Occupational anaphylaxis-Data from the anaphylaxis registry.
drugs
food allergy
latex
occupational anaphylaxis
venom
Journal
Allergy
ISSN: 1398-9995
Titre abrégé: Allergy
Pays: Denmark
ID NLM: 7804028
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Dec 2023
13 Dec 2023
Historique:
revised:
20
11
2023
received:
06
09
2023
accepted:
25
11
2023
medline:
14
12
2023
pubmed:
14
12
2023
entrez:
14
12
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Epidemiologic data on occupational anaphylaxis is scarce, and there is a need of more knowledge about work-related anaphylactic episodes. Based on the data of the Anaphylaxis Registry, we identified cases related to occupational exposure and analyzed the elicitors, demographics, severity of clinical reaction and management. Since 2017, 5851 cases with an information about the occupational relation of the anaphylactic episode were registered whereby 225 (3.8%) were assigned to be caused by an occupational allergen. The vast majority of these occupational anaphylaxis cases were caused by insects (n = 186, 82.7%) followed by food (n = 27, 12.0%) and drugs (n = 8, 3.6%). Latex elicited occupational anaphylaxis in only two cases. Beekeepers, gardeners, farmers, and individuals working in professions associated with food handling, for example, employees in restaurants, bakery, pastry, and cooks were most frequently affected. The comparison of the occupational insect venom-induced anaphylaxis to a group of non-occupational insect anaphylaxis in adults (n = 1842) revealed a significant younger age in occupational anaphylaxis (46 vs. 53 years), a predominance of bee-induced cases (38% vs. 17%), and a higher rate of venom immunotherapy in a primary care setting (3.3% vs. 1.3%, p = .044). In the occupational- versus non-occupational adults with food-induced anaphylaxis atopic dermatitis as concomitant atopic disease was observed more frequently (n = 486; 20% vs. 10%), although this was not significant. Our data demonstrate the impact of venom allergy in work-related anaphylaxis. Foods and drugs are less frequently elicitors, and latex-induced occupational anaphylaxis was rare. More data are needed to determine risk factors associated with occupational anaphylaxis.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Epidemiologic data on occupational anaphylaxis is scarce, and there is a need of more knowledge about work-related anaphylactic episodes.
METHODS
METHODS
Based on the data of the Anaphylaxis Registry, we identified cases related to occupational exposure and analyzed the elicitors, demographics, severity of clinical reaction and management.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Since 2017, 5851 cases with an information about the occupational relation of the anaphylactic episode were registered whereby 225 (3.8%) were assigned to be caused by an occupational allergen. The vast majority of these occupational anaphylaxis cases were caused by insects (n = 186, 82.7%) followed by food (n = 27, 12.0%) and drugs (n = 8, 3.6%). Latex elicited occupational anaphylaxis in only two cases. Beekeepers, gardeners, farmers, and individuals working in professions associated with food handling, for example, employees in restaurants, bakery, pastry, and cooks were most frequently affected. The comparison of the occupational insect venom-induced anaphylaxis to a group of non-occupational insect anaphylaxis in adults (n = 1842) revealed a significant younger age in occupational anaphylaxis (46 vs. 53 years), a predominance of bee-induced cases (38% vs. 17%), and a higher rate of venom immunotherapy in a primary care setting (3.3% vs. 1.3%, p = .044). In the occupational- versus non-occupational adults with food-induced anaphylaxis atopic dermatitis as concomitant atopic disease was observed more frequently (n = 486; 20% vs. 10%), although this was not significant.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Our data demonstrate the impact of venom allergy in work-related anaphylaxis. Foods and drugs are less frequently elicitors, and latex-induced occupational anaphylaxis was rare. More data are needed to determine risk factors associated with occupational anaphylaxis.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : NETWORK FOR ONLINE-REGISTRATION OF ANAPHYLAXIS - NORA e. V
Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Eigenmann PA, Zamora SA. An internet-based survey on the circumstances of food-induced reactions following the diagnosis of IgE-mediated food allergy. Allergy. 2002;57(5):449-453.
Siracusa A, Folletti I, Gerth van Wijk R, et al. Occupational anaphylaxis - an EAACI task force consensus statement. Allergy. 2015;70(2):141-152.
Sampson HA, Munoz-Furlong A, Campbell RL, et al. Second symposium on the definition and management of anaphylaxis: summary report-second National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease/Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network symposium. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2006;117(2):391-397.
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2022. https://www.R-project.org/.
Sjoberg DW, Curry K, Lavery M, Lavery JA, Larmarange J. Reproducible summary tables with the gtsummary package. R J. 2021;13(1):570-580.
Ring J, Beyer K, Biedermann T, et al. Guideline (S2k) on acute therapy and management of anaphylaxis: 2021 update: S2k-Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the Society of Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA), the German Academy of Allergology and Environmental Medicine (DAAU), the German Professional Association of Pediatricians (BVKJ), the Society for Neonatology and Pediatric Intensive Care (GNPI), the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the Austrian Society for Allergology and Immunology (OGAI), the Swiss Society for Allergy and Immunology (SGAI), the German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI), the German Society of Pharmacology (DGP), the German Respiratory Society (DGP), the patient organization German Allergy and Asthma Association (DAAB), the German Working Group of Anaphylaxis Training and Education (AGATE). Allergo J Int. 2021;30(1):1-25.
Lindstrom I, Holtta P, Suuronen K, Suomela S, Suojalehto H. High prevalence of sensitization to bumblebee venom among greenhouse workers. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2022;10(2):637-639.
de Groot H, de Graaf-in 't Veld C, van Wijk RG. Allergy to bumblebee venom. I. Occupational anaphylaxis to bumblebee venom: diagnosis and treatment. Allergy. 1995;50(7):581-584.
Celikel S, Karakaya G, Yurtsever N, Sorkun K, Kalyoncu AF. Bee and bee products allergy in Turkish beekeepers: determination of risk factors for systemic reactions. Allergol Immunopathol (Madr). 2006;34(5):180-184.
Shimizu T, Hori T, Tokuyama K, Morikawa A, Kuroume T. Clinical and immunologic surveys of Hymenoptera hypersensitivity in Japanese forestry workers. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1995;74(6):495-500.
Annila I. Bee venom allergy. Clin Exp Allergy. 2000;30(12):1682-1687.
Toletone A, Voltolini S, Passalacqua G, et al. Hymenoptera venom allergy in outdoor workers: occupational exposure, clinical features and effects of allergen immunotherapy. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2017;13(2):477-483.
Soriano-Gomis V, Cabrera-Beyrouti R, Serrano-Delgado P, Jimenez-Rodriguez TW, Gomez MB, Fernandez-Sanchez J. Epidemiology of Hymenoptera venom allergy in the Valencia Fire Brigade (Spain). J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2021;9(2):1037-1038.e2.
Ono T, Yoshida M, Nakazono N. Hymenoptera stings and serum venom-specific IgE in Japanese pest-control operators. Environ Health Prev Med. 1998;2(4):172-176.
Ricciardi L, Papia F, Cataldo G, Giorgianni M, Spatari G, Gangemi S. Hymenoptera sting reactions in southern Italy forestry workers: our experience compared to reported data. Clin Mol Allergy. 2018;16:8.
Kahan E, Ben-Moshe R, Derazne E, Tamir R. The impact of Hymenoptera venom allergy on occupational activities. Occup Med (Lond). 1997;47(5):273-276.
Paolocci G, Folletti I, Toren K, Muzi G, Murgia N. Hymenoptera venom allergy: work disability and occupational impact of venom immunotherapy. BMJ Open. 2014;4(8):e005593.
Munstedt K, Hellner M, Winter D, von Georgi R. Allergy to bee venom in beekeepers in Germany. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol. 2008;18(2):100-105.
Francuzik W, Rueff F, Bauer A, et al. Phenotype and risk factors of venom-induced anaphylaxis: a case-control study of the European Anaphylaxis Registry. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2021;147(2):653-662.e9.
Liebers V, Hoernstein M, Baur X. Humoral immune response to the insect allergen Chi t I in aquarists and fish-food factory workers. Allergy. 1993;48(4):236-239.
Stevens WJ, Van den Abbeele J, Bridts CH. Anaphylactic reaction after bites by Glossina morsitans (tsetse fly) in a laboratory worker. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1996;98(3):700-701.
Jeebhay MF, Robins TG, Lehrer SB, Lopata AL. Occupational seafood allergy: a review. Occup Environ Med. 2001;58(9):553-562.
Baatjies R, Meijster T, Heederik D, Jeebhay MF. Exposure-response relationships for inhalant wheat allergen exposure and asthma. Occup Environ Med. 2015;72(3):200-207.
Jungewelter S, Airaksinen L, Pesonen M. Occupational buckwheat allergy as a cause of allergic rhinitis, asthma, contact urticaria and anaphylaxis - an emerging problem in food-handling occupations? Am J Ind Med. 2020;63(11):1047-1053.
Ebo DG, Bridts CH, Mertens MH, Stevens WJ. Coriander anaphylaxis in a spice grinder with undetected occupational allergy. Acta Clin Belg. 2006;61(3):152-156.
Jungewelter S, Suomela S, Airaksinen L. Occupational IgE-mediated psyllium allergy in contemporary gluten-free and vegan baking: a case of allergic rhinitis. Am J Ind Med. 2021;64(5):431-434.
Mitchell CL, Lin FC, Vaughn M, Apperson CS, Meshnick SR, Commins SP. Association between lone star tick bites and increased alpha-gal sensitization: evidence from a prospective cohort of outdoor workers. Parasit Vectors. 2020;13(1):470.
Anemuller W, Mohr M, Brans R, Homann A, Jappe U. [Alpha-gal-associated delayed red meat anaphylaxis as an occupational disease]. Hautarzt. 2018;69(10):848-852.
Hanschmann T, Francuzik W, Dolle-Bierke S, et al. Different phenotypes of drug-induced anaphylaxis - data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry. Allergy. 2023;78(6):1615-1627.
Klimek L, Novak N, Hamelmann E, et al. Severe allergic reactions after COVID-19 vaccination with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in Great Britain and USA: position statement of the German Allergy Societies: Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) and Society for Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA). Allergo J Int. 2021;30(2):51-55.
Shavit R, Maoz-Segal R, Iancovici-Kidon M, et al. Prevalence of allergic reactions after Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccination among adults with high allergy risk. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(8):e2122255.
Worm M, Alexiou A, Bauer A, et al. Management of suspected and confirmed COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine hypersensitivity. Allergy. 2022;77(11):3426-3434.
Liss GM, Sussman GL, Deal K, et al. Latex allergy: epidemiological study of 1351 hospital workers. Occup Environ Med. 1997;54(5):335-342.
Blaabjerg MS, Andersen KE, Bindslev-Jensen C, Mortz CG. Decrease in the rate of sensitization and clinical allergy to natural rubber latex. Contact Dermatitis. 2015;73(1):21-28.