Irritant-Induced Asthma

Airway Diseases Related to the Use of Cleaning Agents in Occupational Settings

Exposure to disinfectants and cleaning products (DCPs) is now a well-established risk factor for work-related asthma (WRA). However, questions remain on the specific causal agents and pathophysiological mechanisms. Few studies have also reported an association between DCPs and rhinitis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This review discusses the recent evidence pertaining to airway diseases attributable to occupational exposure to DCPs. In contrast to other agents, the incidence of WRA due to DCPs has increased over time. The use of DCPs in spray form has clearly been identified as an added risk factor. The mechanisms for WRA associated with DCPs remain poorly studied; however, both allergic and nonallergic responses have been described, with irritant mechanisms thought to play a major role. An early diagnostic workup based on clinical assessment accompanied by evaluation of lung function and immunological and airway inflammatory markers is important to guide optimal care and exposure avoidance to the implicated agent. Future research should focus on the effects of "green" products, pathophysiological mechanisms, and quantitative exposure assessment including the use of barcode-based methods to identify specific agents. There is an urgent need to strengthen preventive measures and interventions to reduce the burden of airway diseases associated with DCPs.

How Allergists Can Perform an Occupational History in Every Patient

The occupational history is often neglected in the routine evaluation of new patients with asthma, chronic rhinitis, or dermatologic complaints. Such omissions are inadvertent because work-related conditions are often not prioritized. There also may be lack of awareness of the scope of respiratory or cutaneous allergens capable of inducing occupational asthma (OA) or work-related contact dermatitis. Evidence exists suggesting that the occupational history is often neglected among primary care physicians and specialists. Failure to diagnose OA in a timely fashion by identifying occupational sources of exposure, for example, may result in unnecessary morbidity in workers whose exposure is not modified. In this commentary, we propose a brief intake survey to be administered to all patients coming to an allergy practice to quickly screen for possible work-related respiratory symptoms and another for occupational dermatitis. This would require minimal physician time and could be self-administered at the initial encounter and incorporated into the medical record. A positive response to either survey should trigger a more detailed evaluation by the allergy specialist. More detailed approaches for stepwise clinical evaluation of the worker suspected of OA and contact dermatitis are discussed.

Long-Term Impairment From Irritant-Induced Occupational Asthma

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study is to assess the long-term physical condition, health-related quality of life, employment, and work ability of irritant-induced asthma (IIA) patients.

METHODS

Forty-three IIA patients completed a follow-up questionnaire a median of eight (interquartile range 4-11) years after asthma diagnosis. We compared their results with those of 43 low-molecular-weight (LMW) sensitizer-induced occupational asthma (OA) patients and those of 206 adult-onset asthmatics in the general population.

RESULTS

Of the IIA patients, 40% reported depressive symptoms. Of the <65-year-olds, 56% were employed, of whom 39% assessed their work ability as limited. IIA patients had more difficulty climbing several flights of stairs than LMW-induced OA patients (70% vs 47%, OR = 4.83 95% CI: 1.51-15.47). Most of the IIA patients' outcomes were inferior to those of the adult-onset asthmatics in the general population.

CONCLUSIONS

IIA prognosis appeared poor but resembled that of LMW-induced OA.

Contemporary Concise Review 2023: Environmental and occupational lung diseases

Air pollutants have various effects on human health in environmental and occupational settings. Air pollutants can be a risk factor for incidence, exacerbation/aggravation and death due to various lung diseases, including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), hypersensitivity pneumonitis or pneumonia (HP), pulmonary fibrosis such as pneumoconiosis and malignant respiratory diseases such as lung cancer and malignant pleural mesothelioma. Environmental and occupational respiratory diseases are crucial clinical and social issues worldwide, although the burden of respiratory disease due to environmental and occupational causes varies depending on country/region, demographic variables, geographical location, industrial structure and socioeconomic situation. The correct recognition of environmental and occupational lung diseases and taking appropriate measures are essential to their effective prevention.

Long-term outcome of occupational asthma with different etiology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarizes the recent literature on the long-term outcome of sensitizer-induced and irritant-induced occupational asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies of sensitizer-induced occupational asthma show that after the offending exposure has ceased, most patients report at least partial relief of symptoms. However, in the long term, the diagnosis may negatively impact their careers, incomes, and quality of life. The studies also offer new insights into diisocyanate-induced occupational asthma phenotypes and asthma remission rates. One third of these cases were in remission in long-term after reduction or cessation of exposure. The long-term prognosis of irritant-induced occupational asthma was demonstrated to be poorer than sensitizer-induced occupational asthma. Older age, low fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels and uncontrolled asthma at the time of diagnosis predicted uncontrolled asthma in the long term in patients with irritant and low-molecular-weight sensitizer induced occupational asthma.

SUMMARY

Recent studies provide further evidence of the long-term outcome of different occupational asthma phenotypes and the factors that affect them. These findings help us identify patients at risk of poor asthma outcomes, who need close monitoring and support. It should also be borne in mind that occupational asthma diagnosis may have wider-ranging negative impacts on patients' lives.

Causality between allergic diseases and kidney diseases: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study

Background

Evidence from observational studies and clinical trials suggests that the allergic diseases (ADs) are associated with kidney diseases (KDs). However, the causal association between them remains to be determined. We used bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis to evaluate the potential causality between them.

Methods

Mendelian randomization (MR) was performed using publicly available genome-wide association study (GWAS) summary datasets. Inverse variance weighted (IVW), weighted median, MR-Egger regression, simple mode, and weighted mode methods are used to evaluate the causality between ADs and KDs. Sensitivity and heterogeneity analyses were used to ensure the stability of the results.

Results

The MR results indicated that genetic susceptibility to ADs was associated with a higher risk of CKD [odds ratio (OR) = 1.124, 95% CI = 1.020-1.239, p = 0.019] and unspecified kidney failure (OR = 1.170, 95% CI = 1.004-1.363, p = 0.045) but not with kidney stone, ureter stone or bladder stone (OR = 1.001, 95% CI = 1.000-1.002, p = 0.216), other renal or kidney problem (OR = 1.000, 95% CI = 1.000-1.001, p = 0.339), urinary tract or kidney infection (OR = 1.000, 95% CI = 0.999-1.001, p = 0.604), kidney volume (OR = 0.996, 95% CI = 0.960-1.033, p = 0.812) and cyst of kidney (OR = 0.914, 95% CI = 0.756-1.105, p = 0.354). No causal evidence of KDs on ADs was found in present study.

Conclusion

Results from MR analysis indicate a causal association between ADs and CKD and unspecified kidney failure. These findings partly suggest that early monitoring of CKD risk in patients with ADs is intentional.

Occupational Rhinitis: An Update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Occupational rhinitis is an underdiagnosed disease with significant morbidity and implications in the workplace. Multiple factors associated with this disease continue to pose a challenge to investigators. This review aims to summarize recent literature in occupational rhinitis, including classifications, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment, as well as the impact of occupational rhinitis on individuals. Additionally, it identifies areas in need of further research and investigation.

RECENT FINDINGS

We highlight current research on the association between occupational rhinitis and occupational asthma and the role of immunotherapy in this disease. Discussion includes the impact of social trends on workers and the wider consequences of occupational rhinitis including decreased work productivity, absenteeism, and socioeconomic burden. Occupational rhinitis remains a challenging disease entity due to the numerous potential causative factors, reduced recognition, morbidity in asthma, and therapeutic limitations. Additional research is needed to better identify disease predictors and develop effective management strategies.

Irritant asthma and work: cases from the UK SWORD reporting scheme from 1999 to 2018

BACKGROUND

Acute irritant asthma is a preventable health consequence of a workplace exposure and has a number of adverse outcomes. While cases and case series are reported, little is known about the causes and incidence of this condition over prolonged periods of time.

AIMS

We aimed to estimate the reported incidence of irritant asthma referred to a national reporting scheme, and how this has changed over time.

METHODS

Cases of irritant asthma reported to SWORD, the UK-based Surveillance of Work-related Occupational Respiratory Diseases scheme, were grouped into four 5-year time periods from 1999 onwards. Likely causative exposures, job, work sector and incidence rates were analysed over time.

RESULTS

307 actual cases equated to 1066 estimated cases; actual cases had a mean age of 46 years (SD 17.8); 70.7% were male. The annual incidence fell from 1.98 per million employed in the first 5-year period, to 0.56 in the most recent. Eleven occupational codes were associated with six or more attributed cases, and between them accounted for 38% of all cases. Thirteen exposure categories were associated with five or more cases. These were formaldehyde (n=5), cutting oils and coolants (n=6), isocyanates (n=6), pesticides and herbicides (n=6), welding fumes (n=7), paints (n=7), solder and colophony (n=7), solvents (n=9), fuel oil, diesel and ill-defined fumes (n=10), chlorine and hypochlorites (n=15), acids (n=23), smoke (n=25) and cleaning products and sterilising agents (n=39).

CONCLUSIONS

While the incidence of irritant asthma may have fallen, cases are persistently attributed to well-described causes. A persistence of cases attributed to cleaning agents was seen.

Exposure frequency, intensity, and duration: What we know about work-related asthma risks for healthcare workers from cleaning and disinfection

The objective of this review was to scope the current evidence base related to three exposure assessment concepts: frequency, intensity, and duration (latency) for cleaning and disinfection exposures in healthcare and subsequent work-related asthma risks. A search strategy was developed addressing intersections of four main concepts: (1) work-related asthma; (2) occupation (healthcare workers/nurses); (3) cleaning and disinfection; and (4) exposure. Three databases were searched: Embase, PubMed, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) database. Data were extracted related to three main components of risk assessment: (1) exposure frequency, (2) exposure intensity, and (3) exposure duration. Latency data were analyzed using an exponential distribution fit, and extracted concentration data were compared to occupational exposure limits. The final number of included sources from which data were extracted was 133. Latency periods for occupational asthma were exponentially distributed, with a mean waiting time (1/λ) of 4.55 years. No extracted concentration data were above OELs except for some formaldehyde and glutaraldehyde concentrations. Data from included sources also indicated some evidence for a dose-response relationship regarding increased frequency yielding increased risk, but this relationship is unclear due to potential confounders (differences in role/task and associated exposure) and the healthy worker effect. Data priority needs to include linking concentration data to health outcomes, as most current literature does not include both types of measurements in a single study, leading to uncertainty in dose-response relationships.

Occupational lung disease: when should I think of it and why is it important?

Exposure to toxic inhalants in the workplace has the potential to cause (in susceptible individuals) almost any major type of lung disease, such as asthma, COPD and interstitial lung diseases. Patients with occupational lung disease will often present to or will be managed by respiratory specialists without training in occupational respiratory medicine, and patients (or their clinicians) may not identify a link between their disease and their current or a past job. Without an awareness of the range of different occupational lung diseases that exist, their similarity to their non-occupational counterparts, and without directed questioning, these conditions may go unidentified. Patients with occupational lung diseases are often in lower paid work and are disproportionally affected by health inequality. Both clinical and socioeconomic outcomes generally improve if cases are identified early. This allows appropriate advice to be given about the risks of ongoing exposure, clinical management, occupational mobility and, in some cases, eligibility for legal compensation. As respiratory professionals, it is important that these cases are not missed, and if needed, are discussed with a physician with specialised expertise. Here we describe some of the most common occupational lung diseases and outline the diagnostic and treatment approach.

Mechanistic and Therapeutic Approaches to Occupational Exposure-Associated Allergic and Non-Allergic Asthmatic Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Occupational lung disease, including asthma, is a significant cause of disability worldwide. The dose, exposure frequency, and nature of the causal agent influence the inflammatory pathomechanisms that inform asthma disease phenotype and progression. While surveillance, systems engineering, and exposure mitigation strategies are essential preventative considerations, no targeted medical therapies are currently available to ameliorate lung injury post-exposure and prevent chronic airway disease development.

RECENT FINDINGS

This article reviews contemporary understanding of allergic and non-allergic occupational asthma mechanisms. In addition, we discuss the available therapeutic options, patient-specific susceptibility and prevention measures, and recent scientific advances in post-exposure treatment conception. The course of occupational lung disease that follows exposure is informed by individual predisposition, immunobiologic response, agent identity, overall environmental risk, and preventative workplace practices. When protective strategies fail, knowledge of underlying disease mechanisms is necessary to inform targeted therapy development to lessen occupational asthma disease severity and occurrence.

Update on irritant-induced occupational asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this narrative review, we aim to highlight novel research findings on both acute/subacute irritant-induced asthma (IIA) and chronic exposure IIA (also called 'low dose' IIA).

RECENT FINDINGS

Novel case series showed that acute and subacute IIA cases had similar causal agents (e.g., acid or base aerosols/fumes, dusts, mixtures) but had occurred in different circumstances (accidents vs. regular work). Acute and subacute IIA cases had similar clinical characteristics but poorer short-term outcomes than sensitizer-induced occupational asthma patients. Novel large epidemiological studies reported associations between chronic occupational exposure to irritants and current adult-onset asthma and poor asthma control, and with a specific asthma endotype characterized by neutrophilic inflammation and oxidative stress. Recent studies reconfirmed the association of the use of disinfectants and cleaning products (especially sprays) with IIA. A role for genetic susceptibility has been suggested.

SUMMARY

Recent literature provided further understanding of both acute/subacute and chronic exposure IIA, in terms of causes, possible mechanisms, and consequences such as poor asthma control. Research is needed to clarify several aspects of IIA, including its frequency (still likely underestimated), modulating factors, and mechanisms. Research aiming at improving irritant exposure assessment, including intensity/duration, and determining relevant exposure windows would be welcome.

Long-Term Outcome of Occupational Asthma From Irritants and Low-Molecular-Weight Sensitizers

BACKGROUND

The short-term asthma outcome of irritant-induced asthma (IIA) is poorer than that of low-molecular-weight (LMW) sensitizer-induced occupational asthma (OA).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the long-term asthma outcome of IIA and LMW-induced OA and to determine which baseline features are associated with a poor long-term outcome.

METHODS

This follow-up questionnaire study assessed 43 patients diagnosed with IIA and 43 patients with LMW-induced OA at the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health in 2004-2018. The baseline results were analyzed to detect features associated with uncontrolled asthma (Asthma Control Test [ACT] score of ≤19, or ≥2 exacerbations or ≥1 serious exacerbation within 1 year) at follow-up.

RESULTS

The median interval since OA diagnosis was 6.3 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 4.4-11.3 years). Uncontrolled asthma was more frequent with IIA than with LMW-induced OA (58% vs 40%, adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 3.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.20-10.81). Poor symptom control was the main factor for this difference (median [IQR] ACT score of 18 [15-22] vs 21 [18-23], P = .036, respectively). Among all participants, older age (OR: 1.08 per year, 95% CI: 1.02-1.15), a fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) value <20 ppb (OR: 5.08, 95% CI: 1.45-17.80), and uncontrolled asthma at baseline (OR: 3.94, 95% CI: 1.31-11.88) were associated with uncontrolled asthma at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term asthma control of IIA appears to be inferior to that of LMW-induced OA. Older age, a low FeNO value, and uncontrolled asthma at baseline might indicate a worse long-term outcome among those with IIA and LMW-induced OA.