As compared to previous NHANES reports, our results indicate that the prevalence of asthma among U.S. adults continues to increase. Further, our findings of marked differences among subgroups of the population suggest asthma-related disparities for impoverished persons and greater prevalence of asthma among obese and extremely obese US adults.

Asbestos exposure is a known risk factor for lung cancer. Although recent genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have identified some novel loci for lung cancer risk, few addressed genome-wide gene-environment interactions. To determine gene-asbestos interactions in lung cancer risk, we conducted genome-wide gene-environment interaction analyses at levels of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), genes and pathways, using our published Texas lung cancer GWAS dataset. This dataset included 317 498 SNPs from 1154 lung cancer cases and 1137 cancer-free controls. The initial SNP-level P-values for interactions between genetic variants and self-reported asbestos exposure were estimated by unconditional logistic regression models with adjustment for age, sex, smoking status and pack-years. The P-value for the most significant SNP rs13383928 was 2.17×10(-6), which did not reach the genome-wide statistical significance. Using a versatile gene-based test approach, we found that the top significant gene was C7orf54, located on 7q32.1 (P = 8.90×10(-5)). Interestingly, most of the other significant genes were located on 11q13. When we used an improved gene-set-enrichment analysis approach, we found that the Fas signaling pathway and the antigen processing and presentation pathway were most significant (nominal P < 0.001; false discovery rate < 0.05) among 250 pathways containing 17 572 genes. We believe that our analysis is a pilot study that first describes the gene-asbestos interaction in lung cancer risk at levels of SNPs, genes and pathways. Our findings suggest that immune function regulation-related pathways may be mechanistically involved in asbestos-associated lung cancer risk.

No abstract

Background. The prevalence of asthma has increased over the last three decades with females exhibiting a higher prevalence of asthma than males. The objective of this study was to obtain gender-specific estimates of the prevalence of current and ever asthma and describe the relationships between risk factors and asthma by gender in US men and women ages 20 to 85. Methods. Data for this study came from two cycles (2001-2002 and 2003-2004) of National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and included 9,243 eligible adults: 4,589 females and 4,654 males. Multiple logistic regression was used to investigate gender-specific associations between race/ethnicity, body mass index (BMI), sociodemographic characteristics, and smoking habits for current asthma and ever asthma. Results. The prevalence of current asthma was 8.8% for women and 5.8% for men, while the prevalence of ever having been diagnosed with asthma was higher (13.7% and 10.4% for women and men, respectively). Current asthma was less prevalent in Mexican American women (1.9%) and men (0.9%) born in Mexico as compared to Mexican Americans born in the U.S. (8.7% and 5.2% for women and men, respectively) or for any other ethnic group. Approximately 20% of extremely obese women and men had ever been diagnosed with asthma; among this group, 15% reported they had current asthma. Results from multiple logistic regression models indicate that extreme obesity and living in poverty were strongly associated with current and ever asthma for both women and men, as was former smoking and ever asthma for men. Conclusion. As compared to previous NHANES reports, our results indicate that the prevalence of asthma among U.S. adults continues to increase. Further, our findings of marked differences among subgroups of the population suggest asthma-related disparities for impoverished persons and greater prevalence of asthma among obese and extremely obese US adults.

Scientific publication has long been dominated by the English language and is rapidly moving towards near complete hegemony of English, while the majority of the world’s publishing scientists are not native English speakers. This imbalance has important implications for training in and enforcement of publication ethics, particularly with respect to plagiarism. A lack of understanding of what constitutes plagiarism and the use of a linguistic support strategy known as patchwriting can lead to inadvertent misuse of source material by non-native speakers writing in English as well as to unfounded accusations of intentional scientific misconduct on the part of these authors. A rational and well-informed dialogue about this issue is needed among both native English speaking and non-native English speaking writers, editors, educators, and administrators. Recommendations for educating and training are provided.