Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11562514›Full record

ArticleThorax2001

Role of sulfite additives in wine induced asthma: single dose and cumulative dose studies.

H Vally, P J Thompson

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Thorax, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 154 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Two-Stage Screening ofMicroorganisms · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Reducing SOBiomolecules · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

H VallyDepartment of Medicine, The University of Western Australia and the Asthma and Allergy Research Institute Inc, Perth, Western Australia. hvally@cyllene.uwa.edu.au
P J Thompson
University of Western Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWine appears to be a significant trigger for asthma. Although sulfite additives have been implicated as a major cause of wine induced asthma, direct evidence is limited. Two studies were undertaken to assess sulfite reactivity in wine sensitive asthmatics. The first study assessed sensitivity to sulfites in wine using a single dose sulfited wine challenge protocol followed by a double blind, placebo controlled challenge. In the second study a cumulative dose sulfited wine challenge protocol was employed to establish if wine sensitive asthmatics as a group have an increased sensitivity to sulfites.

methodsIn study 1, 24 asthmatic patients with a strong history of wine induced asthma were screened. Subjects showing positive responses to single blind high sulfite (300 ppm) wine challenge were rechallenged on separate days in a double blind, placebo controlled fashion with wines of varying sulfite levels to characterise their responses to these drinks. In study 2, wine sensitive asthmatic patients (n=12) and control asthmatics (n=6) were challenged cumulatively with wine containing increasing concentrations of sulfite in order to characterise further their sensitivity to sulfites in wine.

resultsFour of the 24 self-reporting wine sensitive asthmatic patients were found to respond to sulfite additives in wine when challenged in a single dose fashion (study 1). In the double blind dose-response study all four had a significant fall in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) (>15% from baseline) following exposure to wine containing 300 ppm sulfite, but did not respond to wines containing 20, 75 or 150 ppm sulfite. Responses were maximal at 5 minutes (mean (SD) maximal decline in FEV(1) 28.7 (13)%) and took 15-60 minutes to return to baseline levels. In the cumulative dose-response study (study 2) no significant difference was observed in any of the lung function parameters measured (FEV(1), peak expiratory flow (PEF), mid phase forced expiratory flow (FEF(25-75))) between wine sensitive and normal asthmatic subjects.

conclusionsOnly a small number of wine sensitive asthmatic patients responded to a single dose challenge with sulfited wine under laboratory conditions. This may suggest that the role of sulfites and/or wine in triggering asthmatic responses has been overestimated. Alternatively, cofactors or other components in wine may play an important role in wine induced asthma. Cumulative sulfite dose challenges did not detect an increased sensitivity to sulfite in wine sensitive asthmatics and an alternative approach to identifying sulfite/wine sensitive asthma may be required.

Indexed as

WineAdultAnalysis of VarianceAsthmaBronchial Provocation TestsCase-Control StudiesDose-Response Relationship, DrugDouble-Blind MethodFemaleFood AdditivesForced Expiratory VolumeHumansLungMaleMiddle AgedPeak Expiratory Flow RateFood AdditivesSulfites

Identifiers

PMID11562514
PMCPMC1745927
OpenAlexW2154602506

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.