MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2037099435 · doi:10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00522.x

Occupational rhinitis and asthma due to metal salts

2005· review· en· W2037099435 sur OpenAlexaff
Malo Jl

Notice bibliographique

RevueAllergy · 2005
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueOccupational exposure and asthma
Établissements canadiensHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPlatinumOccupational asthmaSensitizationAllergyRhodiumAsthmaMedicineChemistryImmunologyCatalysisOrganic chemistry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In the current issue of Allergy, Cristaudo and coworkers publish interesting prevalence data on sensitization to platinum salts and respiratory symptoms in workers of a secondary industry (1). Metals are common causes of allergic sensitization and symptoms in the workplace, as reviewed (2). Among metals, several ‘first long period of transitional elements’, including nickel, chromium, cobalt, vanadium and zinc, have been incriminated. Second and third long periods of transitional elements include those metals that are the focus of the work by Cristaudo and colleagues: platinum, iridium, rhodium, and palladium. This article is relevant and worthwhile for various reasons. First, the authors compare sensitization to various metal salts of the second and third long periods of transitional elements to which the workers were exposed. Platinum salts were described as a cause of allergic sensitization and occupational asthma in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, as reviewed (3). Contrary to most other low-molecular-weight agents, an IgE-dependent mechanism has clearly been elucidated (4–6). Extensive epidemiologic studies in a refinery by Merget and coworkers have shown that platinum salts are highly allergenic (7). Cristaudo and coworkers confirm this by showing that platinum salts are a frequent cause of sensitization (14% incidence in their study). These authors further demonstrate that, among platinum salts that also include potassium and sodium hexachloroplatinate s, hexachloroplatinic acid is clearly the most allergenic. Indeed, all of the 22 sensitized subjects reacted to this salt. However, eight of these 22 subjects (36%) reacted to all platinum salts. Other second- and third-group elements (iridium, rhodium, palladium) were found to be very uncommonly allergenic: only two subjects reacted to both iridium and rhodium and one to iridium only, while all of the latter subjects also reacted to all platinum salts. Linnet and Hughes have also shown that tetraammine platinum dichloride in which the halide is present as an ion and not as a ligand coordinated to platinum, is not allergenic (8). The explanation for these enhanced allergenic properties of hexachloroplatinic acid when compared with other platinum salts and other metal salts of the second- and third-group elements is hypothetical, although most likely related to the molecular structure of the agent (9, 10). It is also interesting that only two subjects reacted to patch tests, whereas all but one showed reactions to prick testing, further confirming that the reaction is IgE-mediated. Secondly, this valuable contribution is a cross-sectional study carried out in a secondary industry that employs a relatively small group of workers. The incidence of sensitization is clearly as elevated as in the primary industry. Prevalences of sensitization and work-related symptoms are often higher in the secondary industry because preventive means and medical surveillance do not operate as efficiently in these workplaces as in large-scale production plants. Thirdly, this study suggests, as other studies have clearly found, that cigarette smoking is a risk factor (11, 12). Most other causes of occupational asthma have not been associated with cigarette smoking. This further emphasizes the need to encourage workers in such workplaces to quit smoking by promoting smoking cessation programmes. Finally, the study by Cristaudo and coworkers demonstrates that skin-prick testing is a highly valuable surveillance tool in the case of workers exposed to platinum salts. It is also a useful indicator of the validity of surveillance programmes in which workers are offered jobs with no exposure to platinum salts. Merget and coworkers have indeed shown that sensitization to platinum disappears when workers are no longer exposed (13). Of the 22 subjects with skin reactivity to platinum salts, 18 had symptoms of rhinitis and 10 reported asthma, although not necessarily work-related. The prevalences of probable occupational rhinitis and asthma were 12 and 6.6%, respectively. These figures are comparable with prevalence figures generally reported in workers exposed to low-molecular-weight agents, i.e. approximately 5–10% for occupational asthma. In most prevalence studies, work-related rhinitis is more common than occupational asthma (14). In the current study, bronchial responsiveness was not assessed; this would have been a further means, now more often used in epidemiological surveys, to confirm the asthmatic status. Using criteria of immunological reactivity along with bronchial hyperresponsiveness and symptoms would have indicated a stronger likelihood of occupational asthma (15). Interventions are clearly warranted to reduce the burden of sensitization, rhinitis and asthma caused at the workplace. Reducing exposure levels should be a priority, as it has proved consistently effective. Newman-Taylor and coworkers have shown that intensity exposure and HLA phenotype (HLA-DR6 increases the risk whereas HLA-DR3 is associated with reduced risk) interact in the case of sensitization to platinum (16). Moreover, early identification of workers who acquire sensitization and transfer to areas with reduced exposure may result in reversal of sensitization to platinum (13). Pre- and regular post-employment assessments of sensitization, bronchial responsiveness and symptomatic status should be carried out in these workers so as to provide incidence figures, more rarely evaluated than prevalence figures in the case of occupational asthma (17), in order to guide efficient interventions.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,989
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,043
Tête enseignante GPT0,350
Écart entre enseignants0,307 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations27
Publié2005
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAllergyMême sujetOccupational exposure and asthmaTravaux en français237 207