logo
Infection Patterns Matter in Selecting Arthritis Therapies

Infection Patterns Matter in Selecting Arthritis Therapies

Medscape16-05-2025
MANCHESTER, England — The risks for infection are broadly similar regardless of the biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying drug used to treat inflammatory arthritis, but different patterns of infection do exist across these advanced therapies, delegates were told at the recent British Society for Rheumatology (BSR) 2025 Annual Meeting.
'There are so many advanced therapies, and they're all very good from an efficacy or effectiveness side of things. So now treatment decisions are more about cost, infection, or comorbidity profiles,' Mark Russell, PhD, an academic clinical lecturer at the Centre for Rheumatic Disease, King's College London, England, told Medscape Medical News .
He said that some of the differences in infection safety profiles with advanced therapies included an 'increased risk for fungal infections with IL [interleukin]-17 inhibitors and shingles with JAK [Janus kinase] inhibitors,' compared with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors.
However, 'whereas TB [tuberculosis] used to be an issue with TNF inhibitors, it's not really an issue after screening. It will probably be the same for JAK inhibitors when we start using the shingles vaccine more widely in the younger population,' Russell said.
Rising Use of Advanced Therapies
In addition to presenting a comprehensive overview of the infection risks associated with newer biologics and small molecules at the meeting, he presented data separately showing that there had been a 62% increase in the use of biologics or small-molecule targeted therapies for various indications over the past 5 years in England. He also showed that around half a million people in England, or 1% of the total population, were prescribed a biologic or targeted therapy in 2025 for any immune-mediated inflammatory disease, which included inflammatory bowel disease and inflammatory arthritis, among others.
Infection Risk Across Biologic Classes
Some of the different types of infection across biologic drug classes highlighted by Russell were an increased risk with IL-6 inhibitors for cellulitis, diverticulitis, diverticular perforation, and erysipelas (a type of skin infection involving the dermis layer), compared with TNF inhibitors.
Mark Russell, PhD
Also, rituximab has been associated with higher rates of lower respiratory tract and lung infections than TNF inhibitors, as well as greater incidences of sepsis, bacteremia, viremia, and fungal infections.
Higher rates of Candida infections have been reported for the IL-17 inhibitors secukinumab, ixekizumab, and, in particular, bimekizumab, which inhibits both IL-17A and IL-17F vs TNF inhibitors.
JAK inhibitors are known to raise the risk for herpes zoster by a substantially greater extent than TNF inhibitors. In the ORAL Surveillance trial of tofacitinib vs the TNF inhibitors adalimumab or etanercept for patients with rheumatoid arthritis, the rate of zoster infection was about 12% with either high- or low-dose tofacitinib compared with 4% for TNF inhibitors. Incidence of herpes zoster was 3.75 per 100 patient-years for tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily and 3.94 per 100 patient-years for tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily compared with 1.18 per 100 patient-years for TNF inhibitors.
The tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) inhibitor deucravacitinib, which is approved to treat plaque psoriasis and is in development for psoriatic arthritis and lupus, as well as other TYK2 inhibitors in development, has shown 'a pretty bland' infection profile, depending on whether COVID-19 data are included, Russell said. However, 'there does appear to be a risk for acne and folliculitis with TYK2 inhibitors, certainly in some smaller studies,' he said, although it is unclear why this is the case.
Explaining and Mitigating Risk
What is 'really important' is how infection risk is communicated to patients, Russell said. 'Remembering relative vs absolute risk. So, a drug has a 50% increased risk of infection, or it increases your risk by only one in 1000; it's really important how you frame that.'
Other factors that are 'much more influential' than use of advanced therapies should also be studied for predicting future infection risk, he said, such as age, prior infection (particularly if hospitalization occurred), steroid use, and lymphopenia.
Mitigation strategies include TB screening for everyone (irrespective of which advanced therapy was being considered), vaccination, and Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia prophylaxis for patients at risk, such as those who may be taking rituximab with steroids and have low immunoglobulin levels.
Russell had received research support from Sandoz UK. In addition, Russell reported receiving honoraria from AbbVie, Biogen, Lilly, Galapagos, Menarini, UCB, and Vifor Pharma, and support for attending educational meetings from Lilly, Pfizer, Janssen, and UCB.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

UK Food Safety Testing Market Size to Reach US$2.8 Billion by 2033
UK Food Safety Testing Market Size to Reach US$2.8 Billion by 2033

Yahoo

time14 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

UK Food Safety Testing Market Size to Reach US$2.8 Billion by 2033

Shaped by strict Food Standards Agency (FSA) regulations and post-Brexit import complexities, the UK market emphasizes robust allergen management and supply chain traceability. High consumer awareness and advanced rapid testing methods are integral to maintaining confidence. Chicago, Aug. 20, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The UK food safety testing market was valued at US$ 1,306.23 million in 2024 and is expected to reach US$ 2,801.82 million by 2033, growing at a CAGR of 9.23% during the forecast period 2025–2033. A dramatic surge in foodborne pathogens is a primary catalyst for growth. The frequency and scale of recent outbreaks are alarming. Official data show 70,352 laboratory-confirmed cases of Campylobacter in England during 2024, marking a decade-long high. Similarly, Salmonella infections in England peaked at 10,388 reported cases in 2024. Specific outbreaks highlight the severity of the situation. A 2024 Salmonella Blockley event resulted in 54 cases across the UK. These cases were distributed with 36 in England, 11 in Scotland, and 7 in Wales. The outbreak led to the hospitalization of ten individuals. Download Sample Pages: Even more concerning was a major Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) O145 outbreak in summer 2024, which caused over 250 illnesses in the UK food safety testing market. By late June 2024, confirmed cases reached 275. The geographical breakdown shows 182 cases in England, 58 in Scotland, and 31 in Wales. The outbreak's severity is underscored by the 122 people hospitalized. Furthermore, seven confirmed cases of haemolytic uraemic syndrome (HUS) were directly linked to the STEC O145 event. The Food Standards Agency (FSA) is actively investigating an increased number of incidents. Investigations into Listeria-related outbreaks grew to 17 in the 2024/25 period. STEC-related outbreak investigations rose to 13, and Salmonella outbreak investigations increased to 11 in the same timeframe. Adding to the domestic pressure, 2,703 cases of travel-associated gastrointestinal infections were recorded in England in 2024, with 183 of these being travel-related STEC infections. Key Findings in UK Food Safety Testing Market Market Forecast (2033) US$ 2,801.82 million CAGR 9.23% By Test Method Microbiological Test (36.64%) By Product Type Processed Food (25.56%) By Containment Type Biological Contaminants (36.85%) By Technology Traditional Testing (54.63%) By Service Sourcing Inhouse (57.75%) By Application Pathogen Detection (44.03%) By End User Food & Beverage (66.6%) Top Drivers Stringent post-Brexit import controls require comprehensive testing regimes. High consumer demand for transparency and clean-label products. Growth of plant-based and free-from food categories necessitates testing. Top Trends Adoption of whole-genome sequencing for precise outbreak source tracking. Focus on developing rapid tests for emerging environmental contaminants. Increased use of data analytics for predictive risk modeling. Top Challenges Navigating regulatory divergence between the UK and the EU. Persistent labor shortages impacting food industry and laboratory staffing. Combatting sophisticated food fraud and economically motivated adulteration. Chemical Contaminant Risks Mandate Broader and More Sophisticated Testing Protocols The threat is not limited to pathogens; chemical contaminants demand equal attention in the UK food safety testing market. Growing concerns over pesticides, industrial chemicals, and mycotoxins are expanding the required scope of testing services. In 2024, the FSA issued 14 food alerts for metal contamination alone, with 4 of these occurring by April. Analysis of imported food revealed residues of 48 pesticides not approved for use in the UK. A deeper look found residues from 46 cancer-linked pesticides in imported produce. In comparison, 19 cancer-linked pesticides were detected in food originating from the UK in 2024. The issue of "forever chemicals" has become prominent. A 2024 analysis discovered 10 different PFAS pesticides in fruit and vegetables sold in the UK food safety testing market. The nation currently approves 25 PFAS pesticides for use, with 6 of them classified as 'highly hazardous'. Government testing confirmed the presence of PFAS chemicals in over 3,300 food and drink samples in 2024. These findings came from a program that tested approximately 3,000 samples of food and produce. Meanwhile, the UK's annual testing for heavy metals covers a mere 400 to 450 samples of meat, milk, fish, and honey. A potential source of contamination is the UK's over 8,500 abandoned mines, which can leach toxic metals into the food chain. Specific food surveys also raise red flags. In a 2024 retail food survey, 13 out of 30 soy samples tested contained elevated levels of the mycotoxin ochratoxin A. A separate test of 90 samples for physical contaminants found one sample to be non-compliant. Escalating Product Recalls and Allergy Alerts Underscore Critical Testing Needs The sheer volume of product recalls provides a stark indicator of systemic weaknesses. These events in the UK food safety testing market are not only more frequent but also larger in scale, fuelling investment in preventive testing. In 2024, just three large-scale recall alerts implicated a staggering 424 different products. The average number of products recalled per event in 2024 was 2.5 times higher than in 2023. In the 2023/24 period, the FSA and Food Standards Scotland (FSS) issued a combined total of 136 food alerts. Within that total, 66 were specific Allergy Alerts. The focus on allergens intensified significantly, with 101 Allergy Alerts issued by the FSA and FSS in 2024. Beyond allergens, there were 67 product recalls in 2024 due to issues like foreign bodies and microbial contamination. The problem is widespread. In the first quarter of 2025, a total of 1,242 food and beverage recalls were recorded across the EU and UK. Non-bacterial contamination was responsible for 550 of these recalls. Aflatoxins were the culprit in 135 recall events. Bacterial contamination led to 237 recalls, with Salmonella being the cause of 174 of those incidents. Undeclared allergens prompted 94 recalls in Q1 2025, with milk being the most frequent issue, causing 19 separate recalls. Such figures make a compelling case for the expanding UK food safety testing market. Strict Regulatory Enforcement and Incident Management Spur Compliance-Driven Testing Demand Regulatory bodies are intensifying their oversight, making robust testing a non-negotiable aspect of compliance. The FSA's incidents response unit managed 1,837 food and feed incidents in the 2023/24 financial year. In the subsequent 2024/25 period, the FSA received notifications for 1,825 incidents across England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Beyond direct notifications, the agency monitored 12,504 food safety signals in 2024/25. These signals prompted 810 intelligence assessments, which in turn launched 36 new investigations. Ultimately, these monitored signals resulted in 18 new incidents that required product withdrawal from the market. Local authorities are also increasing formal enforcement actions, which rose to 5,898 for food hygiene in 2023/24. Actions related to food standards in the food safety testing market grew to 658 in the same period. The financial consequences of non-compliance are severe. In a high-profile 2024 case, retailer ASDA was fined £640,000 for selling over 100 out-of-date food items. Asda was also ordered to pay an additional £15,115 in prosecution costs. The case was not an isolated one; it followed two other 2024 instances where Asda was fined £250,000 and £410,000 for similar food safety breaches. These penalties send a clear message to the industry. Specialized Food Crime and Fraud Investigations Are Now Major Market Drivers A growing area of focus is the criminal threat to the food supply chain. Specialized units are actively tackling food fraud, creating a niche for advanced authenticity and integrity testing. The UK's food crime units were running 29 live investigations during 2024. A significant portion of these, 20 investigations, involved meat and meat products. The scale of these operations is considerable. In a single food crime case in November 2024, officers seized 48 illegal sheep carcasses. As part of that National Food Crime Unit (NFCU) investigation into illegal meat, five men were arrested in London. The NFCU is also securing financial penalties against perpetrators. In a 2025 case, the unit obtained a confiscation order of over £30,000 from an individual selling illegal 'smokie' meat products. The action marked the third high-profile 'smokie' meat fraud case pursued by the NFCU within a single year. These enforcement successes highlight the critical need for sophisticated testing solutions that can verify the origin, composition, and legality of food products, a key growth area for the UK food safety testing market. Strained Local Authority Resources Create Significant Gaps in Public Food Safety While regulatory demands are increasing, the capacity of public enforcement bodies is strained. Under-resourced local authorities in the UK food safety testing market are struggling to maintain oversight, shifting a greater burden of responsibility onto businesses and their internal testing programs. As of 2024, there is a backlog of 95,000 overdue food business inspections across England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Worryingly, this backlog includes 871 businesses classified as high-risk. In Scotland, 12,533 registered food businesses remained unrated as of December 2024. The number of unrated establishments awaiting a first inspection in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland had grown to around 41,000 by April 2024. This resource strain is directly impacting surveillance. The total number of food samples taken by local authorities across the UK dropped to 37,911 in the 2023/24 period. This figure is down from 40,144 samples in the prior period, showing a continuing decline in public testing capacity. Concurrently, consumer complaints are rising. There was an increase of 1,540 consumer complaints related to food hygiene in 2023/24, reaching a total of 60,919. Complaints regarding food standards and authenticity also rose by 200, to a total of 11,188 in the same period. Competitive Landscape Heats Up as Key Players Expand to Meet Demands Leading providers in the UK food safety testing market are responding to these challenges with strategic expansions and innovations. Key players are enhancing their capabilities to capture growing demand, particularly in identified hotspot sectors. In July 2025, Eurofins Food Testing UK demonstrated a clear growth strategy by finalizing its acquisition of the Bio Search food testing laboratory in Belfast. The move significantly expands its capabilities and footprint in Northern Ireland. In 2024, Eurofins also launched a new method for enumerating acetic acid bacteria, a service specifically targeting the needs of the UK beverage industry. These expansions are timely, as certain food categories are under intense scrutiny. A 2024 FSA survey found that 16 out of 40 samples of frozen raw chicken, a total of 40%, were non-compliant due to issues like undeclared water. The same survey revealed that 10 out of 24 frozen beef burger samples, or 42%, were non-compliant. Among the non-compliant burger samples, eight were found to have less meat content than what was declared on the label. These sector-specific failings create clear opportunities for specialized testing services. Advanced Whole Genome Sequencing Technology Revolutionizes Outbreak Response and Investigation The evolution of the UK food safety testing market is intrinsically linked to technological advancement. While widespread adoption rates are proprietary, official reports confirm the critical role of next-generation methods. Advanced testing technologies, particularly whole genome sequencing (WGS), are no longer on the horizon; they are central to modern surveillance and response. The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) extensively used WGS to successfully identify and manage the 2024 outbreaks of Salmonella Blockley and E. coli O145. The application of WGS in these high-profile incidents demonstrates the technology's power. It allows for a level of precision in linking cases and identifying the source of an outbreak that was previously impossible. This capability is transforming public health investigations. The clear success and growing reliance on WGS signal a market-wide shift. The move is away from traditional culturing methods and toward more rapid, accurate, and data-rich technologies. This technological pivot is a fundamental driver of investment and innovation across the entire food safety sector. Need a Customized Version? Request It Now: Post-Brexit Regulations and Future Trends Shaping the UK Food Safety Market The future of the UK food safety testing market will be shaped by an evolving regulatory framework and the continuation of current trends. Post-Brexit adjustments are creating new compliance hurdles and, consequently, new testing requirements. As of January 1, 2024, a significant new rule took effect. All pre-packaged food sold in Great Britain must now include a UK address for the Food Business Operator. The change introduces new labeling verification needs for the entire industry. Looking ahead, the market's growth trajectory appears strong and certain. The convergence of the key drivers—relentless pathogen pressure, expanding chemical threats, massive product recalls, tough enforcement, and public sector gaps—creates a compelling case for sustained investment. Businesses have no alternative but to integrate more frequent, more sophisticated, and more comprehensive testing into their operations. The demand is not just for testing, but for a true partnership in risk mitigation, making the UK food safety testing market a critical component of national food security and public health for years to come. UK Food Safety Testing Market Major Players: ALS Laboratories (UK) Limited Bureau Veritas UK Limited Campden BRI Group Eurofins Food Testing UK Limited Fera Science Limited Food Forensics Limited Intertek Group Plc. Northern Hygiene Laboratories Limited SGS United Kingdom Limited TÜV SÜD UK Limited Other Prominent Players Key Market Segmentation: By Test Method Microbiological Test Total Plate Count (TPC) Coliform Testing Listeria Testing Salmonella Testing Campylobacter Testing Sensory Test Manual Smell Taste Appearance Others Instrumental Smell Taste Appearance Others Physical Test Chemical Test Allergen Test Others By Product Type Processed Food Fruits &Vegetables Beverages Grains & Cereal Confectionery Meat & Meat Products Milk & Milk Products Others By Technology Traditional Testing Rapid Testing By Service Sourcing Inhouse Outsource By End User Food & Beverage Academic and Research Institutions Testing Laboratories Need a Detailed Walkthrough of the Report? Request a Live Session: About Astute Analytica Astute Analytica is a global market research and advisory firm providing data-driven insights across industries such as technology, healthcare, chemicals, semiconductors, FMCG, and more. We publish multiple reports daily, equipping businesses with the intelligence they need to navigate market trends, emerging opportunities, competitive landscapes, and technological advancements. With a team of experienced business analysts, economists, and industry experts, we deliver accurate, in-depth, and actionable research tailored to meet the strategic needs of our clients. At Astute Analytica, our clients come first, and we are committed to delivering cost-effective, high-value research solutions that drive success in an evolving marketplace. Contact Us:Astute AnalyticaPhone: +1-888 429 6757 (US Toll Free); +91-0120- 4483891 (Rest of the World)For Sales Enquiries: sales@ Follow us on: LinkedIn | Twitter | YouTube CONTACT: Contact Us: Astute Analytica Phone: +1-888 429 6757 (US Toll Free); +91-0120- 4483891 (Rest of the World) For Sales Enquiries: sales@ Website:

4 Reasons Why ‘Self-Blame' Is Your Default State, By A Psychologist
4 Reasons Why ‘Self-Blame' Is Your Default State, By A Psychologist

Forbes

time17 minutes ago

  • Forbes

4 Reasons Why ‘Self-Blame' Is Your Default State, By A Psychologist

The habit of staying up at night and replaying all the embarrassing moments of your life while stewing in self-blame isn't just a personality quirk. For most people, this recurring phenomenon, often beyond their control, can start feeling like a mental trap where you keep turning thoughts like 'you should have known better' over and over again in your head. This can also disrupt your sleep cycle. A 2022 study published in the British Journal of Clinical Psychology found that people most often ruminate or worry about past mistakes, negative experiences and social interactions, with nighttime being a high-risk period for such overthinking. The reason you stay stuck in this cycle has to do with your mind's tendency to disguise rumination as 'problem-solving.' You might be under the impression that you're figuring out what went wrong or making sure you will not repeat the mistake. However, in reality, you're just reinforcing the guilt and trapping yourself even further in the same emotional cycle. Over time, this habit can end up chipping away at your confidence, relationships and most importantly, your sense of self. A 2025 study published in Self and Identity explored why forgiving yourself is so difficult for some people and why they can be stuck in self-condemnation. Out of 80 participants, researchers found that 41 of them said they couldn't forgive themselves after a perceived failure. For 39 of them, self-forgiveness came easier. Researchers also identified key patterns that keep people trapped in such self-blame. Here are four reasons you're stuck in a mindset of self-blame, based on the 2025 study: 1. Your 'Time Focus' Keeps You Stuck One of the patterns researchers uncovered through the study was a difference in time focus. People unable to forgive themselves tended to experience the past as if it were still the present. This showed up in many ways. They replayed mistakes in vivid detail and reimagined what they 'should have done.' Essentially, they emotionally relived the moment repeatedly, and painstakingly. The researchers described this as a 'past-as-present' mindset. 'It is a raw feeling. Just like it happened yesterday, but I moved my daughter 4 years ago,' one participant explains, remembering how she struggled to forgive herself when she found out her daughter was being bullied in school. In sharp contrast, the group that could more easily forgive themselves showed a 'future-focused' perspective. They acknowledged their mistake and redirected their attention toward growth, how they could change and what the next steps could be, rather than staying shackled to what had already happened. 'I needed to forgive myself so I could stop blaming myself and stop looking toward the past when I needed to be looking toward the future,' another participant explains, highlighting the power of a future-focus in finding self-forgiveness. These findings suggest that when your dominant focus is on the past, it becomes hard to even see the possibility of a different future. When you find yourself ruminating on the past, you may start to feel like this is an unchangeable part of who you are. But it helps to remember that you are not frozen in that moment. Being in the present moment gives you the power to decide what comes next and take actions that can bring about real change. 2. You Doubt Your Own Agency Moving on from your mistakes isn't just about where your attention is. An important factor we often ignore is our belief in our own ability to make things different. The 2025 study found that people who struggled to forgive themselves frequently questioned whether they even had the ability to change the situation or prevent it from happening again. This 'low-agency' mindset left them feeling powerless. Participants who found themselves stuck in self-condemnation harped on their lack of control over their behavior or circumstances. This led to a deepening of their guilt. On the other hand, those who forgave themselves believed they still had agency. They believed in their capacity to make choices and influence life outcomes. This belief allowed them to move forward. If you lack a sense of agency, it's quite possible your mind lingers on your mistakes, negative events and the past as a prediction of your future. Rebuilding self-trust, therefore, is the first order of business. And you're allowed to start small, such as keeping a promise to yourself, showing up on time to a commitment you've made or making one healthier choice than the day before. 3. You See Your Mistakes As A Reflection Of Your Entire Character Often, the heaviest part of self-blame isn't the action itself. It's what you believe that action says about you that can determine how you see yourself. The researchers of the 2025 study found that people trapped in self-condemnation often saw their mistakes as a reflection of their social-moral identity, or their sense of being a 'good' or 'bad' person in their own eyes and the eyes of others. So, instead of viewing their wrongdoing as a single or isolated event, they saw it as proof that they were fundamentally flawed or unworthy. 'I have a particularly bad habit that has developed over many years. I have tried many times to break the habit without success. This is something I should be able to choose not to do, yet I keep doing it. I cannot forgive myself for developing the habit, and I cannot forgive myself for failing to break the habit. It's demoralizing, frustrating, and has ruined my self-esteem,' one participant shares. However, people who managed to forgive themselves were more likely to separate what they did from who they are. They acknowledged the harm but didn't let it define their whole identity. Moving forward can feel like a moral battle when your self-image feels tied to every misstep. 4. You Cope By Avoiding Instead Of Processing When you're drowning in deep guilt or regret, a natural instinct to quiet the discomfort might kick-in. This can happen in different ways for everyone, say binge-watching something, scrolling endlessly, overworking or distracting yourself in other ways. Indulging in these distractions can numb the emotions for a while, but that might not always be a solution for the long term. Researchers found correlations between self-condemnation and this 'emotion-reduction' style of coping. The defining characteristic of this style was pushing away uncomfortable feelings and a steadfast avoidance of processing and working through them. While this silences short-term pain, it leaves the root cause untouched, with guilt floating just beneath the surface. On the other hand, making sense of a certain event or feeling helps give it a proper ending in your mind. You reflect on what you've learned, have a compassionate conversation with yourself or reframe the event as part of your growth. For instance, one participant mentioned, 'In order to be the best parent I could be, I had to forgive myself and focus on my daughter. I just had to make myself understand that there were many factors that contributed to my daughter's depression, and I was not solely to blame.' Keep in mind that while you cannot change the past, you certainly can change the role it plays in your story and determine how it impacts you and your life. Mistakes Are Proof That You Tried To truly break free from self-blame, you need to make a shift in the relationship you have with that moment frozen in time. Your mistakes do not vanish, no matter how much you try. The good news is, they don't have to. When you learn to approach them from a growth perspective, you can see them as separate from yourself and they become catalysts for insight and resilience. An easy way to shift your perspective is using a narrative reframing technique for your past. Instead of just trying to push guilt away or analyze your mistake, you can go back to the memory and forage for moments of growth and perseverance. Done enough times, you'll likely notice that the emotions you associate with the mistake have taken a 180 degree turn for the positive. Do you keep replaying your mistakes in your mind? Take the science-backed Mistake Rumination Scale to learn more about this habit.

Oximetry Weak for Predicting OSA in Kids With Down Syndrome
Oximetry Weak for Predicting OSA in Kids With Down Syndrome

Medscape

timean hour ago

  • Medscape

Oximetry Weak for Predicting OSA in Kids With Down Syndrome

TOPLINE: Nocturnal pulse oximetry (NPO) indices, such as the 3% and 4% Oxygen Desaturation Indices (ODI3 and ODI4, respectively), demonstrated moderate sensitivity and specificity for detecting moderate and severe obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) in children with Down syndrome but showed low sensitivity for detecting mild OSA. METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the ability of two NPO indices (ODI3 and ODI4) for predicting OSA in children with Down syndrome. They compared cardiorespiratory polygraphy (CRP) and NPO recordings in 387 children aged 2-16 years with Down syndrome (median age, 6.1 years; 46.7% girls) who were referred for the evaluation of OSA at two tertiary sleep centres in the UK between May 2016 and May 2024. OSA was defined as having an Obstructive Apnoea-Hypopnoea Index (OAHI) of one or more events per hour and classified according to severity as mild (one or more to less than five events per hour), moderate (five or more to less than 10 events per hour), or severe (10 or more events per hour). Two-by-two tables were used to determine the sensitivity and specificity of various cutoff values of NPO parameters for predicting OSA: oxygen saturation (SpO2), ODI3, ODI4, minimum SpO2, the Delta 12-second index, and the percentage of analysis time with SpO2 < 94%, < 92%, and < 90%. TAKEAWAY: Of 387 children, 265 (68.5%) had OSA, with 164 (42.4%) having mild OSA, 51 (13.2%) having moderate OSA, and 50 (12.9%) having severe OSA. An ODI3 threshold of 19 or more events per hour provided the highest combined sensitivity and specificity for predicting OSA (59.2% and 74.6%, respectively); increasing the threshold to 23 or more events per hour provided the highest combined sensitivity and specificity for an OAHI of five or more events per hour (70.3% and 79.7%, respectively) and 10 or more events per hour (82.0% and 73.9%, respectively). An ODI4 threshold of 10 or more events per hour yielded moderate sensitivity (76.2%) and specificity (75.2%) for predicting OSA; a threshold of 13 or more events per hour provided moderate sensitivity (72.0%) and high specificity (80.7%) for an OAHI of 10 or more events per hour. For predicting an OAHI of one or more events per hour, an ODI3 threshold of 19 or more events per hour yielded a positive predictive value of 83.5% and a negative predictive value of 45.7%, and an ODI4 of eight or more events per hour yielded a positive predictive value of 82.8% and a negative predictive value of 47.5%. IN PRACTICE: "Oximetry alone does not provide a reliable diagnostic tool for evaluating OSA in children with DS [Down syndrome]; therefore, we recommend CRP/PSG [polysomnography] should be performed," the authors wrote. SOURCE: This study was led by Hannah Vennard, Paediatric Respiratory and Sleep Medicine, Royal Hospital for Children, Glasgow in Glasgow, Scotland. It was published online on August 11, 2025, in Archives of Disease in Childhood. LIMITATIONS: Using CRP instead of polysomnography meant that total sleep time was estimated, which could have potentially led to the underestimation of the OAHI due to underscoring of hypopnoeas not associated with desaturation when arousals from sleep could not be detected. The total recording time of stand-alone oximetry does not match the total sleep time measured using CRP, which may have affected the accuracy of oximetry indices in predicting the OAHI. The high prevalence of central apnoeic events may have affected the accuracy of ODI thresholds for predicting OSA. DISCLOSURES: This study did not receive any funding from any source. The authors declared no conflicts of interest. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store