Analysis of the Construction of a Predictive Model for Eosinophilic Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Shuo Wu,Jiahong Lao,Feitong Jian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/jaa.s450514

2024-02-29

Journal of Asthma and Allergy

Abstract:Shuo Wu, 1, 2 Jiahong Lao, 1 Feitong Jian 1 1 E.N.T. Department, the 3rd Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China; 2 School of Biomedical Engineering, Sun Yat-Sen University, Shenzhen, People's Republic of China Correspondence: Shuo Wu, E.N.T. Department, the 3rd Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, Tel +86-20-85252239, Email Purpose: This study aimed to determine indices to diagnose and predict eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis (ECRS) during the initial clinic visit. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 116 patients with chronic rhinosinusitis who underwent endoscopic sinus surgery and were classified according to the postoperative pathological diagnosis. General data and various clinical indicators were analyzed, and indicators with statistically significant differences between groups were further incorporated into a multivariate logistic regression to establish a comprehensive prediction model. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to compare the two significant valuable single factors from previous studies, the difference in CT scores between the ethmoid sinus and the sum difference of the maxillary sinus (EM difference) and the absolute value of peripheral blood eosinophil (bEOS), with a comprehensive prediction model. Results: There were significant differences in history of allergic asthma (p < 0.001), visual analog scale (VAS) score (p=0.005), sino-nasal outcome test-22(SNOT-22) scale score (p=0.004), Lund-Mackay scale score (p=0.017), EM difference (p=0.002), percentage of bEOS (%)(p=0.001), and absolute value of bEOS (× 109/L) (p=0.000) between the two groups (p the AUC of the absolute value of the bEOS (0.764)>the AUC of the EM difference (0.655). The AUC of the EM difference and the comprehensive prediction model were statistically different (P=0.025). There was no statistical difference between the absolute value of bEOS and the AUC of the comprehensive prediction model. Conclusion: The comprehensive prediction model covering the three aspects of allergic asthma history, VAS score, and bEOS count had the highest AUC compared to the other predictors and had good predictive power for the diagnosis of ECRS. Keywords: eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis, non-eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis, prediction model, the difference of the CT scores between the ethmoid sinus and maxillary sinus, European position paper on rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps 2020 Rhinosinusitis is a highly heterogeneous disease with complex pathogenesis and a wide range of treatment options. The treatment options and prognosis for different types of rhinosinusitis vary greatly. 1 The European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 2 (EPOS-2020), based on the 2012 version, 3 incorporated a large number of research findings and reclassified chronic rhinosinusitis according to its pathogenesis, extent of the lesions, intrinsic phenotype, etc. The classification was not based on the presence or absence of associated nasal polyps, but on the degree of tissue eosinophil percentage (tEOS) infiltration. They are divided into type II (eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis, ECRS) and non-type II (non-eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis, nECRS). 4 Patients with ECRS are more likely to have nasal polyps than those with nECRS and show a higher rate of asthma comorbidity and postoperative recurrence. 5,6 Following the European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases (EUFOREA) treatment algorithm for rhinosinusitis, there are significant differences between the treatment modalities of ECRS and nECRS. 7 Thus, typing diagnosis is an urgent issue for all rhinologists. tEOS ≥10/HPF was recently proposed as a criterion for the diagnosis of ECRS by EPOS-2020. 3 However, this diagnosis requires a local biopsy and an experienced pathologist to evaluate the number of eosinophils in 10 random high-magnification fields before a typing diagnosis can be made. This makes it difficult to carry out this work in primary care hospitals, and it is difficult for primary care physicians to make a precise typing diagnosis in the early stages of a patient's visit so that targeted treatment can be administered. Therefore, it is particularly important to establish a predictive model for typing diagnosis based on clinical characteristics as early as possible. In this study, we retro -Abstract Truncated-

immunology,allergy,respiratory system