. This study tested whether lymphocyte subpopulations assessed by automated full blood count and flow cytometry in cord blood and at 8, 16 and 52 weeks in rural Gambian infants (N = 138) are affected by birth season (DRY = Jan-Jun, harvest season, few infections; WET = Jul-Dec, hungry season, many infections), birth size or micronutrient status.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18462487 PMCID: PMC2409299 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2172-9-18
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Immunol ISSN: 1471-2172 Impact factor: 3.615
Figure 1Leucocyte counts by season of birth (geometric mean and 95% confidence intervals). Solid black bars represent DRY season births, solid grey bars represent WET season births.
Figure 2Lymphocyte counts by season of birth (geometric mean and 95% confidence intervals). Solid black bars represent DRY season births, solid grey bars represent WET season births.
Geometric mean absolute and percentage lymphocyte subpopulation counts at each age and overall, according to season of birth (values adjusted for gender, gestation, birth weight and monoclonal antibody source; overall values also adjusted for age at measurement).
| 0 | 2.30 | 2.53 | 0.41 | 51.8 | 50.5 | 0.70 | |
| 8 | 3.57 | 4.35 | 0.029 | 58.7 | 58.2 | 0.77 | |
| 16 | 4.10 | 5.26 | 0.014 | 57.7 | 59.0 | 0.66 | |
| 52 | 3.32 | 3.72 | 0.26 | 60.9 | 61.9 | 0.71 | |
| All | 3.40 | 3.85 | 0.01 | 57.1 | 56.2 | 0.47 | |
| 0 | 1.45 | 1.73 | 0.17 | 35.0 | 33.8 | 0.65 | |
| 8 | 2.49 | 2.73 | 0.26 | 40.8 | 37.0 | 0.017 | |
| 16 | 2.80 | 3.28 | 0.05 | 39.1 | 37.4 | 0.34 | |
| 52 | 2.07 | 2.19 | 0.55 | 38.4 | 36.7 | 0.27 | |
| All | 2.26 | 2.41 | 0.15 | 37.8 | 35.1 | 0.0017 | |
| 0 | 1.29 | 1.44 | 0.44 | 27.2 | 27.7 | 0.82 | |
| 8 | 0.98 | 1.47 | 0.011 | 16.3 | 19.0 | 0.055 | |
| 16 | 1.34 | 1.65 | 0.093 | 18.7 | 18.7 | 0.97 | |
| 52 | 1.12 | 1.28 | 0.22 | 20.9 | 21.6 | 0.60 | |
| All | 1.16 | 1.42 | 0.0007 | 20.4 | 21.4 | 0.18 | |
| 0 | 0.78 | 0.73 | 0.68 | 17.4 | 14.6 | 0.084 | |
| 8 | 1.88 | 1.94 | 0.79 | 32.7 | 30.7 | 0.37 | |
| 16 | 1.97 | 2.50 | 0.034 | 32.9 | 34.7 | 0.39 | |
| 52 | 1.50 | 1.51 | 0.95 | 27.7 | 25.5 | 0.32 | |
| All | 1.54 | 1.66 | 0.23 | 27.5 | 25.9 | 0.12 | |
| 0 | 0.84 | 0.78 | 0.68 | 19.1 | 16.0 | 0.14 | |
| 8 | 0.27 | 0.35 | 0.095 | 4.8 | 5.4 | 0.34 | |
| 16 | 0.25 | 0.33 | 0.028 | 4.1 | 4.5 | 0.38 | |
| 52 | 0.21 | 0.29 | 0.0052 | 3.9 | 4.7 | 0.036 | |
| All | 0.33 | 0.42 | 0.0014 | 6.1 | 6.5 | 0.17 | |
| 0 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 0.70 | ||||
| 8 | 2.5 | 1.9 | 0.018 | ||||
| 16 | 2.1 | 2.0 | 0.69 | ||||
| 52 | 1.8 | 1.7 | 0.32 | ||||
| All | 1.9 | 1.6 | 0.013 | ||||
Absolute and percentage lymphocyte surface marker counts.
| 0 | 72 | 2.55 (2.32–2.80) | 73 | 55.1 (52.1–58.3) | |
| 8 | 114 | 3.58 (3.28–3.91) | 120 | 57.5 (55.8–59.3) | |
| 16 | 114 | 3.75 (3.43–4.11) | 117 | 55.5 (53.2–57.9) | |
| 52 | 103 | 3.64 (3.34–3.98) | 105 | 62.9 (60.9–64.9) | |
| 0 | 78 | 1.79 (1.62–1.97) | 79 | 38.1 (35.9–40.4) | |
| 8 | 119 | 2.40 (2.22–2.59) | 125 | 38.7 (37.2–40.3) | |
| 16 | 120 | 2.49 (2.31–2.69) | 123 | 36.9 (35.5–38.3) | |
| 52 | 103 | 2.17 (1.98–2.38) | 105 | 37.6 (36.0–39.2) | |
| 0 | 78 | 1.24 (1.10–1.40) | 79 | 26.7 (24.9–28.6) | |
| 8 | 119 | 1.11 (0.99–1.24) | 125 | 17.6 (16.4–18.9) | |
| 16 | 120 | 1.21 (1.08–1.35) | 123 | 18.0 (16.9–19.1) | |
| 52 | 103 | 1.22 (1.10–1.37) | 105 | 21.3 (20.0–22.7) | |
| 0 | 60 | 0.77 (0.67–0.88) | 60 | 16.0 (14.5–17.6) | |
| 8 | 96 | 1.91 (1.72–2.12) | 96 | 31.8 (29.8–33.9) | |
| 16 | 109 | 2.22 (2.00–2.47) | 109 | 33.8 (31.8–35.8) | |
| 52 | 105 | 1.59 (1.42–1.78) | 105 | 27.5 (25.5–29.7) | |
| 0 | 62 | 0.83 (0.71–0.98) | 63 | 17.8 (15.8–20.1) | |
| 8 | 89 | 0.30 (0.26–0.35) | 95 | 5.1 (4.6–5.7) | |
| 16 | 103 | 0.28 (0.25–0.32) | 106 | 4.3 (3.9–4.7) | |
| 52 | 103 | 0.25 (0.23–0.28) | 105 | 4.3 (3.9–4.7) | |
Lymphocyte subpopulation data from the present study and other published studies (1present study, 2 [10], 3 [26], 4 [29].
| 0 | 2.6 | 3.1 | 1.7 | |||
| 2 | 3.6 | 2.5 | ||||
| 12 | 3.6 | 2.7 | ||||
| 0 | 1.8 | 1.9 | 1.4 | |||
| 2 | 2.4 | 2.5 | ||||
| 4 | 2.5 | 2.5 | ||||
| 12 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 1.8 | |||
| 0 | 1.2 | 1.5 | ||||
| 2 | 1.1 | 1.2 | ||||
| 12 | 1.2 | 0.9 | ||||
| 0 | 0.8 | 1 | ||||
| 12 | 1.6 | 0.9 | ||||
| 0 | 0.8 | 0.9 | ||||
| 12 | 0.3 | 0.5 | ||||
| 0 | 55 | 55 | 67 | |||
| 12 | 62 | 64 | 63 | |||
| 0 | 38 | 35 | 47 | |||
| 2 | 38 | 38 | ||||
| 12 | 37 | 37 | 41 | 37 | ||
| 0 | 26 | 29 | 20 | |||
| 2 | 17 | 19 | ||||
| 12 | 21 | 21 | 19 | |||
| 0 | 16 | 20 | ||||
| 12 | 27 | 23 | ||||
| 0 | 18 | 20 | ||||
| 12 | 4 | 11 | ||||
| 0 | 1.5 | 2.3 | 1.2 | |||
| 12 | 1.8 | 2.0 | 1.9 | |||