129
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Systematic review with meta-analysis of the epidemiological evidence relating smoking to COPD, chronic bronchitis and emphysema

      research-article
      1 , , 2 , 1
      BMC Pulmonary Medicine
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Smoking is a known cause of the outcomes COPD, chronic bronchitis (CB) and emphysema, but no previous systematic review exists. We summarize evidence for various smoking indices.

          Methods

          Based on MEDLINE searches and other sources we obtained papers published to 2006 describing epidemiological studies relating incidence or prevalence of these outcomes to smoking. Studies in children or adolescents, or in populations at high respiratory disease risk or with co-existing diseases were excluded. Study-specific data were extracted on design, exposures and outcomes considered, and confounder adjustment. For each outcome RRs/ORs and 95% CIs were extracted for ever, current and ex smoking and various dose response indices, and meta-analyses and meta-regressions conducted to determine how relationships were modified by various study and RR characteristics.

          Results

          Of 218 studies identified, 133 provide data for COPD, 101 for CB and 28 for emphysema. RR estimates are markedly heterogeneous. Based on random-effects meta-analyses of most-adjusted RR/ORs, estimates are elevated for ever smoking (COPD 2.89, CI 2.63-3.17, n = 129 RRs; CB 2.69, 2.50-2.90, n = 114; emphysema 4.51, 3.38-6.02, n = 28), current smoking (COPD 3.51, 3.08-3.99; CB 3.41, 3.13-3.72; emphysema 4.87, 2.83-8.41) and ex smoking (COPD 2.35, 2.11-2.63; CB 1.63, 1.50-1.78; emphysema 3.52, 2.51-4.94). For COPD, RRs are higher for males, for studies conducted in North America, for cigarette smoking rather than any product smoking, and where the unexposed base is never smoking any product, and are markedly lower when asthma is included in the COPD definition. Variations by sex, continent, smoking product and unexposed group are in the same direction for CB, but less clearly demonstrated. For all outcomes RRs are higher when based on mortality, and for COPD are markedly lower when based on lung function. For all outcomes, risk increases with amount smoked and pack-years. Limited data show risk decreases with increasing starting age for COPD and CB and with increasing quitting duration for COPD. No clear relationship is seen with duration of smoking.

          Conclusions

          The results confirm and quantify the causal relationships with smoking.

          Related collections

          Most cited references264

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. NHLBI/WHO Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) Workshop summary.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Lung function testing: selection of reference values and interpretative strategies. American Thoracic Society.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Facilitating meta-analyses by deriving relative effect and precision estimates for alternative comparisons from a set of estimates presented by exposure level or disease category.

              Epidemiological studies relating a particular exposure to a specified disease may present their results in a variety of ways. Often, results are presented as estimated odds ratios (or relative risks) and confidence intervals (CIs) for a number of categories of exposure, for example, by duration or level of exposure, compared with a single reference category, often the unexposed. For systematic literature review, and particularly meta-analysis, estimates for an alternative comparison of the categories, such as any exposure versus none, may be required. Obtaining these alternative comparisons is not straightforward, as the initial set of estimates is correlated. This paper describes a method for estimating these alternative comparisons based on the ideas originally put forward by Greenland and Longnecker, and provides implementations of the method, developed using Microsoft Excel and SAS. Examples of the method based on studies of smoking and cancer are given. The method also deals with results given by categories of disease (such as histological types of a cancer). The method allows the use of a more consistent comparison when summarizing published evidence, thus potentially improving the reliability of a meta-analysis. Copyright (c) 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Pulm Med
                BMC Pulmonary Medicine
                BioMed Central
                1471-2466
                2011
                14 June 2011
                : 11
                : 36
                Affiliations
                [1 ]P N Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd, Sutton, Surrey, UK
                [2 ]Independent consultant, Exeter, Devon, UK
                Article
                1471-2466-11-36
                10.1186/1471-2466-11-36
                3128042
                21672193
                edb92eab-bf8f-4e93-811c-73868d963a3d
                Copyright ©2011 Forey et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 26 November 2010
                : 14 June 2011
                Categories
                Research Article

                Respiratory medicine
                Respiratory medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content360

                Cited by133

                Most referenced authors2,472