Diagnostic value of specific IgE analysis in latex allergy

Reduced protein levels in latex gloves may play an alternative approach to lowering latex sensitization risks among health workers; a cross-sectional analytical study

BACKGROUND

Latex gloves are essential for protecting healthcare workers from biological hazards but pose a risk of latex allergy, particularly due to powdered, protein, and allergen content. Recent advancements in latex glove manufacturing have led to reduced levels of extractable proteins, a known factor triggering allergenic reaction. This study aimed to compare latex sensitization between nursing staff using low-protein and high-protein latex gloves at a tertiary university hospital in Thailand.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analytical study categorized participants into two groups based on glove exposure: the low extractable protein group (only exposed to non-powdered latex gloves with extractable protein levels below 50 µg/g) and the high extractable protein group (exposed to powdered latex gloves with levels above 50 µg/g). The sample size comprised 163 individuals in the low protein group and 318 in the high protein group (1:2). Latex allergy symptoms and sensitization were assessed using a self-administered questionnaire and latex-specific IgE measurement (ImmunoCAP), respectively. Data analysis involved descriptive and inferential statistics, including odds ratios and 95%CI.

RESULTS

Demographic data was mostly similar in both exposure groups except for age. No significant differences in latex sensitization between the low and high protein groups were found via latex-specific IgE measurement (crude OR 1.90, 95%CI: 0.5, 7.18), potentially attributed to lower extractable protein levels in powdered latex gloves compared to previous studies. In contrast, the low protein group exhibited significantly fewer current latex allergy symptoms in both bivariate (crude OR 0.24, 95%CI: 0.06, 0.74) and multiple variable analysis (adjusted OR 0.18, 95%CI: 0.04, 0.86). Moreover, there was a significant reduction in latex allergy symptoms among the low protein group, decreasing from 9.8% who reported experiencing symptoms (when powdered latex gloves were used) to 1.2% who still reported current symptoms (OR 0.11, 95%CI: 0.02, 0.44).

CONCLUSIONS

This study underscores the importance of using non-powdered and low-protein latex gloves to reduce latex allergy symptoms while emphasizing the need for further investigation into the relationship between extractable protein levels in addition to the attempt of the major allergen removal and latex sensitization amid evolving glove manufacturing practices.

Hevea latex-associated allergies: piecing together the puzzle of the latex IgE reactivity profile

Introduction: IgE-mediated Hevea latex allergy and associated food-allergies constitute a significant health issue with serious consequences of diagnostic error. Hence, there is a need for more reliable confirmatory diagnostics.Areas covered: Here, we summarize the major limitations of conventional tests using native extracts and describe how piecing together the IgE reactivity profile can benefit correct diagnosis in difficult cases in whom conventional tests yield equivocal or negative results. A diagnostic algorithm integrating traditional sIgE and component-resolved diagnosis (CRD) is presented.Expert opinion: Moreover, it is clear that the discoveries in the field of the Hevea latex proteome will contribute to our understandings and accurate approach of sometimes complex cross-reactivity phenomena that extend beyond the 'latex-fruit syndrome.'

Allergen-specific IgE to recombinant latex allergens in occupational allergy diagnostics

Objectives

Specific challenge tests (SICs) are considered reference tests for allergic occupational diseases diagnosis. However, in numerous cases, SICs cannot be carried out in the diagnosis of allergy to latex due to the risk of generalized reactions. The aim of the study was to evaluate the usefulness of sIgE determination to recombinant latex allergens in diagnostics of occupational respiratory allergy.

Materials and Methods

The study group comprised 44 healthcare workers (HCW) suspected of suffering from occupational respiratory allergy to latex (they underwent a physical examination, skin‐prick tests (SPTs) to common and latex allergens, spirometry and SIC) and 17 controls not occupationally exposed to latex, with a positive sIgE against latex. Each serum was tested for allergen‐specific IgE to aeroallergens, latex, eight recombinant latex allergens and CCD‐markers.

Results

Specific IgE against Hev b5, 6.01, and 6.02 were significantly more frequently detected in HCWs and their mean serum levels were higher compared with the control group. In 26 HCWs with occupational asthma (OA), sensitization to Hev b5, Hev b6.01, Hev b6.02 was significantly more frequent than in 18 HCWs with work‐exacerbated asthma (WEA); they had positive results SPT to latex significantly more frequently in comparison with subjects with WEA.

Conclusions

Test for recombinant latex allergens is much more accurate in recognition of latex allergy than test for latex extract, which seems to produce false‐positive results in patients with pollen allergy. The measurements of sIgE against recombinant latex allergens Hev b 6.01, 6.02, 5, and 8 are useful in differentiating OA from WEA.

Profile Shift in Latex Sensitization over the Last 20 Years

BACKGROUND

Natural rubber latex (NRL) allergy is commonly diagnosed according to medical history, skin allergy tests, and serological analyses. However, skin tests are increasingly being abandoned because of (i) their time-consuming nature, (ii) latex preparations for skin tests being not commercially available, and (iii) the use of in-house prepared test solutions is becoming ever more difficult due to increasing regulatory hurdles. In this light, we have evaluated differences in the profiles of current and former patients with suspected latex allergy.

METHODS

Sera of skin test-positive patients from a historic cohort (1995-2001, n = 149 patients) and currently (2014-2015, n = 48 patients) were simultaneously analyzed for specific IgE to latex by ImmunoCAP. If the serological screening was positive (≥0.35 kU/L), component-resolved diagnostics including profilins and cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants (CCDs) were performed.

RESULTS

In contrast to 88% (131/149) of the skin test-positive patients from the 1990s, only 51.1% (24/47) of the current cohort were found positive for specific IgE to latex. While 48.3% (72/149) of the patients had a convincing positive history in the 1990s, current skin test-positive patients rarely reported a relevant medical history (8.5%, 4/47). Specific IgE levels to latex were significantly higher in former patients with suspected latex allergy (p < 0.001) than in former sensitized individuals without allergy. However, this significant difference was lost in current allergic and sensitized patients with positive skin tests.

CONCLUSION

Sensitization profiles in patients with latex allergy have changed significantly over the last 2 decades. Discrimination between NRL sensitization and clinical allergy remains a diagnostic challenge. Our data highlight the need for a combination of all 3 criteria, i.e., patient history, skin test, and analysis of specific IgE, for a correct diagnosis of latex allergy.

World Allergy Organization Anaphylaxis Guidelines: 2013 update of the evidence base

The World Allergy Organization (WAO) Guidelines for the assessment and management of anaphylaxis are a widely disseminated and used resource for information about anaphylaxis. They focus on patients at risk, triggers, clinical diagnosis, treatment in health care settings, self-treatment in the community, and prevention of recurrences. Their unique strengths include a global perspective informed by prior research on the global availability of essentials for anaphylaxis assessment and management and a global agenda for anaphylaxis research. Additionally, detailed colored illustrations are linked to key concepts in the text [Simons et al.: J Allergy Clin Immunol 2011;127:593.e1-e22]. The recommendations in the original WAO Anaphylaxis Guidelines for management of anaphylaxis in health care settings and community settings were based on evidence published in peer-reviewed, indexed medical journals to the end of 2010. These recommendations remain unchanged and clinically relevant. An update of the evidence base was published in 2012 [Simons et al.: Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2012;12:389-399]. In 2012 and early 2013, major advances were reported in the following areas: further characterization of patient phenotypes; development of in vitro tests (for some allergens) that help distinguish clinical risk of anaphylaxis from asymptomatic sensitization; epinephrine (adrenaline) research, including studies of a new epinephrine auto-injector for use in community settings, and randomized controlled trials of immunotherapy to prevent food-induced anaphylaxis. Despite these advances, the need for additional prospective studies, including randomized controlled trials of interventions in anaphylaxis is increasingly apparent. This 2013 Update highlights publications from 2012 and 2013 that further contribute to the evidence base for the recommendations made in the original WAO Anaphylaxis Guidelines. Ideally, it should be used in conjunction with these Guidelines and with the 2012 Guidelines Update.

Microarray-based component-resolved diagnosis of latex allergy: isolated IgE-mediated sensitization to latexprofilin Hev b8 may act as confounder

Immediate type allergy to latex is still a widespread problem. Latex-allergic patients undergoing diagnostic and operative medical procedures are at risk of potentially life-threatening reactions. Accurate diagnostic methods are therefore crucial. The aim of this retrospective study was to discriminate between sensitization and relevant allergy to latex based on an easy and suitable diagnostic approach. In 14 patients with clinical symptoms and 27 controls, latex skin prick tests (SPT), IgE against latex (CAP) and serological component resolved specific latex-allergen determination (Hev b1, b3, b5, b6, b7, b8, b9, b10, b11) based on ImmunoCAP ISAC were performed. SPT correlated very well with clinically manifest latex-allergy demonstrating a high specificity (95%) (and a low sensitivity). However, CAP levels to crude latex could not safely discriminate between purely sensitized and latex-allergic patients. The majority of patients mono-sensitized to the latex profilin Hev b8 did not suffer from any relevant symptoms upon contact with latex. However, in two patients with latex-allergy diagnosed by elevated specific IgE only sensitized against Hev b8, additional sensitization to carbohydrate cross-reactive determinants (CCD) was found. In the case of positive serum IgE against latex and negative SPT, component-resolved diagnosis including IgE against specific latex-proteins, specially Hev b8, and carbohydrate cross-reactive determinants (CCD) is a useful tool to discriminate between latex-sensitization and latex-allergy.