Julia Engel1, Vera van Kampen1, Vitali Gering1, Olaf Hagemeyer1, Thomas Brüning1, Monika Raulf1, Rolf Merget2. 1. Institute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine of the German Social Accident Insurance, Institute of the Ruhr University Bochum (IPA), Bürkle-de-la-Camp-Platz 1, 44789, Bochum, Germany. 2. Institute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine of the German Social Accident Insurance, Institute of the Ruhr University Bochum (IPA), Bürkle-de-la-Camp-Platz 1, 44789, Bochum, Germany. merget@ipa-dguv.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Increases of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), sputum eosinophils, and methacholine responsiveness have been described after specific inhalation challenges (SIC) with occupational allergens, but limited information is available about their comparative performance. It was the aim of the study to assess the diagnostic accuracy of these non-invasive tests before and after SIC for the diagnosis of occupational asthma (OA). METHODS: A total of 122 subjects with work-related shortness of breath were included. The 'gold standard' was defined as airway obstruction (pulmonary responders) and/or an increase of FeNO of at least 13 ppb after SIC. The results were compared with those obtained using the pulmonary responder status alone as 'gold standard'. RESULTS: If the pulmonary responder status and/or an increase of FeNO was used as 'gold standard' for SIC, 28 out of 39 positives (72%), but also 20 out of 83 negatives (24%) showed an increase of sputum eosinophils and/or bronchial hyperresponsiveness after SIC. If the pulmonary responder status alone was used as 'gold standard', an increase of FeNO with a sensitivity of 0.57 and a specificity of 0.82 showed a higher accuracy than increases of sputum eosinophils (0.52/0.75) or bronchial hyperresponsiveness (0.43/0.87). Individual case analyses suggest that a few cases of OA may be detected by increases of sputum eosinophils or bronchial hyperresponsiveness alone, but probably false-positive tests dominate. CONCLUSION: It is recommended to use both lung function and increase of FeNO as primary effect parameters of SIC. Changes of sputum eosinophils and bronchial hyperresponsiveness after SIC have a low additional diagnostic value, but may be useful in individual cases.
PURPOSE: Increases of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), sputum eosinophils, and methacholine responsiveness have been described after specific inhalation challenges (SIC) with occupational allergens, but limited information is available about their comparative performance. It was the aim of the study to assess the diagnostic accuracy of these non-invasive tests before and after SIC for the diagnosis of occupational asthma (OA). METHODS: A total of 122 subjects with work-related shortness of breath were included. The 'gold standard' was defined as airway obstruction (pulmonary responders) and/or an increase of FeNO of at least 13 ppb after SIC. The results were compared with those obtained using the pulmonary responder status alone as 'gold standard'. RESULTS: If the pulmonary responder status and/or an increase of FeNO was used as 'gold standard' for SIC, 28 out of 39 positives (72%), but also 20 out of 83 negatives (24%) showed an increase of sputum eosinophils and/or bronchial hyperresponsiveness after SIC. If the pulmonary responder status alone was used as 'gold standard', an increase of FeNO with a sensitivity of 0.57 and a specificity of 0.82 showed a higher accuracy than increases of sputum eosinophils (0.52/0.75) or bronchial hyperresponsiveness (0.43/0.87). Individual case analyses suggest that a few cases of OA may be detected by increases of sputum eosinophils or bronchial hyperresponsiveness alone, but probably false-positive tests dominate. CONCLUSION: It is recommended to use both lung function and increase of FeNO as primary effect parameters of SIC. Changes of sputum eosinophils and bronchial hyperresponsiveness after SIC have a low additional diagnostic value, but may be useful in individual cases.
Authors: J Wanger; J L Clausen; A Coates; O F Pedersen; V Brusasco; F Burgos; R Casaburi; R Crapo; P Enright; C P M van der Grinten; P Gustafsson; J Hankinson; R Jensen; D Johnson; N Macintyre; R McKay; M R Miller; D Navajas; R Pellegrino; G Viegi Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: M R Miller; J Hankinson; V Brusasco; F Burgos; R Casaburi; A Coates; R Crapo; P Enright; C P M van der Grinten; P Gustafsson; R Jensen; D C Johnson; N MacIntyre; R McKay; D Navajas; O F Pedersen; R Pellegrino; G Viegi; J Wanger Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Julia Engel; Vera van Kampen; Anne Lotz; Jessica Abramowski; Vitali Gering; Olaf Hagemeyer; Thomas Brüning; Monika Raulf; Rolf Merget Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2018-05-30 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: J Sastre; C Costa; M del Garcia Potro; E Aguado; I Mahillo; M Fernández-Nieto Journal: J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol Date: 2013 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: E Bacci; S Cianchetti; P L Paggiaro; S Carnevali; L Bancalari; F L Dente; A Di Franco; D Giannini; B Vagaggini; C Giuntini Journal: Clin Exp Allergy Date: 1996-12 Impact factor: 5.018
Authors: Mario Olivieri; Mario Malerba; Gianluca Spiteri; Lorena Torroni; Carlo Alberto Biscardo; Dario Valenza; Andrei Malinovschi Journal: Clin Transl Allergy Date: 2021-10 Impact factor: 5.871