Are high- and low-molecular-weight sensitizing agents associated with different clinical phenotypes of occupational asthma?

European network for the PHenotyping of OCcupational ASthma (E-PHOCAS) investigators

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

19 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: High-molecular-weight (HMW) proteins and low-molecular-weight (LMW) chemicals can cause occupational asthma (OA) although few studies have thoroughly compared the clinical, physiological, and inflammatory patterns associated with these different types of agents. The aim of this study was to determine whether OA induced by HMW and LMW agents shows distinct phenotypic profiles. Methods: Clinical and functional characteristics, and markers of airway inflammation were analyzed in an international, multicenter, retrospective cohort of subjects with OA ascertained by a positive inhalation challenge response to HMW (n = 544) and LMW (n = 635) agents. Results: Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed significant associations between OA caused by HMW agents and work-related rhinitis (OR [95% CI]: 4.79 [3.28-7.12]), conjunctivitis (2.13 [1.52-2.98]), atopy (1.49 [1.09-2.05]), and early asthmatic reactions (2.86 [1.98-4.16]). By contrast, OA due to LMW agents was associated with chest tightness at work (2.22 [1.59-3.03]), daily sputum (1.69 [1.19-2.38]), and late asthmatic reactions (1.52 [1.09-2.08]). Furthermore, OA caused by HMW agents showed a higher risk of airflow limitation (1.76 [1.07-2.91]), whereas OA due to LMW agents exhibited a higher risk of severe exacerbations (1.32 [1.01-1.69]). There were no differences between the two types of agents in the baseline sputum inflammatory profiles, but OA caused by HMW agents showed higher baseline blood eosinophilia and a greater postchallenge increase in fractional nitric oxide. Conclusion: This large cohort study describes distinct phenotypic profiles in OA caused by HMW and LMW agents. There is a need to further explore differences in underlying pathophysiological pathways and outcome after environmental interventions.

Original languageEnglish
JournalAllergy
Volume74
Issue number2
Pages (from-to)261-272
ISSN0105-4538
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2019

Fingerprint

Occupational Asthma
Molecular Weight
Conjunctivitis
Eosinophilia

Keywords

  • asthma
  • bronchial provocation tests
  • occupational diseases
  • phenotype

Cite this

European network for the PHenotyping of OCcupational ASthma (E-PHOCAS) investigators (2019). Are high- and low-molecular-weight sensitizing agents associated with different clinical phenotypes of occupational asthma? Allergy, 74(2), 261-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/all.13542
European network for the PHenotyping of OCcupational ASthma (E-PHOCAS) investigators. / Are high- and low-molecular-weight sensitizing agents associated with different clinical phenotypes of occupational asthma?. In: Allergy. 2019 ; Vol. 74, No. 2. pp. 261-272.
@article{6cc4f2c21be44522bc174da5508ce773,
title = "Are high- and low-molecular-weight sensitizing agents associated with different clinical phenotypes of occupational asthma?",
abstract = "Background: High-molecular-weight (HMW) proteins and low-molecular-weight (LMW) chemicals can cause occupational asthma (OA) although few studies have thoroughly compared the clinical, physiological, and inflammatory patterns associated with these different types of agents. The aim of this study was to determine whether OA induced by HMW and LMW agents shows distinct phenotypic profiles. Methods: Clinical and functional characteristics, and markers of airway inflammation were analyzed in an international, multicenter, retrospective cohort of subjects with OA ascertained by a positive inhalation challenge response to HMW (n = 544) and LMW (n = 635) agents. Results: Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed significant associations between OA caused by HMW agents and work-related rhinitis (OR [95{\%} CI]: 4.79 [3.28-7.12]), conjunctivitis (2.13 [1.52-2.98]), atopy (1.49 [1.09-2.05]), and early asthmatic reactions (2.86 [1.98-4.16]). By contrast, OA due to LMW agents was associated with chest tightness at work (2.22 [1.59-3.03]), daily sputum (1.69 [1.19-2.38]), and late asthmatic reactions (1.52 [1.09-2.08]). Furthermore, OA caused by HMW agents showed a higher risk of airflow limitation (1.76 [1.07-2.91]), whereas OA due to LMW agents exhibited a higher risk of severe exacerbations (1.32 [1.01-1.69]). There were no differences between the two types of agents in the baseline sputum inflammatory profiles, but OA caused by HMW agents showed higher baseline blood eosinophilia and a greater postchallenge increase in fractional nitric oxide. Conclusion: This large cohort study describes distinct phenotypic profiles in OA caused by HMW and LMW agents. There is a need to further explore differences in underlying pathophysiological pathways and outcome after environmental interventions.",
keywords = "asthma, bronchial provocation tests, occupational diseases, phenotype",
author = "O Vandenplas and J Godet and L Hurdubaea and C Rifflart and H Suojalehto and M Wiszniewska and X Munoz and J Sastre and P Klusackova and V Moore and R Merget and D Talini and C Svanes and P Mason and M dell'Omo and P Cullinan and G Moscato and S Quirce and J Hoyle and D Sherson and P Kauppi and A Preisser and N Meyer and {de Blay}, F and {European network for the PHenotyping of OCcupational ASthma (E-PHOCAS) investigators}",
note = "{\circledC} 2018 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1111/all.13542",
language = "English",
volume = "74",
pages = "261--272",
journal = "Allergy: European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology",
issn = "0105-4538",
publisher = "Wiley Online",
number = "2",

}

European network for the PHenotyping of OCcupational ASthma (E-PHOCAS) investigators 2019, 'Are high- and low-molecular-weight sensitizing agents associated with different clinical phenotypes of occupational asthma?', Allergy, vol. 74, no. 2, pp. 261-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/all.13542

Are high- and low-molecular-weight sensitizing agents associated with different clinical phenotypes of occupational asthma? / European network for the PHenotyping of OCcupational ASthma (E-PHOCAS) investigators.

In: Allergy, Vol. 74, No. 2, 02.2019, p. 261-272.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Are high- and low-molecular-weight sensitizing agents associated with different clinical phenotypes of occupational asthma?

AU - Vandenplas, O

AU - Godet, J

AU - Hurdubaea, L

AU - Rifflart, C

AU - Suojalehto, H

AU - Wiszniewska, M

AU - Munoz, X

AU - Sastre, J

AU - Klusackova, P

AU - Moore, V

AU - Merget, R

AU - Talini, D

AU - Svanes, C

AU - Mason, P

AU - dell'Omo, M

AU - Cullinan, P

AU - Moscato, G

AU - Quirce, S

AU - Hoyle, J

AU - Sherson, D

AU - Kauppi, P

AU - Preisser, A

AU - Meyer, N

AU - de Blay, F

AU - European network for the PHenotyping of OCcupational ASthma (E-PHOCAS) investigators

N1 - © 2018 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.

PY - 2019/2

Y1 - 2019/2

N2 - Background: High-molecular-weight (HMW) proteins and low-molecular-weight (LMW) chemicals can cause occupational asthma (OA) although few studies have thoroughly compared the clinical, physiological, and inflammatory patterns associated with these different types of agents. The aim of this study was to determine whether OA induced by HMW and LMW agents shows distinct phenotypic profiles. Methods: Clinical and functional characteristics, and markers of airway inflammation were analyzed in an international, multicenter, retrospective cohort of subjects with OA ascertained by a positive inhalation challenge response to HMW (n = 544) and LMW (n = 635) agents. Results: Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed significant associations between OA caused by HMW agents and work-related rhinitis (OR [95% CI]: 4.79 [3.28-7.12]), conjunctivitis (2.13 [1.52-2.98]), atopy (1.49 [1.09-2.05]), and early asthmatic reactions (2.86 [1.98-4.16]). By contrast, OA due to LMW agents was associated with chest tightness at work (2.22 [1.59-3.03]), daily sputum (1.69 [1.19-2.38]), and late asthmatic reactions (1.52 [1.09-2.08]). Furthermore, OA caused by HMW agents showed a higher risk of airflow limitation (1.76 [1.07-2.91]), whereas OA due to LMW agents exhibited a higher risk of severe exacerbations (1.32 [1.01-1.69]). There were no differences between the two types of agents in the baseline sputum inflammatory profiles, but OA caused by HMW agents showed higher baseline blood eosinophilia and a greater postchallenge increase in fractional nitric oxide. Conclusion: This large cohort study describes distinct phenotypic profiles in OA caused by HMW and LMW agents. There is a need to further explore differences in underlying pathophysiological pathways and outcome after environmental interventions.

AB - Background: High-molecular-weight (HMW) proteins and low-molecular-weight (LMW) chemicals can cause occupational asthma (OA) although few studies have thoroughly compared the clinical, physiological, and inflammatory patterns associated with these different types of agents. The aim of this study was to determine whether OA induced by HMW and LMW agents shows distinct phenotypic profiles. Methods: Clinical and functional characteristics, and markers of airway inflammation were analyzed in an international, multicenter, retrospective cohort of subjects with OA ascertained by a positive inhalation challenge response to HMW (n = 544) and LMW (n = 635) agents. Results: Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed significant associations between OA caused by HMW agents and work-related rhinitis (OR [95% CI]: 4.79 [3.28-7.12]), conjunctivitis (2.13 [1.52-2.98]), atopy (1.49 [1.09-2.05]), and early asthmatic reactions (2.86 [1.98-4.16]). By contrast, OA due to LMW agents was associated with chest tightness at work (2.22 [1.59-3.03]), daily sputum (1.69 [1.19-2.38]), and late asthmatic reactions (1.52 [1.09-2.08]). Furthermore, OA caused by HMW agents showed a higher risk of airflow limitation (1.76 [1.07-2.91]), whereas OA due to LMW agents exhibited a higher risk of severe exacerbations (1.32 [1.01-1.69]). There were no differences between the two types of agents in the baseline sputum inflammatory profiles, but OA caused by HMW agents showed higher baseline blood eosinophilia and a greater postchallenge increase in fractional nitric oxide. Conclusion: This large cohort study describes distinct phenotypic profiles in OA caused by HMW and LMW agents. There is a need to further explore differences in underlying pathophysiological pathways and outcome after environmental interventions.

KW - asthma

KW - bronchial provocation tests

KW - occupational diseases

KW - phenotype

U2 - 10.1111/all.13542

DO - 10.1111/all.13542

M3 - Journal article

VL - 74

SP - 261

EP - 272

JO - Allergy: European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

JF - Allergy: European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

SN - 0105-4538

IS - 2

ER -

European network for the PHenotyping of OCcupational ASthma (E-PHOCAS) investigators. Are high- and low-molecular-weight sensitizing agents associated with different clinical phenotypes of occupational asthma? Allergy. 2019 Feb;74(2):261-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/all.13542