Prevalence of skin test reactions to natural rubber latex in hospital personnel in Russia and eastern Europe

Cutaneous, but not airway, latex exposure induces allergic lung inflammation and airway hyperreactivity in mice

As respiratory symptoms are common in addition to skin reactions in natural rubber latex allergy, we investigated the significance of different allergen exposure routes in the development of lung inflammation and airway hyperreactivity (AHR). Both intracutaneous (IC) and intraperitoneal (IP) exposure followed by airway challenge with latex proteins induced an influx of mononuclear cells and eosinophils to the lungs. AHR and lung mucus production increased significantly after IC and IP but not after intranasal (IN) exposure. Infiltration of inflammatory cells was associated with the induction of T-helper type 2 (Th2) cytokines and several CC chemokines. Only a marginal induction of these mediators was found after IN exposure. On the contrary, increased levels of transforming growth factor-beta1 and forkhead box 3 mRNA, markers of regulatory activities, were found in the lungs after IN but not after IC exposure. Finally, IC and IP, but not IN, latex exposure induced a striking increase in specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels. Cutaneous latex exposure in the absence of adjuvant followed by airway challenge induces a local Th2-dominated lung inflammation and a systemic IgE response. Cutaneous exposure to proteins eluting from latex products may therefore profoundly contribute to the development of asthma in latex allergy.

Latex allergy and skin

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review we address the prevalence and outcome of latex allergy in health care workers (HCWs). Recent findings in natural rubber latex (NRL) allergens and trials of specific immunotherapy (SIT) are also of interest.

RECENT FINDINGS

A study involving skin prick test (SPT) screening in HCWs in Russia and adjacent countries found a prevalence of latex allergy of 1.9%. Questionnaire studies performed in Wales and in the USA identified prevalence rates of about 0.6%. An intervention undertaken at the Mayo Clinic, in which only gloves with low or undetectable allergen levels were allowed, reduced markedly the incidence of NRL allergy. Two studies, one from Finland and another from Ohio, showed that outcomes in latex-allergic HCWs are generally good. A study involving SPT screening showed that 6% of construction workers had latex allergy. A questionnaire study among allergists practicing in the USA showed that 62% performed latex SPT and 6% reported anaphylaxis, which mostly occurred while using a homemade SPT solution. Hev b 2, Hev b 5, Hev b 6.01 and Hev b 13 produced positive SPT reactions in over 60% of latex-allergic individuals. Topical application of NRL in a murine model of protein contact dermatitis caused a striking increase in prohevein-specific (Hev b 6.01) immunoglobulin E levels, together with a T-helper-2 type dermatitis. A placebo-controlled SIT trial with NRL extract alleviated cutaneous symptoms but caused some systemic reactions in latex-allergic patients.

SUMMARY

Low prevalence rates suggest that the peak of the latex allergy epidemic has already passed in HCWs. Hospital-wide interventions requiring use of low-allergen gloves reduce sensitization and changing gloves to nonlatex ones, or even using low-allergen latex gloves, in the affected individuals appears to confer adequate secondary prevention. In the USA there is an urgent need for standardized latex SPT reagent. Hev b 5 and Hev b 6.01 are major in vivo NRL allergens. Findings in mice suggest that NRL proteins eluting from latex gloves may also cause hand eczema in humans. SIT with NRL extract must still be considered an experimental treatment.