Treating asthma with omega-3 fatty acids: where is the evidence? A systematic review

Reisman, Joseph; Schachter, HM; Dales, RE; Tran, Khai; Kourad, K; Barnes, David; Sampson, Margaret; Morrison, Andra; Gaboury, Isabelle; Blackman, James R.

doi:10.1186/1472-6882-6-26

Cited by 69 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of these, there were seven systematic reviews that met the AMSTAR score for high quality (≥32) (3,(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16), whilst one study was excluded for scoring below this mark (17). Four articles were literature reviews or critical appraisals (18)(19)(20)(21), and six were systematic reviews on specific nutrients given as artificial supplements only (22)(23)(24)(25) or on calorie restriction (26,27). There were two abstracts excluded, one with no further information (28) and a second abstract which was followed by a noneligible publication (29) ( Table 1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Horvath (28) Excluded -Abstract only with no further publication Kaur (22) Excluded -Vitamin C as artificial supplement only Klemens (23) Excluded -PUFA as artificial supplement only Klemens (29) Excluded -Abstract only (full SR above) Kremmyda (19) Excluded -Literature review Milan Stephen (24) Excluded -Vitamin C as artificial supplement only Moore (20) Excluded -Literature review Mulholland (27) Excluded -Calorie restriction only Nurmatov (3) 35 Included Pogson (14) 37 Included Reisman (25) Excluded -O-3 fatty acids as artificial supplements only Saadeh (21) Excluded -Review/appraisal article Yang (15) 34 Included Thien Francis (16) 37 Included -O-3 fatty acids as artificial supplements but it contains a section on fish intake *An agreed score of ≥32 achieved by two reviewers was considered acceptable for inclusion in this overview. Pogson (14) Asthma (BHR) The authors reported that from the three eligible studies, data were not comparable due to the different substances used for provocation and differences in the presentation of data MD, mean difference; OR, odds ratio.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Asthma and dietary intake: an overview of systematic reviews

García-Larsen

Giacco

Moreira

et al. 2016

Allergy

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Epidemiological research on the relationship between diet and asthma has increased in the last decade. Several components found in foods have been proposed to have a series of antioxidant, anti-allergic and anti-inflammatory properties, which can have a protective effect against asthma risk. Several literature reviews and critical appraisals have been published to summarize the existing evidence in this field. In the context of this EAACI Lifestyle and asthma Task Force, we summarize the evidence from existing systematic reviews on dietary intake and asthma, using the PRISMA guidelines. We therefore report the quality of eligible systematic reviews and summarize the results of those with an AMSTAR score ≥32. The GRADE approach is used to assess the overall quality of the existing evidence. This overview is centred on systematic reviews of nutritional components provided in the diet only, as a way to establish what type of advice can be given in clinical practice and to the general population on dietary habits and asthma.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asthma and dietary intake: an overview of systematic reviews

García-Larsen

Giacco

Moreira

et al. 2016

Allergy

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A more recent study suggested that it is at present impossible to determine whether or not omega 3 fatty acids are an efficient adjuvant or monotherapy for children or adults with asthma (13).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Omega 3 and 6 oils for primary prevention of allergic disease: systematic review and meta‐analysis

Anandan

Nurmatov

Sheikh

2009

Allergy

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There is conflicting evidence on the use of omega 3 and omega 6 supplementation for the prevention of allergic diseases. We conducted a systematic review evaluating the effectiveness of omega 3 and 6 oils for the primary prevention of sensitization and development of allergic disorders.Methods: We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, PsycInfo, AMED, ISI Web of Science and Google Scholar for double‐blind randomized controlled trials. Two authors independently assessed articles for inclusion. Meta‐analyses were undertaken using fixed effects modelling, or random effects modelling in the event of detecting significant heterogeneity.Results: Of the 3129 articles identified, 10 reports (representing six unique studies) satisfied the inclusion criteria. Four studies compared omega 3 supplements with placebo and two studies compared omega 6 supplements with placebo. There was no clear evidence of benefit in relation to reduced risk of allergic sensitization or a favourable immunological profile. Meta‐analyses failed to identify any consistent or clear benefits associated with use of omega 3 [atopic eczema: RR = 1.10 (95% CI 0.78–1.54); asthma: RR = 0.81 (95% CI 0.53–1.25); allergic rhinitis: RR = 0.80 (95% CI 0.34–1.89) or food allergy RR = 0.51 (95% CI 0.10–2.55)] or omega 6 oils [atopic eczema: RR = 0.80 (95% CI 0.56–1.16)] for the prevention of clinical disease.Conclusions: Contrary to the evidence from basic science and epidemiological studies, our systematic review and meta‐analysis suggests that supplementation with omega 3 and omega 6 oils is probably unlikely to play an important role as a strategy for the primary prevention of sensitization or allergic disease.

show abstract

“…1 Results have not been consistent when assessing high doses of dietary omega-3s on bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR), a key feature of asthma. Early studies administering omega-3s daily over 10 weeks demonstrated no attenuation of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) 2 while causing a small decrease of the late airway response to inhaled allergen.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%