| Literature DB >> 29296002 |
Tye E Arbuckle1, Chun Lei Liang2, Mandy Fisher2, Nicolas J Caron3, William D Fraser4,5.
Abstract
Given that prenatal exposure to tobacco smoke can lead to increased risks of adverse health effects, having valid measures of exposure is important. In a Canadian cohort (n = 2000), maternal and infant biospecimens were analysed for cotinine. Sensitivity and specificity of self-reported active smoking status were estimated. Regression modelling was used to identify potential predictors of maternal and infant plasma cotinine in non-smoking women. During the first trimester, 60.6% of the women reported never smoking, 27.3% were former smokers, 6.1% had quit when they found out they were pregnant, 5.8% were smokers and 42% of the non-smokers reported exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS). Low detection of tobacco biomarkers in meconium limited its ability to identify exposure to SHS. The sensitivity and specificity for self-reported smoking during the 1st trimester were 85.37 and 99.45%, respectively. The lowest sensitivity was found in participants with the highest level of education and income, oldest women and those born outside Canada. Non-smoking women living in an apartment had 1.7 times higher odds of detectable plasma cotinine than those living in a single home after adjusting for other variables. Our results suggest that while self-reports are fairly accurate, they may be less so in populations with higher socio-economic status. This investigation underscores the need to consider the participant socio-economic characteristics and dwelling type when using questionnaires to estimate active and passive tobacco exposure.Entities:
Keywords: Biomonitoring; Cotinine; Meconium; Multiunit dwelling; Plasma; Pregnancy; Smoking
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29296002 PMCID: PMC8075994 DOI: 10.1038/s41370-017-0011-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol ISSN: 1559-0631 Impact factor: 5.563
Summary statistics of plasma cotinine in 1st (T1) and 3rd (T3) trimesters by self-reported smoking status in that trimester
| T1 Maternal plasma | T3 Maternal plasma | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cotinine (ng/ml) | Cotinine (ng/ml) | |||||
| Active only (no second hand smoke) | N | % <LOD | MLE GM | N | % <LOD | MLE GM |
| Never | 689 | 60.38 | NA | 627 | 64.91 | NA |
| Former | 294 | 45.92 | 0.007 | 275 | 54.91 | NA |
| Quit during pregnancy | 44 | 25.00 | 0.026 | 45 | 26.67 | 0.014 |
| Current | 22 | 9.09 | 12.91 | 15 | 0.00 | 15.27 |
| Second hand only (no smoking during pregnancy) | ||||||
| Yes | 711 | 43.18 | 0.011 | 574 | 46.52 | 0.006 |
| No | 983 | 56.05 | NA | 902 | 61.86 | NA |
| Vehicle only | ||||||
| Yes | 20 | 25.00 | 0.023 | 15 | 33.33 | 0.016 |
| No | 983 | 56.05 | NA | 902 | 61.86 | NA |
| Workplace only | ||||||
| Yes | 54 | 44.44 | 0.009 | 50 | 46.00 | 0.006 |
| No | 983 | 56.05 | NA | 902 | 61.86 | NA |
| Public place only | ||||||
| Yes | 504 | 47.62 | 0.008 | 400 | 52.50 | NA |
| No | 983 | 56.05 | NA | 902 | 61.86 | NA |
| Exposed to both active and second hand smoke | ||||||
| Yes (includes women who quit during pregnancy) | 167 | 8.38 | 2.99 | 131 | 10.69 | 1.278 |
| No | 983 | 56.05 | NA | 902 | 61.86 | NA |
NA: geometric mean was not reported because >50% of results were
Note: 1940 women had T1 cotinine measurements and among these, 1049 reported no SHS exposure. At T3, 1683 women had cotinine measurements and among these, 962 reported no SHS exposure
Fig. 1Histogram and kernel density estimate for log cotinine concentration in first trimester, showing cut-point of 5.21 ng/mL and setting values below LOD to a constant LOD/2
Sensitivity and specificity for self-reported active smoking status using cut-off at 5.21 ng/mL by mothers’ characteristics in first trimester
| Non-active smokers | Active smokers | Sensitivity | Specificity | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| <5.21 ng/mL | ≥5.21 ng/mL | <5.21 ng/mL | ≥5.21 ng/mL | |||
| Characteristic |
|
|
|
| % | % |
| All mothersa | 1805 | 18 | 10 | 105 | 85.37 | 99.45 |
| Maternal age | ||||||
| <25 | 102 | 5 | 1 | 30 | 85.71 | 99.03 |
| 25–29 | 404 | 1 | 5 | 33 | 97.06 | 98.78 |
| 30–34 | 663 | 5 | 3 | 23 | 82.14 | 99.55 |
| ≥35 | 636 | 7 | 1 | 19 | 73.08 | 99.84 |
| Parity | ||||||
| 0 | 799 | 6 | 6 | 44 | 88.00 | 99.25 |
| 1 | 731 | 9 | 2 | 37 | 80.43 | 99.73 |
| >1 | 273 | 3 | 2 | 24 | 88.89 | 99.27 |
| Pre-pregnancy BMI | ||||||
| <25 | 1073 | 11 | 2 | 54 | 83.08 | 99.81 |
| 25–29 | 369 | 5 | 2 | 18 | 78.26 | 99.46 |
| ≥30 | 244 | 2 | 4 | 13 | 86.67 | 98.39 |
| Household income ($) | ||||||
| ≤50,000 | 276 | 2 | 6 | 55 | 96.49 | 98.39 |
| 50,001–100,000 | 725 | 6 | 2 | 29 | 82.86 | 99.72 |
| >100,000 | 727 | 5 | 2 | 10 | 66.67 | 99.73 |
| Birthplace | ||||||
| Canada | 1458 | 13 | 8 | 98 | 88.29 | 99.45 |
| Other | 347 | 5 | 2 | 7 | 58.33 | 99.43 |
| Education | ||||||
| High school | 119 | 7 | 2 | 44 | 86.27 | 98.35 |
| College diploma | 503 | 6 | 6 | 47 | 88.68 | 98.82 |
| University degree | 1181 | 5 | 2 | 14 | 73.68 | 99.83 |
a Among the 1940 women with T1 cotinine data, two of them were missing active smoking information and were not included in this table
Fig. 2Flow chart identifying non-smoking participants
Multiple logistic regression model for plasma cotinine detected in 1st trimester of non-smokers
| Variable | Groups | Multiple logistic regression model ( | Differencesc | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | ||||
| Dwelling type | Apartment | 1.72 (1.24, 2.39) | 0.0005 | A |
| Townhome | 1.52 (1.15, 2.00) | A | ||
| Single Home | Reference | B | ||
| Household income | 0.0001 | |||
| SHS in public places | 0.0003 | |||
| SHS in vehicle | 0.003 | |||
| Maternal age | 0.027 | |||
| SHS in home | 0.03 | |||
| SHS at work | 0.04 | |||
786 plasma samples >0.005 ng/mL cotinine
a 63 missing household income information, 5 missing passive smoking in public information, one participant missing passive smoking in home information and one participant missing both household income and passive smoking in public information, leaving 1337 for analysis in the logistic regression model
b H-L p-value: Hosmer-Lemeshow test, p > 0.05 indicates a good fit
c Scheffe multiple pair-wise comparison–categories with the same letter are not significantly different from each other
Multiple linear regression model for log cotinine in cord plasma (parametric method)
| Multiple regression model ( | ||
|---|---|---|
| Variable | Estimate β | |
| Log(cotinine) | ||
| Intercept | −2.6502 | <0.0001 |
| Dwelling type: apartment | 0.1538 | 0.21 |
| Dwelling type: townhome | 0.0324 | |
| Dwelling type: single home (reference) | ||
| Household income: <=$50,000 | 0.3345 | 0.004 |
| Household income: $50,000-$100,000 | 0.0800 | |
| Household income: more than $100,000 (reference) | ||
| SHS in public: No | −0.1638 | 0.01 |
| SHS in public: Yes (reference) | ||
| SHS in vehicle: No | −0.7836 | <0.0001 |
| SHS in vehicle: Yes (reference) | ||
| SHS at home: No | −1.3753 | <0.0001 |
| SHS at home: Yes (reference) | ||
| Education: High school or less | 0.3104 | 0.01 |
| Education: Some college and college | 0.1675 | |
| Education: Undergraduate degree or higher (reference) | ||
| Maternal age: <25 | 0.2304 | 0.01 |
| Maternal age: 25–29 | 0.1593 | |
| Maternal age: 30–34 | 0.2214 | |
| Maternal age: 35+ (reference) | ||