PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Joanne Milot

Publications and source records attributed to Joanne Milot.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Diisocyanate antigen-stimulated monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 synthesis has greater test efficiency than specific antibodies for identification of diisocyanate asthma.

We previously reported that diisocyanate-human serum albumin (DIISO-HSA) stimulated production of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) by peripheral blood mononuclear cells is significantly associated with a clinical diagnosis of diisocyanate asthma (DA). Others have reported that antibodies for DIISO-HSA are specific but insensitive markers of DA. This study was performed to evaluate test characteristics of the in vitro MCP-1 assay compared with DIISO-HSA-specific immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgE in identifying workers with DA. MCP-1 was quantitated in peripheral blood mononuclear cell supernatants 48 hours after incubation with DIISO-HSA antigens. Assay results were compared with outcomes of specific inhalation challenge (SIC) testing. Nineteen of 54 (35%) workers assayed for antibodies and MCP-1 stimulation had SIC-confirmed DA. Mean MCP-1 produced by SIC-positive workers was greater than SIC-negative workers (p < or = 0.001). Diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and test efficiency for specific IgG were 47%, 74%, and 65%, respectively, and for specific IgE were 21%, 89%, and 65%, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, and test efficiency of the MCP-1 test were 79%, 91%, and 87%, respectively. This study indicates that the MCP-1 stimulation assay has greater sensitivity and specificity than the specific antibody assays in correctly identifying DA.

Adult↗

How should we quantify asthma control? A proposal.

BACKGROUND: Current asthma guidelines suggest a series of criteria to assess if asthma is controlled. However, there is a need to develop a simple and practical method to quantify the degree of such control, both in clinical practice and research. STUDY OBJECTIVES: This report describes a new method to quantify asthma control based on a percentage score. It also aims at comparing the percentage scores obtained with patient's self-evaluation of asthma control and a current validated Mini Asthma Quality of Life (MAQOL) questionnaire. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: Forty-two subjects (25 female and 17 male patients) with asthma of different severity recruited from a tertiary center asthma clinic. METHODS: The asthma scoring method provided a percentage control for symptoms, baseline expiratory flows and, an optional parameter, for airway inflammation assessed from induced-sputum eosinophil count. These control parameters were compared to an overall assessment of asthma control by the patient (also on a 100% scale) and the score obtained from a validated MAQOL questionnaire. RESULTS: Mean +/- SEM scores for symptoms, expiratory flows, and airway eosinophilia (last 2 weeks) were 87.8 +/- 1.4%, 88.6 +/- 1.8%, and 66.2 +/- 3.9%, respectively. No significant correlation was found between these three parameters (p > 0.05). The mean global asthma control score and the score estimated by the patient were 80.9 +/- 1.5% and 91.7 +/- 1.5%, respectively (not significantly different). There was a significant correlation between asthma control score (percentage) and percentage symptom score (p < 0.001), while it almost achieved significance for FEV(1) (p = 0.05). Only symptom scores correlated with the MAQOL questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a simple easy-to-use asthma control scoring system based on a percentage of optimal control. The percentage symptom score but not the global control score of this new method correlated with patient's global assessment of asthma control. This could be a simple tool that is potentially useful both for the clinician and for research purposes, to quantify global or specific aspects of asthma control.

Asthma↗