ERJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (13)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Niggemann, B.
Right arrow Articles by MAS-Study Group,
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Niggemann, B.
Right arrow Articles by MAS-Study Group,
Eur Respir J 2001; 17:246-253
Copyright ©ERS Journals Ltd 2001

Histamine challenges discriminate between symptomatic and asymptomatic children

B. Niggemann1, S. Illi1, C. Madloch1, K. Völkel1, S. Lau1, R. Bergmann1, E. von Mutius2, U. Wahn1 and MAS-Study Group

1 University Children's Hospital Charité of Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany and 2 University Children's Hospital, Munich, Germany

CORRESPONDENCE: B. Niggemann, Dept. of Pediatric Pneumology and Immunology, Children's Hospital Charité, Humboldt University, Augustenburger Platz 1, D-13353 Berlin, Germany. Fax: 49 3045066931

Keywords: asthma, bronchial hyperresponsiveness, children, cut-off value, histamine challenge, PC20FEV1

Received: March 15, 2000
Accepted September 8, 2000

The Multicentre Allergy Study (MAS-90) has been supported by the German Ministry of Research and Technology (BMFT), Grant No. 01EE9406.


   Abstract
TOP
 Abstract
Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Acknowledgements
 References
 
The aims of this study were to investigate a threshold value for bronchial responsiveness in children aged 7 yrs, which discriminates between symptomatic and asymptomatic children, and to identify determinants of this responsiveness.

Titrated bronchial histamine challenges using the reservoir method were performed in 645 children aged 7 yrs, from the birth cohort Multicentre Allergy Study (MAS).

When defining a reference population of healthy children within the MAS cohort, the 95th percentile of the provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in forced expired volume in one second PC20 among these asymptomatic study subjects amounted to 0.60 mg·mL–1. This resulted in a specificity of 93.0% and a sensitivity of 45.9%, for discriminating between "current wheezers" and "non-current wheezers". Determinants of airway responsiveness at this age were pulmonary function, sensitization to indoor allergens, total immunoglobulin E and current wheeze.

The results indicate that a very low cut-off provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in forced expired volume in one second (<1.0 mg·mL–1) defines airway hyperresponsiveness in children aged 7 yrs using the reservoir method. Provocation protocols for histamine challenges in this age group should therefore start with concentrations markedly below 1.0 mg·mL–1.

Bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) can be defined as an increase above normal in both the ease and the magnitude of airway narrowing on exposure to a number of nonsensitizing bronchoconstrictive stimuli 1. BHR is commonly thought to be closely related to bronchial asthma 2. The most important factors influencing BHR are genetic predisposition and atopy 3–7. The degree of BHR seems to be associated with asthma severity 2, although recent work shows that there is a dissociation between airway inflammation and airway hyperresponsiveness in allergic asthma 8.

BHR can already be measured in early infancy 9. There is evidence that BHR decreases with age from childhood to adolescence 10–14 and adulthood 15, 16. Several methods have been used to assess BHR in children: pharmacological substances (methacholine, histamine, carbachol), physical exercise, isocapnic hyperventilation of cold air and hyper- or hypo-osmolar solutions. There is only partial correspondence between these methods.

Provocation protocols so far suggest histamine threshold values of 8 mg·mL–1 to indicate BHR. However, this threshold value has never been evaluated in young children. Furthermore, it strongly depends on the methods used. Aims of this study were to investigate bronchial responsiveness to histamine in children aged 7 yrs, and to define a threshold value which discriminates between symptomatic and asymptomatic children. Furthermore, determinants of this responsiveness were identified.


   Methods
TOP
 Abstract
 Methods
Results
 Discussion
 Acknowledgements
 References
 
Study sample
The German Multicentre Atopy Study (MAS), a prospective birth cohort study, recruited 1314 newborns in five German cities during 1990. A detailed description of study subjects and methods is given elsewhere 17. Briefly, of all 7609 children born in 1990 in five study centres, information on family history of atopy was available for 5,863 children. Of these, 499 were included in the study with risk factors for atopy (elevated cord blood immunoglobulin E (IgE; ≥0.9 kU·L–1) and/or ≥2 atopic family members) and 815 newborns with none of these risk factors. At the age of 7 yrs, all children were invited into the clinic within 3 months of their birthday. The study protocol was approved by the local ethics committee and parents gave their informed consent.

Lung function tests
Lung function tests were performed using the same full body plethysmograph in all five study centres (Master-Lab, E. Jaeger, Würzburg, Germany). Forced expired volume in one second (FEV1) manoeuvres were repeated until maximal reproducible results were achieved (usually 3–5 manoeuvres). Beta-2-mimetic agents were withdrawn for at least 12 h and sodium cromoglyceate for 48 h. No other drugs which might interfere with lung function were used by the children. After measuring height and weight, a baseline lung function test was performed. Results were expressed as per cent predicted (% pred) according to Zapletal et al. 18. FEV1, forced vital capacity (FVC), and maximal expiratory flow when 75%, 50%, or 25% of FVC remains to be exhaled (MEF75/50/25) were measured; FEV1/FVC was also calculated.

Bronchial histamine challenges
Bronchial histamine challenge was performed using the reservoir method described by Matthys 19. Briefly, a high quality nebulizer system (Pari Provocation Test 2,Pari, Starnberg, Germany) was used, combined with a 10-L storage bag, allowing standardized pulmonary aerosol deposition at saturated ambient temperature and pressure conditions. Provocation tests were performed in a titrated manner starting with 0.5 mg·mL–1 histamine dihydrochloride (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany). After measuring FEV1 and FVC, increasing provocation doses were applied (2.0 and 8.0 mg·mL–1) every 10 min. In children with a history of bronchial asthma and/or bronchial hyperreactivity, lower starting doses were chosen (0.125 mg·mL–1 in 21.4%, and 0.25 mg·mL–1 in 14.6% of the children). Provocation was stopped if the highest concentration (8 mg·mL–1) was tolerated, or if a 20% fall in FEV1 was induced; hence the provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20) was recorded.

Parental questionnaire
Parents were invited into the clinic within 3 months of the 7th birthday of their child. In an interview, the study doctor asked parents whether their child had ever had "a wheezing or whistling noise in the chest while breathing" ("wheezing ever") and whether the child had "wheezed in the past 12 months" ("current wheeze"). Parents were also asked whether their child had had "a dry nocturnal cough in the past 12 months apart from colds" and whether a doctor had ever diagnosed asthma, hay fever or eczema.

"Current asthma" was defined as a doctor diagnosis with asthma and "current wheeze". Several questions about environmental exposure were also asked, for example, about cigarette smoke exposure, pet ownership, the heating system and the fuel used for heating. Passive smoking was defined as 10 or more cigarettes smoked in the home of the child per day. Parental history of atopy (asthma, hay fever or eczema), number of older siblings (defined as the number of previous deliveries), social status according to the highest school education of the parents (low, medium, high) and smoke exposure during pregnancy (yes/no) had been assessed at the time of birth.

Total and specific immunoglobulin E
Serum total IgE levels and specific IgE antibodies to food allergens (cow's milk, egg white, soya bean and wheat), indoor allergens (house dust mites Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, latex, cat and dog dander), and outdoor allergens (mixed grass and birch pollen) were determined by CAP-RAST FEIA (Pharmacia & Upjohn, Freiburg, Germany) 20. Since blood samples at the age of 7 yrs were not available for all participants (n=546, 84.7%), measurements of the two previous study years were also considered in the definition of atopic sensitization in order to maximize the number of children with available measurements of specific IgE (n=609, 94.1%). Hence, sensitization to a specific allergen was defined as a concentration of 0.70 kU·L–1 (or ≥CAP-RAST FEIA class 2) of the respective specific IgE at the age of 5, 6, or 7 yrs.

A child was defined as "sensitized" if it was sensitized to any one of the indoor, outdoor or food allergens, respectively. For bivariate analysis, total IgE was dichotomised using the cut-point of 100 kU·L–1 to define elevated total IgE levels. For multivariate regression analysis, total IgE measurements were log-transformed and used as a continuous variable.

Statistical analysis
The concentration of histamine that would produce PC20 was estimated by linear interpolation between the last two measurements. If a decline of 20% was not reached by 8 mg·mL–1, the value >8 mg·mL–1 was assigned as PC20. Since 5% of the children had a fall in FEV1 of ≥20% after the first concentration administered, baseline FEV1 and 0 mg·mL–1 histamine were used as the first data point for interpolation in these cases. Hence, the histamine concentrations were not log-transformed 21.

The sensitivity and specificity to detect "current wheeze" and "current asthma" for several cut-off values of PC20 (varying between 0.05 mg·mL–1 and 8 mg·mL–1 in steps of 0.05) were calculated and plotted as receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves in order to assess the optimum cut-off value for PC20.

In order to assess the relevance of this cut-off value with optimum specificity and sensitivity, it was compared with the 95th percentile of the distribution of PC20 in a healthy reference population. This reference population was defined within the study population according to the following criteria 22: 1) no history of doctor diagnosed asthma; 2) no nocturnal cough without colds; 3) no history of wheeze; 4) no respiratory infection at the time of examination according to the study doctor; 5) no premature birth (<38 weeks of gestation) or low birth weight (<2500 g); 6) no history of doctor diagnosed hay fever; 7) no sensitization to any allergen (specific IgE<0.35 kU·L–1) if exposed to the respective allergen at the time of testing, i.e. no sensitization to cat or dog allergen if at home, no sensitization to grass pollen if the child was tested between March and July, and no sensitization to house dust mite; 8) not a member of the ‘high-risk group‘ at birth, i.e. no elevated cord blood IgE levels (>0.9 kU·L–1) and <2 atopic first-degree relatives.

The dose-response slope (DRS) was calculated as the gradient of the line connecting the last data point of the dose-response curve, with the origin of the curve, i.e. the percentage fall in FEV1 at the last concentration, divided by the last concentration. This expresses the percentage change in FEV1 per mg·mL–1 histamine.

In order to identify potential determinants of bronchial responsiveness, the distribution of the DRS was analysed with the Wilcoxon rank sum test in the case of binary variables, and the Kruskal-Wallis test for variables with >2 categories.

All variables with a p-value of ≤0.08 in the bivariate analysis were considered as covariates in a multivariate regression analysis, with the log-transformed DRS as dependent variable. Additionally, the continuous variables height, weight, baseline-FEV1 and baseline-FEV1 in per cent of FVC, were included as independent variables in the analyses. A stepwise forward variable selection procedure was used to obtain an optimum regression model, using a p-value of 0.08 as criterion for variables to stay or be removed from the model. All multivariate analyses were adjusted for study centre, season of testing and high risk for atopy at birth.


   Results
TOP
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
Discussion
 Acknowledgements
 References
 
Response rates
Of the 1314 children in the MAS birth cohort, 939 (71.5%) participated in the follow up study at age 7 yrs, i.e. parents responded to the questionnaire (table 1Go). Of these 939 children, 645 (68.7%) completed the bronchial histamine challenge. Of the 645 participating children, 351 (54.5%) had a positive parental history of asthma and/or atopy.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1 Study population and response rates

 
In order to assess potential participation bias, these 645 participating children were compared with all other children in the MAS birth cohort with respect to data collected at birth. Participants of the histamine challenge were more likely to have mothers smoking during pregnancy (26.8% versus 18.7%, p<0.001), but did not differ significantly from nonparticipants with respect to gender, parental history of atopy at birth, cord-blood IgE levels, cord-blood cotinine, or parental education at birth.

Furthermore, the 645 participating children were compared with the other 294 children with data from parental questionnaires, pulmonary function testing and/or blood sampling, but who had not participated in the bronchial challenge, with respect to data collected at the age of 7 yrs. Participants had a higher FEV1 (% pred) than those unable or unwilling to participate (107.5±12.9 versus 102.6±12.9, p<0.001), but the ratio FEV1/FVC (in %) did not differ significantly (92.4±5.9 versus 91.8±7.4, p=0.95). Additionally, no difference at the age of 7 yrs was found with respect to sensitization to any inhalant allergen, total IgE, wheeze (ever and current), passive smoking, and pets at home.

In order to assess the generalizability of the reference population, it was compared to the study base from which the MAS study population was recruited, i.e. the 5863 children born in 1990 in the five study centres with complete data on family history of atopy at birth. No significant difference was seen with respect to parental history of atopy (reference population 34.4% versus study base 36.9%, p=0.53).

Bronchial challenge
During bronchial challenge, all children in the study sample had a fall in FEV1 0.7–76.4% of baseline FEV1, except for one child that remained stable and one child with an increase in FEV1 of 8.3% of baseline FEV1. A fall in FEV1 of ≥20% was observed in 569 children (88.2%). In the 76 children (11.7%) whose FEV1 fell <20%, the maximum value of >8.0 mg·mL–1 was assigned as PC20.

Provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in forced expired volume in one second
The distribution of PC20 on a doubling scale is shown in figure 1Go, stratified for wheeze in the 7th year of life ("current wheeze"). The children with "current wheeze" tended to have lower PC20 values, i.e. higher bronchial responsiveness, whereas children with "non-current wheeze" tended to have higher values of PC20. However, no unambiguous distinction between "current wheezers" and "non-current wheezers" was observed. Considering all children, about a quarter (22%) had a PC20 of ≤1 mg·mL–1. There was a statistically significant difference between the group of "current wheezers", with 62% of the children having a PC20 below 1 mg·mL–1, and the group of "non-wheezers" with 18% (p<0.001).



View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1.— Distribution of provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in forced expired volume in one second (PC20) in children with () and without ({square}) current wheeze during 7th year of life.

 
The resulting sensitivity and specificity of a PC20 of varying cut-off points (0.05 to 8 mg·mL–1 in steps of 0.05) are shown in figure 2Go. A PC20 of as low as 0.60 mg·mL–1 had a satisfying specificity of 93.0% and sensitivity of 45.9% for discriminating between "current wheezers" and "non-current wheezers". This corresponds to the 95th percentile of the healthy reference population defined within the MAS study population. If equal sensitivity and specificity is taken as the basis, as proposed by other authors 23, 24, a corresponding cut-off point value of 1.3 mg·mL–1 resulted (figure 2Go). For "current asthma", all cut-off points achieved even higher specificity at the expense of only slightly lower sensitivity. If those children only were included in the analyses that had not been at high risk for atopy at birth, the sensitivity of a PC20 of 0.60 mg·mL–1 for "current wheeze" was slightly lower (39.3%) with equal specificity (93.6%). When all children with any family history of atopy and/or asthma were excluded from the reference population, the 95th percentile of PC20 remained unchanged. Choosing the point of equal sensitivity and specificity resulted in a corresponding cut-off point value of 1.0 mg·mL–1 (figure 2Go).



View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2.— Histamine reactivity: sensitivity and specificity for various cut-off points for provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in forced expired volume in one second, in steps of 0.05 mg·mL–1, to discriminate between a) current asthmatics and non-current asthmatics; and b) current wheezers and non-current wheezers. {circ}: Sensitivity; {diamond}: Specificity.

 
Dose-response slope
The distribution of the dose-response slope DRS on a doubling scale is shown in figure 3Go, stratified for "current wheeze". The children with "current wheeze" tended to be in the right tail of the distribution, whereas children with, "non-current wheeze" tended to be in the left tail, with an overlap between the groups.



View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3.— Distribution of the dose-response slope in children with () and without ({square}) ‘current wheeze’. FEV1: forced expired volume in one second.

 
Median, lst and 3rd quartiles of the dose-response slope are shown in table 2Go, for the total sample and stratified for "current wheeze" and various other factors. A significantly higher DRS was found for atopic and asthmatic subjects, i.e. subjects with wheeze ever or in the past l2 months, nocturnal cough apart from colds in the past 12 months, doctor's diagnosis of asthma, hay fever or eczema, elevated total IgE levels and for children with atopic sensitization. Sensitization to indoor allergens (e.g. house dust mite) showed a greater association with the DRS than sensitization to outdoor allergens, whereas sensitization solely to food allergens showed no significant association with the DRS (data not shown).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2 Median, first and third quartile of the dose-response slope, stratified for risk factors

 
Analysing indoor allergens separately, sensitization to house dust mites (D pteronyssinus) showed the strongest effect on the DRS (data not shown). Children with lignite, coal or wood-fired stove heating in their home had a higher DRS, whereas other environmental factors such as parental education, maternal smoking in pregnancy, passive smoking and pets at home had no significant effect on the median DRS. Furthermore, gender, elevated cord-blood IgE levels, number of older siblings, family history of atopy and high risk for atopy at birth had no significant effect on the DRS (data not shown).

Multivariate analysis
Considering all variables of the previous analyses with a p-value <0.08 in a stepwise forward variable selection procedure adjusted for study centre, season of histamine challenge, and high risk for atopy at birth, five independent variables remained in the final model with the log-transformed dose-response slope as dependent variable, resulting in a multiple correlation coefficient (R2) of 0.427: baseline-FEV1, baseline FEV1/FVC ratio, sensitization to indoor allergens, log-transformed total IgE, and "current wheeze" (table 3Go).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 3 Results of multiple regression modeling with log-transformed dose-response slopes as criterion

 

   Discussion
TOP
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
Acknowledgements
 References
 
These findings indicate that in children aged 7 yrs, a cut-off value of a PC20 of <1.0 mg·mL–1 is appropriate for the definition of BHR when performing bronchial histamine challenges in children of this young age. Several methods have been used to assess BHR in large epidemiological studies in children: pharmacological substances (i.e. histamine, methacholine, carbachol) 12, 25–27, physical exercise (treadmill, ergometer or free running) 12, 25–27, isocapnic hyperventilation of cold air 22, 28, 29 as well as hyper- or hypo-osmolar aerosols 30–32. The histamine challenge, as a direct bronchial provocation, was chosen for this study, because it represents a very sensitive method which was thought to be suitable for defining threshold values for BHR in our cohort study. The disadvantages of histamine challenges are the propensity for increased side effects such as coughing, vomiting, and flush. However, comparing different methods of measuring BHR is difficult because there is only partial correspondence between these methods concerning relation to clinical symptoms 33. Hence, the generalizability of the present results obtained with the reservoir method to other techniques needs further evaluation.

The titrated procedure of the histamine challenge used in this study was similar to that described by Cockroft et al. 34, except that a reservoir method was used 19 which offers the advantage of administering a defined dose by inhaling a defined concentration in a defined volume. Furthermore, because children breathed through a valved mouthpiece, the applied dosage was widely independent of the child's cooperation: irrespective of the number of breaths or the time needed, 10 L aerosol with a given concentration were inhaled. Due to the stability of the aerosol in the bag, time for inhaling does not play a significant role; nevertheless, care was taken that children emptied the bag within one min.

The degree of hyperresponsiveness may be influenced by several factors, with respiratory infections being one of the most important in childhood. Therefore, great care was taken to exclude children with a history of upper or lower airway infections during the 4 weeks before challenge. Additionally, sensitization to seasonal allergens may play a role: the statistical analysis showed that the season of testing influenced the PC20/DRS, but adjusting for season of testing as a potential confounder did not change the magnitude of the effects of interest.

The observed low cut-off value for the definition of BHR corresponded to the 95th percentile of a healthy reference population with no increased risk for atopy, hence it may be used in further clinical and epidemiological studies. This reference population did not differ from the study base with respect to a family history of atopy, supporting the generalizability of the findings. Even when defining a super normal reference population by excluding all children with any family history of atopy, the cut-off value, defined as the 95th percentile of the distribution of PC20 in this reference population, remained unchanged.

When analysing sensitivity and specificity of the bronchial histamine challenge for current wheeze and asthma, the high proportion of children at increased risk of atopy in the study population might have biased the results. If sensitivity and specificity were calculated only for children not at high risk, the specificity of a cut-off of 0.60 mg·mL–1 remained almost unchanged (93.6%), but sensitivity was slightly lower than for the total study population (39.3%), pointing towards a potentially lower sensitivity when using bronchial histamine challenges in epidemiological as compared to clinical studies. However, using a cut-off of 0.75 mg·mL–1 yielded a satisfactory specificity of 90.6% and a sensitivity of 50.0%, even in the not at high risk population, suggesting that a cut-off level for PC20<1.0 mg·mL–1 can define BHR in all populations of this age group. The achieved sensitivity and specificity are comparable to those found in other studies using histamine challenge 35 or cold air challenge 22.

Using the point of equal sensitivity and specificity, as proposed by other authors 23, 24, revealed slightly higher cut-off values for the histamine PC20. However, even if this method is chosen, the cut-off values were around 1.0 mg·mL–1 histamine. Moreover, the advantage of this study was that a reference population could be defined, which allowed direct comparison of healthy and asthmatic/wheezing children.

BHR has been shown to be present early in life, and is seen in most infants 36–40 and young children 41–44. While most of the studies were performed in infants or young children with wheezing, there is little information on healthy infants. In a study using oxygen saturation as a monitoring parameter, histamine challenges were performed in newborns and infants at 4 and 26 weeks, showing a marked decrease in Sa,O2 in most of these healthy infants 40. Similar results were obtained with histamine 37, methacholine 38 and cold, dry air challenges 36 in healthy infants.

In one of these studies, also using a histamine challenge 39, 40, BHR was arbitrarily defined as a postchallenge fall in maximal expiratory flow at functional residual capacity of ≥40% from baseline, up to a concentration of 8.0 mg·mL–1. When using a similar definition of BHR in this study, i.e. a fall of FEV1 of at least 20% from baseline, up to a histamine concentration of 8.0 mg·mL–1, most children (88.2%) would have been classified as hyperresponsive. At high enough concentrations of histamine, most subjects will eventually react with a fall in FEV1 of 20%. To identify a meaningful threshold value for defining BHR, we assessed the relationship between airway responsiveness and the presence of symptoms to identify the cut-off level with the best sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for detecting asthmatic symptoms as in previous studies 38, 45–47. When applying such a definition (PC20 <1 mg·mL–1 histamine) the prevalence of BHR amounted to only 22%. This is in accordance with an Australian study which showed 17.8% of children aged 8–11 yrs being hyperresponsive, despite using a different methodology for histamine challenge 35.

In the present study cohort, there was a substantial number of children with a low PC20 to histamine but without clinical symptoms. A Dutch study reported that children and adolescents with asymptomatic BHR (also determined by histamine challenges) showed similar characteristics to those without BHR, but differed strongly from subjects with symptomatic BHR 47. The authors concluded that asymptomatic BHR does not seem be a risk factor for asthma in later life. Using an exercise challenge procedure, a Danish group reported that asymptomatic bronchial hyperresponsiveness indicated increased risk of developing wheezing 48.

The present study's data showing that total IgE, as well as specific IgE to indoor and outdoor allergens, represent an important risk factor for the degree of BHR, is in line with previous studies 11, 26. Furthermore, the fact that FEV1 is a significant risk factor may underline the role of baseline lung function for BHR.

In conclusion, the present study's results indicate that a very low cut-off of a provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in forced expired volume in one second below 1.0 mg·mL–1 defines airway hyperresponsiveness in children at 7 yrs of age, using the reservoir method. Provocation protocols for histamine challenges in this age group should therefore start with concentrations markedly below 1.0 mg·mL–1.


   Acknowledgements
TOP
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Acknowledgements
References
 
The authors express their thanks to P. Wagner for her excellent technical help in performing lung function tests and histamine challenge tests. They also thank C. Sommerfeld for eminent data management.

German Multicenter Allergy Study Group (besides authors): C.P. Bauer, F. Bieber, G. Edenharter, J. Forster, C. Genzel, M. Goetz, M. Groeger, B. Hampel, G. Leskosek, R. Mayrl, C. Sommerfeld, U. Tacke, P. Wagner, V. Wahn, F. Zepp, K.E. Bergmann from Pediatric Depts of Berlin, Dusseldorf, Freiburg, Mainz and Munich.


   References
TOP
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Acknowledgements
 References
 

  1. Cockroft DW, Hargreave FE. Airway hyperresponsiveness. Relevance of random population data to clinical usefulness. Am Rev Respir Dis 1990;142:497–500.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Avital A, Noviski N, Bar-Yishay E, Springer C, Levy M, Godfrey S. Nonspecific bronchial reactivity in asthmatic children depends on severity but not on age. Am Rev Respir Dis 1991;144:36–38.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  3. Burrows B, Sears MR, Flannery EM, Herbison GP, Holdaway M. Relationships of bronchial responsiveness assessed by methacholine to serum IgE, lung function, symptoms, and diagnoses in 11-year-old New Zealand children. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1992;90:376–385.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  4. Clough JB, Williams JD, Holgate ST. Profile of bronchial responsiveness in children with respiratory symptoms. Arch Dis Child 1992;67:574–579.[Abstract]
  5. Cockroft DW, Ruffin RE, Dolovich J, Hargreave FE. Allergen-induced increase in non-allergic bronchial reactivity. Clin Allergy 1977;7:503–513.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Van Asperen PP, Kemp AS, Mukhi A. Atopy in infancy predicts the severity of bronchial hyperresponsiveness in later childhood. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1990;85:790–795.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  7. Warner JO. Bronchial hyperresponsiveness, atopy, airway inflammation, and asthma. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 1998;9:56–60.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  8. Crimi E, Spanvello A, Neri M, Ind PW, Rossi GA, Brusasco V. Dissociation between airway inflammation and airway hyperresponsiveness in allergic asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;157:4–9.
  9. Clarke JR, Salmon B, Silverman M. Bronchial responsiveness in the neonatal period as a risk factor for wheezing in infancy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995;151:1434–1440.[Abstract]
  10. Backer V, Groth S, Dirksen A. Spontaneous changes in bronchial responsiveness in children and adolsecents: An 18-month follow-up. Pediatr Pulmonol 1991;11:22–28.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  11. Burrows B, Sears MR, Flannery EM, Herbison GP, Holdaway MD, Silva PA. Relation of the course of bronchial responsiveness from age 9 to age 15 to allergy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995;152:1302–1308.[Abstract]
  12. Forastière F, Corbo GM, Dellórco V, Pistelli R, Agabiti N, Kriebel D. A longitudinal evaluation of bronchial responsiveness to methacholine in children: Role of baseline lung function, gender, and change in atopic status. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1996;153:1098–1104.[Abstract]
  13. Roorda RJ, Gerritsen J, van Aalderen WMC, Schouten JP, Veltman JC, Weiss ST, Knol K. Follow-up of asthma from childhood to adulthood: Influence of potential childhood risk factors on the outcome of pulmonary function and bronchial responsiveness in adulthood. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1994;93:575–584.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  14. Ulrik CS, Backer V. Markers of impaired growth of pulmonary function in children and adolescents. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999;160:40–44.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Grol MH, Postma DS, Vonk JM, et al. Risk factors from childhood to adulthood for bronchial responsiveness at age 32–42 yr. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999;160:150–156.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Cockroft DW, Murdock KY, Berscheid BA, Gore BP. Sensitivity and specificity of histamine PC20 determination in a random selection of young college students. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1992;89:23–30.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  17. Bergmann RL, Bergmann KE, Lau-Schadendorf S, et al. Atopic diseases in infancy. The German multicenter atopy study (MAS 90). Pediatr Allergy Immunol 1994;5:19–25.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  18. Zapletal A, Paul T, Samanek M. Die Bedeutung heutiger Methoden der Lungenfunktionsdiagnostik zur Feststellung einer Obstruktion der Atemwege bei Kindern und Jugendlichen. Z Erkrank Atm-Org 1977;149:343–371.
  19. Matthys H, Knoch M, Eltschka R. A new aerosol device for bronchial provocation tests. Respiration 1993;60:343–350.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  20. Axen R, Drevin H, Kober A, Yman L. A new laboratory diagnostic system applied to allergy testing. N Engl Reg Allergy Proc 1988;9:503.
  21. Cockroft DW, Murdock KY, Mink JT. Determination of histamine PC20: Comparison of linear and logarithmic interpolation. Chest 1993;84:505–506.
  22. Nicolai T, Mutius EV, Reitmeier P, Wjst M. Reactivity to cold-air hyperventilation in normal and in asthmatic children in a survey of 5,697 schoolchildren in Southern Bavaria. Am Rev Respir Dis 1993;147:565–572.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  23. Carlsen KH, Engh G, Mørk M, Schrøder E. Cold air inhalation and exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in relationship to metacholine bronchial responsiveness: different patterns in asthmatic children and children with other lung diseases. Respir Med 1998;92:308–315.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  24. Godfrey S, Springer C, Bar-Yishay E, Avital A. Cut-off points defining normal and asthmatic bronchial reactivity to exercise and inhalation challenges in children and young adults. Eur Respir J 1999;14:659–668.[Abstract]
  25. Backer V, Dirksen A, Bach-Mortensen N, et al. The distribution of bronchial responsiveness to histamine and exercise in 527 children and adolescents. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1991;88:68–76.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  26. Peat JK, Salome CM, Woolcock AJ. Longitudinal changes in atopy during a 4-year period: Relation to bronchial hyperresponsiveness and respiratory symptoms in a population sample of Australian schoolchildren. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1990;85:65–74.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  27. Sears MR, Holdaway MD, Flannery EM, Herbison GP, Silva PA. Parental and neonatal risk factors for atopy, airway hyperresponsiveness, and asthma. Arch Dis Child 1996;75:392–398.[Abstract]
  28. Lombardi E, Morgan WJ, Wright AL, Stein RT, Holberg CJ, Martinez FD. Cold air challenge at age 6 and subsequent incidence of asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997;156:1863–1869.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Von Mutius E, Martinez FD, Fritzsch C, Nicolai T, Roell G, Thiemann HH. Prevalence of asthma and atopy in two areas of West and East Germany. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1994;149:358–364.[Abstract]
  30. Gibson PG, Wlodarczyk JW, Hensley MJ. Epidemiological association of airway inflammation with asthma symptoms and airway hyperresponsiveness in childhood. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;158:36–41.
  31. Riedler J, Gamper A, Eder W, Oberfeld G. Prevalence of bronchial hyperresponsiveness to 4.5% saline and its relation to asthma and allergy symptoms in Australian children. Eur Respir J 1998;11:355–360.[Abstract]
  32. Studnicka M, Roithner B, Gartner C, Weiss ST, Neumann M, Frischer T. Longitudinal predictors of airway responsiveness to distilled water: The role of atopy and maternal smoke exposure. Eur Respir J 1998;12:75–81.[Abstract]
  33. Vasar M, Bråbåck L, Julge K, Knutsson A, Riikjärv MA, Björkstén B. Prevalance of bronchial hyperreactivity as determined by several methods among Estonian schoolchildren. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 1996;7:141–146.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  34. Cockroft DW, Killian DN, Mellon JJA, Hargreave FE. Bronchial reactivity to inhaled histamine: a method and clinical survey. Clin Allergy 1977;7:235–243.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  35. Salome CM, Peat JK, Britton WJ, Woolcock AJ. Bronchial hyperresponsiveness in two populations of Australian schoolchildren. I. Relation to respiratory symptoms and diagnosed asthma. Clin Allergy 1987;17:271–281.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  36. Geller DE, Morgan WJ, Cota KA, Wright AL, Taussig LM. Airway responsiveness to cold, dry airin normal infants. Pediatr Pulmonol 1988;4:90–97.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  37. LeSouëf PN, Geelhoed GC, Turner DJ, Morgan SEG, Landau LI. Response of normal infants to inhaled histamine. Am Rev Respir Dis 1989;139:62–66.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  38. Tepper RS. Airway reactivity in infants: a positive response to methacholine end metaproterenol. J Appl Physiol 1987;62:1155–1159.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Young S, LeSouëf PN, Geelhoed GC, Stick SM, Turner KJ, Landau LI. The influence of a family history of asthma and parental smoking on airway responsiveness in early infancy. N Engl J Med 1991;324:1168–1173.[Abstract]
  40. Young S, Geelhoed GC, Stick SM, Landau LI, LeSouëf PN. The effect of age on oxygen desaturation during histamine inhalation challenge innormal infants. Pediatr Pulmonol 1993;16:158–162.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  41. Delacourt C, Benoist MR, Waernessyckle S, et al. Repeatability of lung function tests during methacholine challenge in wheezy infants. Thorax 1998;53:933–938.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Klug B, Bisgaard H. Repeatability of methacholine challenges in 2- to 4-year-old children with asthma, using a new technique for quantitative delivery of aerosol. Pediatr Pulmonol 1997;23:278–286.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  43. Phagoo SB, Wilson NM, Silverman M. Evaluation of a new interrupter device for measuring bronchial responsiveness and the response to bronchodilator in 3 year old children. Eur Respir J 1996;9:1374–1380.[Abstract]
  44. Tinkelman DG, Lutz C, Conner B. Methacholine challenges in the management of young children. Ann Allergy 1991;66:225–230.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  45. Nicolai T, Illi S, von Mutius E. Effect of dampness at home in childhood on bronchial hyperreactivity in adolescence. Thorax 1998;53:1035–1049.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  46. Pattemore PK, Asher MI, Harrison AC, Mitchell EA, Rea HH, Stewart AW. The interrelationship among bronchial hyperresponsiveness, the diagnosis of asthma, and asthma symptoms. Am Rev Respir Dis 1990;142:549–554.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  47. Kolnaar BGM, Folgering H, van den Hoogen HJM, van Weel C. Asymptomatic bronchial hyperresponsiveness in adolescents and young adults. Eur Respir J 1997;10:44–50.[Abstract]
  48. Rasmussen F, Lambrechtsen J, Sierstedt HC, Hansen HS, Hansen NC. Asymptomatic bronchial hyperrespon<!?show=[fo]>siveness to exercise in childhood and the development of asthma related symptoms in young adulthood: the Odense schoolchild study. Thorax 1999;54:587–589.[Abstract/Free Full Text]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur Respir JHome page
S. Lau, S. Illi, C. Sommerfeld, B. Niggemann, K. Volkel, C. Madloch, C. Gruber, R. Nickel, J. Forster, U. Wahn, et al.
Transient early wheeze is not associated with impaired lung function in 7-yr-old children
Eur. Respir. J., May 1, 2003; 21(5): 834 - 841.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
L.-P. Boulet
Asymptomatic Airway Hyperresponsiveness: A Curiosity or an Opportunity to Prevent Asthma?
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., February 1, 2003; 167(3): 371 - 378.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (13)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Niggemann, B.
Right arrow Articles by MAS-Study Group,
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Niggemann, B.
Right arrow Articles by MAS-Study Group,

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS