Study of risk factors for atopic sensitization, asthma, and bronchial hyperresponsiveness in animal laboratory workers

Abstract

al.: Animal laboratory workers: risks for allergy and asthma associated with sensitization, asthma, or BHR. Conclusion: Exposure to laboratory animals was associated with atopic sensitization. However, we did not find a cutoff allergen concentration that increased the risk for sensitization. Duration of exposure seems to be more relevant to sensitization than concentration of allergens in dust. (J Occup Health 2016; 58: 7−15) Key words: Animal experimentation, Atopy, Bronchial hyperreactivity, Occupational disease Workers exposed to laboratory animals have a high risk of developing allergic reactions 1,2) . Rats and mice are the most common etiology of laboratory animal allergy because they are the most commonly used animals in research 3) . The high prevalence of this condition became evident from epidemiological crosssectional studies conducted in the 1980s 1,4) . Eleven to 44% of individuals who work with laboratory animals have reported allergic symptoms. These symptoms can range from skin reactions, nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, sneezing, and conjunctivitis, to severe asthma. Allergic rhinitis and allergic conjunctivitis symptoms are the most commonly reported symptoms. Among workers who become symptomatic, 4 to 22% have occupational asthma 2) . In a cohort study of 342 laboratory animal workers, quantitative analyses of exposure demonstrated a doseresponse relation between the intensity of exposure to skin symptoms and skin prick tests. Intensity of exposure (divided into 4 categories) was evaluated by quantification of rat urinary aeroallergen. Exposureresponse relations for symptoms were observed among sensitized workers, and for chest and eye/nose symptoms, they were not as clear as for skin symptoms. Two exposure indices were created: one based on the The aim of this estudy was to investigate the influence of allergen exposure levels and other risk factors for allergic sensitization, asthma, and bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) in workers exposed to laboratory animals. Methods: This was a crosssectional study performed at two universities, 123 workplaces with 737 subjects. Dust samples were collected from laboratories and animal facilities housing rats, mice, guinea pigs, rabbits, or hamsters and analyzed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to measure allergen concentrations. We also sampled workplaces without animals. Asthma was defined by both symptoms and BHR to mannitol. The concentrations of allergens were tested for association with a skin prick test, respiratory symptoms, spirometry data, and BHR. This multivariate analysis was performed by using Poisson regression to estimate the relative risk (RR) for the exposed group. Results: Our sample comprised students and workers, with 336 subjects in the nonexposed group and 401 subjects in the exposed group. Sixty-nine subjects (17%) had positive results in the skin prick test for animal allergens in the exposed group; in the nonexposed group, 10 subjects had positive results (3%) (p<0.001). Exposure to laboratory animals over 2.8 years...

Laboratory animal allergy reduction from 2001 to 2016: An intervention study

“…Our figures were low compared with other reports in Brazil [8], in Korea [10] and in USA [11]. Personal atopy and total IgE level are risk factors for the sensitization to LA [3,6,10] and incidence of symptoms is significantly related to exposure in a dose-related matter for some authors [6,7].…”

“…Exposure to laboratory animals (LA) can cause allergic sensitization and symptoms. Prevalence estimation of LA allergy ranged between 11 and 44% of workers, with higher figures in old reports and lower prevalence in more recent studies [1][2][3][4][5]. Symptoms included allergic rhinitis, conjunctivitis, asthma, anaphylaxis, and skin symptoms [4][5][6].…”

Allergic sensitization to laboratory animals is more associated with asthma, rhinitis, and skin symptoms than sensitization to common allergens

“…25 Finally, even though reduction in exposure to occupational allergens is an important issue, identifying a safe exposure threshold is difficult, as several authors have failed to find a cut-off value associated with increased risk of sensitization to laboratory animals or any symptoms. [26][27][28] For all these features, we believe that the recommendation for the complete cessation of exposure should be taken into consideration for the group of workers with occupational sensitization.…”

How Working Tasks Influence Biocontamination in an Animal Facility

“…In recent years, the topic regarding animal allergen exposure has been treated both in pets [3][4][5] and experimental animals [6][7][8][9], and attention has been also addressed to co-exposure of allergens and endotoxins in these workplaces, although in a more restricted way [10][11][12][13][14][15]. Exposure to biocontaminants in animal facilities in USA and in the United Kingdom has received great attention [16][17][18][19] as demonstrated by the NIOSH publication in 1998 [20], where the so-called LAA (Laboratory Animal Allergy) was considered an occupational risk, and by Gordon in 2001 [21]. Various papers have been published in scientific literature both as a review [22][23][24] and experimental studies [25][26][27] while in Italy the topic of LAA is not studied carefully yet.…”