Abstract

Introduction

Tuberculosis (TB) remains a substantial global health problem, with an estimated one out of every three people worldwide infected with Mycobacterium tuberculosis [1] and 8.6 million incident active cases globally in 2012 [2]. Smoking, though declining in the United States, is still a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States and worldwide. Smoking has consistently been shown to be a risk factor for poor TB outcomes including activation of latent TB infection (LTBI) to TB disease, progression of active TB, and TB-related mortality [3], [4], [5]. There is less evidence and agreement on the role that smoking may have on transmission and infection with TB.

While active or former smoking has been associated with increased risk for LTBI [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], including a population-based national sample in the United States [13], fewer studies have investigated the association between passive smoking (secondhand smoke exposure) and LTBI in adults [14] or children [15], [16], [17]. All studies reported a positive association between passive smoking and LTBI, though some did not adjust for confounding variables [16], [17], and one study found no association after adjusting for confounding variables [15]. Among studies that assessed a dose-response relationship between smoke exposure levels, Shin et. al. reported an increased risk of LTBI with increased smoke exposure [14] while Horne et. al. reported a dose-response relationship only among non-Hispanic blacks in the United States but no overall association among adults of all race/ethnicity between past or present smoke exposure and LTBI in a study using the 1999-2000 NHANES dataset [13].

Passive smoke exposure may contribute to the household spread of TB, and contacts of TB patients who smoke have been shown to have an independent and increased risk of LTBI [18]. As children are thought to be more susceptible to the effects of passive smoking on their immature respiratory and immune systems [19], [20], they may be at particular risk of TB infection when exposed to secondhand smoke [21]. The association between passive smoking with LTBI has not yet been investigated on a representative sample in the United States.

In many previous studies on the relationship between passive smoking and LTBI researchers have relied on self-reported smoking status to assess risk [15], [16], [17]; this measurement can be subject to significant underreporting bias. Furthermore, variations in smoking behavior that can affect pathophysiology, such as depth of inhalation, are difficult to capture via self-report [22]. Cotinine, a metabolite of nicotine, may be measured in a variety of body fluids and is considered the gold-standard for assessing nicotine exposure [23]. While self-reported current smoking status is 80–90% concordant with measured serum cotinine levels in national studies in the United States [24], estimating exposure to passive smoke among non-smokers is more difficult [25]. Furthermore, there is less concordance between biologic assessment of smoking status and self-report among adolescents, among whom smoking may be more sporadic and where socially desirable responding may lead to under-reporting of current or passive smoking [22].

We sought to determine the association between active and passive smoking and LTBI in a representative sample of the US population using cotinine verification of smoking exposure among non-smoking adults and children.

Methods

TB and smoking exposure classification

After TST placement, induration was measured 48–72 hours later by trained readers. Induration ≥10 mm was considered a positive result for LTBI. For those with evidence of Bacillus Calmette-Guérin(BCG) vaccination (determined by the presence of a scar on the upper arm during the medical examination), induration of ≥15 mm was considered positive. There were 39 adults and 4 children that were BCG-vaccinated and had induration between 10–15 mm that were not considered to have LTBI.

Self-reported current smoking behavior was measured through the home interview followed by the lab interview conducted at the time of the physical examination, when serum sampling is completed. At the home interview adults that had smoked at least 100 cigarettes in their life were asked “Do you currently smoke cigarettes?”. At the lab interview adults and adolescents 12–19 years were asked “During the past 5 days, did you use any product containing nicotine including cigarettes, pipes, cigars, chewing tobacco, snuff, nicotine patches, nicotine gum, or any other product containing nicotine?” and if adolescents indicated they had ever tried smoking they were also asked “During the past 30 days, on how many days did you smoke cigarettes?”.

Participants were classified as non-, passive, or active smokers using information from both the home and lab interviews and the laboratory results using CDC definitions [28] (Table 1). Persons with serum cotinine levels <0.05 ng/mL (0.05 ng/mL being the minimum level of detection (LOD) for the 1999–2000 survey) who did not report smoking prior to their physical examination were classified as non-smokers. Those who reported no smoking but had serum cotinine levels of 0.05–10 ng/mL were classified as passive smokers. Participants with serum cotinine levels >10 ng/mL who reported smoking cigarettes, pipes, or cigars, were considered active smokers. Persons who reported smoking and had serum cotinine levels <10 ng/mL were considered active smokers (likely light or non-daily smokers) [24].Where there were discrepant responses regarding current smoking in between interview questions, or interview questions with regards to current smoking behavior were missing, we then used the above described serum cotinine cutoff points to categorize smoking exposure. Children aged 3–12 years were not interviewed regarding smoking and were assigned to exposure categories using only serum cotinine levels; cotinine levels ≥0.05 ng/mL defined children as passive smokers. Of the 3856 adults and 3206 children who had TST results, 203 adults (unweighted proportion 5.6%) and 253 children (unweighted proportion 7.9%) were missing serum cotinine lab results and were excluded from this analysis. Since cotinine measurements could be influenced by smokeless tobacco products or cessation aids containing nicotine, 55 adults (unweighted proportion 1.5%) and 10 children (unweighted proportion 0.3%) with cotinine lab results that reported using smokeless tobacco products or cessation aids without self-reported smoking were also excluded from this analysis.

Table 1

Determination of smoking status among those with complete tuberculin skin test (TST) results.

	Smoking status	Adults (unweighted n=3598)	Children (unweighted n=2943)
		Ages 20+	Ages 12–19	Ages 3–11∧
Active smoking	Self-reported smoker w/cotinine ≥10 ng/mL	849	178	-
	Discrepant self-report w/cotinine ≥10 ng/mL	10	29	-
	Missing self-report w/cotinine ≥10 ng/mL	32	17	-
	Self-reported non-smoker w/cotinine ≥10 ng/mL	47	27	-
	Self-reported smoker w/cotinine <10 ng/mL	86	66	-
	Subtotal	938	317	-
Passive smoking	Self-reported non-smoker w/cotinine ≥ 0.05 ng/mL & <10 ng/mL	1206	817	-
	Discrepant self-report w/cotinine ≥ 0.05 ng/mL & <10 ng/mL	14	42	-
	Missing self-report w/cotinine≥ 0.05 ng/mL & <10 ng/mL (≥0.05 for children 3–11)	3	66	682
	Subtotal	1223	925	682
Non-smoking	Self-reported non-smoker w/cotinine <0.05 ng/mL	1435	586	-
	Discrepant self-report w/cotinine <0.05 ng/mL	2	19	-
	Missing self-report w/cotinine <0.05 ng/mL	0	25	389
	Subtotal	1437	630	389
	Total	3598	1872	1071

Open in a separate window

∧Ages 3-11 did not receive smoking behavior questions

Covariates of interest included age at time of examination (approximately 4–6 weeks after the home interview), gender, race/ethnicity, country of birth (United States, Mexico, Other foreign-born), poverty income ratio (<1 indicates below the poverty line, adjusted by year), level of education, the number of persons living in the same household, and whether the participant had ever lived with someone with active TB. Frequency of alcohol use among adult participants with complete TST tests and smoking status had a substantial amount of missing data (15.3%); we performed a sensitivity analysis to compare the inclusion of heavy alcohol use (≥5 drinks per day) in the multivariate model for adults.

Results

Sociodemographic correlates of LTBI

Respondents with LTBI were more likely to have been born outside the United States, and have lower household income than those who did not have LTBI (Table 2). Among adults, respondents with LTBI were more likely to be male, of minority race/ethnicity, with less than high school education, living in larger households than LTBI-negative participants, and report having lived with someone with active TB. Among children, age, gender, race/ethnicity, having lived with someone with active TB, and household size did not significantly differ by LTBI status. Overall, there was no difference in LTBI status based on BCG vaccination (p=0.42 for adults and p=0.78 for children, Pearson's Chi-square). There was no association between heavy alcohol use and LTBI among adults (OR=1.17, 95% CI 0.45–3.06). Heavy alcohol use was included in a multivariate model that included n=2634 adults with alcohol data; the relationship between active and passive smoking and LTBI was strengthened (AOR=3.41, 95% CI 1.91–6.10 and AOR=2.39, 95% CI 1.16–4.92, respectively).

Table 2

Latent TB Infection among US non-institutionalized adults (aged ≥20 years) and children (aged 3–19 years) by sociodemographic correlates and smoking status, 1999–2000.

	Adults			Children
	LTBI-Unweighted n=3317 (weighted %)	LTBI+ Unweighted n=281 (weighted %)	P (Pearson's Chi-square)	LTBI- Unweighted n=2885 (weighted %)	LTBI+ unweighted n=58 (weighted %)	P
Smoking status			0.046			0.387
Non-smoker	1335 (35.8)	102 (24.5)		987 (31.0)	32 (41.3)
Passive smoker	1135 (33.6)	88 (36.8)		1585 (58.5)	22 (56.2)
Active smoker	847 (30.7)	91 (38.7)		313 (10.5)	4 (2.5)
Age (years)			0.068			0.999
Weighted mean	45.3	48.7		11.6	11.6
Male sex	1499 (46.3)	174 (61.5)	0.010	1505(53.8)	38 (50.8)	0.847
Race/Ethnicity			<0.001			0.108
Non-Hispanic White	1615 (73.2)	37 (30.7)		593 (59.0)	5 (55.5)
Mexican American	849 (6.0)	140 (17.2)		1214 (11.5)	46 (29.2)
Non-Hispanic Black	586 (9.7)	65 (19.6)		832 (15.1)	5 (07.9)
Other Hispanic/Multiracial/Other	267 (11.1)	39(32.6)		246 (14.4)	2 (07.4)
Birthplace			<0.001			<0.001
US	2550 (85.3)	114 (40.1)		2512 (92.2)	22 (30.1)
Mexico	456 (3.3)	112 (15.2)		277 (2.1)	30 (19.0)
Other country	308 (11.3)	55 (44.7)		95 (5.8)	6 (50.9)
Ever lived with someone with active TB	136 (3.3)	35 (12.9)	<0.001	40 (0.8)	4 (2.6)	0.072
BCG scar	466 (12.9)	35 (17.5)	0.418	42(0.8)	0(0.0)	0.777
Education			<0.001			-
< High School graduate	1182 (22.9)	185 (49.0)		-	-
High school graduate/GED or more	2115 (77.1)	95 (51.1)		-	-
Poverty Income Ratio<1	566 (15.1)	68 (26.9)	0.029	979 (27.7)	31 (87.1)	<0.001
Household size (persons)			<0.001			0.618
Weighted mean	3.0	3.6		4.4	4.7

Open in a separate window

Active and passive smoking and LTBI

Adults with cotinine-confirmed active smoking status were almost two times as likely to have LTBI (OR=1.85, 95% CI 1.09–3.14) compared to non-smokers (Table 3). After adjusting for age, gender, poverty income ratio, race, education, birthplace, household size, and having ever lived with somebody with TB, the odds ratio (OR) for the association between active smoking and LTBI among adults was 2.31 (95% CI 1.17–4.55) (Table 4). The adjusted OR for LTBI among cotinine-confirmed passive smoking among adults was 2.00 (95% CI 0.87–4.60). Neither active or passive smoking was associated with LTBI in multivariate analyses for children.

Table 3

Bivariate logistic regression of smoking status and other sociodemographic correlates, and LTBI, United States, 1999–2000.

	Adults (≥20) n=3843	Children (3–19) n=2943
	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)
Smoking status (Ref=non-smokers)
Passive smokers	1.60 (0.92–2.80)	0.72 (0.18–2.86)
Active smokers	1.85 (1.09–3.14)	0.18 (0.04–0.89)
Age (5-year intervals for adults, 2-year intervals for children)	1.00(1.00–1.02)	1.00 (0.93–1.07)
Male sex	1.85(1.18–2.91)	1.12 (0.31–4.16)
Race/ethnicity (ref=non-Hispanic white)
Mexican American	6.79 (3.66–12.62)	2.70 (0.74–9.85)
Non-Hispanic Black	4.81 (2.59–8.93)	0.56 (0.12–2.66)
Other Hispanic/multiracial/Other	7.01 (3.57–13.77)	0.54 (0.07–4.11)
Education (ref= Beyond High School)
< High school graduate	3.23 (2.16–4.83)	-
Poverty income ratio <1	2.07(1.08–3.98)	17.68 (5.77–54.16)
Birthplace (Ref=born in US)
Mexican-born	9.64(6.70–13.88)	27.79 (7.99–96.66)
Foreign-born	8.41(4.98–14.21)	27.07 (5.13–142.64)
Size of household (unit=1 person)	1.27(1.15–1.39)	1.17 (0.60–2.28)
Ever lived w/someone w/active TB	4.40(2.29–8.44)	3.39 (0.81–14.21)

Open in a separate window

Table 4

Multivariable analysis^* of smoking status and LTBIrisks by age and birthplace,United States, 1999-2000.

	All Adults (n=3092)	All Children (n=2563)	U.S. born adults (n=2319)	U.S. born children (n=2222)	Foreign born adults (n=773)	Foreign born children (n=302)
	Adjusted OR	Adjusted OR	Adjusted OR	Adjusted OR	Adjusted OR	Adjusted OR
Smoking Status (Ref=non-smokers)
Passive smokers	2.00(0.87–4.60)	0.40 (0.07–2.24)	1.46 (0.59–3.63)	0.07 (0.01–0.42)	2.27 (1.09–4.72)	1.31 (0.40–4.23)
Active smokers	2.31(1.17–4.55)	0.13 (0.01–1.44)	1.73 (0.80–3.76)	0.18 (0.05–0.66)	2.56 (1.20–5.45)	0.06 (0.00–0.75)

Open in a separate window

*All models for adultswere adjusted for age, gender, poverty income ratio, race, education,household size, and having ever lived with someone withTB (except

when stratified by birthplace).Models for children were adjusted using the same variables as for adults except for education.

The strongest correlate of LTBI for both adults and children in this sample was foreign-born status (Table 3).Therefore, we tested the association of smoking and LTBI among adults and children stratifying by place of birth (Table 4). Among foreign-born adults, the association between active and passive smoking and LTBI was stronger than for US-born adults. US and foreign-born children who were active smokers as well as US born passive smoking children were paradoxically less likely to have LTBI compared with non-smokers.

Prevalence of LTBI

The prevalence of LTBI overall was 4.8% (95% CI 3.4%–6.1%) for adults and 1.1% (95% CI 0.3%–1.9%) for children aged 3–19 (Table 5). The prevalence of LTBI was 6.0%, 5.2%, and 3.3% for adult active smokers, passive smokers, and non-smokers, respectively. The prevalence of LTBI among children ages 3–19 was 0.3% for active smokers and 1.1% for passive smokers and 1.5% for non-smokers. The prevalence of LTBI among US born adults was 3.01%, 2.44%, and 1.50% for active smokers, passive smokers and non-smokers, compared to 24.0%, 18.3%, and 11.2% among foreign-born adults, respectively. In the same respective smoking categories, US born children had an LTBI prevalence of 0.3%, 0.1%, and 0.9% compared to 0.5%, 12.5%, and 7.1% among foreign-born children.

Table 5

Estimated US prevalence of LTBI according to smoking characteristics by age and birthplace, 1999–2000.

	Adults			Children
Characteristics	Weighted LTBI prevalence	Population with characteristic	Estimated no. with LTBI	Weighted LTBI prevalence	Population with characteristic	Estimated no. with LTBI
	% (95% CI)	No. x 1,000	No. x 1,000 (95% CI)	% (95% CI)	No. x 1,000	No. x 1,000 (95% CI)
All participants	4.76 (3.44–6.09)	192748	9184 (6637–11730)	1.13 (0.33–1.94)	69500	789 (226–1352)
Smoking
Overall
Non-smokers	3.31 (2.31,4.72)	67895	2248 (1569–3208)	1.51 (0.64–3.50)	21638	326 (139–757)
Passive	5.20 (3.31–8.06)	65043	3379 (2154–5242)	1.01 (0.38–3.10)	40624	443 (154–1260)
Active	5.95 (4.20,8.36)	59811	3556 (2509–5001)	0.27 (0.06–1.19)	7238	20 (5–86)
U.S. Born
Non-smokers	1.50 (0.94–2.40)	55142	827 (516–1321)	0.88 (0.25–3.08)	19469	171 (48–599)
Passive	2.44 (1.49–3.96)	53732	1310 (801–2130)	0.13 (0.04–0.41)	37477	50 (16–153)
Active	3.01 (1.97–4.56)	51464	1549 (1016–2348)	0.26 (0.05–1.25)	6609	17 (3–83)
Foreign Born
Non-smokers	11.16 (6.92–17.51)	12741	1422 (882–2231)	7.14 (2.62–18.04)	2171	155 (57–392)
Passive	18.34 (11.24–28.49)	11290	2071 (1269–3216)	12.52 (5.16–27.32)	3143	393 (162–859)
Active	23.98 (16.48–33.52)	8380	2009 (1381–2809)	0.47 (0.05–4.24)	630	3 (0–27)

Open in a separate window

Discussion

This study of the non-institutionalized US population confirms the positive association between cotinine-confirmed active smoking and LTBI among adult participants. In addition, after stratification by foreign-born status, the risk of LTBI due to active smoking was even greater among adults born outside of the United States and there was no association between active smoking and LTBI among US-born adults. Passive smoking had a marginally significant association with LTBI among US-born adults and a significant association with LTBI among the foreign-born adults. The effect of smoking and smoke exposure may be particularly important where there is a higher prevalence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis circulating in the community, which is the case for many nations from which the foreign born population in the United States emigrate. In fact, den Boon et al. found that passive smoking was only associated with LTBI among those living with an active TB patient and was not associated among those not living with an active TB patient [15]. Therefore, active and passive smoking in immigrants' home countries along with higher prevalence of M. tuberculosis may be an important determinant of the US TB burden.

We did not find that passive smoking was associated with increased risk for LTBI among children in contrast with other published studies on LTBI [15], [16], [17], [29] and active TB [30], [31] among children. This lack of association could simply be due to the small number of LTBI cases among children in the NHANES 1999–2000. However, all other studies were conducted among contacts of TB patients or in high TB incidence areas and used self-reported smoking measures, which could affect risk estimates. Two of these studies reported an association between passive smoking and TB infection among children living in the home of a TB patient [15], [17]. Du Preez et al. reported a dose-response relationship between passive smoke exposure and LTBI in a high TB-incidence area [29]. In the only other study of passive smoking and LTBI among children conducted in the United States, Kuemmerer did not exclude active smokers or control for known confounding factors; in addition LTBI prevalence and smoking prevalence were much higher at the time of his study (1963) than in 1999–2000, and the control group would thus have experienced more extensive passive smoke exposure. We therefore suspect that our differing results may be attributable to the low prevalence of LTBI in the US population (especially among children), differences in measurement of passive smoke exposure, and the difference in passive smoke exposure in the US population of 1999–2000 compared with other study populations. More research is needed among adults and children using cotinine-confirmed measures of passive smoking in settings with diverse TB exposures.

There is increasing mechanistic evidence providing biological plausibility that smoking increases the likelihood of TB infection [32], [33], [34]. Smoke exposure reduces normal ciliary function of pathogen clearance from the lung and bronchial pathways [35]. Alveolar macrophages in smokers are less able to respond to harmful bacteria in the lung [36]. In addition, systemic immune response is compromised in smokers [32]. Finally, smoke exposure results in more coughing [37], [38] that may facilitate aerosolizing M. Tuberculosis from the lungs of infected smokers, which could lead to increased transmission.

Since smoking has been associated with poor adherence to treatment for both active TB and LTBI [39], [40],_ENREF_37 and given our approximation of 6.9 million adults who were either active or passive smokers with LTBI in the US in 1999–2000 (4.1 million of whom are foreign-born), current efforts to treat LTBI in the US may benefit with special attention to tobacco control policies and smoking cessation interventions among adults generally and the foreign-born with LTBI. With recent changes in treatment guidelines for LTBI [29], more research is needed to determine if there is an association between LTBI treatment failure under new guidelines and active and passive smoking exposure.

Conclusion

While the effects of active and passive smoking on LTBI in the United States across age and country of birth are not consistent in the 1999–2000 NHANES, active smoking among all adults, and active and passive smoking among the foreign-born adults, were strongly associated with LTBI. Further research using cotinine-confirmed smoking exposure assessment, especially for passive smoking, in areas of higher TB prevalence would help to more accurately determine the specific TB burden due to tobacco use. Comprehensive global tobacco control including active and passive smoking prevention and cessation efforts will likely further decrease the prevalence of LTBI in the United States, especially among adults. Tobacco cessation programs among TB patients as well as encouraging smoke-free homes for TB patients have already been recommended by The Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease [43]. Furthermore, cigarette smoking exposure has been recommended as a criterion for treatment of LTBI [44]and has been incorporated into guidelines in the United States [45] and Canada [46]. Yet only Canada currently recommends smoking as criterion for TB testing among the already immigrated foreign-born. The US foreign-born who smoke or are exposed to smoke represent a subpopulation at particular risk for LTBI. Thus, the United States should also recommend TB testing for the already immigrated foreign-born that actively smoke or are exposed to passive smoke. Global tobacco control efforts should be joined with TB control programs in order to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with TB.

Acknowledgments

Funding Statement

Ryan Lindsay was supported in part by a trainee grants from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA T32DA023356) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI R25CA113710). Sanghyuk Shin received support from NIDA Dissertation Grant 1R36DA033152. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

1. Bloom BR, Murray CJ (1992) Tuberculosis: commentary on a reemergent killer. Science 257: 1055–1064. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

2. WHO (2013) Global tuberculosis control 2013. Geneva: WHO.

3. Bates MN, Khalakdina A, Pai M, Chang L, Lessa F, et al. (2007) Risk of tuberculosis from exposure to tobacco smoke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med 167: 335–342. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

4. Lin HH, Ezzati M, Murray M (2007) Tobacco smoke, indoor air pollution and tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med 4: e20. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

5. Slama K, Chiang CY, Enarson DA, Hassmiller K, Fanning A, et al. (2007) Tobacco and tuberculosis: a qualitative systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 11: 1049–1061. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

6. Anderson RH, Sy FS, Thompson S, Addy C (1997) Cigarette smoking and tuberculin skin test conversion among incarcerated adults. American journal of preventive medicine 13: 175–181. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

7. Plant AJ, Watkins RE, Gushulak B, O'Rourke T, Jones W, et al. (2002) Predictors of tuberculin reactivity among prospective Vietnamese migrants: the effect of smoking. Epidemiology and infection 128: 37–45. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

8. Solsona J, Cayla JA, Nadal J, Bedia M, Mata C, et al. (2001) Screening for tuberculosis upon admission to shelters and free-meal services. European journal of epidemiology 17: 123–128. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

9. den Boon S, van Lill SW, Borgdorff MW, Verver S, Bateman ED, et al. (2005) Association between smoking and tuberculosis infection: a population survey in a high tuberculosis incidence area. Thorax 60: 555–557. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

10. Nisar M, Williams CS, Ashby D, Davies PD (1993) Tuberculin testing in residential homes for the elderly. Thorax 48: 1257–1260. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

11. Brunet L, Pai M, Davids V, Ling D, Paradis G, et al. (2011) High prevalence of smoking among patients with suspected tuberculosis in South Africa. The European respiratory journal: official journal of the European Society for Clinical Respiratory Physiology 38: 139–146. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

12. McCurdy SA, Arretz DS, Bates RO (1997) Tuberculin reactivity among California Hispanic migrant farm workers. American journal of industrial medicine 32: 600–605. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

13. Horne DJ, Campo M, Ortiz JR, Oren E, Arentz M, et al. (2012) Association between smoking and latent tuberculosis in the U.S. population: an analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. PLoS One 7: e49050. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

14. Shin SS, Laniado-Laborin R, Moreno PG, Novotny TE, Strathdee SA, et al. (2013) Dose-response association between salivary cotinine levels and Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 17: 1452–1458. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

15. den Boon S, Verver S, Marais BJ, Enarson DA, Lombard CJ, et al. (2007) Association between passive smoking and infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis in children. Pediatrics 119: 734–739. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

16. Kuemmerer JM, Comstock GW (1967) Sociologic concomitants of tuberculin sensitivity. The American review of respiratory disease 96: 885–892. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

17. Singh M, Mynak ML, Kumar L, Mathew JL, Jindal SK (2005) Prevalence and risk factors for transmission of infection among children in household contact with adults having pulmonary tuberculosis. Archives of disease in childhood 90: 624–628. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

18. Godoy P, Cayla JA, Carmona G, Camps N, Alvarez J, et al. (2013) Smoking in tuberculosis patients increases the risk of infection in their contacts. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 17: 771–776. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

19. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2008) Disparities in secondhand smoke exposure—United States, 1988–1994 and 1999-2004. MMWR Morbidity and mortality weekly report 57: 744–747. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

20. Cook DG, Strachan DP (1999) Health effects of passive smoking-10: Summary of effects of parental smoking on the respiratory health of children and implications for research. Thorax 54: 357–366. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

21. Lin H-H, Chiang Y-T, Chuang J-H, Yang S-L, Chang H-Y, et al. (2013) Exposure to Secondhand Smoke and Risk of Tuberculosis: Prospective Cohort Study. PLoS ONE 8: e77333. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

22. Caraballo RS, Giovino GA, Pechacek TF (2004) Self-reported cigarette smoking vs. serum cotinine among U.S. adolescents. Nicotine & tobacco research: official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco 6: 19–25. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

23. Cummings SR, Richard RJ (1988) Optimum cutoff points for biochemical validation of smoking status. American journal of public health 78: 574–575. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

24. Caraballo RS, Giovino GA, Pechacek TF, Mowery PD (2001) Factors associated with discrepancies between self-reports on cigarette smoking and measured serum cotinine levels among persons aged 17 years or older: Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988-1994. American journal of epidemiology 153: 807–814. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

25. Max W, Sung HY, Shi Y (2009) Who is exposed to secondhand smoke? Self-reported and serum cotinine measured exposure in the U.S., 1999-2006. International journal of environmental research and public health 6: 1633–1648. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

26. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) (1999–2000) NHANES 1999–2000 Public Data Release File Documentation In: Services USDoHaH, editor. Hyattsville, MD.

27. Bennett DE, Courval JM, Onorato I, Agerton T, Gibson JD, et al. (2008) Prevalence of tuberculosis infection in the United States population: the national health and nutrition examination survey, 1999-2000. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 177: 348–355. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

28. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2010) Vital signs: nonsmokers' exposure to secondhand smoke --- United States, 1999-2008. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 59: 1141–1146. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

29. du Preez K, Mandalakas AM, Kirchner HL, Grewal HM, Schaaf HS, et al.. (2011) Environmental tobacco smoke exposure increases Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection risk in children. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 15: 1490–1496, i. [Abstract]

30. Tipayamongkholgul M, Podhipak A, Chearskul S, Sunakorn P (2005) Factors associated with the development of tuberculosis in BCG immunized children. The Southeast Asian journal of tropical medicine and public health 36: 145–150. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

31. Altet MN, Alcaide J, Plans P, Taberner JL, Salto E, et al. (1996) Passive smoking and risk of pulmonary tuberculosis in children immediately following infection. A case-control study. Tuber Lung Dis 77: 537–544. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

32. Domagala-Kulawik J (2008) Effects of cigarette smoke on the lung and systemic immunity. Journal of physiology and pharmacology: an official journal of the Polish Physiological Society 59 Suppl 6: 19–34. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

33. Shang S, Ordway D, Henao-Tamayo M, Bai X, Oberley-Deegan R, et al.. (2011) Cigarette Smoke Increases Susceptibility to Tuberculosis—Evidence From In Vivo and In Vitro Models. The Journal of infectious diseases. [Abstract]

34. Underner M, Perriot J (2012) [Smoking and tuberculosis]. Presse medicale 41: 1171–1180. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

35. Dye JA, Adler KB (1994) Effects of cigarette smoke on epithelial cells of the respiratory tract. Thorax 49: 825–834. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

36. Hodge S, Hodge G, Ahern J, Jersmann H, Holmes M, et al. (2007) Smoking alters alveolar macrophage recognition and phagocytic ability: implications in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 37: 748–755. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

37. Hamari A, Toljamo T, Nieminen P, Kinnula VL (2010) High frequency of chronic cough and sputum production with lowered exercise capacity in young smokers. Ann Med 42: 512–520. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

38. Loudon RG (1976) Smoking and cough frequency. The American review of respiratory disease 114: 1033–1036. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

39. Chang KC, Leung CC, Tam CM (2004) Risk factors for defaulting from anti-tuberculosis treatment under directly observed treatment in Hong Kong. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 8: 1492–1498. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

40. Lavigne M, Rocher I, Steensma C, Brassard P (2006) The impact of smoking on adherence to treatment for latent tuberculosis infection. BMC Public Health 6: 66. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

41. Benowitz NL (1996) Cotinine as a biomarker of environmental tobacco smoke exposure. Epidemiologic reviews 18: 188–204. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

42. Benowitz NL, Bernert JT, Caraballo RS, Holiday DB, Wang J (2009) Optimal serum cotinine levels for distinguishing cigarette smokers and nonsmokers within different racial/ethnic groups in the United States between 1999 and 2004. American journal of epidemiology 169: 236–248. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

43. Bissell K FT, Chiang C-Y, Enarson DA (2010) Smoking cessation and smokefree environments for tuberculosis patients Paris, France: International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease.

44. Chan ED, Keane J, Iseman MD (2010) Should cigarette smoke exposure be a criterion to treat latent tuberculous infection? American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine 182: 990–992. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

45. Mazurek GH, Jereb J, Vernon A, LoBue P, Goldberg S, et al. (2010) Updated guidelines for using Interferon Gamma Release Assays to detect Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection - United States, 2010. MMWR Recommendations and reports: Morbidity and mortality weekly report Recommendations and reports/Centers for Disease Control 59: 1–25. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]

46. Public Health Agency of Canada (2010) Updated recommendations on interferon gamma release assays for latent tuberculosis infection-2010 update. An Advisory Committee Statement (ACS). Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada 36: 1–21. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]