Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • For authors
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Author FAQs
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • For authors
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Author FAQs
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions

Combined value of exhaled nitric oxide and blood eosinophils in chronic airway disease: the Copenhagen General Population Study

Yunus Çolak, Shoaib Afzal, Børge G. Nordestgaard, Jacob L. Marott, Peter Lange
European Respiratory Journal 2018 52: 1800616; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00616-2018
Yunus Çolak
1Dept of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
2The Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
3The Copenhagen City Heart Study, Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shoaib Afzal
1Dept of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
2The Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
3The Copenhagen City Heart Study, Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Børge G. Nordestgaard
1Dept of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
2The Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
3The Copenhagen City Heart Study, Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
4Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jacob L. Marott
2The Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
3The Copenhagen City Heart Study, Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Peter Lange
2The Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
3The Copenhagen City Heart Study, Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
4Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
5Dept of Public Health, Section of Social Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
6Dept of Internal Medicine, Section of Respiratory Medicine, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

We investigated whether the combination of increased exhaled nitric oxide fraction (FeNO) level and blood eosinophil count had an additive value in chronic airway disease in the general population.

We included 4677 individuals aged 20–100 years from the Copenhagen General Population Study. Based on pre- and post-bronchodilator spirometry, self-reported asthma and smoking history, participants were subdivided into healthy never-smokers (n=1649), healthy ever-smokers (n=1581), asthma (n=449), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (n=404), asthma–COPD overlap (ACO) (n=138) and nonspecific airflow limitation (n=456).

Compared to individuals with FeNO <25 ppb and blood eosinophils <0.3×109 cells·L−1, age- and sex-adjusted odds ratios (95% CI) for wheezing were 1.54 (1.29–1.84) for individuals with FeNO ≥25 ppb or blood eosinophils ≥0.3×109 cells·L−1 and 2.14 (1.47–3.10) for individuals with FeNO ≥25 ppb and blood eosinophils ≥0.3×109 cells·L−1. Corresponding odds ratios were 1.13 (0.91–1.41) and 1.83 (1.20–2.79) for sputum production, 1.54 (1.22–1.94) and 3.26 (2.16–4.94) for asthma, 1.03 (0.80–1.32) and 0.67 (0.36–1.27) for COPD and 1.32 (0.88–1.96) and 2.14 (1.05–4.36) for ACO. Among individuals reporting respiratory symptoms, predicting the type of chronic airway disease did not differ between the two biomarkers and did not improve by combining them.

Combination of FeNO and blood eosinophils may have an additive value in characterising chronic airway disease in the general population but still needs to be investigated further with regard to clinical application.

Abstract

Combination of exhaled nitric oxide and blood eosinophils may have an additive value in chronic airway disease http://ow.ly/jUmj30kod8B

Introduction

Eosinophilic airway inflammation is increasingly recognised as an important feature of patients that are highly responsive to treatment with corticosteroids [1, 2]. Both fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) level and blood eosinophil count have been suggested as biomarkers to determine and quantify the degree of eosinophilic airway inflammation [3]. Although FeNO and blood eosinophils may be a measure of the same inflammatory component, the two biomarkers seem to be regulated by different inflammatory pathways, which is supported by the weak correlation between them and by the results from large clinical trials of treatments targeting type 2 T-helper cell cytokine-driven inflammation [4–9]. Therefore, it has been suggested that they be used as complementary biomarkers of a clinically important pattern of inflammation [5, 10, 11] . However, studies on the clinical importance of combining these two biomarkers are still limited.

In the present study, we investigated whether the combination of increased FeNO level and blood eosinophil count had an additive value in chronic airway disease in the general population.

Methods

Study design and participants

We included 5578 individuals aged 20–100 years from the second examination of the Copenhagen General Population Study (CGPS), a population-based prospective cohort study initiated in April 2014 with ongoing enrolment. In the second examination, individuals are invited from the same areas as the first examination (2003–2014), meaning that some are newly invited and some were examined in the first examination [12, 13]. Individuals living in the Capital Region of Denmark were randomly selected from the National Danish Civil Registration System to reflect the adult Danish population by using the unique identification number provided to everyone at birth or immigration. Among individuals aged 20–39 years, ∼25% of those eligible were randomly selected and invited, whereas all eligible individuals aged ≥40 years were randomly selected and invited. All participants completed a comprehensive questionnaire, underwent a physical examination and provided blood for biochemical analyses. Questionnaires were reviewed in detail at the day of attendance by a healthcare professional together with the participant. The study was approved by Herlev and Gentofte Hospital (Herlev, Denmark) and a Danish ethical committee, and was conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants provided written informed consent.

Exhaled nitric oxide and blood eosinophils

FeNO levels in the expiratory volume were obtained using an online measurement technique with the portable hand-held device NIOX VERO (Aerocrine, Solna, Sweden), in accordance with the recommendations from the European Respiratory Society (ERS) and American Thoracic Society (ATS) [12, 14]. The apparatus has a lowest detection limit of 5 ppb and a measurement range of 5–300 ppb. Measurements were performed with individuals in a sitting position without the use of a nose-clip, as this may lead to accumulation of nitric oxide in the nasal region and promote leakage via the posterior nasopharynx [14]. During the inspiration phase, individuals were required to inhale to their total lung capacity through the mouthpiece, which possesses a protective filter, in order to avoid environmental containment. During the exhalation phase, individuals were guided via an animated interface on the apparatus to maintain a correct constant expiratory flow rate. The apparatus did not analyse the expiratory volume for a FeNO level if individuals failed to sustain a correct constant expiratory flow rate and automatically required the measurement to be repeated. Since spirometry and reversibility testing may affect FeNO levels in the airways [14], measurement of FeNO was always performed before spirometry and reversibility testing. Healthcare professionals were trained on proper use of standard operating procedures in the measurement of FeNO and certified on three occasions by more experienced healthcare professionals. Maintenance of the apparatus was undertaken regularly, as recommended by the manufacturer. A FeNO level <25 ppb was considered as normal and ≥25 ppb as increased, in accordance with the recommendations from the ATS [15].

White blood cell counts were measured on fresh samples using the ADVIA 120 Hematology System (Siemens Healthcare, Munich, Germany). Analyses were subjected to daily precision testing using internal quality control material and monthly accuracy testing using an external control quality programme [12]. Blood eosinophil counts were reported in ×109 cells·L−1 together with other leukocyte subpopulations, and percentage of total white blood cell count was calculated. A blood eosinophil count <0.3×109 cells·L−1 was considered normal and ≥0.3×109 cells·L−1 increased, as the cut-off has been associated with significant disease severity and increased risk of exacerbations in chronic airway disease [5, 10, 12, 16].

Definition of chronic airway disease

The clinical groups of chronic airway disease were defined based on information obtained from the questionnaire and spirometry with the highest likelihood principle in accordance with the agreed recommendations from the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) and Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) [17, 18].

Information on asthma and tobacco smoking was obtained through self-report. Asthma was defined as an affirmative response to the question “do you have asthma?” Smoking status was defined as never-, former and current smokers. Based on information on age at smoking onset, duration of tobacco smoking and amount of tobacco consumed, we calculated smoking history (cumulative tobacco consumption) in pack-years for former and current smokers; 1 pack-year corresponded to 20 cigarettes or equivalent (e.g. cheroots, cigars, pipe), smoked daily for 1 year.

Spirometry was performed using an EasyOne Spirometer (ndd Medical Technologies, Zurich, Switzerland) in a standing position without the use of a nose-clip. Prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) were measured with at least three sets of values, and a validated spirometry performance was based on at least two measurements differing by <5% and a correct visual inspection of the spirometry curves. Spirometry use in the CGPS has undergone a rigorous validation process [19]. Individuals with presence of airflow limitation, defined as a prebronchodilator FEV1/FVC ratio <0.70 were additionally asked to undergo reversibility testing: postbronchodilator FEV1 and FVC were measured using the same procedures 15 min after inhalation of 400 µg salbutamol, a β2-agonist, from a dry powder inhaler (Ventoline Diskus; GlaxoSmithKline, Brentford, UK). Percentage of predicted values were calculated separately for men and women using internally derived reference values based on a subsample of healthy asymptomatic never-smokers with age and height as covariates [19]. The lower limit of normal (LLN), defined as the lower 5th percentile of the predicted value for FEV1 and FEV1/FVC, was calculated as the mean value minus 1.645 sd.

In total, 4677 individuals were available with sufficient information on relevant measurements, of whom 1260 had prebronchodilator airflow limitation with FEV1/FVC <0.70. Among these individuals, 456 declined to perform a reversibility test and, therefore, lacked information on postbronchodilator values. We subdivided participants into the following six groups (figure 1). 1) Healthy never-smokers: never-smokers with prebronchodilator FEV1/FVC ≥0.70 and no self-reported asthma; 2) healthy ever-smokers: former and current smokers with prebronchodilator FEV1/FVC ≥0.70 and no self-reported asthma; 3) asthma: individuals with prebronchodilator FEV1/FVC ≥0.70 and self-reported asthma, or with prebronchodilator FEV1/FVC <0.70 and postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC ≥0.70, or with pre- and postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC <0.70 and who, despite no self-reported asthma have FEV1 reversibility of >12% and >400 mL and <10 pack-years of smoking history; 4) COPD: individuals with pre- and postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC <0.70 and no self-reported asthma or FEV1 reversibility (FEV1 reversibility of <12% and <200 mL); 5) ACO: individuals with pre- and post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC <0.70 and self-reported asthma or with pre- and postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC <0.70 and who, despite no self-reported asthma have FEV1 reversibility of ≥12% and ≥200 mL; 6) nonspecific airflow limitation: individuals with prebronchodilator FEV1/FVC <0.70 and no reversibility testing.

FIGURE 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 1

Flow chart of the study population. FeNO: exhaled nitric oxide fraction; FEV1: forced expiratory volume in 1 s; FVC: forced vital capacity; ACO: asthma–chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) overlap.

Other information

Body mass index (BMI) was calculated as measured weight divided by measured height squared (kg·m−2). Familial predisposition was defined as at least one first-degree relative (father, mother and/or sibling) with the condition in question. Allergy was defined if the participants reported to have allergy for different allergens (i.e. mould fungus, pollens from trees, grasses or weeds, dust mites, pets or other allergens) or asthma, hay fever or eczema as a reaction to food, medications, grass, flowers, animal hair or other allergens. In addition, information on childhood asthma or allergy was self-reported. Use of airway medication was defined as taking any kind of medication for asthma/bronchitis (including sprays/dry powders) daily or almost daily. Wheezing was whistling or wheezing while breathing. Sputum production was phlegm from the lungs in the morning and/or during the day for three consecutive months each year. Chronic cough was cough lasting >8 weeks. Dyspnoea was shortness of breath during different levels of activity, at night-time and/or while seated/at rest. Individuals were asked whether they had respiratory symptoms during the day or at night.

Statistical analyses

Statistical analyses were performed using STATA/SE 13.1 for Windows (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). Logistic regression models were used. Area under the curve (AUC) for the receiver operating characteristics and classification statistics were determined; the positive outcome thresholds were estimated by plotting the sensitivity and specificity versus probability cut-off. First, associations of clinical attributes with an increased FeNO level and blood eosinophil count were investigated. Second, associations of an increased FeNO level and blood eosinophil count with symptoms and type of chronic airway disease were investigated. Third, predictive capabilities of the two biomarkers were investigated in a clinical population reporting at least one respiratory symptom (i.e. wheezing, sputum production, chronic cough, dyspnoea and respiratory symptoms during the day or at night). All prediction analyses were adjusted for age and sex. All analyses for the two biomarkers were performed separately and combined.

Results

Among 4677 individuals, 1649 were healthy never-smokers, 1581 were healthy ever-smokers, 449 had asthma, 404 had COPD, 138 had ACO and 456 had nonspecific airflow limitation (figure 1). Individuals with COPD, ACO and nonspecific airflow limitation were older compared to the other groups (table 1). Individuals with asthma, COPD and particularly those with ACO had lower lung function and reported more symptoms and greater use of airway medication. Generally, healthy individuals with atopy compared to those without atopy irrespective of smoking status seemed to have higher FeNO levels and blood eosinophil counts, while healthy current smokers compared to healthy never- and former smokers irrespective of presence of atopy seemed to have lower FeNO levels and higher blood eosinophil counts (figure 2 and online supplementary figures S1–S4).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Characteristics of individuals from the Copenhagen General Population Study according to clinical groups of chronic airway disease

FIGURE 2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 2

Distribution of a) exhaled nitric oxide fraction (FeNO) levels and b) blood eosinophil counts in i) healthy never-smokers ii) without and iii) with atopy.

Clinical attributes

A higher age, male sex, prebronchodilator FEV1/FVC <0.70, positive reversible test, self-reported atopy and use of airway medication were all associated with an increased risk of having a FeNO level ≥25 ppb and a blood eosinophil count ≥0.3×109 cells·L−1, both when analysed separately and combined (figure 3). In contrast, only higher BMI, prebronchodilator FEV1/FVC <LLN and FEV1 % pred <LLN and <80% were associated with an increased risk of having a blood eosinophil count ≥0.3×109 cells·L−1, whereas current smoking and smoking history were associated with a reduced risk of having a FeNO level ≥25 ppb.

Respiratory symptoms

An increased FeNO level was associated with an increased risk of wheezing and respiratory symptoms during the day and at night, whereas an increased blood eosinophil count was associated with an increased risk of all types of respiratory symptoms (figure 4). These associations were attenuated after additional adjustment for potential confounders. Compared to individuals with FeNO level <25 ppb and blood eosinophil count <0.3×109 cells·L−1, age- and sex-adjusted odds ratios (95% CI) for wheezing were 1.54 (1.29–1.84) for individuals with FeNO level ≥25 ppb or blood eosinophil count ≥0.3×109 cells·L−1 and 2.14 (1.47–3.10) for individuals with FeNO level ≥25 ppb and blood eosinophil count ≥0.3×109 cells·L−1 (figure 5). Corresponding odds ratios (95% CI) were 1.13 (0.91–1.41) and 1.83 (1.20–2.79) for sputum production, 1.22 (0.96–1.55) and 1.51 (0.92–2.48) for chronic cough, 1.21 (1.04–1.40) and 1.03 (0.73–1.46) for dyspnoea, 1.34 (1.12–1.61) and 1.30 (0.86–1.98) for daytime respiratory symptoms and 1.33 (1.06–1.68) and 1.56 (0.95–2.56) for night-time respiratory symptoms. Results were attenuated but similar after additional adjustment for potential confounders.

FIGURE 3
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 3

Clinical attributes associated with a) increased exhaled nitric oxide fraction (FeNO; ≥25 ppb); b) increased blood eosinophil count (≥0.3×109 cells·L−1); and c) combined value. Reversibility was defined as forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) reversibility of ≥12% and ≥200 mL. Logistic regression models were used. Estimates are unadjusted. p-values were from Wald's test. BMI: body mass index; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; LLN: lower limit of normal; FVC: forced vital capacity.

FIGURE 4
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 4

Separate association of increased exhaled nitric oxide level and blood eosinophil count with respiratory symptoms. Logistic regression models were used. Multivariable adjustment included age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, smoking history, familial predisposition for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma, atopy and use of airway medication. p-values were from Wald's test. FeNO: exhaled nitric oxide fraction.

Chronic airway disease

When the two biomarkers were analysed separately, an increased FeNO level and blood eosinophil count were associated with an increased risk of asthma, but not COPD or ACO (figure 6). Compared to individuals with FeNO level <25 ppb and blood eosinophil count <0.3×109 cells·L−1, age- and sex-adjusted odds ratios (95% CI) for asthma were 1.54 (1.22–1.94) for individuals with FeNO level ≥25 ppb or blood eosinophil count ≥0.3×109 cells·L−1 and 3.26 (2.16–4.94) for individuals with FeNO level ≥25 ppb and blood eosinophil count ≥0.3×109 cells·L−1. Corresponding odds ratios (95% CI) were 1.03 (0.80–1.32) and 0.67 (0.36–1.27) for COPD and 1.32 (0.88–1.96) and 2.14 (1.05–4.36) for ACO. Adjustment for additional potential confounders gave attenuated but similar results. Results were similar when defining the clinical groups of obstructive lung disease according to FEV1/FVC <LLN (online supplementary figure S5).

FIGURE 5
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 5

Combined association of increased exhaled nitric oxide level and blood eosinophil count with respiratory symptoms. Logistic regression models were used. Multivariable adjustment included age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, smoking history, familial predisposition to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma, atopy and use of airway medication. p-values were from Wald's test. FeNO: fraction of exhaled nitric oxide.

In additional analyses, we restricted to different subgroups of individuals with chronic airway disease. In the subgroup of individuals with asthma and COPD, an increased FeNO level and blood eosinophil count was associated with an increased risk of asthma compared to COPD, especially when the two biomarkers were combined (figure 7). Similarly, when individuals with COPD and ACO were analysed separately, an increased FeNO level and blood eosinophil count was associated with an increased risk of ACO compared to COPD. No clear associations were observed in the ACO and asthma subgroup.

FIGURE 6
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 6

Association of increased exhaled nitric oxide level and blood eosinophil count with asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma–COPD overlap (ACO). a) Separate association analyses; b) combined association analyses. Logistic regression models were used. Multivariable adjustment included age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, smoking history, familial predisposition to COPD and asthma, atopy and use of airway medication. p-values were from Wald's test. FeNO: exhaled nitric oxide fraction.

FIGURE 7
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 7

Increased exhaled nitric oxide level and blood eosinophil count favouring more asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or asthma–COPD overlap (ACO). a) Separate association analyses; b) combined association analyses. Logistic regression models were used. Multivariable adjustment included age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, smoking history, familial predisposition to COPD and asthma, atopy and use of airway medication. p-values were from Wald's test. FeNO: exhaled nitric oxide fraction.

Predictive capabilities

Among individuals reporting respiratory symptoms, FeNO and blood eosinophils had a poor sensitivity and specificity with regard to predicting asthma, COPD or ACO (table 2). Furthermore, the negative predictive value was high (≥90%) and the positive predictive value was low (≤18%). No differences were observed between the two biomarkers, and the combination of them did not seem to improve the predictive capability. AUC (95% CI) values for predicting asthma were 0.62 (0.58–0.65) for FeNO ≥25 ppb, 0.60 (0.57–0.64) for blood eosinophils ≥0.3×109 cells·L−1 and 0.61 (0.58–0.64) for FeNO ≥25 ppb and/or blood eosinophils ≥0.3×109 cells·L−1. Corresponding AUC (95% CI) values were 0.68 (0.65–0.72), 0.68 (0.64–0.71) and 0.69 (0.65–0.72) for COPD and 0.63 (0.57–0.68), 0.64 (0.59–0.69) and 0.64 (0.59–0.69) for ACO.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2

Predictive capabilities of increased exhaled nitric oxide level and blood eosinophil count with regard to chronic airway disease in symptomatic individuals

After restricting the analyses to subgroups with chronic airway disease, no differences could be observed between the two biomarkers and the combination of them with regard to the predictive capability of differentiating between asthma, COPD or ACO. Although the overall predictive capabilities were poor, the two biomarkers seemed to have an acceptable performance with regard to differentiating between asthma and COPD.

Discussion

In this large random sample from the general population, we found that compared to individuals with normal FeNO level and blood eosinophil count, individuals with both increased biomarkers had an increased risk of respiratory symptoms and asthma and ACO with higher risk estimates than those with only one increased biomarker. Among individuals reporting respiratory symptoms, predicting the type of chronic airway disease did not differ between the two biomarkers and did not improve by combining them; however, use of the two biomarkers seemed to rule out chronic airway disease with a negative predictive value of ≥90%. Thus, our findings suggest that although the combination of these two biomarkers may have an additive value in characterising chronic airway disease, it still needs to be investigated further with regard to potential clinical application.

Exhaled nitric oxide is believed to arise due to local inflammation in the airways related to the activation of interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13, whereas blood eosinophils are believed to reflect systemic inflammation with the activation of interleukin IL-5 [2]. In large clinical trials, treatment with mepolizumab (monoclonal anti-IL-5) reduced blood eosinophil counts significantly without any noteworthy effect on FeNO levels [7–9], while treatment with lebrikizumab (anti-IL-13) and dupilumab (anti-IL-4 and -13) reduced FeNO levels significantly with no or a very modest increase in blood eosinophil counts [4, 6]. This suggests that these two biomarkers should not be used interchangeably, but instead be combined in order to determine different aspects of an eosinophilic airway inflammation. In the present study, we observed not only an additive value of combining these two biomarkers, but that these biomarkers were differently associated with some of the clinical attributes when analysed separately. A greater airflow limitation, a well-known clinical attribute of severe obstructive lung disease [20, 21], was associated with an increased risk of having a blood eosinophil count ≥0.3×109 cells·L−1 but not with FeNO level ≥25 ppb. Furthermore, measures of atopy and smoking were associated with FeNO rather than with blood eosinophils.

Another interesting finding was that both an increased FeNO level and blood eosinophil count were associated with asthma and ACO, but not with COPD. We do not necessarily believe that FeNO and blood eosinophils are able to differentiate asthma and ACO from COPD, but rather identify a pathophysiological trait more common in asthma and ACO rather than in COPD [22]. However, the use of FeNO and blood eosinophils had low sensitivity and specificity among symptomatic individuals for diagnosing the type of chronic airway disease, suggesting that the two biomarkers have their limitations and should be more thoroughly investigated in clinical studies before implementation in routine practice. Yet, the two biomarkers had a negative predictive value of ≥90% and therefore seem to be useful for excluding presence of chronic airway disease among symptomatic individuals in a general population setting. Since the positive and negative predictive values are also dependent on the prevalence of the disease irrespective of the sensitivity and specificity, a potential explanation for observing a high negative predictive value in combination with a low sensitivity and specificity in the present study may be the low prevalence of chronic airway disease in the present sample of the general population.

Previous studies have shown an increased FeNO level and blood eosinophil count to be independently associated with increased disease severity and acute attacks among patients with asthma and COPD [12, 16, 23–26]. However, the additive value of combining these two biomarkers has not been investigated extensively. In the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, combining FeNO and blood eosinophils gave an additive value with regard to determining risk of current asthma, wheezing, asthma attack and asthma-related emergency department visits [5, 11]. Furthermore, the same investigators could also observe an additive value by combining the two biomarkers among asthmatic individuals with regard to determining severity of airflow limitation, degree of bronchial responsiveness, and having uncontrolled asthma and frequent asthma attacks [10]. Lastly, since the majority of individuals with asthma in the present study had mild disease, the median values of FeNO and blood eosinophils were lower compared to those with a more severe disease, which is often seen in secondary care [27].

An important limitation of the present study includes the definitions of the clinical groups of chronic airway disease. Despite the differentiation between reversible and irreversible airflow limitation, both asthma and COPD are very complex diseases with regard to clinical presentation and natural history and may be difficult to separate, and in particular the definition of ACO is still controversial. Although we had a highest likelihood principle to define the clinical groups by taking the agreed recommendations from GOLD and GINA into account [18], our findings warrant replication in clinical settings, where more detailed characterisation of type of chronic airway disease is possible. Another limitation was that we were unable to determine the type of used airway medication. Lastly, although spirometry use in the CGPS has previously undergone a rigorous validation process, some of the procedures were not in accordance with the recommendations from the ERS and ATS [28].

In conclusion, the combination of FeNO and blood eosinophils may have an additive value in characterising chronic airway disease in the general population, but still needs to be investigated further with regard to clinical application.

Supplementary material

Supplementary Material

Please note: supplementary material is not edited by the Editorial Office, and is uploaded as it has been supplied by the author.

Supplement ERJ-00616-2018_Supplement

Footnotes

  • This article has supplementary material available from erj.ersjournals.com

  • Author contributions: Y. Çolak and S. Afzal had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analyses. Study concept and design: Y. Çolak, S. Afzal, B.G. Nordestgaard, J.L. Marott and P. Lange. Acquisition, analyses, or interpretation of data: Y. Çolak, S. Afzal, B.G. Nordestgaard, J.L. Marott and P. Lange. Drafting of the manuscript: Y. Çolak. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Y. Çolak, S. Afzal, B.G. Nordestgaard, J.L. Marott and P. Lange. Statistical analyses: Y. Çolak and S. Afzal. Obtained funding: B.G. Nordestgaard and P. Lange. Administrative, technical, or material support: B.G. Nordestgaard. Study supervision: P. Lange.

  • Conflict of interest: Y. Çolak reports personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and AstraZeneca outside the submitted work.

  • Conflict of interest: P. Lange reports grants from AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline, and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Novartis and GlaxoSmithKline, outside the submitted work.

  • Support statement: The Lundbeck Foundation, the Dept of Internal Medicine and Dept of Clinical Biochemistry at Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, and the Danish Lung Association. The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis or interpretation of the data; preparation, review or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Funding information for this article has been deposited with the Crossref Funder Registry.

  • Received June 20, 2017.
  • Accepted June 4, 2018.
  • Copyright ©ERS 2018

References

  1. ↵
    1. George L,
    2. Brightling CE
    . Eosinophilic airway inflammation: role in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Ther Adv Chronic Dis 2016; 7: 34–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Pavord ID,
    2. Beasley R,
    3. Agusti A, et al.
    After asthma: redefining airways diseases. Lancet 2018; 391: 350–400.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Pavord ID,
    2. Afzalnia S,
    3. Menzies-Gow A, et al.
    The current and future role of biomarkers in type 2 cytokine-mediated asthma management. Clin Exp Allergy 2017; 47: 148–160.
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. Corren J,
    2. Lemanske RF,
    3. Hanania NA, et al.
    Lebrikizumab treatment in adults with asthma. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 1088–1098.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. ↵
    1. Malinovschi A,
    2. Fonseca JA,
    3. Jacinto T, et al.
    Exhaled nitric oxide levels and blood eosinophil counts independently associate with wheeze and asthma events in National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey subjects. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2013; 132: 821–827.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  6. ↵
    1. Wenzel S,
    2. Ford L,
    3. Pearlman D, et al.
    Dupilumab in persistent asthma with elevated eosinophil levels. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 2455–2466.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. ↵
    1. Haldar P,
    2. Brightling CE,
    3. Hargadon B, et al.
    Mepolizumab and exacerbations of refractory eosinophilic asthma. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 973–984.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Ortega HG,
    2. Liu MC,
    3. Pavord ID, et al.
    Mepolizumab treatment in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 1198–1207.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Pavord ID,
    2. Korn S,
    3. Howarth P, et al.
    Mepolizumab for severe eosinophilic asthma (DREAM): a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2012; 380: 651–659.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. ↵
    1. Malinovschi A,
    2. Janson C,
    3. Borres M, et al.
    Simultaneously increased fraction of exhaled nitric oxide levels and blood eosinophil counts relate to increased asthma morbidity. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2016; 138: 1301–1308.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Pavord ID,
    2. Bafadhel M
    . Exhaled nitric oxide and blood eosinophilia: independent markers of preventable risk. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2013; 132: 828–829.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  11. ↵
    1. Vedel-Krogh S,
    2. Nielsen SF,
    3. Lange P, et al.
    Blood eosinophils and exacerbations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The Copenhagen General Population Study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2016; 193: 965–974.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Çolak Y,
    2. Afzal S,
    3. Nordestgaard BG, et al.
    Prognosis of asymptomatic and symptomatic, undiagnosed COPD in the general population in Denmark: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Respir Med 2017; 5: 426–434.
    OpenUrl
  13. ↵
    American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society. ATS/ERS recommendations for standardized procedures for the online and offline measurement of exhaled lower respiratory nitric oxide and nasal nitric oxide, 2005. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005; 171: 912–930.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  14. ↵
    1. Dweik RA,
    2. Boggs PB,
    3. Erzurum SC, et al.
    An official ATS clinical practice guideline: interpretation of exhaled nitric oxide levels (FENO) for clinical applications. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2011; 184: 602–615.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. ↵
    1. Price DB,
    2. Rigazio A,
    3. Campbell JD, et al.
    Blood eosinophil count and prospective annual asthma disease burden: a UK cohort study. Lancet Respir Med 2015; 3: 849–858.
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. Lange P,
    2. Çolak Y,
    3. Ingebrigtsen TS, et al.
    Long-term prognosis of asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap in the Copenhagen City Heart study: a prospective population-based analysis. Lancet Respir Med 2016; 4: 454–462.
    OpenUrl
  17. ↵
    Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA), Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). Diagnosis of Diseases of Chronic Airflow Limitation: Asthma, COPD, and Asthma-COPD Overlap Syndrome (ACOS). www.goldcopd.org/asthma-copd-asthma-copd-overlap-syndrome Date last accessed: March 13, 2018.
  18. ↵
    1. Løkke A,
    2. Marott JL,
    3. Mortensen J, et al.
    New Danish reference values for spirometry. Clin Respir J 2013; 7: 153–167.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. www.goldcopd.org/gold-reports Date last accessed: March 13, 2018.
  20. ↵
    Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA). Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention. www.ginasthma.org/2018-gina-report-global-strategy-for-asthma-management-and-prevention/ Date last accessed: March 13, 2018.
  21. ↵
    1. Agusti A,
    2. Bel E,
    3. Thomas M, et al.
    Treatable traits: toward precision medicine of chronic airway diseases. Eur Respir J 2016; 47: 410–419.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    1. Alcázar-Navarrete B,
    2. Ruiz Rodríguez O,
    3. Conde Baena P, et al.
    Persistently elevated exhaled nitric oxide fraction is associated with increased risk of exacerbation in COPD. Eur Respir J 2018; 51: 1701457.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Bafadhel M,
    2. McKenna S,
    3. Terry S, et al.
    Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: identification of biologic clusters and their biomarkers. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2011; 184: 662–671.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Bjerregaard A,
    2. Laing IA,
    3. Backer V, et al.
    High fractional exhaled nitric oxide and sputum eosinophils are associated with an increased risk of future virus-induced exacerbations: a prospective cohort study. Clin Exp Allergy 2017; 47: 1007–1013.
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Coumou H,
    2. Westerhof GA,
    3. de Nijs SB, et al.
    Predictors of accelerated decline in lung function in adult-onset asthma. Eur Respir J 2018; 51: 1701785.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. ↵
    1. Schleich FN,
    2. Chevremont A,
    3. Paulus V, et al.
    Importance of concomitant local and systemic eosinophilia in uncontrolled asthma. Eur Respir J 2014; 44: 97–108.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. ↵
    1. Miller MR,
    2. Hankinson J,
    3. Brusasco V, et al.
    Standardisation of spirometry. Eur Respir J 2005; 26: 319–338.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
View this article with LENS
Vol 52 Issue 2 Table of Contents
European Respiratory Journal: 52 (2)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Combined value of exhaled nitric oxide and blood eosinophils in chronic airway disease: the Copenhagen General Population Study
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Combined value of exhaled nitric oxide and blood eosinophils in chronic airway disease: the Copenhagen General Population Study
Yunus Çolak, Shoaib Afzal, Børge G. Nordestgaard, Jacob L. Marott, Peter Lange
European Respiratory Journal Aug 2018, 52 (2) 1800616; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00616-2018

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Combined value of exhaled nitric oxide and blood eosinophils in chronic airway disease: the Copenhagen General Population Study
Yunus Çolak, Shoaib Afzal, Børge G. Nordestgaard, Jacob L. Marott, Peter Lange
European Respiratory Journal Aug 2018, 52 (2) 1800616; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00616-2018
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Supplementary material
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

Original articles

  • Control of S. aureus infection despite tertiary lymphoid structure disorganisation
  • Mitochondrial antiviral signalling protein in pulmonary fibrosis development
  • DNA methylation at birth is associated with lung function development
Show more Original articles

Asthma and COPD

  • Case-finding to identify subjects with undiagnosed asthma or COPD
  • Fatty airways: implications for obstructive disease
Show more Asthma and COPD

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Reviewers
  • CME
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Submit a manuscript
  • ERS author centre

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2021 by the European Respiratory Society