Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 May 27;16(5):e0252215. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252215

Modelling maternal and perinatal risk factors to predict poorly controlled childhood asthma

Samuel Schäfer 1,2, Kevin Wang 3, Felicia Sundling 1, Jean Yang 3,4, Anthony Liu 1,5, Ralph Nanan 1,5,*
Editor: Kazumichi Fujioka6
PMCID: PMC8158992  PMID: 34043705

Abstract

Asthma is the most common non-communicable pulmonary condition, affecting prepubertal boys more often than girls. This study explored how maternal and perinatal risk factors are linked to poorly controlled childhood asthma in a sex dependent manner. This single centre study was performed at a metropolitan teaching hospital in Western Sydney, Australia, using electronical obstetric records from 2000 to 2017 and electronical pediatric records from 2007 to 2018. The data of 1694 children with complete entries were retrospectively analysed. Risk factors for multiple hospital admission for asthma were selected by backward-eliminated Poisson regression modelling. Selection stability of these parameters was independently confirmed using approximated exhaustive search. Sex-specific regression models indicated that most notably parity (RR[95%CI] for parity = 3; 1.85[1.22–2.81]), birth length z-score (1.45[1.23–1.70]) and birth weight z-score (0.77[0.65–0.90]) contributed to multiple asthma admissions in girls, while boys were affected most prominently by maternal BMI (e.g. BMI 35–39.9; 1.92[1.38–2.67]) and threatened preterm labor (1.68[1.10–2.58]). Allergic status was a risk factors for both boys and girls (1.47[1.18–1.83] and 1.46[1.13–1.89]). Applying ROC analysis, the predictive modelling of risk factors for hospital admissions showed an incremental increase with an AUC of 0.84 and 0.75 for girls and boys respectively for >3 hospital admissions. Multiple hospital admissions for asthma are associated with maternal and perinatal risk factors in a sex and birth order dependent manner. Hence, prospective risk stratification studies aiming to improve childhood asthma control are warranted to test the clinical utility of these parameters. Furthermore, the influence of the early in utero environment on male-female differences in other communicable and non-communicable respiratory conditions should be considered.

Introduction

Asthma is a chronic disease affecting approximately 339 million people globally [1], making it one of the most common non-communicable diseases in the world. In terms of disability and premature death, the pediatric population carries the greatest burden of asthmatic disease [1]. While deaths due to asthma have decreased steadily, prevalence has increased by 17% between 2006 and 2016 [1]. Genetic changes are too slow to account for this abrupt rise in prevalence and perinatal factors have thus gained more interest [2]. This concept is a focus of the developmental origins of health and disease (DOHaD) hypothesis [3].

The DOHaD hypothesis proposes that epigenetic factors induced by the in utero environment might be part of evolutionary adaptive strategies to fit predicted postnatal environments [3]. If there is a mismatch between the in utero predicted and postnatally encountered environment the infant may not be able to adapt to these changes, which has been associated with increased risk for chronic disease later in life [4,5]. It was, for example, recently shown that perinatal stress could have a life-long impact on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, resulting in decreased CD8+ T cell function and hence long-term immunological consequences [6].

Asthma also appears to be initiated in utero [7] with increasing evidence supporting an association of development of asthma in childhood and a wide range of perinatal factors [2,7,8]. While one set of studies indicate that asthma diagnosis might be associated with parity, low birth weight, caesarian section, maternal age at delivery, maternal asthma, socioeconomic status and maternal smoking, another set of independent studies report a strong association with male sex [7,911]. In this regard it has for example been shown that prepubertal boys have increased allergic inflammation and serum IgE levels as well as narrower airways relative to lung volume compared to girls which could make them more likely to exhibit symptoms [12]. How these sexual differences are mediated to begin with can though only be speculated on in these association studies.

Animal models indicate that environmental insults during pregnancy program male and female fetuses differently [13,14]. Human studies suggest that epigenetic differences between males are more pronounced than between females which could suggest that males are more sensitive to environmental factors than females [15]. In order to harness the concept of DOHaD for clinical purposes, we here aim to examine sex-dependent differences in the impact of maternal and perinatal factors on poorly controlled childhood asthma. Insights might be used to develop clinical strategies capable of stratifing patients by risk group, and hence allowing for early diagnosis and adequate preventative resource allocation that can prevent hospital admission and lessen the burden of disease.

Materials and methods

Study design

In this retrospective cohort study, the association of maternal and perinatal factors, and childhood asthma was examined, analysing electronic paediatric and obstetric hospital records. This single centre study was performed at a metropolitan teaching hospital in Western Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Data was retrieved from the electronic databases of the maternity and paediatric departments.

Study population

The obstetric database (eMaternity) is a state-wide mandatory obstetric database and reported on 67268 babies delivered between January 2000 and December 2017. Patients from this data base were included in the study if they had a unique medical record number (MRN) and if their sex was known. Entries from this register were excluded if a stillbirth was reported or if maternal parity exceeded 15. Hence 50352 patients were included. The pediatric electronic database between from January 2007 and February 2018 and reported on 7783 patients that had been admitted to the pediatric ward 10261 times collectively. Patients were included if their allergy status, sex and weight was recorded at admission to the pediatric ward (n = 7335). Collectively 9768 admissions were reported for the 7335 patients, multiple admissions of the same patient were detected by this patients MRN and data from all entries was aggregated. Records from the paediatric database could be linked to eMaternity based on each patient’s unique MRN. This occurred for 1694 of the included patients.

Data measurements

Information included in eMaternity concerned maternal and perinatal outcomes routinely documented in the context of pregnancy, such as infant parameters, pregnancy associated variables and maternal health information. A full list of the recorded variables as well as their definitions can be found in S1 Table. From the pediatric data base information on the patient’s sex, weight, length, head circumference, allergies, admission age, diagnoses, allergy status, medical history and diagnosis was extracted. Childhood allergy was defined as parental reported allergy for any agent.

The pediatric data base was used to ascertain admission and asthma diagnosis. Asthma admissions were defined as physician diagnosed asthma requiring admission to a paediatric ward. Multiple admissions for asthma were used as a surrogate for poorly controlled asthma. This is based on a uniform approach for asthma management applying the NSW Asthma guidelines [16]. In this context, admission criteria are inability to stretch reliever therapy to third hourly inhaled salbutamol following acute asthma management [16]. As it can be difficult to diagnose asthma before the age of two years [17], we excluded all patients below this age except for 98 patients aged 18–23 months who had a solid diagnosis based on strong family history of asthma, multiple hospital admissions for asthma or being on an asthma medication.

Statistical analysis

Data management

Observations for arterial cord blood pH, lactate and base excess beyond four standard deviations were considered outliers and removed, thereafter mean and SD were recalculated. BMI was calculated as a function of the mother’s pre-pregnancy weight and height. BMI was then categorized in compliance with current BMI categories by the World Health Organization.

Perinatal growth curves were created based on the anthropometric measurements of all 50352 obstetric patients that passed inclusion criteria (S1 File). Growth curves were used to convert birth weight, length and head circumference (HC) into gestational age and sex adjusted z-scores which made anthropometric measurements comparable between children of different gestational age and sex.

Population characteristics

Standard descriptive statistics were applied during the creation of the population characteristics. Continuous variables were analysed using t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test. Categorical variables were analysed using chi-square test. Significance level was defined as P < 0.05.

Variable selection

Initially 23 variables (shown in Table 1) entered a Poisson regression model with asthma admittance frequency as response variable, stepwise backward elimination was applied using the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) as the stopping criterion. The predictors remaining significant were used to fit separate sex-specific Poisson models. In order to further investigate the variable selection stability of our backward eliminated Poisson regression model, we used the methods described in [18].

Table 1. Comparison of included and excluded population characteristics.
Obstetric characteristics
Included (n = 1694) Excluded (n = 48658) Included (n = 1694) Excluded (n = 48658)
Variables % % P Variables % % P
Parity <10−8 Smoking 0.046
 0 44.27% 37.77%  No 80.87% 76.88%
 1 30.28% 30.85%  Yes 19.13% 20.65%
 2 15.11% 16.85%  Not specified 0.00% 2.47%
 3 6.49% 7.70% Alcohol 0.531
 ≥3 3.84 6.83  No 97.70% 95.56%
Conception mode 0.726  Yes 0.30% 0.42%
 Spontaneous 96.16% 93.47%  Not specified 2.00% 4.03%
 Assisted 3.84% 3.93% Illegal drugs 0.273
 Not specified 0.00% 2.59%  No 98.11% 95.14%
TPL 0.072  Yes 1.89% 2.37%
 No 96.22% 94.70%  Not specified 0.00% 2.59%
 Yes 3.78% 4.73% Infant sex <10−3
 Not specified 0.00% 0.57%  Female 43.80% 48.51%
Diabetes 0.288  Male 56.20% 51.49%
 No 92.74% 89.91% Mode of birth 0.005
 Gestational 6.26% 7.06%  Vaginal 62.63% 65.91%
 Pre-existing 1.00% 0.86%  CS 37.37% 34.09
 Not specified 0.00% 2.18% Feeding discharge 0.515
Season of birth 0.357  Infant formula 23.44% 22.48%
 Spring 23.20% 25.07%  Breast milk 76.56% 76.40%
 Summer 24.85% 24.08%  Not specified 0.00% 1.12%
 Autumn 25.44% 25.25% Maternal age 0.384
 Winter 26.51% 25.60%  < 20 5.61% 6.07%
BMI 0.629  20 to 35 80.28% 78.90%
 Underweight 11.39% 10.42%  > 35 14.11% 15.03%
 Normal 40.38% 40.16%
 Overweight 24.77% 22.98% Mean±SD Mean±SD P
 Obese class I 13.58 13.29% Birth weight (z) 0.036±0.95 -0.001±1.00 0.111
 Obese class II 7.03% 6.34% Birth length (z) 0.048±0.97 -0.002±1.00 0.038
 Obese class III 4.13% 4.73% Birth HC (z) 0.070±0.99 -0.001±1.00 0.003
 Not specified 0.00% 2.08% Gestational age 39.32±1.67 38.92±2.50 <10−19
APH after 20weeks 0.005 ACB pH 7.28±0.07 7.27±0.08 <10−3
 No 97.46% 96.10% ACB BE -1.08±3.65 -1.74±3.85 <10−12
 Yes 2.54% 3.91% ACB lactate 4.02±1.69 4.03±1.96 0.907
Pediatric characteristics
Included (n = 1694) Excluded (n = 5641) Included (n = 1694) Excluded (n = 5641)
Variables % % P Variables Median [IQR] Median [IQR] P
Allergies 0.035 n Asthma admissions 0 [0–0] 0 [0–0] <10−5 *
 No 74.62% 77.13% Admission age (y) 3.66 [2.64–5.35] 6.18 [3.54–10.67] <10−147
 Yes 25.38% 22.87%
 Not specified (n) 0 519

Abbreviations: TPL, threatened premature labor; BMI, body mass index; APH, antepartum premature hemorrhage; CS, caesarian section; HC, head circumference; ACB, arterial cord blood; BE, base excess; *, less asthma admissions in excluded group (mean included = 0.37, mean excluded = 0.26).

Ethics

This study complies with the Helsinki Declaration and relevant Australian guidelines and was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Nepean Blue Mountain Local Health District (Ethics number: 10/16). The accessed data were not anonymized. As this was a retrospective study the need for patient consent was not required according to the ethics committee.

Results

Population characteristics

Data was derived from an obstetric and a pediatric database. After inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to the records of respective databases the obstetric data base documented the birth related parameters of 50352 children. The pediatric data documented 9768 admissions of 7335 children to the pediatric ward (Fig 1). The information of multiple admissions of a unique patient to the pediatric ward was aggregated and information on the number of asthma related admissions was extracted. Entries from both databases were matched using the patient specific medical record number, which resulted in the inclusion of 1694 patients (407 with asthma admissions).

Fig 1. Flow chart describing inclusion and exclusion criteria as well as database merging.

Fig 1

Main results from this article are derived from 1694 patients for which both paediatric hospital records and obstetric records were available. Reference z-scores for perinatal growth curves were derived from a subset of the obstetric database, using the inclusion criteria indicated. Abbreviation: MRN, medical record number.

To ensure the representability of our selection we compared the included with excluded children of the same database (Table 1). Differences between groups, such as included children having a lower parity, being more frequently male, being born at a lower gestational age and more allergies, reflect general risk factors for increased prevalence of paediatric disease [19]. Interestingly we also notice that excluded children are older than included children, which is likely due to exclusion of children without a paediatric record (dated back to 2007), which excluded many children in eMaternity born prior to 2007. When stratifying the included children by asthma admission frequency, age distributions of included children were similar although children with more asthma admissions naturally tended to be slightly older (S1 Fig).

To avoid multicollinearity between gestational age and anthropometric parameters in our regression models we created perinatal growth curves (S1 File) based on which z-scores for the birth weight, length and HC of all 1694 children could be calculated (S2S7 Figs).

Risk factors for multiple hospitalizations due to asthma

Following backward elimination, eight of 23 variables remained in a Poisson regression model (AIC = 2936.429; p < 10−9; Table 2) for asthma admittance frequency. To test for sex-specific effects, these eight variables were then entered in Poisson regression models for males and females respectively without applying any backward elimination (Table 2). Looking at both sexes, multiple hospital admission for asthma was associated with allergies, parity, maternal pre-pregnancy BMI, threatened premature labour (TPL), birth weight, birth length, feeding method (breastfed vs. formula fed; P = 0.08), as well as the child’s sex (P = 0.059). Higher birth weight was inversely associated with hospital admissions for asthma. While categories such as maternal BMI obese class III as well as parity>3 were included in the model they did not reach statistical significance, likely due to the few individuals included in these categories (Table 1). In females, birth weight, birth length as well as being born second (parity = 1), compared to firstborn, was associated with multiple asthma admission. This is an interesting finding as those risk factors were not seen in males. The two risk factors affecting multiple asthma admissions most drastically in the combined model, namely TPL and obesity class II, were not significant in the female model.

Table 2. Poisson regression models for multiple hospital admission for asthma.

Male & Female Female Male
Variables RR (95% CI) P RR (95% CI) P RR (95% CI) P
Allergic 1.46 (1.24–1.73) <10−5 1.46 (1.13–1.89) <10−2 1.47 (1.18–1.83) <10−3
z-score birth length 1.22 (1.10–1.35) <10−3 1.45 (1.23–1.70) <10−5 1.08 (0.95–1.23) 0.26
BMI:underweight 0.79 (0.59–1.06) 0.11 1.06 (0.69–1.64) 0.78 0.62 (0.42–0.92) 0.02
BMI:pre-obese 1.03 (0.84–1.27) 0.75 1.21 (0.88–1.67) 0.24 0.93 (0.71–1.23) 0.61
BMI:obese class I 1.12 (0.88–1.42) 0.38 1.34 (0.91–1.96) 0.14 0.98 (0.71–1.33) 0.88
BMI:obese class II 1.65 (1.26–2.16) <10−3 1.29 (0.81–2.06) 0.29 1.92 (1.38–2.67) <10−3
BMI:obese class III 1.03 (0.67–1.57) 0.90 0.86 (0.41–1.78) 0.68 1.13 (0.67–1.90) 0.65
TPL: yes 1.65 (1.18–2.30) <10−2 1.47 (0.84–2.56) 0.18 1.68 (1.10–2.58) 0.02
Parity: 1 0.89 (0.74–1.08) 0.24 0.71 (0.52–0.97) 0.03 1.04 (0.82–1.33) 0.73
Parity: 2 0.89 (0.70–1.14) 0.36 0.76 (0.51–1.12) 0.16 1.00 (0.72–1.37) 0.99
Parity: 3 1.49 (1.13–1.97) <10−2 1.85 (1.22–2.81) <10−2 1.31 (0.90–1.92) <10–3
Parity: > 3 1.06 (0.72–1.57) 0.77 0.98 (0.51–1.88) 0.96 1.10 (0.67–1.80) 0.70
z-score birth weight 0.87 (0.78–0.97) 0.02 0.77 (0.65–0.90) <10−2 0.97 (0.84–1.12) 0.67
Sex: Male 1.17 (0.99–1.37) 0.06 - - - -
Breastfed 1.19 (0.98–1.45) 0.08 1.11 (0.82–1.50) 0.51 1.28 (0.99–1.66) 0.06
AIC = 2936.429, P < 10−9 AIC = 1225.457, P < 10−5 AIC = 1722.212, P < 10−5

Abbreviations: TPL, threatened preterm labor, AIC, Akaike information criterion, RR, risk ratio.

Conversely, TPL and maternal pre-pregnancy obesity class II, were the strongest risk factors for multiple asthma admissions in males, while birth weight and length did not seem to affect the hospitalization risk. Additionally, maternal pre-pregnancy underweight seemed to have a rather strong inverse association with asthma related hospitalization in males and, though only borderline significant (P = 0.06), it seemed that feeding method affected the risk of hospital in males, while not at all having an effect on females.

This sex-based stratification of our population revealed that few of the eight risk factors, that were found to influence multiple hospital admissions due to asthma generally, effected both males and females. Indeed, only two of these eight risk factors, namely parity and allergy status, were shared between males and females. However, parity seemed to effect females to a greater extent than males (Table 2).

The potential of the eight risk factors for stratifying asthmatic patients into low-risk and high-risk groups is further demonstrated in the ROC-curves (Fig 2). In particular, we find that the above regression model can differentiate quite accurately between patients being hospitalized zero to three times and patients being hospitalized four or more times. Furthermore, the statistical stability of risk factors chosen by the backward eliminated Poisson regression model was demonstrated by application of APproximated Exhaustive Search (APES; S8S10 Figs). APES indicated that risk factors included in the above Poisson regression models, indeed were frequently chosen in repeated bootstrap subsampling which is indicative of the generalizability of our findings. All eight risk factors selected in the general Poisson regression model were also selected in the general APES model, furthermore, APES indicated that gestational and pre-existing diabetes, season of birth, gestational age, caesarean section and arterial cord blood pH might have additional predictive value. Likewise, the general APES model, sex-specific APES models were in reasonably good agreement with the sex-specific Poisson models.

Fig 2. ROC-curves showing prediction accuracy of the Poisson regression model for classifying samples with more than n visits.

Fig 2

Each column depictures the accuracy of the Poisson model classifying patients into having more than n hospital admissions or less than/equal with n hospital admissions. As shown, prediction accuracy is highest when n ≥ 3 and tends to be slightly higher in females than in males. AUC is annotated within each graph.

Discussion

Similar to other lung-diseases [20,21] and previous findings in asthma [10], we find that hospital admission due to asthma is sex-biased. This raised the question if asthma develops differently in males and females due to differences in perinatal factors. This retrospective study therefore combined paediatric and obstetric data to investigate sex-specific patterns in the effect of perinatal factors on multiple asthma admissions in children.

A Poisson regression including both sexes found a number of perinatal factors to influence risk for multiple asthma admissions. In accordance with previous research [22,23], we found that allergic status was associated with multiple asthma admissions. The effect of allergic status seems uniform among sexes. Also, in agreement with previous studies [7,911,19], male sex (P = 0.06) was found to possibly influence risk for multiple hospital admissions, to investigate the relationship between sex and asthma further we conducted additional Poisson regressions were implemented for males and females respectively. Most significant in females, high parity, high birth length and low birth weight contributed to multiple asthma admissions in childhood, while being second born (parity = 1) decreased the risk. Conversely, in males a high maternal BMI and TPL were the most significant risk factors for increased multiple asthma admissions. This suggests that risk factors in the multiple asthma admissions have a sex-specific pattern.

Male risk factors

In this study we find that children born to obese mothers (BMI>35kg/m2) are at greater risk for multiple asthma admissions. This coincides well with previous findings linking increasing maternal weight to asthma in the offspring [2426]. Other studies suggest that this association holds true even when accounting for gestational weight gain [24,26] and the child’s own weight [25]. To our knowledge, our study is first to show that maternal obesity is associated with multiple asthma admissions in male, but not female, offspring. That the obesity class III (BMI>40kg/m2) did not reach statistical significance is probably due to insufficient sample size. It is likely that the risk for multiple hospital admissions for asthma continues to increase with increasing BMI.

Previous studies have found that obese women’s placentas are more commonly dysfunctional, showing decreased oxygen and nutrient delivery [27]; this obesogenic intrauterine environment could alter foetal lung development through oxidative stress [27] and dysregulation of the maternal hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal-axis [28]. Giussani et al. showed in sheep, that male foetuses had a twofold greater increase in plasma cortisol in response to hypoxia compared to female foetuses [29]. Obesity is also a state of chronic low-grade inflammation where adipose tissue expresses increased levels of leptin and decreased levels of adiponectin [30], which have been shown to effect foetal lung development and airway reactivity [30,31]. Our finding that only males were subject to risk increase through maternal BMI could therefore potentially be explained by males’ apparent susceptibility to inflammatory and hypoxic stress in utero.

We also found an association between TPL and asthma admissions in male offspring. As gestational age was excluded from the general model this is unlikely reflecting the increased risk of premature birth for male foetuses [32]. Instead, it is likely to reflect that medications used for treatment of TPL can alter the intrauterine environment and thereby affect foetal lung development [33]. It might also be that increase of asthma severity could be connected to the risk factors underlying TPL that are not included in the model, such as immunological factors [34] and intrauterine infection [34].

Female risk factors

We found that a parity = 3 was associated with an increased risk for multiple hospital admissions for asthma in both males and females, though having the strongest effect on females. Furthermore, it seemed that female second-borns (parity = 1) had a lower risk for asthma related hospitalization, compared to a firstborns (parity = 0). Even previous studies have found birth order to influence asthma severity, though results are ambiguous. Some studies report that having many older siblings increases the severity of asthma [35], while others claim the opposite [36]. In one recent study, Kikkawa et al. found that the risk for asthma increases with birth order in early childhood, but after 10 years of age the risk for asthma decreases with birth order [37].

In our Poisson regression, the risk for severe asthma was affected by birth weight (adjusted for gestational age). This agrees well with previous reports [2,7,8]. Interestingly, we find that risk for hospital admission for asthma only was increased in small for gestational age females and not males. Similarly, birth length (adjusted for gestational age) seemed to only affect the risk for severe asthma in females. While the exact mechanism behind this sex-biased association of foetal growth and the number of hospital admissions for asthma warrants further research, it might be speculated that sex-dependent differences in the foetal-maternal intrauterine communication could be involved. Further, it cannot be ruled out that this outcome is biased by uncontrolled maternal asthma, which has been reported to be associated with reduced female foetal growth specifically [38].

Strengths and limitations

A strength of this study is the validation of the backward eliminated variable selection in the Poisson regression by the new statistical approach APES [18]. The retrospective study design allowed us to account for many variables, did however not allow us to account for family history of asthma or socioeconomic status, which are known risk factors for asthma [2,7,9]. It is also worth mentioning that this is a monocentric study and bigger longitudinal studies are needed to investigate the possibility of sex-specific risk factors in the severity of childhood asthma. The interpretation of the here presented results is further complicated as multiple hospital admission for asthma could have intrinsic causes, as assumed here, but also extrinsic causes in the form of non-compliance.

Conclusion

As shown in this study, environmental influences during pregnancy are likely to result in different foetal programming in males and females. Maternal obesity for example is associated with increasing number of hospital admissions for asthma in male, but not female, offspring. These sex-specific patterns in asthma severity warrant further mechanistical and epidemiological investigation and could have profound implications in aiming prevention efforts as well as in treatment strategies. In a broader context, evidence for the importance of the perinatal environment for later-life health is increasing and it will be imperative for future research to consider whether inherent sex-differences could originate in utero. Especially future research should consider sex when assessing risk factors, symptoms, and treatment outcomes for asthma.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Included children stratified by admission age and asthma admission frequency.

(PDF)

S2 Fig. Growth curves for birth weight by gestational age, starting at 22 weeks gestation.

Children below 32 weeks gestation were excluded from our study population, but as growth references for small gestational ages are scarce growth curves for future reference were created starting at 22 weeks gestation. One dot represents one child.

(PDF)

S3 Fig. Growth curves for birth length by gestational age, starting at 22 weeks gestation.

Children below 32 weeks gestation were excluded from our study population, but as growth references for small gestational ages are scarce growth curves for future reference were created starting at 22 weeks gestation. One dot represents one child.

(PDF)

S4 Fig. Growth curves for birth head circumference by gestational age, starting at 22 weeks gestation.

Children below 32 weeks gestation were excluded from our study population, but as growth references for small gestational ages are scarce growth curves for future reference were created starting at 22 weeks gestation. One dot represents one child.

(PDF)

S5 Fig. Growth curves for birth weight from gestational age 32 upward.

(PDF)

S6 Fig. Growth curves for birth length from gestational age 32 upward.

(PDF)

S7 Fig. Growth curves for birth head circumference from gestational age 32 upward.

(PDF)

S8 Fig. Variable selection for prediction of number of asthma related hospitalization in the general population, using APES.

Included in the plot is the AIC and BIC threshold, which both present penalized-likelihood criteria which can be used to choose the best predictor subset. AIC, Akaike information criterion; BIC, Bayesian information criterion.

(PDF)

S9 Fig. Variable selection for prediction of number of asthma related hospitalization in the female population, using APES.

Included in the plot is the AIC and BIC threshold, which both present penalized-likelihood criteria which can be used to choose the best predictor subset. AIC, Akaike information criterion; BIC, Bayesian information criterion.

(PDF)

S10 Fig. Variable selection for prediction of number of asthma related hospitalization in the male population, using APES.

Included in the plot is the AIC and BIC threshold, which both present penalized-likelihood criteria which can be used to choose the best predictor subset. AIC, Akaike information criterion; BIC, Bayesian information criterion.

(PDF)

S1 Data. Minimal, anonymized data for included patients.

(PDF)

S1 File. Supplementary information and methods.

This file includes supplementary method descriptions, supplementary figure descriptions as well as supplementary tables.

(DOCX)

Data Availability

The non-anonymized data set cannot be shared publicly in order to protect patient integrity. Requests to access the non-anonymized dataset can be made to the Nepean Mountains Local Health District (Human Research Ethics Office, Nepean Hospital, PO Box 63, Penrith NSW 2751, Australia; Phone: +6124734 3441; Fax: +6124734 1967; Email: NBMLHD-Ethics@health.nsw.gov.au). A minimal, anonymized version of the data of included patients can be found in the Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Collaborators GBDCRD. Global, regional, and national deaths, prevalence, disability-adjusted life years, and years lived with disability for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet Respir Med. 2017;5(9):691–706. Epub 2017/08/22. 10.1016/S2213-2600(17)30293-X [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Metsälä J, Kilkkinen A, Kaila M, Tapanainen H, Klaukka T, Gissler M, et al. Perinatal Factors and the Risk of Asthma in Childhood—A Population-based Register Study in Finland. American Journal of Epidemiology. 2008;168(2):170–8. 10.1093/aje/kwn105 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Gluckman PD, Hanson MA. Living with the past: evolution, development, and patterns of disease. Science. 2004;305(5691):1733–6. 10.1126/science.1095292 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Gluckman PD, Hanson MA, Beedle AS. Early life events and their consequences for later disease: A life history and evolutionary perspective. American Journal of Human Biology. 2007;19(1):1–19. 10.1002/ajhb.20590 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Barker DJP, Godfrey KM, Gluckman PD, Harding JE, Owens JA, Robinson JS. Fetal nutrition and cardiovascular disease in adult life. The Lancet. 1993;341(8850):938–41. 10.1016/0140-6736(93)91224-A [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Hong JY, Lim J, Carvalho F, Cho JY, Vaidyanathan B, Yu S, et al. Long-Term Programming of CD8 T Cell Immunity by Perinatal Exposure to Glucocorticoids. Cell. 2020;180(5):847-61.e15. Epub 2020/03/07. 10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.018 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Duijts L. Fetal and infant origins of asthma. European journal of epidemiology. 2012;27(1):5–14. Epub 2012/02/22. 10.1007/s10654-012-9657-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Annesi-Maesano I, Moreau D, Strachan D. In utero and perinatal complications preceding asthma. Allergy. 2001;56(6):491–7. 10.1034/j.1398-9995.2001.056006491.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Davidson R, Roberts SE, Wotton CJ, Goldacre MJ. Influence of maternal and perinatal factors on subsequent hospitalisation for asthma in children: evidence from the Oxford record linkage study. BMC Pulmonary Medicine. 2010;10(1):14. 10.1186/1471-2466-10-14 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Postma DS. Gender differences in asthma development and progression. Gend Med. 2007;4 Suppl B:S133–46. Epub 2007/12/25. 10.1016/s1550-8579(07)80054-4 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Melgert BN, Ray A, Hylkema MN, Timens W, Postma DS. Are there reasons why adult asthma is more common in females? Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2007;7(2):143–50. Epub 2007/04/18. 10.1007/s11882-007-0012-4 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Fuseini H, Newcomb DC. Mechanisms Driving Gender Differences in Asthma. Current allergy and asthma reports. 2017;17(3):19. Epub 2017/03/24. 10.1007/s11882-017-0686-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Watkins AJ, Ursell E, Panton R, Papenbrock T, Hollis L, Cunningham C, et al. Adaptive responses by mouse early embryos to maternal diet protect fetal growth but predispose to adult onset disease. Biol Reprod. 2008;78(2):299–306. Epub 2007/11/09. 10.1095/biolreprod.107.064220 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Maloney CA, Hay SM, Young LE, Sinclair KD, Rees WD. A methyl-deficient diet fed to rat dams during the peri-conception period programs glucose homeostasis in adult male but not female offspring. J Nutr. 2011;141(1):95–100. Epub 2010/11/26. 10.3945/jn.109.119453 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Watanabe M, Honda C, Iwatani Y, Yorifuji S, Iso H, Kamide K, et al. Within-pair differences of DNA methylation levels between monozygotic twins are different between male and female pairs. BMC Medical Genomics. 2016;9(1):55. 10.1186/s12920-016-0217-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Infants and Children—Acute Management of Asthma [Internet]. Agency for Clinical Innovation. 2012 [cited 22/03/2020]. Available from: https://www1.health.nsw.gov.au/pds/ActivePDSDocuments/PD2012_056.pdf.
  • 17.Castro-Rodriguez JA. The Asthma Predictive Index: early diagnosis of asthma. Current opinion in allergy and clinical immunology. 2011;11(3):157–61. 10.1097/ACI.0b013e3283464c4a [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Wang KY, Tarr G, Yang JY, Mueller S. Fast and approximate exhaustive variable selection for generalised linear models with APES. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics. 2019;61(4):445–65. 10.1111/anzs.12276 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Kam-lun EH, Nelson A. Gender disparity in paediatric hospital admissions. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2006;35:882–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Peretz J, Hall OJ, Klein SL. Sex differences in influenza virus infection, vaccination, and therapies. Sex and gender differences in infection and treatments for infectious diseases: Springer; 2015. p. 183–210. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Asselta R, Paraboschi EM, Mantovani A, Duga S. ACE2 and TMPRSS2 variants and expression as candidates to sex and country differences in COVID-19 severity in Italy. 2020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Arroyave WD, Rabito FA, Carlson JC, Sever ML, Lefante J. Asthma severity, not asthma control, is worse in atopic compared with nonatopic adolescents with asthma. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2016;116(1):18–25. Epub 2015/11/13. 10.1016/j.anai.2015.10.015 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Schwindt CD, Tjoa T, Floro JN, McLaren C, Delfino RJ. Association of atopy to asthma severity and medication use in children. J Asthma. 2006;43(6):439–46. Epub 2006/09/06. 10.1080/02770900600758234 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Forno E, Young OM, Kumar R, Simhan H, Celedon JC. Maternal obesity in pregnancy, gestational weight gain, and risk of childhood asthma. Pediatrics. 2014;134(2):e535–46. Epub 2014/07/23. 10.1542/peds.2014-0439 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Ekstrom S, Magnusson J, Kull I, Lind T, Almqvist C, Melen E, et al. Maternal body mass index in early pregnancy and offspring asthma, rhinitis and eczema up to 16 years of age. Clin Exp Allergy. 2015;45(1):283–91. Epub 2014/05/09. 10.1111/cea.12340 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Harpsoe MC, Basit S, Bager P, Wohlfahrt J, Benn CS, Nohr EA, et al. Maternal obesity, gestational weight gain, and risk of asthma and atopic disease in offspring: a study within the Danish National Birth Cohort. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013;131(4):1033–40. Epub 2012/11/06. 10.1016/j.jaci.2012.09.008 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.McGillick EV, Orgeig S, Giussani DA, Morrison JL. Chronic hypoxaemia as a molecular regulator of fetal lung development: implications for risk of respiratory complications at birth. Paediatr Respir Rev. 2017;21:3–10. Epub 2016/10/04. 10.1016/j.prrv.2016.08.011 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Bose M, Oliván B, Laferrère B. Stress and obesity: the role of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis in metabolic disease. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2009;16(5):340–6. 10.1097/MED.0b013e32832fa137 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Giussani DA, Fletcher AJ, Gardner DS. Sex differences in the ovine fetal cortisol response to stress. Pediatr Res. 2011;69(2):118–22. Epub 2010/11/04. 10.1203/PDR.0b013e3182042a20 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Sideleva O, Suratt BT, Black KE, Tharp WG, Pratley RE, Forgione P, et al. Obesity and asthma: an inflammatory disease of adipose tissue not the airway. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012;186(7):598–605. Epub 2012/07/28. 10.1164/rccm.201203-0573OC [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Torday JS, Sun H, Wang L, Torres E, Sunday ME, Rubin LP. Leptin mediates the parathyroid hormone-related protein paracrine stimulation of fetal lung maturation. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2002;282(3):L405–10. Epub 2002/02/13. 10.1152/ajplung.2002.282.3.L405 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Di Renzo GC, Rosati A, Sarti RD, Cruciani L, Cutuli AM. Does fetal sex affect pregnancy outcome? Gend Med. 2007;4(1):19–30. Epub 2007/06/23. 10.1016/s1550-8579(07)80004-0 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Ogawa K, Tanaka S, Limin Y, Arata N, Sago H, Yamamoto-Hanada K, et al. Beta-2 receptor agonist exposure in the uterus associated with subsequent risk of childhood asthma. Pediatric allergy and immunology: official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology. 2017;28(8):746–53. Epub 2017/09/12. 10.1111/pai.12805 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Lettieri L, Vintzileos AM, Rodis JF, Albini SM, Salafia CM. Does "idiopathic" preterm labor resulting in preterm birth exist? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;168(5):1480–5. Epub 1993/05/01. 10.1016/s0002-9378(11)90785-6 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Strachan DP, Ait-Khaled N, Foliaki S, Mallol J, Odhiambo J, Pearce N, et al. Siblings, asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis and eczema: a worldwide perspective from the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood. Clin Exp Allergy. 2015;45(1):126–36. Epub 2014/06/11. 10.1111/cea.12349 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.McKeever TM, Lewis SA, Smith C, Collins J, Heatlie H, Frischer M, et al. Siblings, multiple births, and the incidence of allergic disease: a birth cohort study using the West Midlands general practice research database. Thorax. 2001;56(10):758–62. Epub 2001/09/20. 10.1136/thorax.56.10.758 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Kikkawa T, Yorifuji T, Fujii Y, Yashiro M, Okada A, Ikeda M, et al. Birth order and paediatric allergic disease: A nationwide longitudinal survey. Clin Exp Allergy. 2018;48(5):577–85. Epub 2018/01/26. 10.1111/cea.13100 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Murphy VE, Gibson PG, Giles WB, Zakar T, Smith R, Bisits AM, et al. Maternal asthma is associated with reduced female fetal growth. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine. 2003;168(11):1317–23. 10.1164/rccm.200303-374OC [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Kazumichi Fujioka

2 Mar 2021

PONE-D-21-03952

Modelling Maternal and Perinatal Risk Factors to Predict Poorly Controlled Childhood Asthma

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Ralph Nanan,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 16 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Kazumichi Fujioka

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2.Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified (1) whether consent was informed and (2) what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). If your study included minors, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

If you are reporting a retrospective study of medical records or archived samples, please ensure that you have discussed whether all data were fully anonymized before you accessed them and/or whether the IRB or ethics committee waived the requirement for informed consent. If patients provided informed written consent to have data from their medical records used in research, please include this information.

3.We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

4. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

5. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: General Comments:

This study showed that maternal obesity and threatened premature labour (TPL) are associated with the development of asthma in children. This is consistent with recent findings that epigenetics is involved in the development of asthma. The number of participants in the study is large, the missing data is small, and the value of the data is very high. However, it is difficult to understand the intent of the study and I suggest a revision of the description and analysis.

Specific recommendations for revision major:

You should emphasize more in the introduction why you have analyzed the subject separately as male and female. Revising the following four points will make the reason more clear.

1. line66-69

Furthermore, male sex has been linked to a more serious asthma phenotype during childhood with increased risk of hospitalization (9, 12). This is in agreement with sex-biases seen in other lung diseases such as influenza (13) and COVID-19 (14) and might relate to fundamental sex-differences that are minted in utero.

It is true that boys are more likely to develop asthma in childhood than girls. However, I feel that this fact is an insufficient reason for this study to be analyzed separately for boys and girls. I suggest that this part be deleted.

2. line 70-71

Animal models indicate that environmental insults during pregnancy program male and female fetuses differently (15, 16), though it is unclear to what extent this applies to humans.

This is probably the reason why this study was conducted separately for males and females. It is known that males are more prone to epigenetic mutations caused by environmental factors than females. Didn't you assume that it would be easier to identify the environmental factors that lead to epigenetic variation if you analyzed only males?

Not only in animal models, but also in human studies, it has been found that males are more prone to epigenetic mutations caused by environmental factors than females. I would suggest adding the following references for example.

Within-pair differences of DNA methylation levels between monozygotic twins are different between male and female pairs

BMC Med Genomics. 2016; 9: 55.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27561550/

3. line 166-167

Following backward elimination, eight of 23 variables remained in the Poisson regression model (AIC = 2936.429; p < 10-9 ; Table 2).

Based on the hypothesis that men are more strongly affected by epigenetics, it would be better to use only men in the selection of risk factors. I would like you to discuss this with the statisticians.

Furthermore, it is puzzling that smoking during pregnancy was not included in the eight risk factors selected. This problem will be solved if smoking is found to be associated with asthma by analysis of males only.

4. line 262-264

Mechanistically, it is possible that the intrauterine environment is permanently altered through pregnancies and that these alterations influence female foetuses to a greater extent than male foetuses.

This speculation contradicts the hypothesis that men are more prone to epigenetic mutations caused by environmental factors than women. I feel that it is unnecessary to discuss female risk factors in order to clarify the intent of this study.

Specific recommendations for revision minor:

1. line 248-250

Instead, it is imaginable that medications used to treat TPL could alter the intrauterine environment and thereby affect foetal lung development.

I propose to add the following paper.

Beta-2 receptor agonist exposure in the uterus associated with subsequent risk of childhood asthma

Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2017; 28: 746-753.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28892561/

Reviewer #2: Interesting subject and good study. The key message here are sex differences in asthma admission rate and prenatal risk factors.

Minor remarks:

Abstract - statement “condition affecting boys more often than girls” – is not accurate while it’s true only before puberty – see ref. 10, and quiet different later in life when women have more asthma than men. I will be helpful to add on some information form literature why those difference are observed - e.g. lung development, total IgE level.

I suggest to add an information about the asthma admission cases – what is the age, sex and how many admissions. As I believe it’s 17 years period of time, so we have both 2 y. and 17 y. children?

Since asthma is a different phenotype before 5y. and after – it’s important to differentiate according to age. So called “childhood asthma” is triggered by infections, which are more common earlier in life in second child, than in first, and some young children outgrow symptoms later in life.

Socioeconomic status is an important risk factor affecting asthma admission related mainly to regularity of treatment but also smoking and obesity. The lack of this data is a disadvantage of this study, however possibly doesn’t affect the sex differences which were observed.

In table 2 the data regarding admission is missing? - 0-0? Or not clear.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Mitsuhiro Okamoto

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 May 27;16(5):e0252215. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252215.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


26 Apr 2021

PONE-D-21-03952

Modelling Maternal and Perinatal Risk Factors to Predict Poorly Controlled Childhood Asthma

Dear Editor,

We resubmit the manuscript after having implemented all by the reviewers suggested changes. We have also ensured that the manuscript meets PLOS ONE style requirements and additional detail on participant consent has been added.

We took also note the journals requirement of data availability. As this study was conducted on non-anonymized patient records. We cannot share the non-anonymized data publicly. This is to protect patient integrity. Requests to access the non-anonymized dataset can be made to the Nepean Mountains Local Health District and this information has been added to the text. However, we have uploaded a minimal, anonymized version of the data of included patients as Supporting Information.

Kind regards,

Ralph Nanan, on behalf of all authors

Response to reviewers' comments:

Reviewer #1: General Comments:

This study showed that maternal obesity and threatened premature labour (TPL) are associated with the development of asthma in children. This is consistent with recent findings that epigenetics is involved in the development of asthma. The number of participants in the study is large, the missing data is small, and the value of the data is very high. However, it is difficult to understand the intent of the study and I suggest a revision of the description and analysis.

Specific recommendations for revision major:

You should emphasize more in the introduction why you have analyzed the subject separately as male and female. Revising the following four points will make the reason more clear.

1. line66-69

Furthermore, male sex has been linked to a more serious asthma phenotype during childhood with increased risk of hospitalization (9, 12). This is in agreement with sex-biases seen in other lung diseases such as influenza (13) and COVID-19 (14) and might relate to fundamental sex-differences that are minted in utero.

It is true that boys are more likely to develop asthma in childhood than girls. However, I feel that this fact is an insufficient reason for this study to be analyzed separately for boys and girls. I suggest that this part be deleted.

This section has been removed in accordance with your suggestion.

2. line 70-71

Animal models indicate that environmental insults during pregnancy program male and female fetuses differently (15, 16), though it is unclear to what extent this applies to humans.

This is probably the reason why this study was conducted separately for males and females. It is known that males are more prone to epigenetic mutations caused by environmental factors than females. Didn't you assume that it would be easier to identify the environmental factors that lead to epigenetic variation if you analyzed only males?

Not only in animal models, but also in human studies, it has been found that males are more prone to epigenetic mutations caused by environmental factors than females. I would suggest adding the following references for example.

Within-pair differences of DNA methylation levels between monozygotic twins are different between male and female pairs

BMC Med Genomics. 2016; 9: 55.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27561550/

This was a very interesting read. The referenced article has been added. Please see line 67-69.

3. line 166-167

Following backward elimination, eight of 23 variables remained in the Poisson regression model (AIC = 2936.429; p < 10-9 ; Table 2).

Based on the hypothesis that men are more strongly affected by epigenetics, it would be better to use only men in the selection of risk factors. I would like you to discuss this with the statisticians. Furthermore, it is puzzling that smoking during pregnancy was not included in the eight risk factors selected. This problem will be solved if smoking is found to be associated with asthma by analysis of males only.

We have divided our response into two parts, corresponding to your two comments.

SMOKING AS A PREDICTOR:

It is true that, while smoking was included as a potential variable in the backward selected Poisson regression model for all patients (male & female), it did not remain among the final set of potential risk factors. Hence the effect of smoking was not analyzed in the sex-specific Poisson regression models.

In our analysis we applied backward selection to limit the number of variables in the model to such a degree that we only conserved a highly parsimonious model. Backward selection examines models following very strict variable inclusion/exclusion ordering, and, as a result, many other equally sensible models can be ignored in the process. As you point out, one could speculate that smoking is more closely associated with asthma in males than in females and that its’ correlation strength in the general (male + female) regression model therefore might be diluted to such an extent that it is excluded from the model.

However, we already provide complementary analyses in the form of APES (APproximated Exhaustive Search) that suggest that this is not the case. During APES analysis, we performed repeated subsampling in attempt to stabilize the variable selection process, this allowed us to calculate the frequency for which a certain variable was included as a predictor in a model of a given size. APES was applied to the general model (male + female) but also the sex-specific models (male only and female only). APES analysis shows that smoking was infrequently selected as a predictor in all three models (male & female, male only, female only). This is shown in Supplementary Figures S8 – S10. Since the repeated bootstrap subsampling during the APES analysis did suggest smoking to be a poor predictor for asthma in our population, we have no reason to believe that smoking should have been included as a predictor for the number of asthma admissions in the backward eliminated Poisson regression models for our population.

SELECTION OF RISK FACTORS BASED ON MEN ONLY:

As mentioned above, we have during APES analysis selected risk factors based on only male, only female, and male and female combined. When comparing variables that were selected more than 60% of times in models of reasonable statistical quality (evaluated by the Akaike Information Criterion), the variables selected by APES for “only male” and “only female” models closely resemble the variables that achieved significance in the sex-specific Poisson regression models.

For example, predictive variables that were selected frequently (>60%) by APES when analyzing males only include BMI, allergic status, threatened premature labor, breastfeeding, maternal diabetes. Except for maternal diabetes, all of these variables have been included in the Poisson regression model for males and we hence find the Poisson regression model to be fairly complete.

4. line 262-264

Mechanistically, it is possible that the intrauterine environment is permanently altered through pregnancies and that these alterations influence female foetuses to a greater extent than male foetuses.

This speculation contradicts the hypothesis that men are more prone to epigenetic mutations caused by environmental factors than women. I feel that it is unnecessary to discuss female risk factors in order to clarify the intent of this study.

This speculation has been removed.

Specific recommendations for revision minor:

1. line 248-250

Instead, it is imaginable that medications used to treat TPL could alter the intrauterine environment and thereby affect foetal lung development.

I propose to add the following paper.

Beta-2 receptor agonist exposure in the uterus associated with subsequent risk of childhood asthma

Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2017; 28: 746-753.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28892561/

Thank you for this recommendation, we have added this paper and rephrased this sentence. Please see line 264 – 266.

Reviewer #2: Interesting subject and good study. The key message here are sex differences in asthma admission rate and prenatal risk factors.

Minor remarks:

Abstract - statement “condition affecting boys more often than girls” – is not accurate while it’s true only before puberty – see ref. 10, and quite different later in life when women have more asthma than men. I will be helpful to add on some information form literature why those difference are observed - e.g. lung development, total IgE level.

This inaccuracy has been clarified in the abstract, see line 18-19. We have also added a brief section commenting on attributable factors to this phenomenon (e.g. IgE levels and airway diameter) to the introduction, see line 61-64.

I suggest to add an information about the asthma admission cases – what is the age, sex and how many admissions. As I believe it’s 17 years period of time, so we have both 2 y. and 17 y. children?

Since asthma is a different phenotype before 5y. and after – it’s important to differentiate according to age. So called “childhood asthma” is triggered by infections, which are more common earlier in life in second child, than in first, and some young children outgrow symptoms later in life.

We have now added an additional supplementary figure (Figure S1) showing the age distributions for children with no, one, two, and three or more asthma admissions. This figure shows that the majority of included children is relatively young as also indicated by Table 1. Expectedly, children that were admitted several times tended to be slightly older but still the majority was prepubertal (judging by age). Please see line 164 – 166.

Socioeconomic status is an important risk factor affecting asthma admission related mainly to regularity of treatment but also smoking and obesity. The lack of this data is a disadvantage of this study, however possibly doesn’t affect the sex differences which were observed.

We agree that socioeconomic status is an important risk factor, unfortunately the design of this study did not allow us access to such data though. As you point out, we judge that it is unlikely to affect the sex-differences, as we do not assume that there is an underlying sex-bias in socioeconomic status.

In table 2 the data regarding admission is missing? - 0-0? Or not clear.

Table 2 shows the Poisson regression outcomes. In these regression models’ number of admissions was used as the response variable. This was stated in line 129 – 131 (Methods). We have further clarified the nature of the regression model in line 174-175 (Results), which we believe will increase the understandability of this section.

Assuming “0 - 0” in your comment refers to Table 1, this table shows the number of asthma admissions per child in the format: median [1st quartile – 3rd quartile]. Showing that children in both groups were admitted 0 [0-0] indicates that a majority of children in both the included and excluded group never was admitted for asthma.

Kind Regards

Ralph Nanan

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers PLOSone 150421.docx

Decision Letter 1

Kazumichi Fujioka

12 May 2021

Modelling Maternal and Perinatal Risk Factors to Predict Poorly Controlled Childhood Asthma

PONE-D-21-03952R1

Dear Dr. Nanan,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Kazumichi Fujioka

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: All my remarks were addressed and vague aspects clarified. The manuscript has been improved. I don't have any further comments.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Mitsuhiro Okamoto

Reviewer #2: No

Acceptance letter

Kazumichi Fujioka

18 May 2021

PONE-D-21-03952R1

Modelling maternal and perinatal risk factors to predict poorly controlled childhood asthma

Dear Dr. Nanan:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Kazumichi Fujioka

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Included children stratified by admission age and asthma admission frequency.

    (PDF)

    S2 Fig. Growth curves for birth weight by gestational age, starting at 22 weeks gestation.

    Children below 32 weeks gestation were excluded from our study population, but as growth references for small gestational ages are scarce growth curves for future reference were created starting at 22 weeks gestation. One dot represents one child.

    (PDF)

    S3 Fig. Growth curves for birth length by gestational age, starting at 22 weeks gestation.

    Children below 32 weeks gestation were excluded from our study population, but as growth references for small gestational ages are scarce growth curves for future reference were created starting at 22 weeks gestation. One dot represents one child.

    (PDF)

    S4 Fig. Growth curves for birth head circumference by gestational age, starting at 22 weeks gestation.

    Children below 32 weeks gestation were excluded from our study population, but as growth references for small gestational ages are scarce growth curves for future reference were created starting at 22 weeks gestation. One dot represents one child.

    (PDF)

    S5 Fig. Growth curves for birth weight from gestational age 32 upward.

    (PDF)

    S6 Fig. Growth curves for birth length from gestational age 32 upward.

    (PDF)

    S7 Fig. Growth curves for birth head circumference from gestational age 32 upward.

    (PDF)

    S8 Fig. Variable selection for prediction of number of asthma related hospitalization in the general population, using APES.

    Included in the plot is the AIC and BIC threshold, which both present penalized-likelihood criteria which can be used to choose the best predictor subset. AIC, Akaike information criterion; BIC, Bayesian information criterion.

    (PDF)

    S9 Fig. Variable selection for prediction of number of asthma related hospitalization in the female population, using APES.

    Included in the plot is the AIC and BIC threshold, which both present penalized-likelihood criteria which can be used to choose the best predictor subset. AIC, Akaike information criterion; BIC, Bayesian information criterion.

    (PDF)

    S10 Fig. Variable selection for prediction of number of asthma related hospitalization in the male population, using APES.

    Included in the plot is the AIC and BIC threshold, which both present penalized-likelihood criteria which can be used to choose the best predictor subset. AIC, Akaike information criterion; BIC, Bayesian information criterion.

    (PDF)

    S1 Data. Minimal, anonymized data for included patients.

    (PDF)

    S1 File. Supplementary information and methods.

    This file includes supplementary method descriptions, supplementary figure descriptions as well as supplementary tables.

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers PLOSone 150421.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The non-anonymized data set cannot be shared publicly in order to protect patient integrity. Requests to access the non-anonymized dataset can be made to the Nepean Mountains Local Health District (Human Research Ethics Office, Nepean Hospital, PO Box 63, Penrith NSW 2751, Australia; Phone: +6124734 3441; Fax: +6124734 1967; Email: NBMLHD-Ethics@health.nsw.gov.au). A minimal, anonymized version of the data of included patients can be found in the Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES