Numerous studies have demonstrated an association between
ambient air pollution and reduced lung function in childhood (1). However, there is a lack of consensus regarding the most
vulnerable exposure windows. In this issue of the Journal, Cai and
colleagues (pp. 112–123) sought to answer this question (2). The authors present a prospective cohort study of more than
5,000 children in England, examining associations between exposures to particulate
matter <10 μm in diameter (PM10) during each pregnancy trimester,
infancy, and childhood with lung function at ages 8 and 15 years. Higher levels of
PM10, particularly from road traffic, during pregnancy and childhood were
associated with lower lung function at age 8 years. Average PM10 from road
traffic was highly correlated among trimesters, precluding an assessment of
trimester-specific associations. However, total PM10 from all sources during
the third trimester was associated with lower age 8-years FVC, even after mutual
adjustment for other trimester and postnatal exposure averages. At age 15 years, these
associations reversed direction and prenatal PM10 was associated with higher
lung function, though not after multiple test corrections. The authors conclude that
prenatal and early-life exposure to traffic-related PM impairs lung function in
childhood. Major strengths of this study are its very large size with detailed
characterization and longitudinal follow-up of children from prebirth to adolescence,
and the evaluation of PM10 coming from traffic versus nontraffic sources.The cohort was born almost 30 years ago (1991–1992), at a time when ambient
PM10 levels were generally higher than they are today in England and the
United States. In the United States, emissions reductions have led to an almost 30%
decrease in average PM10 levels since 1990 (3). Because the cohort was born in the early 1990s, the authors could not
examine fine PM2.5 because PM2.5 was not monitored in the study
area in the 1990s. PM10 is often referred to as “respirable”
particles because particles in this size range are inhalable. Of these, the larger
particles (2.5–10 μm) such as sand, dust, and pollen generally deposit in
the nasopharynx. The smaller particles (<2.5 μm) include fuel combustion
products like traffic-related soot and sulfate aerosol, and deposit throughout the
respiratory tract, including the alveolar spaces (4). PM2.5 is a better indicator of combustion-related pollution,
whereas PM10 is less specific and potentially less toxic.Although some studies suggest that long-term PM2.5 exposure has a greater
effect on lung function compared with PM10 (5), numerous studies have found that PM10 is also associated with
worse lung function in children and adults (6,
7). In this study, investigators overcame
limitations of their exposure data by applying advanced modeling methods to estimate
PM10 from major road sources, incorporating data on traffic flows,
tailpipe emission rates, and meteorological variables. Their main finding that
traffic-related PM is associated with lower childhood lung function is consistent with a
large body of evidence demonstrating that pollution from traffic sources is particularly
harmful to child respiratory health.The authors go to great lengths to identify “sensitive time periods” during
the prenatal period and early childhood when PM exposure may be particularly harmful.
Lung development starts in the first trimester and continues after birth, and so it is
conceivable that maternal exposure to toxic pollutants could affect lung development. In
animal toxicology, prenatal plus early postnatal exposure to PM2.5 from motor
vehicle sources has been found to impair lung growth (8), although little (if any) mechanistic research has focused on vulnerable
periods during gestation. On the other hand, identifying an especially sensitive
trimester has been of great interest in epidemiologic research, with inconclusive
results (1, 9, 10). This question may be
unanswerable with observational data because a trimester lasts 3 months and is therefore
a snapshot of pollution exposure that aligns perfectly with season. Although statistical
models adjust for season, if the differences in exposure are determined almost entirely
by season, then statistical tools may not fully distinguish between effects of birth
season versus trimester-specific PM exposure on lung function. This is an important
issue with an outcome like lung function, which is affected by seasonal exposures like
viruses and allergens.The authors found that modeled PM10 from traffic sources was highly correlated
across trimesters and therefore they could not contrast the effects of traffic-related
pollution by trimester. This is not surprising, because traffic has little seasonal
variability. On the other hand, fuel combustion for heating and cooling can vary a lot
by season. Although the authors found some suggestion of a greater effect of
third-trimester PM10 on FVC at age 8 years, we would be hesitant to conclude
that this is convincing evidence of an especially vulnerable trimester. Newer, more
flexible statistical methods have been developed to examine vulnerable windows during
pregnancy, such as Bayesian distributed lag interaction models to identify weeks of
gestation rather than specific trimesters, and these could be applied toward this
question (11, 12). Nonetheless, this study’s finding that children with higher
prenatal exposure to PM10 had lower lung function at age 8 years is likely
robust to seasonal confounding because the entire pregnancy spans most of a calendar
year.Paradoxically, the investigators also found a pattern of positive associations between
prenatal PM10, especially from traffic, and lung function at age 15 years.
Similarly, PM10 during the first trimester was associated with greater lung
function growth from age 8 to 15 years. The authors hypothesize that this may be due to
catch-up growth following improved air quality during this time. Others have found
stronger associations of recent (e.g., prior year) pollution exposure with child or
adolescent lung function than early-life exposures, suggesting the effects of early-life
PM exposures may reverse (1, 13). Several studies, most notably the
Children’s Health Study in California, have found more rapid lung function growth
following improvement in air quality (14).
Evaluating the effects of air quality improvements on lung function trajectories will
address an important policy-relevant question: are the harmful effects of early-life
traffic pollution exposure on lung function reversible if air quality is subsequently
improved?
Authors: Erica S Schultz; Jenny Hallberg; Tom Bellander; Anna Bergström; Matteo Bottai; Flaminia Chiesa; Per M Gustafsson; Olena Gruzieva; Per Thunqvist; Göran Pershagen; Erik Melén Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2016-01-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: W James Gauderman; Robert Urman; Edward Avol; Kiros Berhane; Rob McConnell; Edward Rappaport; Roger Chang; Fred Lurmann; Frank Gilliland Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mary B Rice; Sheryl L Rifas-Shiman; Augusto A Litonjua; Emily Oken; Matthew W Gillman; Itai Kloog; Heike Luttmann-Gibson; Antonella Zanobetti; Brent A Coull; Joel Schwartz; Petros Koutrakis; Murray A Mittleman; Diane R Gold Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2016-04-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Thais Mauad; Dolores Helena Rodriguez Ferreira Rivero; Regiani Carvalho de Oliveira; Ana Julia de Faria Coimbra Lichtenfels; Eliane Tigre Guimarães; Paulo Afonso de Andre; David Itiro Kasahara; Heloisa Maria de Siqueira Bueno; Paulo Hilário Nascimento Saldiva Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2008-07-02 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Sara H Downs; Christian Schindler; L-J Sally Liu; Dirk Keidel; Lucy Bayer-Oglesby; Martin H Brutsche; Margaret W Gerbase; Roland Keller; Nino Künzli; Philippe Leuenberger; Nicole M Probst-Hensch; Jean-Marie Tschopp; Jean-Pierre Zellweger; Thierry Rochat; Joel Schwartz; Ursula Ackermann-Liebrich Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-12-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ulrike Gehring; Olena Gruzieva; Raymond M Agius; Rob Beelen; Adnan Custovic; Josef Cyrys; Marloes Eeftens; Claudia Flexeder; Elaine Fuertes; Joachim Heinrich; Barbara Hoffmann; Johan C de Jongste; Marjan Kerkhof; Claudia Klümper; Michal Korek; Anna Mölter; Erica S Schultz; Angela Simpson; Dorothea Sugiri; Magnus Svartengren; Andrea von Berg; Alet H Wijga; Göran Pershagen; Bert Brunekreef Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2013-09-27 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Yutong Cai; Anna L Hansell; Raquel Granell; Marta Blangiardo; Mariagrazia Zottoli; Daniela Fecht; John Gulliver; A John Henderson; Paul Elliott Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 21.405