Controlling Exposure to Laboratory Animal Allergens

Abstract

Laboratory animal allergy (LAA) is a significant occupational disease that may affect up to one third of personnel exposed to laboratory animals. Research has characterized the relative risks of exposure, in terms of intensity, frequency, and duration, associated with given tasks and work areas in the animal facility. Studies have shown that reduced exposure to animal allergens can reduce the incidence of LAA and relieve symptoms among affected workers. A combination of measures to eliminate or control allergen exposure, including engineering and administrative controls and personal protective equipment, have been integral components of effective LAA management programs. The author provides a comprehensive review of exposure control options, considerations, and " best practices" relative to laboratory animal allergen in the context of traditional industrial hygiene methods.

Environmental detection of mouse allergen by means of immunoassay for recombinant Mus m 1

“…Workers most at risk for development of occupational allergic diseases are those who receive the highest levels of exposure from handling animals, bedding, cages, or cage-washing systems. [1][2][3][4][5][6] Recently, sensitization to mouse allergens has also been identified as a risk factor for the development of asthma among innercity children who were exposed to high levels of allergen in their homes. 7,8 The major mouse allergens are secreted in large amounts with the urine of male mice (1-5 mg/mL) and are a group of proteins known as MUPs.…”

A multi‐faceted approach to risk assessment of laboratory animal allergens at two facilities

“…Collecting background information through management and employee questionnaires gives the assessment team an overall impression of safety management and of employees' Ryder,1999;Harrison, 2001;Preece and Renstro« m, 2002;Wald and Stave, 2003;Sargent and Gallo, 2003; …”

“…Most of the samples were collected using the Millipore cassettes, as their air flow was easier to adjust. Because rodent allergens appear mostly in particles less than 10-20 mm in diameter [Bush et al, 1998;Harrison, 2001], the higher collection efficiency of IOM samplers for large (>30 mm) particles [Li et al, 2000;Harper et al, 2004] is not of vital importance. Thus, the rodent allergen results obtained with the two samplers can be regarded as comparable.…”

“…Substitution involves the use of fewer allergenic species, the introduction of in vitro techniques, and computer modeling instead of the use of animals. Engineering controls represent attempts to isolate workers from hazards, including such measures as material substitution, process substitution, isolation or enclosure, and ventilation [Harrison, 2001]. Modification of work practices is often needed to minimize exposure.…”

“…Finally, personal protective equipment may be needed to provide a barrier between employees and hazards that cannot be adequately controlled by other means [Seward, 2001;Wald and Stave, 2003]. Detailed information has been published previously on controlling LAA exposure through the following means: separation, general ventilation, task ventilation, automation, cage systems, reduction in the number of exposed persons, animals (e.g., age, gender), stock density, bedding material, housekeeping, movements within the facility, work premises and visitors, environmental monitoring, personal hygiene, protective clothing, respiratory protective equipment, training and education, pre-placement assessment, risk assessment, and health surveillance [e.g., National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 1998;ReebWhitaker et al, 1999;Ryder, 1999;Harrison, 2001;Preece and Renström, 2002;Schweitzer et al, 2003;Wald and Stave, 2003]. In summary, the controls should reduce both the intensity and the duration of exposure.…”