The Experts below are selected from a list of 267 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Meinir Jones - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Measurement of Specific IgG Anti-Fel d 1 Antibodies.
Methods in molecular biology (Clifton N.J.), 2019Co-Authors: Meinir JonesAbstract:There is currently considerable interest in the role of specific IgG antibodies in Allergy. Several studies suggest that specific IgG antibodies may play a protective role in Allergy. Successful immunotherapy is associated with increases in allergen-specific IgG antibodies which correlate with clinical outcome. Other studies have identified an inverse relationship between exposure to cat and sensitization, which was associated with high-titer-specific IgG and IgG4. This immune response was described as a modified Th2 response, since both IgE and IgG4 require Th2 cytokine IL-4 for their production. A modified Th2 response was described with laboratory Animal Allergy, where there was almost a twofold reduction in the risk of developing work-related chest symptoms.In this chapter, we review the major factors to be considered in the development of an ELISA for the determination of specific IgG and IgG4 antibodies.
-
laboratory Animal Allergy is preventable in modern research facilities
European Respiratory Journal, 2019Co-Authors: Johanna Feary, Meinir Jones, Sj Schofield, Jennifer Canizales, Bernadette Fitzgerald, James Potts, Paul CullinanAbstract:Background Historical data suggest 15% of laboratory Animal workers develop IgE sensitisation and 10% symptoms of laboratory Animal Allergy (LAA), including occupational asthma. Individually ventilated cages (IVCs) are replacing conventional open cages; we sought to evaluate their impact on the development of LAA. Methods We surveyed 750 laboratory Animal workers and measured airborne Mus m 1 (mouse allergen) levels in seven UK institutions. We compared the prevalence of sensitisation to mouse proteins (by specific IgE assay or skin prick test) and of work-related allergic symptoms in IVC-only and open cage units. Results Full-shift Mus m 1 levels were lower in IVC than open cage units (geometric mean 1.00 (95% CI 0.73–1.36) versus 8.35 (95% CI 6.97–9.95) ng·m−3; p Conclusion In contemporary practice, LAA is now largely preventable with the use of IVC systems and the judicious use of appropriate respiratory protection.
-
P56 Cross-sectional study of prevalence of sensitisation to mouse allergens in laboratory Animal workers: the SPIRAL (Safe Practice In Reducing Allergy in Laboratories) study
Thorax, 2015Co-Authors: Johanna Feary, Meinir Jones, Bernadette Fitzgerald, Z Lightfoot, Winston Banya, Paul CullinanAbstract:Introduction At least 12000 people work with laboratory Animals in the UK. Approximately 15% of exposed employees develop specific IgE sensitisation and 10% clinical symptoms of occupational rhinitis and asthma due to laboratory Animal Allergy (LAA). Individually ventilated cages (IVCs) are increasingly replacing conventional open cages (primarily for mice welfare); whilst this can be associated with lower levels of ambient aeroallergen levels no corresponding reduction in incidence of LAA is apparent. The SPIRAL (Safe Practice In Reducing Allergy in Laboratories) study is a large multi-centred study designed to increase understanding of the complex association between workplace exposure to mouse allergens and development of sensitisation, and to evaluate the risk of working with mice today. Methods A cross-sectional study of Animal workers at UK medical research institutions is underway. Primary outcome is a comparison of prevalence of sensitisation to mouse proteins in those working in IVC only and those working in mixed facilities (open cages +/- IVCs). Participants complete a detailed online questionnaire including questions about work tasks and practices. Skin-prick tests to common aeroallergens and various Animal proteins are performed and blood samples analysed for serum specific IgE to Mus m 1 (mouse urinary protein) and mouse epithelium. Aeroallergen sampling for particulate matter and Mus m 1 is undertaken concurrently to provide objective exposure measurements (results presented elsewhere). Results 507 participants have been recruited to date. Analyses were restricted to those with less than 5 years exposure to mice (n = 212); of these, 10 (5%) participants were sensitised to mouse proteins. Prevalence of sensitisation was 3.5% in IVC only facilities and 6.3% in open cage/mixed facilities. Although numbers are small, a history of atopy to common aeroallergens and the site at which people worked appears to be associated with risk of sensitisation. Reporting of symptoms of laboratory Animal Allergy was as anticipated. (Table 1). Conclusion The results from the SPIRAL study will be used to develop an evidence-based “Code of best working practices” for facilities using IVC systems, nationally and further afield, with the overall goal of significantly reducing the incidence of LAA.
-
Laboratory Animal Allergy in the Modern Era
Current Allergy and Asthma Reports, 2015Co-Authors: Meinir JonesAbstract:Laboratory Animal workers face a high risk of developing laboratory Animal Allergy as a consequence of inhaling Animal proteins at work; this has serious consequences for their health and future employment. Exposure to Animal allergen remains to be the greatest risk factor although the relationship is complex, with attenuation at high allergen exposure. Recent evidence suggests that this may be due to a form of natural immunotolerance. Furthermore, the pattern of exposure to allergen may also be important in determining whether an allergic or a tolerant immune response is initiated. Risk associated with specific tasks in the laboratory need to be determined to provide evidence to devise a code of best practice for working within modern laboratory Animal facilities. Recent evidence suggests that members of lipocalin allergens, such as Mus m 1, may act as immunomodulatory proteins, triggering innate immune receptors through toll-like receptors and promoting airway laboratory Animal Allergy. This highlights the need to understand the relationship between endotoxin, Animal allergen and development of laboratory Animal Allergy to provide a safe working environment for all laboratory Animal workers.
-
S6 The Role Of Individually Ventilated Cages In Prevention Of Laboratory Animal Allergy: A Proof Of Concept Study
Thorax, 2014Co-Authors: Johanna Feary, Meinir Jones, Bernadette Fitzgerald, Z Lightfoot, Susie Schofield, Paul CullinanAbstract:Introduction and objectives At least 12000 people work with laboratory Animals in the UK. Approximately 15% of exposed employees develop specific IgE sensitisation and 10% clinical symptoms of laboratory Animal Allergy (LAA), a form of occupational asthma. Individually ventilated cages (IVCs) are increasingly replacing conventional open cages (primarily to protect mice from external infection) and whilst this can be associated with lower levels of ambient aeroallergen levels no corresponding reduction in the incidence of LAA is apparent. The SPIRAL (Safe Practice In Reducing Allergy in Laboratories) study is a large multi-centred study designed to increase understanding of the complex association between workplace exposure to mouse allergens and development of sensitisation, and to evaluate the risk of working with mice today. Methods A cross-sectional study of Animal workers at seven UK medical research institutions is in progress. We aim to recruit 250 people working in IVC-only facilities and 160 people working in mixed facilities; our primary outcome is a comparison of prevalence of sensitisation to Mus m 1 (mouse urinary antigen) between these two groups. Participants are invited to complete a detailed online questionnaire about work tasks and practices. Skin-prick tests to common aeroallergens and various Animal proteins are performed and blood samples analysed for serum specific IgE to Mus m 1. Aeroallergen sampling for particular matter and Mus m 1 is undertaken concurrently to provide additional information about potential exposures. Recently employed individuals are invited to participate in a cohort study to determine incidence rates of laboratory Animal Allergy. Results 136 individuals have been recruited to date; Table 1 shows their demographics and preliminary immunology results. Prevalence of allergic symptoms and sensitisation is similar to that anticipated. Conclusion The SPIRAL study is the largest, most detailed study of LAA to be carried out. It aims to increase understanding of the relationship between allergen exposure and risk of sensitisation with the goal of significantly reducing the incidence of LAA. The results will be used to develop a “Code of best working practices” for facilities using IVC systems, nationally and further afield.
Paul Cullinan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
laboratory Animal Allergy is preventable in modern research facilities
European Respiratory Journal, 2019Co-Authors: Johanna Feary, Meinir Jones, Sj Schofield, Jennifer Canizales, Bernadette Fitzgerald, James Potts, Paul CullinanAbstract:Background Historical data suggest 15% of laboratory Animal workers develop IgE sensitisation and 10% symptoms of laboratory Animal Allergy (LAA), including occupational asthma. Individually ventilated cages (IVCs) are replacing conventional open cages; we sought to evaluate their impact on the development of LAA. Methods We surveyed 750 laboratory Animal workers and measured airborne Mus m 1 (mouse allergen) levels in seven UK institutions. We compared the prevalence of sensitisation to mouse proteins (by specific IgE assay or skin prick test) and of work-related allergic symptoms in IVC-only and open cage units. Results Full-shift Mus m 1 levels were lower in IVC than open cage units (geometric mean 1.00 (95% CI 0.73–1.36) versus 8.35 (95% CI 6.97–9.95) ng·m−3; p Conclusion In contemporary practice, LAA is now largely preventable with the use of IVC systems and the judicious use of appropriate respiratory protection.
-
Laboratory Animal Allergy: a new world.
Current opinion in allergy and clinical immunology, 2016Co-Authors: Johanna Feary, Paul CullinanAbstract:Purpose of review In recent years there has been a dramatic shift in the world of Animal research whereby genetically modified mice have largely supplanted rats, and individually ventilated cages have been introduced to house delicate experimental Animals in place of traditional open cages. Although laboratory Animal Allergy remains an important cause of occupational asthma, the risks associated with contemporary practice and consequently the opportunities for primary and secondary prevention are largely unknown. Recent findings Although there is clear confirmation of a widespread increase in Animal experiments using mice, the evidence-base on the associated risks has lagged. Individually ventilated cages reduce ambient levels of mouse urinary protein in air but task-based exposures are unquantified. Immunological techniques to identify sensitization to mouse proteins are poorly standardized. The available evidence suggests that modern practices are, in most cases, associated with a reduced incidence of Animal sensitization. Summary There is a paucity of data to inform evidence-based practice in methods to control the incidence of laboratory Animal Allergy under the prevailing research environment; a better understanding of the relationship between exposures and outcome is urgently needed. As exposures decline, the relative importance of individual susceptibility will become prominent.
-
P56 Cross-sectional study of prevalence of sensitisation to mouse allergens in laboratory Animal workers: the SPIRAL (Safe Practice In Reducing Allergy in Laboratories) study
Thorax, 2015Co-Authors: Johanna Feary, Meinir Jones, Bernadette Fitzgerald, Z Lightfoot, Winston Banya, Paul CullinanAbstract:Introduction At least 12000 people work with laboratory Animals in the UK. Approximately 15% of exposed employees develop specific IgE sensitisation and 10% clinical symptoms of occupational rhinitis and asthma due to laboratory Animal Allergy (LAA). Individually ventilated cages (IVCs) are increasingly replacing conventional open cages (primarily for mice welfare); whilst this can be associated with lower levels of ambient aeroallergen levels no corresponding reduction in incidence of LAA is apparent. The SPIRAL (Safe Practice In Reducing Allergy in Laboratories) study is a large multi-centred study designed to increase understanding of the complex association between workplace exposure to mouse allergens and development of sensitisation, and to evaluate the risk of working with mice today. Methods A cross-sectional study of Animal workers at UK medical research institutions is underway. Primary outcome is a comparison of prevalence of sensitisation to mouse proteins in those working in IVC only and those working in mixed facilities (open cages +/- IVCs). Participants complete a detailed online questionnaire including questions about work tasks and practices. Skin-prick tests to common aeroallergens and various Animal proteins are performed and blood samples analysed for serum specific IgE to Mus m 1 (mouse urinary protein) and mouse epithelium. Aeroallergen sampling for particulate matter and Mus m 1 is undertaken concurrently to provide objective exposure measurements (results presented elsewhere). Results 507 participants have been recruited to date. Analyses were restricted to those with less than 5 years exposure to mice (n = 212); of these, 10 (5%) participants were sensitised to mouse proteins. Prevalence of sensitisation was 3.5% in IVC only facilities and 6.3% in open cage/mixed facilities. Although numbers are small, a history of atopy to common aeroallergens and the site at which people worked appears to be associated with risk of sensitisation. Reporting of symptoms of laboratory Animal Allergy was as anticipated. (Table 1). Conclusion The results from the SPIRAL study will be used to develop an evidence-based “Code of best working practices” for facilities using IVC systems, nationally and further afield, with the overall goal of significantly reducing the incidence of LAA.
-
S6 The Role Of Individually Ventilated Cages In Prevention Of Laboratory Animal Allergy: A Proof Of Concept Study
Thorax, 2014Co-Authors: Johanna Feary, Meinir Jones, Bernadette Fitzgerald, Z Lightfoot, Susie Schofield, Paul CullinanAbstract:Introduction and objectives At least 12000 people work with laboratory Animals in the UK. Approximately 15% of exposed employees develop specific IgE sensitisation and 10% clinical symptoms of laboratory Animal Allergy (LAA), a form of occupational asthma. Individually ventilated cages (IVCs) are increasingly replacing conventional open cages (primarily to protect mice from external infection) and whilst this can be associated with lower levels of ambient aeroallergen levels no corresponding reduction in the incidence of LAA is apparent. The SPIRAL (Safe Practice In Reducing Allergy in Laboratories) study is a large multi-centred study designed to increase understanding of the complex association between workplace exposure to mouse allergens and development of sensitisation, and to evaluate the risk of working with mice today. Methods A cross-sectional study of Animal workers at seven UK medical research institutions is in progress. We aim to recruit 250 people working in IVC-only facilities and 160 people working in mixed facilities; our primary outcome is a comparison of prevalence of sensitisation to Mus m 1 (mouse urinary antigen) between these two groups. Participants are invited to complete a detailed online questionnaire about work tasks and practices. Skin-prick tests to common aeroallergens and various Animal proteins are performed and blood samples analysed for serum specific IgE to Mus m 1. Aeroallergen sampling for particular matter and Mus m 1 is undertaken concurrently to provide additional information about potential exposures. Recently employed individuals are invited to participate in a cohort study to determine incidence rates of laboratory Animal Allergy. Results 136 individuals have been recruited to date; Table 1 shows their demographics and preliminary immunology results. Prevalence of allergic symptoms and sensitisation is similar to that anticipated. Conclusion The SPIRAL study is the largest, most detailed study of LAA to be carried out. It aims to increase understanding of the relationship between allergen exposure and risk of sensitisation with the goal of significantly reducing the incidence of LAA. The results will be used to develop a “Code of best working practices” for facilities using IVC systems, nationally and further afield.
-
Epidemiology of laboratory Animal Allergy
Occupational Asthma, 2010Co-Authors: H. Jeal, Meinir Jones, Paul CullinanAbstract:Laboratory Animal Allergy is common and an important occupational health issue for the research, pharmaceutical and toxicological sectors. In most settings where there is regular contact with laboratory Animals — chiefly small mammals — the prevalence of specific sensitisation is around 15% and the prevalence of clinical Allergy around 10%. These figures probably underestimate the true risk of disease since epidemiological studies of the disease have been beset by response and survivor biases. Allergen exposure appears to be the most important modifiable risk factor, but the effects of such exposure seem to be modified importantly by individual susceptibility. Laboratory Animal research shows no signs of becoming less common, and an increasingly susceptible (atopic) population is likely to be recruited into such work. Future studies should be designed to take into account the inherent biases of occupational epidemiology, to study in detail the immunological mechanisms that underlie sensitisation and tolerance, and to identify early biomarkers of each.
Gregg M. Stave - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Occupational Animal Allergy
Current Allergy and Asthma Reports, 2018Co-Authors: Gregg M. StaveAbstract:Purpose of Review This review explores Animal allergen exposure in research laboratories and other work settings, focusing on causes and prevention. Recent Findings (1) Consistent with the hygiene hypothesis, there is new evidence that early childhood exposure to pets produces changes in the gut microbiome that likely lead to a lower risk of Allergy. (2) Anaphylaxis from laboratory Animal bites occurs more frequently than suggested by prior literature. (3) Animal allergens represent an occupational hazard in a wide variety of work settings ranging from fields that work with Animals to public settings like schools and public transportation where allergens are brought into or are present in the workplace. Summary Exposure to Animal allergens can result in Allergy, asthma, and anaphylaxis. Animal Allergy has been most studied in the research laboratory setting, where exposure reduction can prevent the development of Allergy. Similar prevention approaches need to be considered for other Animal work environments and in all settings where Animal allergens are present.
-
Laboratory Animal Bite Anaphylaxis: A National Survey: Part 1: Case Series and Review of the Literature.
Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 2017Co-Authors: Gregg M. Stave, Edward H Lee, Dennis J. DarceyAbstract:Objective: This study documents previously unreported cases of laboratory Animal bite anaphylaxis in Animal laboratory facilities in the United States. Methods: An online survey was e-mailed to designated institutional officials at laboratory Animal facilities identified by the National Institutes of Health Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare. Results: One hundred ninety eight organizations responded and 15 organizations indicated that workers had experienced anaphylaxis following an Animal bite. Case report forms were completed by nine of these institutions for 14 cases, 13 for rodent bites, and one involving a needlestick from a horse. In half of the cases involving rodents, there was no prior history of Animal Allergy. All workers had uncomplicated recoveries. Treatment, testing, and work restrictions varied across cases. Conclusions: While uncommon, anaphylaxis from laboratory Animal bites occurs more frequently than suggested by the literature.
-
Prevention of laboratory Animal Allergy in the United States: a national survey.
Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 2012Co-Authors: Gregg M. Stave, Dennis J. DarceyAbstract:OBJECTIVE Respiratory Allergy to laboratory Animals is a common and preventable occupational health problem. This study documents current laboratory Animal Allergy (LAA) prevention programs in the United States. METHODS An online survey was e-mailed to designated institutional officials at laboratory Animal facilities identified by the National Institutes of Health Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare. RESULTS A total of 198 organizations responded and more than 80% required the use of uniforms and gloves to control exposure. Respirators were required by 25% of organizations. Medical surveillance was mandated by 58% of organizations (70% for organizations with at least 100 employees working with Animals). Work restriction practices varied. Only 25% of organizations reported knowing the prevalence (range: 0% to 75%) and 29% reported knowing the incidence of LAA (range: 0% to 18%). CONCLUSIONS There is broad variation in policy and practice to prevent LAA. An evidence-based consensus would ensure greater protection of workers.
-
Laboratory Animal Allergy: an update.
ILAR journal, 2003Co-Authors: Robert K. Bush, Gregg M. StaveAbstract:Allergic reactions are among the most common conditions affecting the health of workers involved in the care and use of research Animals. Between 11 and 44% of the individuals working with laboratory Animals report work-related allergic symptoms. Of those who become symptomatic, 4 to 22% may eventually develop occupational asthma that can persist even after exposure ceases. Allergic symptoms consist of rashes where Animals are in contact with the skin, nasal congestion and sneezing, itchy eyes, and asthma (cough, wheezing, and chest tightness). The generation of immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibodies is a prerequisite for the production of allergic symptoms. The mechanism by which IgE antibodies develop is becoming clearer. The propensity to produce IgE is genetically determined, and pre-existing Allergy may be a risk factor for the development of laboratory Animal Allergy (LAA). However, exposure to Animal allergens is the major risk factor for the development of LAA. Techniques to measure the airborne concentration of laboratory Animal allergens have been developed. Research on Animal allergens themselves indicates that many of the mouse and rat urinary proteins belong to a family of proteins called lipocalins, which share sequence homology with antigens of the parasitic agent that causes schistosomiasis. The fact that parasite infections also trigger IgE antibody responses may account for the development of LAA in persons who have never had any previous Allergy. The prevention of LAA should be a major goal of an effective health and safety program in the Animal research facility, and it can be accomplished by education and training of employees, reduction of exposure (including the use of personal protective gear), and changes in facility design. Medical surveillance programs can also play a role in improving health of individuals working with laboratory research Animals. Early recognition of symptoms and evidence of sensitization can lead to interventions to reduce exposure and thereby avoid the long-term health consequences of LAA.
-
Primary and secondary allergies to laboratory Animals.
Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 2002Co-Authors: Leslie E. Goodno, Gregg M. StaveAbstract:Although laboratory Animal Allergy (LAA) is a significant occupational hazard among workers exposed to laboratory Animals, few studies have evaluated long-term risks to workers who remain in the workplace. This short-term focus has obscured the evaluation of subsequent Animal allergies (secondary LAA). We analyzed surveillance data from a 10-year LAA prevention program to estimate incidence rates of primary and secondary LAA and to evaluate the effectiveness of the prevention program in reducing the development of primary LAA. The 10-year incidence rates of primary and secondary LAA were 1.34 (95% CI, 0. 78-1. 90) and 11 (95% CI, 7.4-14.6) cases per 100 person-years, respectively. The annual incidence of primary LAA was reduced from 3.6% to 0 in the first 5 years and did not rise above 1.2% over the remaining years, whereas the incidence of secondary LAA was greater than 8% in most years. These findings suggest that programs effective at preventing primary LAA may need to be evaluated for their effectiveness at protecting against further risk.
Robert K. Bush - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Laboratory Animal Allergy: an update.
ILAR journal, 2003Co-Authors: Robert K. Bush, Gregg M. StaveAbstract:Allergic reactions are among the most common conditions affecting the health of workers involved in the care and use of research Animals. Between 11 and 44% of the individuals working with laboratory Animals report work-related allergic symptoms. Of those who become symptomatic, 4 to 22% may eventually develop occupational asthma that can persist even after exposure ceases. Allergic symptoms consist of rashes where Animals are in contact with the skin, nasal congestion and sneezing, itchy eyes, and asthma (cough, wheezing, and chest tightness). The generation of immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibodies is a prerequisite for the production of allergic symptoms. The mechanism by which IgE antibodies develop is becoming clearer. The propensity to produce IgE is genetically determined, and pre-existing Allergy may be a risk factor for the development of laboratory Animal Allergy (LAA). However, exposure to Animal allergens is the major risk factor for the development of LAA. Techniques to measure the airborne concentration of laboratory Animal allergens have been developed. Research on Animal allergens themselves indicates that many of the mouse and rat urinary proteins belong to a family of proteins called lipocalins, which share sequence homology with antigens of the parasitic agent that causes schistosomiasis. The fact that parasite infections also trigger IgE antibody responses may account for the development of LAA in persons who have never had any previous Allergy. The prevention of LAA should be a major goal of an effective health and safety program in the Animal research facility, and it can be accomplished by education and training of employees, reduction of exposure (including the use of personal protective gear), and changes in facility design. Medical surveillance programs can also play a role in improving health of individuals working with laboratory research Animals. Early recognition of symptoms and evidence of sensitization can lead to interventions to reduce exposure and thereby avoid the long-term health consequences of LAA.
-
Mechanism and epidemiology of laboratory Animal Allergy.
ILAR journal, 2001Co-Authors: Robert K. BushAbstract:Laboratory Animal Allergy (LAA) is a form of occupational allergic disease. The development of laboratory Animal Allergy is due to the presence of IgE antibodies directed against Animal proteins. The process of sensitization (development of IgE antibodies) is a complex process which involves interaction of antigen presenting cells and lymphocytes of the Th-2 cell type. These cells generate a host of cytokines and other factors which lead to immediate hypersensitivity reactions and other factors which lead to immediate hypersensitivity reactions and the generation of allergic inflammation. Typical symptoms of laboratory Animal Allergy include nasal symptoms, such as sneezing, watery discharge, and congestion. Skin rashes are also common. Asthma, which produces symptoms of cough, wheezing, and shortness of breath, may affect 20-38% of workers who are sensitized to laboratory Animal allergens. Rarely a generalized, life-threatening allergic reaction (anaphylaxis) may occur. The estimated prevalence of laboratory Animal Allergy is variable depending on the method used for diagnosis, but nonetheless may affect up to 46% of exposed workers. The presence of pre-existing allergies to non-work place allergens (e.g., dust mite, pollens, molds), exposure to laboratory Animal allergens, and possibly tobacco smoking are risk factors for the development of laboratory Animal Allergy. Progress in the understanding of the mechanism and epidemiology of laboratory Animal Allergy will lead to improved methods for its prevention.
-
Assessment and treatment of laboratory Animal Allergy.
ILAR journal, 2001Co-Authors: Robert K. BushAbstract:Laboratory Animal Allergy (LAA) is a form of occupational sensitivity affecting up to one third or more of exposed workers. Symptoms involve the eyes, nose, skin, and lower respiratory tract. Asthma may develop in 20 to 30% of sensitized individuals. An occupational medical history is the primary tool if a diagnosis of LAA is suspected. The diagnosis is confirmed by demonstrating the presence of immunoglobulin E antibodies to laboratory Animal allergens by skin testing or in vitro assays. If laboratory Animal allergen-induced asthma is suspected, measurements of lung function are necessary for confirmation and assessing the degree of impairment. One approach to the problem is presented in this article. For individuals with LAA, avoidance of exposure is the primary treatment. For individuals who continue to work in the environment, pharmacological treatment of their symptoms may be necessary. Methods to prevent the development of LAA are also discussed.
-
Laboratory Animal Allergy
The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology, 1998Co-Authors: Robert K. Bush, Robert A. Wood, Peyton A. EgglestonAbstract:Approximately one third of laboratory Animal workers have occupational Allergy to Animal danders, and a third of these have symptomatic asthma. Sensitization generally occurs with the first 3 years of employment, and risk factors include atopic background, as well as job description as it relates to the intensity of exposure. A symptomatic worker can reduce allergen exposure with personal protective devices. A laboratory can further reduce exposure with generally available equipment, such as laminar flow caging, and procedures, such as frequent wet washing of vivaria and careful maintenance of ventilation systems. It is advisable to institute periodic medical screening of all laboratory Animal workers with questionnaires and Allergy skin testing in addition to providing them with training programs to reduce personal exposure.
Ph Larsson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
prospective study of laboratory Animal Allergy factors predisposing to sensitization and development of allergic symptoms
Allergy, 1994Co-Authors: A. Renström, Per Malmberg, K. Larsson, B.‐m. Sundblad, Ph LarssonAbstract:In a prospective study of laboratory technicians, selected indicators of Allergy and atopy were studied in an attempt to determine predictors of laboratory-Animal Allergy (LAA). Laboratory technicians underwent spirometry, methacholine provocation tests, and blood sampling, and responded to a questionnaire during training and after 2 years' work. Among 38 laboratory-Animal-exposed subjects, total IgE before exposure gave the best correlation (P < 0.01; Mann-Whitney U-test) to reported symptoms caused by laboratory Animals (n = 8) at follow-up. The prevalence of atopy and allergic symptoms had increased in exposed technicians at follow-up, but this was also found among unexposed matched referents (n = 36 pairs). One subject in the exposed group reported asthma before exposure, compared with seven at follow-up (P < 0.05; Fisher's exact test). However, the prevalence of asthma had increased from two to six (not significant) also among unexposed technicians. There were no significant differences between the groups in any measured variable at follow-up. Among 43 subjects who later worked with laboratory Animals, 21% had a positive skin prick test for common allergens, as compared with 37% among 112 without Animal exposure (P = 0.06; chi2 test), suggesting selection for laboratory Animal work.
-
Prospective study of laboratory‐Animal Allergy: factors predisposing to sensitization and development of allergic symptoms
Allergy, 1994Co-Authors: A. Renström, Per Malmberg, K. Larsson, B.‐m. Sundblad, Ph LarssonAbstract:In a prospective study of laboratory technicians, selected indicators of Allergy and atopy were studied in an attempt to determine predictors of laboratory-Animal Allergy (LAA). Laboratory technicians underwent spirometry, methacholine provocation tests, and blood sampling, and responded to a questionnaire during training and after 2 years' work. Among 38 laboratory-Animal-exposed subjects, total IgE before exposure gave the best correlation (P < 0.01; Mann-Whitney U-test) to reported symptoms caused by laboratory Animals (n = 8) at follow-up. The prevalence of atopy and allergic symptoms had increased in exposed technicians at follow-up, but this was also found among unexposed matched referents (n = 36 pairs). One subject in the exposed group reported asthma before exposure, compared with seven at follow-up (P < 0.05; Fisher's exact test). However, the prevalence of asthma had increased from two to six (not significant) also among unexposed technicians. There were no significant differences between the groups in any measured variable at follow-up. Among 43 subjects who later worked with laboratory Animals, 21% had a positive skin prick test for common allergens, as compared with 37% among 112 without Animal exposure (P = 0.06; chi2 test), suggesting selection for laboratory Animal work.