Association of bronchial reactivity to occupational agents with methacholine reactivity, sputum cells and immunoglobulin E-mediated reactivity

Chemical respiratory sensitization-Current status of mechanistic understanding, knowledge gaps and possible identification methods of sensitizers

Respiratory sensitization is a complex immunological process eventually leading to hypersensitivity following re-exposure to the chemical. A frequent consequence is occupational asthma, which may occur after long latency periods. Although chemical-induced respiratory hypersensitivity has been known for decades, there are currently no comprehensive and validated approaches available for the prospective identification of chemicals that induce respiratory sensitization, while the expectations of new approach methodologies (NAMs) are high. A great hope is that due to a better understanding of the molecular key events, new methods can be developed now. However, this is a big challenge due to the different chemical classes to which respiratory sensitizers belong, as well as because of the complexity of the response and the late manifestation of symptoms. In this review article, the current information on respiratory sensitization related processes is summarized by introducing it in the available adverse outcome pathway (AOP) concept. Potentially useful models for prediction are discussed. Knowledge gaps and gaps of regulatory concern are identified.

[Diagnosis and treatment of asthma: a guideline for respiratory specialists 2023 - published by the German Respiratory Society (DGP) e. V.]

The management of asthma has fundamentally changed during the past decades. The present guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of asthma was developed for respiratory specialists who need detailed and evidence-based information on the new diagnostic and therapeutic options in asthma. The guideline shows the new role of biomarkers, especially blood eosinophils and fractional exhaled NO (FeNO), in diagnostic algorithms of asthma. Of note, this guideline is the first worldwide to announce symptom prevention and asthma remission as the ultimate goals of asthma treatment, which can be achieved by using individually tailored, disease-modifying anti-asthmatic drugs such as inhaled steroids, allergen immunotherapy or biologics. In addition, the central role of the treatment of comorbidities is emphasized. Finally, the document addresses several challenges in asthma management, including asthma treatment during pregnancy, treatment of severe asthma or the diagnosis and treatment of work-related asthma.

Workplace-related inhalation test - Specific inhalation challenge: S2k Guideline of the German Society for Occupational and Environmental Medicine e.V. (DGAUM), the German Society for Pneumology and Respiratory Medicine e.V. (DGP) and the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology e.V. (DGAKI)

Not available.

Assessment and Management of Occupational Asthma

Exposures at work can give rise to different phenotypes of "work-related asthma." The focus of this review is on the diagnosis and management of sensitizer-induced occupational asthma (OA) caused by either a high- or low-molecular-weight agent encountered in the workplace. The diagnosis of OA remains a challenge for the clinician because there is no simple test with a sufficiently high level of accuracy. Instead, the diagnostic process combines different procedures in a stepwise manner. These procedures include a detailed clinical history, immunologic testing, measurement of lung function parameters and airway inflammatory markers, as well as various methods that relate changes in these functional and inflammatory indices to workplace exposure. Their diagnostic performances, alone and in combination, are critically reviewed and summarized into evidence-based key messages. A working diagnostic algorithm is proposed that can be adapted to the suspected agent, purpose of diagnosis, and available resources. Current information on the management options of OA is summarized to provide pragmatic guidance to clinicians who have to advise their patients with OA.

Inhalation Challenge Tests in Occupational Asthma: Why Are Multiple Tests Needed?

Occupational and environmental lung diseases are on the rise because of the widespread use of various toxic agents in industry. Asthma etiopathogenesis is unclear because of exposure to high and low molecular agents in workplaces. Approximately 15-25% of asthma in adults is reported to be related to occupational exposure. The prevalence of occupational asthma (OA) is predicted to be high. The difficulties in diagnosing OA results in inadequate treatment, permanent airway damage, and medicolegal and social problems. As with other occupational diseases, it is necessary to demonstrate a direct causal relationship between the suspected agent and OA. Spirometry, peak expiratory flow rate, and/or non-specific bronchial hyperresponsiveness are frequently used to show airway hyperresponsiveness at the workplace and away from work. However, there are some controversies about the specificity and sensitivity of these test methods. Furthermore, these tests do not identify the exposure agent, which could be the causative agent. Specific inhalation challenge (SIC) tests that demonstrate the direct causal relationship are currently the gold standard. However, their positive and negative predictive values have not yet been established; therefore, many low molecular weight agents could cause late or atypical reactions. Therefore, a negative SIC test cannot exclude the disease. This review describes the procedures for the SIC test and discusses the importance of using the combined test methods with the SIC test.

Assessment of eosinophilic airway inflammation as a contribution to the diagnosis of occupational asthma

BACKGROUND

Ascertaining the presence of asthma through the assessment of nonspecific bronchial hyperresponsiveness (NSBH) is a key step in the diagnosis of occupational asthma (OA). We aimed at investigating whether indices of airway inflammation including fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and sputum eosinophils would be useful adjuncts to the measurement of NSBH in diagnosing OA defined as a positive specific inhalation challenge (SIC).

METHODS

The study included 240 consecutive subjects with a suspicion of OA who completed a SIC, of whom 133 showed a positive response. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of NSBH, and FeNO, as well as sputum eosinophil counts assessed at baseline of the SIC were determined.

RESULTS

A concentration of histamine inducing a 20% decline in FEV₁ (PC₂₀ ) ≤16 mg/mL showed a sensitivity of 87% and a specificity of 36%. A FeNO level ≥25 ppb and a sputum eosinophil count ≥2% provided lower sensitivity rates (47% and 39%, respectively) than the PC₂₀ value. Eight of the 17 subjects without baseline NSBH despite a positive SIC showed a sputum eosinophil count ≥2%, a FeNO level ≥25 ppb, or both outcomes. Combining either a PC₂₀ value ≤16 mg/mL or a FeNO ≥25 ppb increased the sensitivity to 91%. Using either a PC₂₀ ≤16 mg/mL or a sputum eosinophil count ≥1% increased the sensitivity to 94%.

CONCLUSION

Adding the assessment of FeNO level and sputum eosinophils to NSBH improves the identification of subjects who may have OA and require further objective testing before excluding the possibility of OA.

Diagnosing occupational asthma

Making an accurate diagnosis of occupational asthma (OA) is, generally, important. The condition has not only significant health consequences for affected workers, but also substantial socio-economic impacts for workers, their employers and wider society. Missing a diagnosis of OA may lead to continued exposure to a causative agent and progressive worsening of disease; conversely, diagnosing OA when it is not present may lead to inappropriate removal from exposure and unnecessary financial and social consequences. While the most accurate investigation is specific inhalation challenge in an experienced centre, this is a scarce resource, and in many cases, reliance is on other tests. This review provides a technical dossier of the diagnostic value of the available methods which include an appropriate clinical history, the use of specific immunology and measurement of inflammatory markers, and various methods of relating functional changes in airway calibre to periods at work. It is recommended that these approaches are used iteratively and in judicious combination, in cognizance of the individual patient's circumstances and requirements. Based on available evidence, a working diagnostic algorithm is proposed that can be adapted to the suspected agent, purpose of diagnosis and available resources. For better or worse, many of the techniques - and their interpretation - are available only in specialized centres and where there is room for doubt, referral to such a centre is probably wise. Accordingly, the implementation or development of such specialized centres with appropriate equipment and expertise should greatly improve the diagnostic evaluation of work-related asthma.

Biomarkers in Occupational Asthma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Work-related asthma is a common disorder among adult asthma patients, and in the case of occupational asthma, it is induced by workplace exposures.

RECENT FINDINGS

Occupational asthma provides an excellent model and benchmark for identifying and testing different allergy or inflammatory biomarkers associated with its inception or progression. Moreover, specific inhalation challenge with the incriminated agent represents an experimental setting to identify and validate potential systemic or local biomarkers. Some biomarkers are mainly blood-borne, while local airway biomarkers are derived from inflammatory or resident cells. Genetic and gene-environment interaction studies also provide an excellent framework to identify relevant profiles associated with the risk of developing these work-related conditions. Despite significant efforts to identify clinically relevant inflammatory and genomic markers for occupational asthma, apart from the documented utility of airway inflammatory biomarkers, it remains elusive to define specific markers or signatures clearly associated with different endpoints or outcomes in occupational asthma.

Usefulness of Biomarkers in Work-Related Airway Disease

Determination of biomarkers may be useful in the surveillance of occupational exposure and workers' health. The possibility of predicting development/clinical course of specific disorders or current disease, diagnosing in early steps, and health condition monitoring is a real necessity. Various agents present in the workplace environment (or their metabolites) can be measured in samples possessed from human body (blood and urine, saliva, etc.). On the other hand, inhalant exposure may induce specific or non-specific, local or systemic, acute or chronic biological response expressed by synthesis or releasing specific or non-specific substances/mediators that also can be determined in blood, nasal and bronchial lavage or sputum, tear fluid, exhaled breath, etc. The least is known about genetic markers which may predict individual susceptibility to develop some work-related disorders under the influence of occupational exposure. Due to common exposure to inhalant agents at workplace, researches on biomarkers that allow to inspect the impact of exposure to humans' health are still needed. The authors of this article summarize the utility of biomarkers' determination in work-related airway diseases in a recent clinical approach.

New developments in work-related asthma

INTRODUCTION

Work-related asthma includes two subtypes: occupational asthma or asthma caused by specific agents (sensitizers or irritants) in the workplace, and work-exacerbated asthma or pre-existing asthma worsened by workplace exposures. Areas covered: This review provides an update on the definitions and the clinical features of the different work-related asthma subtypes as well as new insights into their etiology and the pathophysiological mechanisms involved. The diagnosis of work-related asthma should be made on objective basis using a constellation of clinical, physiologic and allergologic tests. Specific inhalation challenge with the suspected occupational agent(s) remains as the reference standard for diagnosis. A literature search was performed using the following terms: work-related asthma, occupational asthma, work-exacerbated asthma, irritant-induced asthma and etiological agents. Expert commentary: Studies focusing on the biological effects and mechanisms of environmental exposures in the development of sensitizer-induced or irritant-induced asthma in various workplace settings are of greatest interest. An integrative approach that combines clinical parameters with component-resolved diagnosis as well as inflammatory biomarkers appears to be very promising. Occupational allergy provides a good opportunity to understand the complex relationships between exposure to allergens in the workplace, interaction with genes and the co-exposures to other factors in the working environment.

Biological and genetic markers in occupational asthma

Occupational asthma (OA) is a complex disease that is often hard to diagnose due to difficulties in detecting relevant exposure, along with inherent differences in disease susceptibility. Numerous studies have attempted to identify relevant biological and genetic markers for OA and to devise tools capable of detecting exposure to the causative agent. Immunological markers, including skin prick test reactivity and specific IgE and IgG antibodies can be used to detect high-molecular-weight allergens in cases of baker's asthma. For OA induced by low-molecular-weight agents, such as isocyanate, potential biomarkers include serum-specific IgE and IgG antibodies to isocyanate-HSA conjugate and IgG to cytokeratin 19 and transglutaminase-2. For protein-based markers, ferritin/transferrin and vitamin D-binding protein levels have been suggested for isocyanate-OA. Genetic markers of susceptibility to isocyanate-OA include human leukocyte antigen and CTNNA3. Further investigations will be needed to identify better biomarkers for OA, which may be used to inform clinical decision.

IgE antibodies in occupational asthma: are they causative or an associated phenomenon?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To evaluate recent data on the causative role of specific IgE antibodies, as well as the performance of IgE diagnostic tests, in allergic occupational asthma induced by high (HMW) or low-molecular-weight (LMW) agents.

RECENT FINDINGS

Skin prick testing (SPT) and specific IgE assays are useful to document allergy to most HMW allergens and some LMW agents. These tests, however, are limited by the lack of standardized and commercially available reagents. There is a wide variability among the quality of occupational allergen extracts used for SPT and the sensitivity of several SPT solutions is low. In addition, many individuals with allergen-specific serum IgE and/or positive SPT to specific HMW allergens do not have clinical symptoms. Sensitization or allergenic cross-reactivity to allergens or epitopes from unrelated sources may interfere in the diagnosis of IgE-mediated allergy, giving rise to false-positive results, particularly when cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants (CCDs) are involved. The immune responses to these ubiquitous structures may interfere with the diagnosis of occupational allergy. Component-resolved diagnosis of IgE-mediated allergic diseases (occupational and nonoccupational) using panels of native or recombinant allergens, or micro-arrayed allergens, have been proposed to identify specific molecules responsible for these disorders and to overcome false-positive in-vitro test results.

SUMMARY

Improvement and standardization of SPT solutions for occupational allergens are highly recommended. More refined diagnostic tools than specific IgE measurements are being developed, such as inhibition assays of IgE binding to CCDs with specific carbohydrate molecules, and component-resolved diagnosis.

Diagnosis and frequency of work-exacerbated asthma among bakers

BACKGROUND

Work-exacerbated asthma (WEA) is asthma worsened by workplace exposures, although the asthma is not caused by sensitizers in the work environment.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the frequency of WEA in bakers reporting work-related respiratory symptoms and the usefulness of diagnostic tests in differentiating WEA from occupational asthma (OA).

METHODS

The study group included 393 bakers reporting respiratory symptoms at the workplace. In all patients, questionnaire, spirometry, skin prick tests (SPTs), and evaluation of serum total and specific IgE levels were performed. Recognition of OA was based on a specific inhalation challenge test.

RESULTS

Occupational asthma was found in 44.5% of patients, whereas WEA was recognized in 16%. The latency period was 11.2 ± 8.2 years in patients with OA vs 13.3 ± 9.7 years in those with WEA. Sixty percent of patients with OA and 50.8% of those with WEA had positive SPT reactions to common allergens; occupational SPT results were positive in 74.9% and 34.9%, respectively. Specific IgE to flours were found in 61.7% of patients with OA and 28.6% of those with WEA. In addition, OA frequently coexisted with occupational rhinitis (53.7% of patients), whereas WEA and rhinitis were found in 31.7% of patients.

CONCLUSION

Work-exacerbated asthma was diagnosed in 16% of bakers who reported allergic respiratory symptoms. The specific challenge test for occupational allergens should be performed in bakers with suspected work-related asthma, because an assessment of sensitization (SPT to occupational allergens, evaluation of specific IgE) is not specific enough to differentiate OA from WEA.

Developments in the field of allergy in 2011 through the eyes of Clinical and Experimental Allergy

As in previous years, we felt it would be of value to our readership to summarize the new information provided by the authors who have published in Clinical and Experimental Allergy in 2011 and set this in the context of recent advances in our understanding of the pathogenesis and management of allergic disease in all its many manifestations. In 2011, about 210 articles were published in Clinical and Experimental Allergy including editorials, reviews, opinion articles, guidelines, letters, book reviews and of course at the heart of the journal, papers containing original data. As before, this review is divided into sections based on the way the journal is structured, although this year we have grouped together all the papers dealing with mechanisms of allergic disease, whether they involve patients (clinical mechanisms), pure in vitro studies (basic mechanisms) or animal models (experimental models), as we felt this was a more coherent way to deal with the subject. In the field of asthma and rhinitis, the relationship between airway inflammation and airway dysfunction was of perennial interest to investigators, as were phenotypes and biomarkers. Aspirin hypersensitivity appeared in studies in several papers and there was new interest in asthma in the elderly. The mechanisms involved in allergic disease describe advances in our understanding of T cell responses, the relationship between inflammation and disease, mast cell and basophil activation, steroid resistance and novel therapies. In the section dealing with epidemiology, studies seeking to identify risk factors for allergic disease including vitamin D are prominent, as once again are studies investigating gene-environment interactions. The clinical allergy section focuses on drug allergy, food allergy and immunotherapy. The area of oral immunotherapy for food allergy is well covered and we were grateful to Stephen Durham for guest editing an outstanding special issue on immunotherapy in the centenary year of Leonard Noon's pioneering work. Lastly, in the field of allergens, the interest in component-resolved diagnosis continues to grow and there are also articles describing important novel cultivars and the effect of food processing on the allergenic properties of foods. Another terrific year, full of important and high-quality work,which the journal has been proud to bring to the allergy community.

Diagnosis of occupational asthma: an update

Work-related asthma (WRA) includes patients with sensitizer- and/or irritant-induced asthma in the workplace, as well as patients with preexisting asthma that is worsened by work factors. WRA is underdiagnosed; thus, the diagnosis is critical to prevent disease progression and its potential for morbidity and mortality. The interview is the first diagnostic tool to be used by physicians, and the question, "Does asthma improve away from work?" is of the highest sensitivity. However, history can show numerous false positives, and the relationships between asthma worsening and work should be confirmed by objective methods such as peak expiratory flow (PEF) at and away from work. PEF sensitivity and specificity can be enhanced in combination with nonspecific bronchial hyperresponsiveness to histamine/methacholine (NSBP) before and after 2 weeks at work and a similar period off work. Immunologic testing, especially skin prick test (SPT) or specific IgE, is useful for high molecular weight allergens and some low molecular weight agents. Other immunologic tests, as well as induced sputum, measurement of exhaled nitric oxide, exhaled breath condensate, and specific inhalation challenge (SIC) are methods that contribute to the diagnosis and are typically performed at specialized facilities. A diagnosis of occupational asthma (OA) should no longer be based on a compatible history only but should be confirmed by means of objective testing. SIC is the diagnostic gold standard. When SIC is not available, the combination of PEF measurement, NSBP test , a specific SPT, or specific IgE may be an appropriate alternative in diagnosing OA.

Inhalation challenges with occupational agents: threshold duration of exposure

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to characterize the threshold duration of exposure needed to elicit an asthmatic reaction during specific inhalation challenges (SIC) with various occupational agents and to determine the duration of exposure that should be completed before the test can be considered negative.

METHODS

This retrospective study analysed the cumulative duration of challenge exposure that was required to elicit a ≥20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second in 335 consecutive subjects with a positive SIC.

RESULTS

The threshold duration of challenge exposure required to induce an asthmatic reaction was ≤60 min in 179 (53%) subjects, between 61 and 120 min in 74 (22%) subjects, and longer than 120 min in 82 (25%) subjects. The multivariate linear regression analysis showed that a longer duration of exposure was associated with exposure to low-molecular-weight agents (p < 0.001), a higher level of baseline non-specific bronchial hyperresponsiveness to histamine (p = 0.015), increasing age (p = 0.011), and a shorter duration of asthma symptoms at work (p = 0.060).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that the sensitivity of SICs for diagnosing OA is highly dependent upon the duration of the challenge exposure. These data may provide useful guidance for improving the reliability of SICs performed with realistic methods of exposure.

The current diagnostic role of the specific occupational laboratory challenge test

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Classically, the specific occupational challenge test has been considered as the reference test in the diagnosis of occupational asthma. The present study assesses the usefulness of this test for diagnosing this disease and compares it with other diagnostic methods.

RECENT FINDINGS

Occupational asthma is the most frequent work-related respiratory disease in developed countries. Its correct diagnosis is vitally important not only from the medical point of view, but also in view of the disease's major socio-economic repercussions both for the patient and for society as a whole. Diagnosis is based on clinical suspicion of bronchial asthma and of a possible association with the patient's occupation. Various diagnostic strategies have been proposed, including clinical history, immunological test, spirometry, the study of peak flow, the methacholine test and the specific occupational challenge test, as well as studies of bronchial inflammation using noninvasive methods.

SUMMARY

The specific occupational challenge test remains the reference test for the diagnosis of occupational asthma for causal agents of both high and low molecular weight.

EAACI consensus statement for investigation of work-related asthma in non-specialized centres

Work-related asthma (WRA) is a relevant problem in several countries, is cause of disability and socioeconomic consequences for both the patient and the society and is probably still underdiagnosed. A correct diagnosis is extremely important to reduce or limit the consequences of the disease. This consensus document was prepared by a EAACI Task Force consisting of an expert panel of allergologists, pneumologists and occupational physicians from different European countries. This document is not intended to address in detail the full diagnostic work-up of WRA, nor to be a formal evidence-based guideline. It is written to provide an operative protocol to allergologists and physicians dealing with asthma useful for identifying the subjects suspected of having WRA to address them to in-depth investigations in a specialized centre. No evidence-based system could be used because of the low grade of evidence of published studies in this area, and instead, 'key messages' or 'suggestions' are provided based on consensus of the expert panel members.