Skip to main content

Table 3 Associations between risk groups and the evolution of airway inflammation and responsiveness markers among the 318 subjects

From: Do airway inflammation and airway responsiveness markers at the start of apprenticeship predict their evolution during initial training? A longitudinal study among apprentice bakers, pastry makers and hairdressers

Evolution

At inclusion

NO Group

Eosinophil Count Group

Airway Responsiveness FEV1 Group

Airway Responsiveness Resistance Group

Number of subjects

+a

n = 46

-a

n = 272

+b

n = 44

-b

n = 274

+c

n = 44

-c

n = 274

+d

n = 27

-d

n = 291

Proportion of subjects with rhinoconjunctivitis-like symptomse

p-value for interaction

p = 0.26

p = 0.13

p = 0.57

p = 0.33

 Model- predicted value

29.1%

29.0%

32.5%

28.4%

25.2%

29.8%

23.2%

29.7%

 OR(p)

1.01 (0.98) f

1.4 (0.48) f

0.70 (0.39) f

0.59 (0.34) f

Proportion of subjects with asthma-like symptomse

 p-value for interaction

p = 0.50

p = 0.51

p = 0.41

p = 0.32

 Model- predicted value

6.5%

8.6%

6.3%

8.7%

8.8%

8.4%

6.3%

8.7%

 OR(p)

0.65 (0.56) f

0.62 (0.50) f

1.08 (0.90) f

0.62 (0.55) f

Percentage decrease during MBC test - FEV1[%]g

 p-value for interaction

p = 0.25

p = 0.11

p = 0.07

p = 0.38

 Model- predicted value

9.7%

9.3%

8.9%

9.4%

14.1%

8.9%

10.8%

9.2%

 Difference (p)

0.44 (0.67) h

0.47 (0.64) h

5.43 (0.001) f

1.63 (0.19) h

Percentage increase during MBC test - resistance[%]g

 p-value for interaction

p = 0.79

p = 0.84

p = 0.06

p = 0.12

 Model- predicted value

22.1%

18.9%

18.9%

19.4%

23.0%

18.7%

25.2%

18.5%

 Difference (p)

3.28 (0.17) h

−0.58 (0.80) h

4.24 (0.06) h

6.8 (0.052) f

Proportion of subjects with a possible asthmae

 p-value for interaction

Not estimable

p = 0.61

p = 0.59

p = 0.95

 Model- predicted value

0.9%

1.7%

2.0%

1.6%

5.0%

1.0%

3.3%

1.5%

 OR(p)

0.50 (0.57) f

1.30 (0.79) f

6.19 (0.012) f

2.53 (0.36) f

Proportion of subjects with eosinophil count ≥1%e

 p-value for interaction

p = 0.94

p = 0.61

p = 0.43

p = 0.50

 Model- predicted value

19.2%

10.1%

19.6%

9.3%

13.4%

11.5%

10.5%

12.0%

 OR(p)

2.31 (0.003) h

2.51 (0.001) f

1.22 (0.497) h

0.84 (0.66) h

FeNO level [ppb] g

 p-value for interaction

p = 0.31

p = 0.43

p = 0.23

p = 0.33

 Model- predicted value

29.7

12.9

17.7

13.9

16.7

14.0

18.7

14.0

 Ratio (p)

2.30 (< 0.001) f

1.27 (0.006) h

1.19 (0.038) h

1.33 (0.007) h

  1. aNO Group +: subjects with a baseline FeNO level > 27 ppb; −: subjects with a baseline FeNO level < 27 ppb
  2. bEosinophil Count Group +: subjects with a baseline percentage of eosinophils > 1% in the nasal lavage; −: subjects without eosinophils at baseline
  3. cAirway Responsiveness FEV1 Group +: subjects with a baseline FEV1 decrease of 15% or more during the MBC test; −: subjects with a baseline FEV1 decrease < 15%
  4. dAirway Responsiveness Resistance Group +: subjects with a baseline increase in resistance of 50% or more between 4 and 16 Hz; −: subjects with a baseline resistance increase < 50%
  5. eLogistic regression; symptom models adjusted for sex, degree of sensitization, tobacco usage status, training track, and visit; eosinophil count model adjusted for degree of sensitization, training track, and visit
  6. fIn visits 2,3,4 excluding the interaction between the risk group at inclusion and the number of the visit on the evolution of the marker
  7. gLinear regression; adjustment for sex, height, degree of sensitization, tobacco usage status, training track, and visit
  8. hIn visits 1, 2, 3, 4 excluding interaction between the risk group at inclusion and the number of the visit on the evolution of the marker
  9. p-value for interaction: p-value for interaction between the baseline risk group and the number of the visit on the evolution of the marker