| Literature DB >> 27020595 |
Takayuki Hoshino1, Ayami Hoshino2, Junya Nishino3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between air concentrations of fine particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) and ischaemic attacks in high-risk elderly patients (aged ≥60 years).Entities:
Keywords: Heart attack; brain attack; ischaemic attack; particulate matter <2.5 µm; type 2 diabetes mellitus
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27020595 PMCID: PMC5536720 DOI: 10.1177/0300060516631702
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Int Med Res ISSN: 0300-0605 Impact factor: 1.671
Figure 1.The extraction and storage system used for the clinical and environmental data that were analysed in a Japanese study that examined the relationship between air concentrations of particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) and ischaemic attacks in elderly patients (aged ≥ 60 years) with and without T2DM. Database construction was achieved by extracting clinical data from the Mega-Oak electronic medical chart system and environmental data from the Ministry of the Environment Atmospheric Environmental Regional Observation System (Soramame-kun). The clinical and environmental data were then integrated and rendered anonymous using Standardized Structured Medical Information eXchange (SS-MIX) software.
Counting schema and formula used for calculating odds ratios in a Japanese study examining the relationship between air concentrations of particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter and ischaemic attacks in elderly patients (aged ≥60 years) with and without T2DM.[a]
| PM2.5 | Stroke | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | |
| Higher than reference value | A | B |
| Lower than reference value | C | D |
Patients were divided into two groups: with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) or without T2DM. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated after counting the examination data according to the air concentration of particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) (above or below the reference value) and whether they had T2DM. OR was calculated as (A/B)/(C/D).
Basic demographic characteristics of four groups of Japanese patients aged ≥60 years with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who did or did not experience an ischaemic attack during the 2-year study period and who were included in this analysis of the effects of air pollution with particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter
| Categories | Males | Females | Males and females | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Age, years | Total | Age, years | Total | Age, years | ||||
| Mean | 95% CI | Mean | 95% CI | Mean | 95% CI | ||||
| Patients with T2DM who had an ischaemic attack | 3345[ | 73.17 | 72.93, 73.42 | 1853 | 77.13 | 76.79, 77.48 | 5198 | 74.59[ | 74.38, 74.79 |
| Patients with T2DM who did not have an ischaemic attack | 8571[ | 72.36 | 72.19, 72.52 | 4247 | 74.92 | 74.69, 75.16 | 12 818 | 73.21 | 73.07, 73.34 |
| Patients without T2DM who had an ischaemic attack | 6311 | 74.67 | 74.46, 74.88 | 4868 | 76.13 | 75.90, 76.36 | 11 179 | 75.31[ | 75.15, 75.46 |
| Patients without T2DM who did not have an ischaemic attack | 32 924 | 72.89 | 72.81, 72.98 | 32 528 | 75.03 | 74.94, 75.12 | 65 452 | 73.96 | 73.89, 74.02 |
The two groups with T2DM had significantly higher male-to-female ratios than the two groups without T2DM (Pearson’s χ2, P < 0.0001 for all comparisons).
The two groups experiencing ischaemic attacks were significantly older than the two groups not experiencing ischaemic attacks (Student's t-test, P < 0.0001 for all comparisons).
CI, confidence interval.
Results of the odds ratio (OR) analysis of the data set restricted to when the air temperature was ≥20℃ and patients had type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) analysed according to the concentration of particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) and the time lag (in a Japanese study examining the relationship between air PM2.5 concentrations and ischaemic attacks in elderly patients [aged ≥ 60 years] with and without T2DM). There were no significant increases in ORs
| PM2.5 reference value, µg/m3 | Time lag, days | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lag 0 | Lag 1 | Lag 2 | Lag 3 | Lag 4 | Lag 5 | Lag 6 | |
| 10[ | 1.10 | 1.06 | 0.84 | 0.91 | 1.02 | 0.98 | 1.05 |
| 11[ | 1.00 | 1.02 | 0.85 | 0.94 | 0.99 | 1.01 | 1.07 |
| 12[ | 1.01 | 0.99 | 0.94 | 1.01 | 1.02 | 1.07 | 1.02 |
| 13 | 1.02 | 1.00 | 0.96 | 0.99 | 1.05 | 1.06 | 1.00 |
| 14 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.99 | 1.10 | 1.03 |
| 15 | 1.02 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 1.08 | 1.01 |
| 16 | 1.06 | 1.02 | 1.05 | 1.01 | 1.00 | 1.03 | 1.00 |
| 17 | 1.09 | 1.02 | 1.03 | 1.04 | 0.95 | 1.02 | 1.00 |
| 18 | 1.05 | 1.03 | 1.04 | 1.05 | 0.94 | 1.03 | 1.01 |
| 19 | 1.04 | 1.06 | 1.03 | 0.98 | 0.95 | 1.04 | 1.00 |
| 20 | 1.04 | 1.00 | 1.06 | 0.97 | 0.99 | 1.03 | 1.05 |
| 21 | 1.01 | 0.96 | 1.01 | 0.97 | 1.02 | 1.04 | 1.04 |
| 22 | 0.99 | 0.97 | 0.96 | 1.01 | 1.01 | 1.03 | 1.00 |
| 23 | 1.03 | 0.96 | 0.93 | 0.96 | 1.00 | 1.05 | 1.05 |
| 24 | 1.03 | 0.96 | 0.93 | 0.95 | 0.99 | 1.05 | 1.07 |
| 25[ | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.86 | 0.94 | 0.98 | 1.07 | 1.07 |
| 26[ | 0.97 | 0.96 | 0.84 | 0.91 | 0.97 | 1.13 | 1.05 |
| 27[ | 0.91 | 0.99 | 0.81 | 0.83 | 0.90 | 1.06 | 1.03 |
| 28[ | 0.92 | 0.94 | 0.75 | 0.81 | 0.89 | 1.02 | 0.99 |
| 29[ | 0.89 | 1.00 | 0.83 | 0.81 | 0.95 | 1.02 | 0.97 |
| 30[ | 0.87 | 1.05 | 0.85 | 0.79 | 0.94 | 1.06 | 0.94 |
These data were unsuitable for analysis because the number of patients was small.
1.00 < OR < 1.11.
Results of the odds ratio (OR) analysis of the data set restricted to when the air temperature was ≥20℃ and the patients did not have type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) analysed according to the concentration of particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) and the time lag (in a Japanese study examining the relationship between air PM2.5 concentrations and ischaemic attacks in elderly patients [aged ≥ 60 years] with and without T2DM). There were no significant increases in ORs
| PM2.5 reference value, µg/m3 | Time lag, days | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lag 0 | Lag 1 | Lag 2 | Lag 3 | Lag 4 | Lag 5 | Lag 6 | |
| 10[ | 0.92 | 0.88 | 0.97 | 1.08 | 1.07 | 0.98 | 1.00 |
| 11[ | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 1.08 | 1.04 | 0.97 | 0.98 |
| 12[ | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.92 | 1.09 | 1.01 | 0.95 | 1.00 |
| 13 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.92 | 1.09 | 0.97 | 0.93 | 1.01 |
| 14 | 0.96 | 1.02 | 0.96 | 1.02 | 1.00 | 0.98 | 0.99 |
| 15 | 0.95 | 0.97 | 0.94 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.98 | 1.02 |
| 16 | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 1.03 |
| 17 | 0.95 | 0.94 | 0.96 | 0.95 | 0.98 | 1.01 | 1.02 |
| 18 | 0.91 | 0.96 | 0.93 | 0.95 | 1.01 | 1.00 | 1.03 |
| 19 | 0.90 | 0.96 | 0.95 | 0.92 | 1.00 | 1.03 | 1.06 |
| 20 | 0.88 | 0.95 | 0.94 | 0.93 | 0.99 | 1.06 | 1.06 |
| 21 | 0.91 | 0.95 | 0.91 | 0.91 | 0.98 | 1.05 | 1.04 |
| 22 | 0.94 | 0.96 | 0.91 | 0.91 | 0.99 | 1.06 | 1.03 |
| 23 | 0.93 | 0.91 | 0.87 | 0.91 | 0.98 | 1.12 | 1.02 |
| 24 | 0.92 | 0.90 | 0.88 | 0.92 | 0.99 | 1.10 | 1.00 |
| 25[ | 0.92 | 0.89 | 0.84 | 0.93 | 0.99 | 1.08 | 1.05 |
| 26[ | 0.92 | 0.90 | 0.85 | 0.91 | 0.99 | 1.11 | 1.06 |
| 27[ | 0.93 | 0.86 | 0.83 | 0.86 | 0.96 | 1.09 | 1.05 |
| 28[ | 0.89 | 0.87 | 0.84 | 0.85 | 0.98 | 1.11 | 1.06 |
| 29[ | 0.87 | 0.83 | 0.85 | 0.84 | 0.98 | 1.07 | 1.06 |
| 30[ | 0.80 | 0.81 | 0.83 | 0.85 | 1.00 | 1.08 | 1.12 |
These data were unsuitable for analysis because the number of patients was small.
1.00 < OR < 1.11.
Results of the odds ratio (OR) analysis of the data set restricted to when the air temperature was ≥25℃ and the patients had type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) analysed according to the concentration of particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) and the time lag (in a Japanese study examining the relationship between air PM2.5 concentrations and ischaemic attacks in elderly patients [aged ≥ 60 years] with and without T2DM). There was a tendency for the OR to be higher than the other analytical conditions – particularly when the time lag was 2 days, the values were higher in the 20–24 µg/m3 PM2.5 reference value range and ischaemic attacks were more likely to occur than under other conditions. At the PM2.5 reference value of 20µg/m3 and above, the OR 2 days after PM2.5 exposure was 1.24, which was significantly higher than the OR for the group without T2DM under the same conditions (see Table 6)
| PM2.5 reference value, µg/m3 | Time lag, days | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lag 0 | Lag 1 | Lag 2 | Lag 3 | Lag 4 | Lag 5 | Lag 6 | |
| 10[ | 1.03 | 1.23 | 0.89 | 1.18 | 0.85 | 0.92 | 0.98 |
| 11[ | 0.92 | 1.10 | 0.96 | 1.09 | 0.91 | 0.99 | 1.06 |
| 12[ | 0.94 | 1.04 | 1.05 | 1.13 | 0.92 | 1.02 | 0.91 |
| 13 | 0.98 | 1.05 | 1.09 | 1.13** | 1.00 | 1.04 | 0.87 |
| 14 | 0.95 | 1.02 | 1.07 | 1.09 | 0.98 | 1.08 | 0.95 |
| 15 | 1.01 | 1.04 | 1.11** | 1.12** | 0.96 | 1.04 | 0.91 |
| 16 | 1.02 | 1.08 | 1.18** | 1.18** | 0.97 | 1.01 | 0.95 |
| 17 | 1.01 | 1.14** | 1.16** | 1.20** | 0.94 | 1.00 | 0.92 |
| 18 | 1.00 | 1.15** | 1.20** | 1.17** | 0.95 | 0.99 | 0.94 |
| 19 | 0.97 | 1.19** | 1.17** | 1.09 | 0.96 | 0.99 | 0.93 |
| 20 | 0.96 | 1.10 | 1.24*** | 1.08 | 1.04 | 0.97 | 0.99 |
| 21 | 0.92 | 1.05 | 1.16** | 1.13** | 1.06 | 1.02 | 1.01 |
| 22 | 0.88 | 1.03 | 1.23*** | 1.14** | 1.02 | 1.00 | 0.97 |
| 23 | 0.97 | 1.02 | 1.19** | 1.09 | 1.01 | 1.05 | 1.02 |
| 24 | 0.97 | 1.02 | 1.21*** | 1.08 | 0.98 | 1.05 | 1.03 |
| 25[ | 0.94 | 1.04 | 1.11 | 1.04 | 1.00 | 1.10 | 1.07 |
| 26[ | 0.94 | 1.03 | 1.08 | 1.04 | 1.02 | 1.10 | 1.06 |
| 27[ | 0.93 | 1.12 | 1.02 | 0.96 | 0.98 | 1.04 | 1.04 |
| 28[ | 1.03 | 1.07 | 1.02 | 0.90 | 0.95 | 1.04 | 0.93 |
| 29[ | 0.93 | 1.08 | 0.98 | 0.92 | 1.00 | 0.91 | 0.87 |
| 30[ | 0.94 | 1.07 | 0.94 | 0.87 | 0.93 | 0.99 | 0.95 |
These data were unsuitable for analysis because the number of patients was small.
1.00 < OR < 1.11; **1.10 < OR < 1.21; ***1.20 < OR < 1.31.
Results of the odds ratio (OR) analysis of the data set restricted to when the air temperature was ≥25℃ and the patients who did not have type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) analysed according to the concentration of particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) and the time lag (in a Japanese study examining the relationship between air PM2.5 concentrations and ischaemic attacks in elderly patients [aged ≥ 60 years] with and without T2DM). There were no significant increases in ORs, and even 2 days after exposure to PM2.5 at the PM2.5 reference value of ≥20 µg/m3, there was no increase in OR, which was in contrast to the group with T2DM (see Table 5)
| PM2.5 reference value, µg/m3 | Time lag, days | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lag 0 | Lag 1 | Lag 2 | Lag 3 | Lag 4 | Lag 5 | Lag 6 | |
| 10[ | 0.98 | 0.91 | 1.02 | 0.98 | 1.24 | 1.03 | 1.06 |
| 11[ | 1.03 | 1.01 | 0.99 | 1.04 | 1.09 | 0.94 | 0.99 |
| 12[ | 1.10 | 1.00 | 0.99 | 1.08 | 1.05 | 0.96 | 1.00 |
| 13 | 1.10 | 0.98 | 1.01 | 1.12** | 0.96 | 0.93 | 1.02 |
| 14 | 1.04 | 1.03 | 1.03 | 1.03 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 0.98 |
| 15 | 0.99 | 1.01 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.98 | 0.96 | 1.03 |
| 16 | 1.01 | 0.98 | 1.04 | 0.99 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 1.05 |
| 17 | 0.99 | 0.98 | 1.02 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 1.02 | 1.01 |
| 18 | 0.95 | 1.00 | 0.98 | 0.98 | 1.01 | 1.01 | 1.04 |
| 19 | 0.94 | 0.98 | 1.01 | 0.93 | 0.98 | 1.04 | 1.05 |
| 20 | 0.91 | 0.95 | 0.99 | 0.95 | 0.96 | 1.08 | 1.05 |
| 21 | 0.93 | 0.95 | 0.97 | 0.86 | 0.94 | 1.02 | 1.05 |
| 22 | 0.95 | 0.96 | 0.99 | 0.82 | 0.96 | 1.03 | 1.06 |
| 23 | 0.95 | 0.91 | 0.96 | 0.81 | 1.01 | 1.11** | 1.05 |
| 24 | 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.96 | 0.82 | 1.00 | 1.12** | 1.03 |
| 25[ | 0.94 | 0.85 | 0.86 | 0.79 | 0.99 | 1.07 | 1.09 |
| 26[ | 0.94 | 0.86 | 0.82 | 0.77 | 0.95 | 1.08 | 1.07 |
| 27[ | 0.98 | 0.84 | 0.72 | 0.77 | 0.96 | 1.12 | 1.08 |
| 28[ | 0.86 | 0.88 | 0.73 | 0.76 | 0.96 | 1.19 | 1.11 |
| 29[ | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0.68 | 0.79 | 0.97 | 1.10 | 1.10 |
| 30[ | 0.72 | 0.66 | 0.71 | 0.83 | 1.02 | 1.15 | 1.18 |
These data were unsuitable for analysis because the number of patients was small.
1.00 < OR < 1.11; **1.10 < OR < 1.21.
Details of the number of patients included in the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval analysis of the data set restricted to when the air temperature was ≥25℃ and the patients had type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) analysed according to the concentration of particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) and a time lag of 2 days from exposure (in a Japanese study examining the relationship between air PM2.5 concentrations and ischaemic attacks in elderly patients [aged ≥ 60 years] with and without T2DM)
| PM2.5 reference value, µg/m3 | Odds ratio | 95% confidence interval | Number of patients with an ischaemic attack below the reference value (A) | Total number of patients below the reference value (B) | A/B, % | Number of patients with an ischaemic attack at or above the reference value (C) | Total number of patients at or above the reference value (D) | C/D, % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10[ | 0.89 | 0.68, 1.17 | 224 | 1204 | 18.6 | 3062 | 17095 | 17.91 |
| 11[ | 0.96 | 0.80, 1.16 | 628 | 3439 | 18.26 | 2658 | 14860 | 17.89 |
| 12[ | 1.05 | 0.90, 1.23 | 925 | 5173 | 17.88 | 2361 | 13126 | 17.99 |
| 13 | 1.09 | 0.94, 1.27 | 1174 | 6629 | 17.71 | 2112 | 11670 | 18.10 |
| 14 | 1.07 | 0.93, 1.24 | 1435 | 8136 | 17.64 | 1851 | 10163 | 18.21 |
| 15 | 1.11 | 0.96, 1.28 | 1815 | 10223 | 17.75 | 1471 | 8076 | 18.21 |
| 16 | 1.18 | 1.02, 1.37 | 2032 | 11585 | 17.54 | 1254 | 6714 | 18.68 |
| 17 | 1.16 | 1.00, 1.35 | 2248 | 12737 | 17.65 | 1038 | 5562 | 18.66 |
| 18 | 1.20 | 1.02, 1.41 | 2449 | 13787 | 17.76 | 837 | 4512 | 18.55 |
| 19 | 1.17 | 0.99, 1.39 | 2609 | 14695 | 17.75 | 677 | 3604 | 18.78 |
| 20 | 1.24 | 1.04, 1.49 | 2694 | 15170 | 17.76 | 592 | 3129 | 18.92 |
| 21 | 1.16 | 0.96, 1.41 | 2781 | 15579 | 17.85 | 505 | 2720 | 18.57 |
| 22 | 1.23 | 1.00, 1.49 | 2825 | 15862 | 17.81 | 461 | 2437 | 18.92 |
| 23 | 1.19 | 0.96, 1.48 | 2922 | 16331 | 17.89 | 364 | 1968 | 18.50 |
| 24 | 1.21 | 0.97, 1.52 | 2951 | 16498 | 17.89 | 335 | 1801 | 18.60 |
| 25[ | 1.11 | 0.85, 1.45 | 3066 | 17025 | 18.01 | 220 | 1274 | 17.27 |
| 26[ | 1.08 | 0.82, 1.44 | 3096 | 17167 | 18.03 | 190 | 1132 | 16.78 |
| 27[ | 1.02 | 0.71, 1.47 | 3175 | 17572 | 18.07 | 111 | 727 | 15.27 |
| 28[ | 1.02 | 0.67, 1.54 | 3208 | 17801 | 18.02 | 78 | 498 | 15.66 |
| 29[ | 0.98 | 0.64, 1.50 | 3215 | 17824 | 18.04 | 71 | 475 | 14.95 |
| 30[ | 0.94 | 0.61, 1.46 | 3219 | 17859 | 18.02 | 67 | 440 | 15.23 |
These data were unsuitable for analysis because the number of patients was small.
Figure 2.Changes in odds ratio (OR) of Japanese patients aged ≥ 60 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus experiencing an ischaemic attack 2 days after exposure at an air temperature of ≥25℃ according to the concentration of particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) reference values in the optimal analysis range. OR for the occurrence of an ischaemic attack on Day 2 after exposure gradually increased starting at a mean PM2.5 concentration of 16µg/m3; OR peaked at 20µg/m3. Although the ORs varied widely, the tendency for the OR values to be high continued
Air quality reference values from different regions around the world[1,13,35–40]
| Area/country | Reference value, µg/m3 | |
|---|---|---|
| 24-h mean | 1-year mean | |
| WHO | 25 | 10 |
| EU (2015 target) | – | 25 |
| EU (2020 target) | – | 20 |
| USA | 35 | 15 |
| Canada | 30 | – |
| Japan | 35 | 15 |
| China (grade 1) | 35 | 15 |
| China (grade 2) | 75 | 35 |
| India | 60 | 40 |
WHO, World Health Organization; EU, European Union.