Dataset Information

Tobacco smoke, indoor air pollution and tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Tobacco smoking, passive smoking, and indoor air pollution from biomass fuels have been implicated as risk factors for tuberculosis (TB) infection, disease, and death. Tobacco smoking and indoor air pollution are persistent or growing exposures in regions where TB poses a major health risk. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantitatively assess the association between these exposures and the risk of infection, disease, and death from TB.

Methods and findings

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies reporting effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals on how tobacco smoking, passive smoke exposure, and indoor air pollution are associated with TB. We identified 33 papers on tobacco smoking and TB, five papers on passive smoking and TB, and five on indoor air pollution and TB. We found substantial evidence that tobacco smoking is positively associated with TB, regardless of the specific TB outcomes. Compared with people who do not smoke, smokers have an increased risk of having a positive tuberculin skin test, of having active TB, and of dying from TB. Although we also found evidence that passive smoking and indoor air pollution increased the risk of TB disease, these associations are less strongly supported by the available evidence.

Conclusions

There is consistent evidence that tobacco smoking is associated with an increased risk of TB. The finding that passive smoking and biomass fuel combustion also increase TB risk should be substantiated with larger studies in future. TB control programs might benefit from a focus on interventions aimed at reducing tobacco and indoor air pollution exposures, especially among those at high risk for exposure to TB.

SUBMITTER: Lin HH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1769410 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:There is inconclusive evidence on the association between ambient air pollution and pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) incidence, tuberculosis-related hospital admission and mortality. This review aimed to assess the extent to which selected air pollutants are associated to PTB incidence, hospital admissions and mortality. This was a systematic review of studies published in English from January 1st, 1946, through May 31st, 2022, that quantitatively assessed the association between PM2.5, PM10, NO2, SO2, CO, O3 and the incidence of, hospital admission or death from PTB. Medline, Embase, Scopus and The Cochrane Library were searched. Extracted data from eligible studies were analysed using STATA software. Random-effect meta-analysis was used to derive pooled adjusted risk and odds ratios. A total of 24 studies (10 time-series, 5 ecologic, 5 cohort, 2 case-control, 1 case cross-over, 1 cross-sectional) mainly from Asian countries were eligible and involved a total of 437,255 tuberculosis cases. For every 10 μg/m3 increment in air pollutant concentration, there was a significant association between exposure to PM2.5 (pooled aRR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.06-1.19, p < 0.001, N = 6); PM10 (pooled aRR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.01-1.12, p = 0.022, N = 8); SO2 (pooled aRR = 1.08, 95% CI: 1.04-1.12, p < 0.001, N = 9); and the incidence of PTB. There was no association between exposure to CO (pooled aRR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.98-1.11, p = 0.211, N = 4); NO2 (pooled aRR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.99-1.17, p = 0.057, N = 7); O3 (pooled aRR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.99-1.02, p = 0.910, N = 6) and the incidence of PTB. There was no association between the investigated air pollutants and mortality or hospital admissions due to PTB. Overall quality of evidence was graded as low (GRADE approach). Exposure to PM2.5, PM10 and SO2 air pollutants was found to be associated with an increased incidence of PTB, while exposure to CO, NO2 and O3 was not. There was no observed association between exposure to these air pollutants and hospital admission or mortality due to PTB. The quality of the evidence generated, however, remains low. Addressing the tuberculosis epidemic by 2030 as per the 4th Sustainable Development Goal may require a more rigorous exploration of this association.

Project description:BackgroundAir pollution is both a sensory blight and a threat to human health. Inhaled environmental pollutants can be naturally occurring or human-made, and include traffic-related air pollution (TRAP), ozone, particulate matter (PM) and volatile organic compounds, among other substances, including those from secondhand smoking. Studies of air pollution on reproductive and endocrine systems have reported associations of TRAP, secondhand smoke (SHS), organic solvents and biomass fueled-cooking with adverse birth outcomes. While some evidence suggests that air pollution contributes to infertility, the extant literature is mixed, and varying effects of pollutants have been reported.Objective and rationaleAlthough some reviews have studied the association between common outdoor air pollutants and time to pregnancy (TTP), there are no comprehensive reviews that also include exposure to indoor inhaled pollutants, such as airborne occupational toxicants and SHS. The current systematic review summarizes the strength of evidence for associations of outdoor air pollution, SHS and indoor inhaled air pollution with couple fecundability and identifies gaps and limitations in the literature to inform policy decisions and future research.Search methodsWe performed an electronic search of six databases for original research articles in English published since 1990 on TTP or fecundability and a number of chemicals in the context of air pollution, inhalation and aerosolization. Standardized forms for screening, data extraction and study quality were developed using DistillerSR software and completed in duplicate. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess risk of bias and devised additional quality metrics based on specific methodological features of both air pollution and fecundability studies.OutcomesThe search returned 5200 articles, 4994 of which were excluded at the level of title and abstract screening. After full-text screening, 35 papers remained for data extraction and synthesis. An additional 3 papers were identified independently that fit criteria, and 5 papers involving multiple routes of exposure were removed, yielding 33 articles from 28 studies for analysis. There were 8 papers that examined outdoor air quality, while 6 papers examined SHS exposure and 19 papers examined indoor air quality. The results indicated an association between outdoor air pollution and reduced fecundability, including TRAP and specifically nitrogen oxides and PM with a diameter of ≤2.5 µm, as well as exposure to SHS and formaldehyde. However, exposure windows differed greatly between studies as did the method of exposure assessment. There was little evidence that exposure to volatile solvents is associated with reduced fecundability.Wider implicationsThe evidence suggests that exposure to outdoor air pollutants, SHS and some occupational inhaled pollutants may reduce fecundability. Future studies of SHS should use indoor air monitors and biomarkers to improve exposure assessment. Air monitors that capture real-time exposure can provide valuable insight about the role of indoor air pollution and are helpful in assessing the short-term acute effects of pollutants on TTP.

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the role of air pollutants in risk of dementia, considering differences by study factors that could influence findings.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesEMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, Psycinfo, and OVID Medline from database inception through July 2022.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesStudies that included adults (≥18 years), a longitudinal follow-up, considered US Environmental Protection Agency criteria air pollutants and proxies of traffic pollution, averaged exposure over a year or more, and reported associations between ambient pollutants and clinical dementia. Two authors independently extracted data using a predefined data extraction form and assessed risk of bias using the Risk of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Exposures (ROBINS-E) tool. A meta-analysis with Knapp-Hartung standard errors was done when at least three studies for a given pollutant used comparable approaches.Results2080 records identified 51 studies for inclusion. Most studies were at high risk of bias, although in many cases bias was towards the null. 14 studies could be meta-analysed for particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5). The overall hazard ratio per 2 μg/m3 PM2.5 was 1.04 (95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.09). The hazard ratio among seven studies that used active case ascertainment was 1.42 (1.00 to 2.02) and among seven studies that used passive case ascertainment was 1.03 (0.98 to 1.07). The overall hazard ratio per 10 μg/m3 nitrogen dioxide was 1.02 ((0.98 to 1.06); nine studies) and per 10 μg/m3 nitrogen oxide was 1.05 ((0.98 to 1.13); five studies). Ozone had no clear association with dementia (hazard ratio per 5 μg/m3 was 1.00 (0.98 to 1.05); four studies).ConclusionPM2.5 might be a risk factor for dementia, as well as nitrogen dioxide and nitrogen oxide, although with more limited data. The meta-analysed hazard ratios are subject to limitations that require interpretation with caution. Outcome ascertainment approaches differ across studies and each exposure assessment approach likely is only a proxy for causally relevant exposure in relation to clinical dementia outcomes. Studies that evaluate critical periods of exposure and pollutants other than PM2.5, and studies that actively assess all participants for outcomes are needed. Nonetheless, our results can provide current best estimates for use in burden of disease and regulatory setting efforts.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42021277083.

Project description:BackgroundThe adverse effects of air pollution on human health include many diseases and health conditions associated with mortality, morbidity and disability. One example of these outcomes that can be translated into economic costs is the number of days of restricted activity. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of outdoor exposure to particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 and 2.5 μm (PM10, PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and ozone (O3), on restricted activity days.MethodsObservational epidemiological studies with different study designs were included, and pooled relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated for an increase of 10 μg/m3 of the pollutant of interest. Random-effects models were chosen because of the environmental differences between the studies. Heterogeneity was estimated using prediction intervals (PI) and I-Squared (I2) values, while risk of bias was assessed using a tool developed by the World Health Organization specifically designed for air pollution studies, and based on different domains. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed where possible. The protocol for this review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022339607).ResultsWe included 18 articles in the quantitative analysis. Associations between pollutants and restricted activity days in time-series studies of short-term exposures, measured as work-loss days, school-loss days, or both were significant for PM10 (RR: 1.0191; 95%CI: 1.0058-1.0326; 80%PI: 0.9979-1.0408; I2: 71%) and PM2.5 (RR: 1.0166; 95%CI: 1.0050-1.0283; 80%PI: 0.9944-1.0397; I2: 99%), but not for NO2 or O3. Some degree of heterogeneity between studies was observed, but sensitivity analysis showed no differences in the direction of the pooled relative risks when studies with a high risk of bias were excluded. Cross-sectional studies also showed significant associations for PM2.5 and restricted activity days. We could not perform the analysis for long-term exposures because only two studies analysed this type of association.ConclusionRestricted activity days and related outcomes were associated with some of the pollutants under evaluation, as shown in studies with different designs. In some cases, we were able to calculate pooled relative risks that can be used for quantitative modelling.

Project description:BackgroundAcute exposure to air pollution has been linked to myocardial infarction, but its effect on heart failure is uncertain. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between air pollution and acute decompensated heart failure including hospitalisation and heart failure mortality.MethodsFive databases were searched for studies investigating the association between daily increases in gaseous (carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone) and particulate (diameter <2·5 ?m [PM2·5] or <10 ?m [PM10]) air pollutants, and heart failure hospitalisations or heart failure mortality. We used a random-effects model to derive overall risk estimates per pollutant.FindingsOf 1146 identified articles, 195 were reviewed in-depth with 35 satisfying inclusion criteria. Heart failure hospitalisation or death was associated with increases in carbon monoxide (3·52% per 1 part per million; 95% CI 2·52-4·54), sulphur dioxide (2·36% per 10 parts per billion; 1·35-3·38), and nitrogen dioxide (1·70% per 10 parts per billion; 1·25-2·16), but not ozone (0·46% per 10 parts per billion; -0·10 to 1·02) concentrations. Increases in particulate matter concentration were associated with heart failure hospitalisation or death (PM2·5 2·12% per 10 ?g/m(3), 95% CI 1·42-2·82; PM10 1·63% per 10 ?g/m(3), 95% CI 1·20-2·07). Strongest associations were seen on the day of exposure, with more persistent effects for PM2·5. In the USA, we estimate that a mean reduction in PM2·5 of 3·9 ?g/m(3) would prevent 7978 heart failure hospitalisations and save a third of a billion US dollars a year.InterpretationAir pollution has a close temporal association with heart failure hospitalisation and heart failure mortality. Although more studies from developing nations are required, air pollution is a pervasive public health issue with major cardiovascular and health economic consequences, and it should remain a key target for global health policy.FundingBritish Heart Foundation.