TY - T1的血液嗜酸性粒细胞计数的基因ral population and airways disease: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis JF - European Respiratory Journal JO - Eur Respir J DO - 10.1183/13993003.04590-2020 SP - 2004590 AU - Benson, Victoria S. AU - Hartl, Sylvia AU - Barnes, Neil AU - Galwey, Nicholas AU - Van Dyke, Melissa K. AU - Kwon, Namhee Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - //www.qdcxjkg.com/content/early/2021/05/28/13993003.04590-2020.abstract N2 - Background The clinical context for using blood eosinophil (EOS) counts as treatment-response biomarkers in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) requires better understanding of EOS distributions and ranges. We describe EOS distributions and ranges published in asthma, COPD, control (non-asthma/COPD) and general populations.Methods We conducted a comprehensive literature review and meta-analysis of observational studies (Jan 2008 to Nov 2018) that included EOS counts in asthma, severe asthma, COPD, control and general populations. Excluded studies had total sample sizes <200, EOS as inclusion criterion, hospitalised population only, exclusively paediatric participants.Results Overall, 91 eligible studies were identified, most had total-population-level data available: asthma (n=39 studies), severe asthma (n=12 studies), COPD (n=23 studies), control (n=7 studies), general populations (n=14 studies); some articles reported data for multiple populations. Reported EOS distributions were right-skewed (n=7 studies). Reported median EOS counts ranged from: asthma, 157–280 cells·µL−1 (n=22 studies); severe asthma, 200–400 cells·µL−1 (n=8 studies); COPD, 150–183 cells·µL−1 (n=6 studies); controls, 100–160 cells·µL−1 (n=3 studies); general populations, 100–200 cells·µL−1 (n=6 studies). The meta-analysis showed observed variability was mostly between studies rather than within studies. Factors reportedly associated with higher blood EOS counts included: current smoking, positive skin prick test, elevated total IgE, comorbid allergic rhinitis, age ≤18 years, male sex, spirometric asthma/COPD diagnosis, metabolic syndrome and adiposity.Conclusion EOS distribution and range varied by study population, and were affected by clinical factors including age, smoking history and comorbidities which, regardless of severity, should be considered during treatment decision making.FootnotesThis manuscript has recently been accepted for publication in the European Respiratory Journal. It is published here in its accepted form prior to copyediting and typesetting by our production team. After these production processes are complete and the authors have approved the resulting proofs, the article will move to the latest issue of the ERJ online. Please open or download the PDF to view this article.Conflict of interest: Dr. Benson reports employment by GlaxoSmithKline, and stock/share ownership in GlaxoSmithKline.Conflict of interest: Dr. Hartl reports grants from GlaxoSmithKline during the conduct of the study not related to the submitted work for the Ludwig Boltzmann Research Institute of Lung Health; grants from Astra Zeneca, grants from Böhringer Ingelheim, grants from Menarini, grants from Chiesi Farma, grants from Pfizer, grants from Merck Sharp &amp; Dohme Corp., grants from Air Liquide, grants from Vivisol for the Ludwig Boltzmann Research Institute of Lung Health outside the submitted work.Conflict of interest: Dr. Barnes reports employment by GlaxoSmithKline, and stock/share ownership in GlaxoSmithKline.Conflict of interest: Dr. Galwey reports employment by GlaxoSmithKline and GlaxoSmithKline stock/share ownership, during the conduct of the study; .Conflict of interest: Dr. Van Dyke reports employment by GlaxoSmithKline, and stock/share ownership in GlaxoSmithKline.Conflict of interest: Dr. Kwon reports employment by GlaxoSmithKline, and stock/share ownership in GlaxoSmithKline. ER -