The Experts below are selected from a list of 300 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Lishan Hsieh - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
comparison of Latex specific ige binding among nonammoniated Latex ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove allergenic extracts by elisa and immunoblot inhibition
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1996Co-Authors: Akira Akasawa, Lishan HsiehAbstract:Abstract BACKGROUND: Nonammoniated Latex, ammoniated Latex, and Latex Glove extracts have been used as source materials for the preparation of allergenic extracts for the diagnosis of Latex allergy. These materials showed different patterns of protein bands and immunoreactive bands. However, their IgE–reactive repertoires were not compared. OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were to compare the IgE reactivity and to define the common IgE–reactive epitopes among three Latex allergenic extracts. METHODS: Two serum pools were obtained from adults and children with Latex allergy to evaluate the IgE reactivity among three Latex extracts. IgE reactivity and IgE–reactive proteins were compared by inhibition ELISA and inhibition immunoblot methods, respectively. RESULTS: In this study inhibition curves were similar for nonammoniated Latex and ammoniated Latex but were different when the Latex Glove extracts were used. Several protein bands of ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove extracts could not be inhibited by the nonammoniated Latex. The ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove extracts were able to remove all the Latex-specific IgE from the serum. CONCLUSION: The IgE–reactive proteins differ among different Latex extracts. Ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove extracts contain more complete immunoreactive repertoires for detecting IgE antibodies. Our study provides useful information for selecting the Latex extract. (J ALLERGY CLIN IMMUNOL 1996;97:1116-20.)
-
Comparison of Latex–specific IgE binding among nonammoniated Latex, ammoniated Latex, and Latex Glove allergenic extracts by ELISA and immunoblot inhibition
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1996Co-Authors: Akira Akasawa, Lishan HsiehAbstract:Abstract BACKGROUND: Nonammoniated Latex, ammoniated Latex, and Latex Glove extracts have been used as source materials for the preparation of allergenic extracts for the diagnosis of Latex allergy. These materials showed different patterns of protein bands and immunoreactive bands. However, their IgE–reactive repertoires were not compared. OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were to compare the IgE reactivity and to define the common IgE–reactive epitopes among three Latex allergenic extracts. METHODS: Two serum pools were obtained from adults and children with Latex allergy to evaluate the IgE reactivity among three Latex extracts. IgE reactivity and IgE–reactive proteins were compared by inhibition ELISA and inhibition immunoblot methods, respectively. RESULTS: In this study inhibition curves were similar for nonammoniated Latex and ammoniated Latex but were different when the Latex Glove extracts were used. Several protein bands of ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove extracts could not be inhibited by the nonammoniated Latex. The ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove extracts were able to remove all the Latex-specific IgE from the serum. CONCLUSION: The IgE–reactive proteins differ among different Latex extracts. Ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove extracts contain more complete immunoreactive repertoires for detecting IgE antibodies. Our study provides useful information for selecting the Latex extract. (J ALLERGY CLIN IMMUNOL 1996;97:1116-20.)
Akira Akasawa - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
comparison of Latex specific ige binding among nonammoniated Latex ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove allergenic extracts by elisa and immunoblot inhibition
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1996Co-Authors: Akira Akasawa, Lishan HsiehAbstract:Abstract BACKGROUND: Nonammoniated Latex, ammoniated Latex, and Latex Glove extracts have been used as source materials for the preparation of allergenic extracts for the diagnosis of Latex allergy. These materials showed different patterns of protein bands and immunoreactive bands. However, their IgE–reactive repertoires were not compared. OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were to compare the IgE reactivity and to define the common IgE–reactive epitopes among three Latex allergenic extracts. METHODS: Two serum pools were obtained from adults and children with Latex allergy to evaluate the IgE reactivity among three Latex extracts. IgE reactivity and IgE–reactive proteins were compared by inhibition ELISA and inhibition immunoblot methods, respectively. RESULTS: In this study inhibition curves were similar for nonammoniated Latex and ammoniated Latex but were different when the Latex Glove extracts were used. Several protein bands of ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove extracts could not be inhibited by the nonammoniated Latex. The ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove extracts were able to remove all the Latex-specific IgE from the serum. CONCLUSION: The IgE–reactive proteins differ among different Latex extracts. Ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove extracts contain more complete immunoreactive repertoires for detecting IgE antibodies. Our study provides useful information for selecting the Latex extract. (J ALLERGY CLIN IMMUNOL 1996;97:1116-20.)
-
Comparison of Latex–specific IgE binding among nonammoniated Latex, ammoniated Latex, and Latex Glove allergenic extracts by ELISA and immunoblot inhibition
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1996Co-Authors: Akira Akasawa, Lishan HsiehAbstract:Abstract BACKGROUND: Nonammoniated Latex, ammoniated Latex, and Latex Glove extracts have been used as source materials for the preparation of allergenic extracts for the diagnosis of Latex allergy. These materials showed different patterns of protein bands and immunoreactive bands. However, their IgE–reactive repertoires were not compared. OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were to compare the IgE reactivity and to define the common IgE–reactive epitopes among three Latex allergenic extracts. METHODS: Two serum pools were obtained from adults and children with Latex allergy to evaluate the IgE reactivity among three Latex extracts. IgE reactivity and IgE–reactive proteins were compared by inhibition ELISA and inhibition immunoblot methods, respectively. RESULTS: In this study inhibition curves were similar for nonammoniated Latex and ammoniated Latex but were different when the Latex Glove extracts were used. Several protein bands of ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove extracts could not be inhibited by the nonammoniated Latex. The ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove extracts were able to remove all the Latex-specific IgE from the serum. CONCLUSION: The IgE–reactive proteins differ among different Latex extracts. Ammoniated Latex and Latex Glove extracts contain more complete immunoreactive repertoires for detecting IgE antibodies. Our study provides useful information for selecting the Latex extract. (J ALLERGY CLIN IMMUNOL 1996;97:1116-20.)
Donald H. Beezhold - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
incidence of Latex sensitization among Latex Glove users
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1998Co-Authors: Gordon L. Sussman, Donald H. Beezhold, Gary M. Liss, Maureen Cividino, Mark C. Swanson, John Yunginger, Ken Deal, Shirley Brown, Gordon Smithb, Andrew DouglasAbstract:Abstract Background: Although there are several reports of the prevalence of Latex sensitization among health care workers, the incidence of sensitization is unknown. Objective: The objective of this study was to estimate the incidence of sensitization among Latex Glove users at a hospital in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Methods: Workers with negative results to the skin test at baseline were followed prospectively over 1 year, some wearing powdered Gloves and others using powder-free Gloves. They were reevaluated in 1995 with a questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT) sensitivity to Latex reagents, three common inhalants, and six foods. A conversion was defined as a (new) Latex SPT with wheal diameter at least 4 mm greater than saline control. Glove extracts were assayed for antigenic protein, and air samples were obtained to estimate exposure to airborne Latex protein. Results: During powdered Glove use, personal exposures ranged from 5 to 616 ng/m 3 , whereas during powder-free Glove use, all but two results for air samples were below the limit of detection (about 0.1 ng/m 3 ). During the study period, the protein concentration in the powdered Gloves, initially mean 557 μg/gm of sample, declined at a rate of 295 μg/gm per year ( p Conclusion: To our knowledge, this represents the first reported estimate (about 1%) of incidence of sensitization in hospital personnel using Latex Gloves. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 1998;101:171-8.)
-
Incidence of Latex sensitization among Latex Glove users
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1998Co-Authors: Gordon L. Sussman, S Siu, Donald H. Beezhold, Gary M. Liss, Maureen Cividino, Gordon Smith, Mark C. Swanson, Ken Deal, Shirley Brown, John YungingerAbstract:Background: Although there are several reports of the prevalence of Latex sensitization among health care workers, the incidence of sensitization is unknown. Objective: The objective of this study was to estimate the incidence of sensitization among Latex Glove users at a hospital in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Methods: Workers with negative results to the skin test at baseline were followed prospectively over 1 year, some wearing powdered Gloves and others using powder-free Gloves. They were reevaluated in 1995 with a questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT) sensitivity to Latex reagents, three common inhalants, and six foods. A conversion was defined as a (new) Latex SPT with wheal diameter at least 4 mm greater than saline control. Glove extracts were assayed for antigenic protein, and air samples were obtained to estimate exposure to airborne Latex protein. Results: During powdered Glove use, personal exposures ranged from 5 to 616 ng/m3, whereas during powder-free Glove use, all but two results for air samples were below the limit of detection (about 0.1 ng/m3). During the study period, the protein concentration in the powdered Gloves, initially mean 557 μg/gm of sample, declined at a rate of 295 μg/gm per year (p ≤ 0.0001). Of the 1075 SPT-negative participants at baseline, 479 were working in eligible wards, and of these, 435 (91%) participated in follow-up, 227 using powder-free Gloves and 208 using powdered Gloves. We identified four conversions, two (1.0%) in the powdered Glove group and two (0.9%) in the powder-free group. The two participants using powdered Gloves were the only converters who were symptomatic. The significance of skin test conversions identified in the powder-free group, both asymptomatic patients, is unclear. The limitations of the study are discussed, including the limited power, the declines in Latex protein concentrations, and the possibility of information (observer) bias. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this represents the first reported estimate (about 1%) of incidence of sensitization in hospital personnel using Latex Gloves.
-
measurement of natural rubber proteins in Latex Glove extracts comparison of the methods
Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology, 1996Co-Authors: Donald H. Beezhold, Mark C. Swanson, Bradley D Zehr, David A KostyalAbstract:Background Healthcare workers and individuals with frequent contact with Latex are at risk for Latex protein allergy. Objective The purpose of this study was to compare several established methods for measuring protein in extracts from Latex-containing medical devices. Methods Extracts from Latex Gloves were analyzed for natural rubber proteins using a modified Lowry assay and two different immunochemical assays. The imunochemical methods were competitive inhibition assays that employed either immune rabbit serum or human serum with antibodies directed against natural rubber proteins. Results Seventy extracts representing five different brands of Gloves from four manufacturers were analyzed. A good linear correlation (r = 0.88) was found between the immunoassay methods. Correlation to the modified Lowry method was not possible because many of the samples were below the limit of detection for the Lowry assay. Reference extracts and antisera were further characterized by Western blot analysis. The data demonstrate that the proteins recognized by rabbit antisera and the proteins recognized by human IgE are similar. The greatest difference in the immunochemical assays appears to be the relative binding of the antibody sources to high and low molecular weight natural rubber proteins in the reference extracts. Conclusions The immunochemical assays are specific for Latex proteins and provide a more sensitive and biologically relevant method for determining protein levels in Latex medical products.
Mark C. Swanson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
incidence of Latex sensitization among Latex Glove users
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1998Co-Authors: Gordon L. Sussman, Donald H. Beezhold, Gary M. Liss, Maureen Cividino, Mark C. Swanson, John Yunginger, Ken Deal, Shirley Brown, Gordon Smithb, Andrew DouglasAbstract:Abstract Background: Although there are several reports of the prevalence of Latex sensitization among health care workers, the incidence of sensitization is unknown. Objective: The objective of this study was to estimate the incidence of sensitization among Latex Glove users at a hospital in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Methods: Workers with negative results to the skin test at baseline were followed prospectively over 1 year, some wearing powdered Gloves and others using powder-free Gloves. They were reevaluated in 1995 with a questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT) sensitivity to Latex reagents, three common inhalants, and six foods. A conversion was defined as a (new) Latex SPT with wheal diameter at least 4 mm greater than saline control. Glove extracts were assayed for antigenic protein, and air samples were obtained to estimate exposure to airborne Latex protein. Results: During powdered Glove use, personal exposures ranged from 5 to 616 ng/m 3 , whereas during powder-free Glove use, all but two results for air samples were below the limit of detection (about 0.1 ng/m 3 ). During the study period, the protein concentration in the powdered Gloves, initially mean 557 μg/gm of sample, declined at a rate of 295 μg/gm per year ( p Conclusion: To our knowledge, this represents the first reported estimate (about 1%) of incidence of sensitization in hospital personnel using Latex Gloves. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 1998;101:171-8.)
-
Incidence of Latex sensitization among Latex Glove users
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1998Co-Authors: Gordon L. Sussman, S Siu, Donald H. Beezhold, Gary M. Liss, Maureen Cividino, Gordon Smith, Mark C. Swanson, Ken Deal, Shirley Brown, John YungingerAbstract:Background: Although there are several reports of the prevalence of Latex sensitization among health care workers, the incidence of sensitization is unknown. Objective: The objective of this study was to estimate the incidence of sensitization among Latex Glove users at a hospital in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Methods: Workers with negative results to the skin test at baseline were followed prospectively over 1 year, some wearing powdered Gloves and others using powder-free Gloves. They were reevaluated in 1995 with a questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT) sensitivity to Latex reagents, three common inhalants, and six foods. A conversion was defined as a (new) Latex SPT with wheal diameter at least 4 mm greater than saline control. Glove extracts were assayed for antigenic protein, and air samples were obtained to estimate exposure to airborne Latex protein. Results: During powdered Glove use, personal exposures ranged from 5 to 616 ng/m3, whereas during powder-free Glove use, all but two results for air samples were below the limit of detection (about 0.1 ng/m3). During the study period, the protein concentration in the powdered Gloves, initially mean 557 μg/gm of sample, declined at a rate of 295 μg/gm per year (p ≤ 0.0001). Of the 1075 SPT-negative participants at baseline, 479 were working in eligible wards, and of these, 435 (91%) participated in follow-up, 227 using powder-free Gloves and 208 using powdered Gloves. We identified four conversions, two (1.0%) in the powdered Glove group and two (0.9%) in the powder-free group. The two participants using powdered Gloves were the only converters who were symptomatic. The significance of skin test conversions identified in the powder-free group, both asymptomatic patients, is unclear. The limitations of the study are discussed, including the limited power, the declines in Latex protein concentrations, and the possibility of information (observer) bias. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this represents the first reported estimate (about 1%) of incidence of sensitization in hospital personnel using Latex Gloves.
-
measurement of natural rubber proteins in Latex Glove extracts comparison of the methods
Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology, 1996Co-Authors: Donald H. Beezhold, Mark C. Swanson, Bradley D Zehr, David A KostyalAbstract:Background Healthcare workers and individuals with frequent contact with Latex are at risk for Latex protein allergy. Objective The purpose of this study was to compare several established methods for measuring protein in extracts from Latex-containing medical devices. Methods Extracts from Latex Gloves were analyzed for natural rubber proteins using a modified Lowry assay and two different immunochemical assays. The imunochemical methods were competitive inhibition assays that employed either immune rabbit serum or human serum with antibodies directed against natural rubber proteins. Results Seventy extracts representing five different brands of Gloves from four manufacturers were analyzed. A good linear correlation (r = 0.88) was found between the immunoassay methods. Correlation to the modified Lowry method was not possible because many of the samples were below the limit of detection for the Lowry assay. Reference extracts and antisera were further characterized by Western blot analysis. The data demonstrate that the proteins recognized by rabbit antisera and the proteins recognized by human IgE are similar. The greatest difference in the immunochemical assays appears to be the relative binding of the antibody sources to high and low molecular weight natural rubber proteins in the reference extracts. Conclusions The immunochemical assays are specific for Latex proteins and provide a more sensitive and biologically relevant method for determining protein levels in Latex medical products.
Robert G Hamilton - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Hev b 5 and Hev b 13 as allergen markers to estimate the allergenic potency of Latex Gloves.
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2004Co-Authors: Hoong Yeet Yeang, S.a.m. Arif, Monika Raulf-heimsoth, Y.h. Loke, Ingrid Sander, Siti Hawa Sulong, Robert G HamiltonAbstract:Abstract Background Sensitization to natural rubber Latex has been linked to proteins from medical Latex Gloves. Various assays to estimate the amount of residual allergenic proteins extractable from Latex Gloves to assess their potential exposure hazard have inherent weaknesses. Objective This investigation was aimed at developing 2-site immunoenzymetric assays and identifying appropriate protein markers to assess the allergenic potential of Latex Gloves. Methods The presence of 6 Latex allergens—Hev b 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 13—was measured in a cross-section of commercial Latex medical Gloves by using monoclonal and polyclonal antibody-based 2-site immunoenzymetric assays. The overall allergenic potential of these Gloves was assessed by IgE-inhibition assay. Stepwise multiple regression analyses were performed to identify marker allergens that best explained the variation in Latex Glove allergenicity. Results All 6 Latex allergens were detected in at least some of the Glove samples. Hev b 5 and Hev b 13 were identified as the marker allergens that combined best to explain the variation in the Glove allergenicity. The significant multiple correlation ( R =0.855) between these 2 markers and Glove allergenic potency forms the basis of an assay to gauge Latex Glove allergenicity. Conclusion The overall allergenic potential of Latex Gloves can be estimated by using Hev b 5 and Hev b 13 as indicator allergens. The correlation between Glove allergenicity and the level of these allergens was maintained for low-protein Gloves (
-
validation of the Latex Glove provocation procedure in Latex allergic subjects
Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology, 1997Co-Authors: Robert G Hamilton, Franklin N AdkinsonAbstract:Background A Latex provocation test is needed to clarify the allergic status of patients who present with a positive clinical history for Latex allergy and a negative Latex skin test and /or serologic test. Objective In the present study, we aimed to optimize and validate the performance and safety of a Latex Glove provocation protocol and to employ it to verify the barrier properties of the Dermapor expanded polytetrafluorethylene (ePTFE) Glove liner (liner) for Latex Glove allergen. Methods Twenty-one skin test positive Latex-allergic subjects donned goggles and a silicone mask, washed their hands and then put high allergen-containing Latex Gloves (mean = 15,072 AU/mL) on a moist, bare and liner-covered hand. Due to an absence of verifiable reactions on the bare hand in the first five subjects, the protocol was modified to puncture the skin in the three sites on the hand prior to donning the liner/Glove or Latex Glove alone. Subjects were observed for 30 minutes for localized allergic symptoms (pruritus and hives). Lined and unlined hands were compared for reactions. Results Application of highly allergenic Latex Gloves onto the bare hands of five skin test-positive, Latex-allergic subjects produced some mild pruritus but no visually detectable dermatitis. In contrast, all 17 Latex-allergic subjects who underwent the modified Glove challenge protocol involving a puncture prior to Glove application experienced intense pruritus with measurable wheals and erythema at sites where their skin was punctured. Equivalent wheal and erythema reactions were observed at a site where a puncture was performed directly through the Glove. These same subjects experienced no pruritus or hives on their opposite hands that received a liner prior to Latex Glove application. Conclusions Direct application of highly allergenic Latex Gloves onto the hands of skin test-positive, Latex-allergic individuals does not commonly produce localized allergic symptoms after minutes, especially if the subject has successfully avoided Latex and has no evidence of dermatitis. By puncturing the skin prior to Latex Glove donning, quantifiable hives are produced within 15 minutes following Glove application. A Dermapore ePTFE liner prevents the transfer of allergen from Gloves onto the skin and therefore can serve to minimize contact exposure as part of avoidance therapy.
-
Validation of the Latex Glove provocation procedure in Latex-allergic subjects
Annals of Allergy Asthma and Immunology, 1997Co-Authors: Robert G Hamilton, N. Franklin AdkinsonAbstract:Background: A Latex provocation test is needed to clarify the allergic status of patients who present with a positive clinical history for Latex allergy and a negative Latex skin test and/or serologic test. Objective: In the present study, we aimed to optimize and validate the performance and safety of a Latex Glove provocation protocol and to employ it to verify the barrier properties of the Dermapor expanded polytetrafluorethylene (ePTFE) Glove liner (liner) for Latex Glove allergen. Methods: Twenty-one skin test positive Latex-allergic subjects donned goggles and a silicone mask, washed their hands and then put high allergen-containing Latex Gloves (mean = 15,072 AU/mL) on a moist, bare and liner-covered hand. Due to an absence of verifiable reactions on the bare hand in the fast five subjects, the protocol was modified to puncture the skin in three sites on the hand prior to donning the liner/Glove or Latex Glove alone. Subjects were observed for 30 minutes for localized allergic symptoms (pruritus and hives). Lined and unlined hands were compared for reactions. Results: Application of highly allergenic Latex Gloves onto the bare hands of five skin test-positive, Latex-allergic subjects produced some mild pruritus but no visually detectable dermatitis. In contrast, all 17 Latex-allergic subjects who underwent the modified Glove challenge protocol involving a puncture prior to Glove application experienced intense pruritus with measurable wheals and erythema at sites where their skin was punctured. Equivalent wheal and erythema reactions were observed at a site where a puncture was performed directly through the Glove. These same subjects experienced no pruritus or hives on their opposite hands that received a liner prior to Latex Glove application. Conclusions: Direct application of highly allergenic Latex Gloves onto the hands of skin test- positive, Latex-allergic individuals does not commonly produce localized allergic symptoms after minutes, especially if the subject has successfully avoided Latex and has no evidence of dermatitis. By puncturing the skin prior to Latex Glove donning, quantifiable hives are produced within 15 minutes following Glove application. A Dermapor ePTFE liner prevents the transfer of allergen from Gloves onto the skin and therefore can serve to minimize contact exposure as part of avoidance therapy.
