Allergy to laboratory animals: a retrospective and a prospective study.

Abstract

ABSTRACr Twenty four volunteers who had been allergic to laboratory animals for some years were examined by means of a questionnaire paying particular attention to symptoms associated with rats and by serological and skin tests with extracts of rat urine (retrospective study). Nasal and eye symptoms were reported by 21 and 16 individuals respectively: 13 had asthma. Positive skin tests and high levels of specific IgE antibody to rat urine extract were found in 17 of the more severely affected individuals and this group included 12 of those with asthma. Latent periods of work with animals before symptoms appeared varied from 0*5 to 12 years. Also 148 individuals were studied during their first year of work with animals (prospective study). Symptoms developing during the year were reported by 15%, asthma by 2%. IgE antibody levels to rat urine were raised in 40% of affected and 6% of the unaffected individuals but there was no significant correlation between symptoms and either antibody levels or positive skin tests. Allergic symptoms developing during the first year of postemployment were, on the whole, much milder than those seen in the retrospective study. A tentative conclusion is that most individuals who become allergic to laboratory animals develop the condition in a mild form during their first year of employment but it appears probable that atopic individuals, although having an equal chance of developing allergy as compared with non-atopic individuals, may eventually progress to a more severe form of the disease.Allergy to laboratory animals (ALA), after a period of relative neglect, is now receiving increased attention' 1O. While all authors agree that the overall incidence of ALA in the exposed population is about 20%, there is considerable variation in terms of the percentage of individuals with ALA (table 1).A notable advance in the study of ALA resulted from the findings of Newman-Taylor etal" and Longbottom12 that a major allergen is found in the urine of rats and mice. Among other benefits these findings have facilitated the use of relevant immunological approaches to the problems presented by ALA. Despite our increased knowledge, more information is needed before a rational approach to the control of ALA can be instituted. The present study had two main aims: (1) symptoms in a group of people with established allergy to rats and (2) to study the nature and rate of development of allergy during the period of employment as an animal worker. A subsidiary aim of the study was to offer an explanation for the apparently wide differences in the reported incidence of asthma. The present paper describes our initial findings, and is presented in two parts, a retrospective study and a prospective study.The retrospective study attempted to correlate rat associated allergic symptoms with the presence of specific IgE antibody and the response in skin tests to rat urine. The volunteers included in this study were selected solely on the basis of their previous report of allergic symptoms.8 Although some of th...

Occurrence of self-reported asthma among Swedish bakers

“…Davies et a1 (19) reposted an incidence of 2% during the first year of exposure among laboratory animals. TorCn et a1 (20) measured the incidence of self-reported, but not physiciandiagnosed asthma among paper mill workers.…”

Proficient Handling and Restraint of the Laboratory Animal Rat (Rattus Norvegicus) Facilitate Essential Biochemical and Molecular Level Studies in Biomedical Sciences

“…An estimated 37% of individuals who work with laboratory animals may eventually develop an allergy to laboratory animals [20], which is manifested by reddened, itchy eyes, nasal symptoms and skin rashes. Asthma can also be developed in the persons who are already suffering from animal-associated allergy and some cases of Anaphylaxis are also reported [21].…”

Have the prevalence and incidence of occupational asthma and rhinitis because of laboratory animals declined in the last 25 years?

“…Between 1983 and 2005 four longitudinal studies evaluated OR and/or OA in workers exposed to LA, allowing incidence estimates (Table 2) (23)(24)(25)(26)(27). Two publications were treated as a single study because the reported analysis came from the same cohort of animal health apprentices (26,27).…”

“…To investigate trends in the prevalence and incidence of OA and OR over time, we reviewed the available published literature for both (8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27).…”