| Literature DB >> 31365583 |
Beena Elizabeth Thomas1, Kannan Thiruvengadam1, Rani S1, Dileep Kadam2, Senthanro Ovung1, Shrutha Sivakumar1, Shri Vijay Bala Yogendra Shivakumar3, Mandar Paradkar4, Nikhil Gupte4,5, Nishi Suryavanshi4, C K Dolla1, Akshay N Gupte5, Rewa Kohli4, Neeta Pradhan4, Gomathi Narayan Sivaramakrishnan1, Sanjay Gaikwad2, Anju Kagal2, Kavitha Dhanasekaran1, Andrea Deluca5, Jonathan E Golub5,6, Vidya Mave4,5, Padmapriyadarshini Chandrasekaran1, Amita Gupta5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: More than 20% of tuberculosis (TB) disease worldwide may be attributable to smoking and alcohol abuse. India is the second largest consumer of tobacco products, a major consumer of alcohol particularly among males, and has the highest burden of TB globally. The impact of increasing tobacco dose, relevance of alcohol misuse and past versus current or never smoking status on TB treatment outcomes remain inadequately defined.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31365583 PMCID: PMC6668833 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220507
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Comparison of profile between smoker vs. never smokers.
| Factors | Never | Past | Current | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| | 34 (25–45) | 45 (30–52) | 48.5 (39–54) | <0.001 |
| Female | 159 (49%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (1%) | <0.001 |
| Male | 167 (51%) | 35 (100%) | 93 (99%) | |
| Audit < 8 | 312 (96%) | 24 (69%) | 74 (79%) | <0.001 |
| Audit ≥ 8 | 14 (4%) | 11 (31%) | 20 (21%) | |
| < 16.0 | 74 (23%) | 12 (34%) | 34 (36%) | 0.053 |
| 16.0–18.5 | 102 (31%) | 12 (34%) | 27 (29%) | |
| ≥ 18.5 | 150 (46%) | 11 (31%) | 33 (35%) | |
| Literate | 276 (85%) | 27 (77%) | 74 (79%) | 0.227 |
| Illiterate | 50 (15%) | 8 (23%) | 20 (21%) | |
| Non-Working | 104 (32%) | 17 (49%) | 30 (32%) | 0.142 |
| Working | 222 (68%) | 18 (51%) | 64 (68%) | |
| <15000 | 259 (79%) | 29 (83%) | 76 (81%) | 0.922 |
| >15000 | 67 (21%) | 6 (17%) | 18 (19%) | |
| Rural | 74 (23%) | 16 (46%) | 41 (44%) | <0.001 |
| Urban | 252 (77%) | 19 (54%) | 53 (56%) | |
| Absence | 240 (74%) | 20 (57%) | 66 (70%) | 0.111 |
| Presence | 86 (26%) | 15 (43%) | 28 (30%) | |
| NA | 18 (15–20) | 20 (16–21) | 0.110 | |
| NA | 26 (13–37) | 30 (14–36) | 0.489 | |
| NA | 8.6 (1.4–31) | 7.4 (2.6–22) | 0.481 | |
| Normal | 169 (52%) | 16 (46%) | 54 (57%) | 0.452 |
| Depressed | 157 (48%) | 19 (54%) | 40 (43%) | |
| CES Score | n = 326; 9 (5–14) | n = 35; 10 (3–17) | n = 94; 8 (5–14) | 0.814 |
| Absence | 216 (66%) | 15 (43%) | 56 (60%) | 0.019 |
| Presence | 110 (34%) | 20 (57%) | 38 (40%) | |
| Negative | 300 (92%) | 34 (97%) | 91 (97%) | 0.212 |
| Positive | 26 (8%) | 1 (3%) | 3 (3%) | |
| Negative | 121 (37%) | 7 (20%) | 22 (23%) | 0.011 |
| Positive | 205 (63%) | 28 (80%) | 72 (77%) | |
| Negative | 66 (20%) | 2 (6%) | 9 (10%) | 0.009 |
| Positive | 260 (80%) | 33 (94%) | 85 (90%) | |
Values were shown in n (%) and median (Inter-Quartile Range)
Fisher's Exact test was used to compare the categorical information and K-Wallis followed by Dunn post-test that was used to compare age and CES score at 5% level of significance
*"Never" is different from the other two groups
Fig 1Univariate assessment of risk factors of composite TB treatment outcomes among males.
Risk of composite TB treatment outcomes due to smoking and alcohol among males.
| Smoking & Alcohol | Unadjusted | Adjusted | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IRR (95%CI) | p-value | aIRR (95%CI) | p-value | |
| Never & AUDIT <8 | Reference | Reference | ||
| Never & AUDIT ≥8 | 1.09 | 0.834 | 1.01 | >0.950 |
| Past & AUDIT <8 | 1.30 | 0.377 | 1.54 | 0.227 |
| Past & AUDIT ≥8 | 1.95 | 0.032 | 4.67 | <0.001 |
| Current & AUDIT <8 | 1.50 | 0.031 | 1.75 | 0.019 |
| Current & AUDIT ≥8 | 2.62 | <0.001 | 3.58 | <0.001 |
IRR = incidence rate ratio; aIRR = adjusted IRR
1Composite treatment outcome included failure, recurrence and death
2Adjusted for age, BMI, family income, HIV coinfection, diabetes, chest x-ray cavity and smear.
Fig 2Dose-response relationship between tobacco smoking and the risk of composite TB treatment outcomes.