• Login
    View Item 
    •   UMB Digital Archive
    • UMB Open Access Articles
    • UMB Open Access Articles 2020
    • View Item
    •   UMB Digital Archive
    • UMB Open Access Articles
    • UMB Open Access Articles 2020
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of UMB Digital ArchiveCommunitiesPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    Assessing the strength of evidence for a causal effect of respiratory syncytial virus lower respiratory tract infections on subsequent wheezing illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    Publisher version
    View Source
    Access full-text PDFOpen Access
    View Source
    Check access options
    Check access options
    Author
    Brunwasser, Steven M.
    Snyder, Brittney M.
    Driscoll, Amanda J.
    Fell, Deshayne B.
    Savitz, David A.
    Feikin, Daniel R.
    Skidmore, Becky
    Bhat, Niranjan
    Bont, Louis J.
    Dupont, William D.
    Wu, Pingsheng
    Gebretsadik, Tebeb
    Holt, Patrick G.
    Zar, Heather J.
    Ortiz, Justin R.
    Hartert, Tina V.
    Show allShow less

    Date
    2020-08-01
    Journal
    The Lancet Respiratory Medicine
    Publisher
    Elsevier Ltd.
    Type
    Article
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    See at
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30109-0
    Abstract
    Background: Although a positive association has been established, it is unclear whether lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) with respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause chronic wheezing illnesses. If RSV-LRTI were causal, we would expect RSV-LRTI prevention to reduce the incidence of chronic wheezing illnesses in addition to reducing acute disease. We aimed to evaluate the strength of evidence for a causal effect of RSV-LRTI on subsequent chronic wheezing illness to inform public health expectations for RSV vaccines. Methods: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies evaluating the association between RSV-LRTI and subsequent wheezing illness (exposure studies) and studies evaluating the association between RSV immunoprophylaxis and subsequent wheezing illness (immunoprophylaxis studies). Exposure studies were included if the exposure group members had an LRTI with laboratory-confirmed RSV and if the exposure ascertainment period began before 2 years of age and ended before 5 years of age. We required a wash-out period of more than 30 days between the index RSV-LRTI and the outcome measurement to allow for resolution of the acute illness. Comparisons between RSV-LRTI and non-RSV-LRTI were not included. Immunoprophylaxis studies were included if they measured the association with subsequent wheezing illness relative to a control group, either in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) or an observational design. For the immunoprophylaxis drugs in question, we required evidence of efficacy in targeting RSV-LRTI from at least one RCT to ensure biological plausibility. All variations of wheezing illness were combined into a single outcome that refers broadly to asthma or any other respiratory illness with wheezing symptoms. Ovid MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from inception up to Aug 28, 2018. We evaluated whether data from exposure studies could provide evidence against the most viable non-causal theory that RSV-LRTI is a marker of respiratory illness susceptibility rather than a causal factor. Additionally, we tested whether RSV immunoprophylaxis reduces the odds of subsequent wheezing illnesses. We used a random-effects modelling framework and, to accommodate studies providing multiple correlated estimates, robust variance estimation meta-regressions. Meta-regression coefficients (b) quantify differences between exposure and comparator groups on the loge odds ratio (loge OR) scale. Findings: From 14 235 records we identified 57 eligible articles that described 42 studies and provided 153 effect estimates. 35 studies estimated the direct effect of RSV-LRTI on wheezing illnesses (exposure studies) and eight evaluated the effect of RSV immunoprophylaxis (immunoprophylaxis studies). Exposure studies that adjusted for genetic influences yielded a smaller mean adjusted OR estimate (aOR+ 2·45, 95% CI 1·23–4·88) compared with those that did not (4·17, 2·36–7·37), a significant difference (b 0·53, 95% CI 0·04–1·02). Infants who were not protected with RSV immunoprophylaxis tended to have higher odds of subsequent wheezing illness, as we would expect if RSV-LRTI were causal, but the effect was not significant (OR+ 1·21, 95% CI 0·73–1·99). There was generally a high threat of confounding bias in the observational studies. Additionally, in both the observational studies and immunoprophylaxis RCTs, there was high risk of bias due to missing outcome data. Interpretation: Our findings, limited to exposure and immunoprophylaxis studies, do not support basing policy decisions on an assumption that prevention of RSV-LRTI will reduce recurrent chronic wheezing illnesses. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. © 2020 The Author(s).
    Sponsors
    Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
    Keyword
    chronic wheezing illness
    lower respiratory tract infections
    Respiratory Sounds
    Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human
    Respiratory Tract Infections
    Identifier to cite or link to this item
    http://hdl.handle.net/10713/13539
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30109-0
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    UMB Open Access Articles 2020

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2021)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Policies | Contact Us | UMB Health Sciences & Human Services Library
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.