Occupational Asthma Reference

Feary JR, Schofield SJ, Canizales J, Fitzgerald B, Potts J, Jones M, Cullinan P, Laboratory animal allergy is preventable in modern research facilities, Eur Respir J, 2019;53:1900171,10.1183/13993003.00171-2019

Keywords: UK, RPE, mouse, animal, IgE, am, ep, laboratory animal, prevention, cs,

Known Authors

Paul Cullinan, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK Paul Cullinan

Meinir Jones, Royal Brompton Hospital, London Meinir Jones

Jo Feary, Royal Brompton Hospital Jo Feary

If you would like to become a known author and have your picture displayed along with your papers then please get in touch from the contact page. Known authors can choose to receive emails when their papers receive comments.

Abstract

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<0.001), but varied eight-fold across the IVC units (geometric mean range 0.33–4.12 ng·m-3). Primary analyses on data from 216 participants with =3 years exposure to mice revealed a lower prevalence of sensitisation in those working in IVC units compared with conventional cage units (2.4% (n=2) versus 9.8% (n=13); p=0.052). Sensitisation in IVC units varied from 0% to 12.5%; the use of fitted respiratory protection was less common in IVC units where prevalence of sensitisation was higher. Work-related allergy symptoms were more frequently reported by mouse-sensitised individuals (46.7% versus 10.9%; p<0.001) and only by those working in open cage units.

Conclusion
In contemporary practice, LAA is now largely preventable with the use of IVC systems and the judicious use of appropriate respiratory protection.

Plain text: 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<0.001), but varied eight-fold across the IVC units (geometric mean range 0.33-4.12 ng.m-3). Primary analyses on data from 216 participants with <=3 years exposure to mice revealed a lower prevalence of sensitisation in those working in IVC units compared with conventional cage units (2.4% (n=2) versus 9.8% (n=13); p=0.052). Sensitisation in IVC units varied from 0% to 12.5%; the use of fitted respiratory protection was less common in IVC units where prevalence of sensitisation was higher. Work-related allergy symptoms were more frequently reported by mouse-sensitised individuals (46.7% versus 10.9%; p<0.001) and only by those working in open cage units. Conclusion In contemporary practice, LAA is now largely preventable with the use of IVC systems and the judicious use of appropriate respiratory protection.

Full Text

Full text of this reference not available

Please Log In or Register to add the full text to this reference

Associated Questions

Registered users of this website have associated this reference with the following questions. This association is not a part of the BOHRF occupational asthma guidelines.

What evidence is there for the benefit of the enhanced use of respiratory protective equipment?
burgeps
Is exposure to agents in the workplace a risk factor for developing occupational asthma?
burgeps

Please Log In or Register to put forward this reference as evidence to a question.

Comments

This cross-sectional study of laboratory animal workers handing mice showed that allergen levels in the air and sensitisation was less in units where the mice were kept in individual ventilated cages (with HEPA filters on top), and less in units where fitted respiratory protection was used.
7/4/2019

Please sign in or register to add your thoughts.


Oasys and occupational asthma smoke logo