Cited by 54Air Quality and Health ImpactsAsthma and respiratory diseasesIndoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure

Analysis of induced sputum after air and ozone exposures in healthy subjects

Fahy, J.V., Wong, H.H., Liu, J.T., Boushey, H.A.·1995·Environmental Research

Abstract

Exposure of healthy subjects to ozone is associated with increases in cellular and biochemical markers of inflammation in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. To determine if analysis of induced sputum might similarly reveal the pulmonary inflammatory effects of ozone exposure, we performed cellular and biochemical analysis of induced sputum collected 4 hr after air and ozone (0.4 ppm for 2 hr) exposures from 10 healthy subjects (age 30.0 +/- 5.0 years; 5 females) in a randomized crossover study in which exposures were separated by 2 weeks. We found that the total number of nonsquamous cells was significantly higher after ozone exposure than after air exposure (7.4 vs 3.9 x 10(5)/ml, P < 0.05) as was the percentage of the nonsquamous cells that were neutrophils (80.0 +/- 7.0% vs 51.0 +/- 20.0%, P < 0.05) and the levels of myeloperoxidase in the sputum fluid phase (1.6 +/- 0.6 vs 1.3 +/- 0.6 microg/ml, P < 0.05). In addition, IL-6 and IL-8 levels were higher after ozone than after air exposures, but not significantly so (44.5 +/- 32.4 pg/ml vs 26.8 +/- 30.7 pg/ml, P = 0.11; 1.5 +/- 0.5 ng/ml vs 1.1 +/- 0.6 ng/ml, P = 0.09). Mucin-like glycoprotein levels were also not significantly different between exposures (1.6 +/- 0.9 mg/ml vs 1.3 +/- 1.0 mg/ml, P = 0.26). We conclude that analysis of induced sputum is a useful noninvasive method for studying the pulmonary response to ozone exposure in healthy subjects.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/enrs.1995.1051

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Ozone exposure resulted in significant neutrophilic inflammation, reflected with increased levels of myeloperoxidase in the supernatant of induced sputum samples from healthy subjects.

    “Ozone exposure resulted in significant neutrophilic inflammation, reflected with increased levels of myeloperoxidase (MPO) in the supernatant of induced sputum samples from healthy subjects (39, 40).”

    From Ozone pollution: A Major health hazard worldwide (2019) · cites this paper as [39]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fahy, J. V., Wong, H. H., Liu, J. T., & Boushey, H. A.
Affiliations
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Venue
Environmental Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1995-08
Volume
70
Issue
2
Pages
77-83
ISSN
0013-9351 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2090582545
Cited by
54
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Environmental Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Air Quality and Health Impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Asthma and respiratory diseases
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Indoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
Keywords
ozone exposure, induced sputum, air pollution, lung inflammation, neutrophils, myeloperoxidase, interleukin-6, interleukin-8, mucin-like glycoprotein, healthy volunteers, non-invasive biomarkers
MeSH terms
Adult, Airway Resistance, Cell Count, Eosinophils, Epithelial Cells, Epithelium, Female, Humans, Lymphocytes, Macrophages, Male, Mucins, Peroxidase, Neutrophils, Ozone, Surveys and Questionnaires, Spirometry, Sputum, Interleukin-6, Single-Blind Method, Interleukin-8, Cross-Over Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review