Laboratory animal allergy inapharmaceutical company

A crosssectional surveywascarried outon 138workers exposed tolaboratory animals. Sixty (44%)hadsymptomsina self completed questionnaire that wereconsistent withlaboratory animal allergy (LAA)ofwhom15(11%)hadchest symptoms. There was apositive skinprick test to one ormore animal urine extracts (rat, mouse,guinea pig, rabbit) in13%and38%hadapositive radioallergosorbent test tourine extract. LAAchest symptoms werealmost five times more common inatopic thannon-atopic subjects (whoweredistinguished byskin test responsetocommon, non- animal aeroallergens). Apositive skin test toanimal urine wasassociated withLAAchest symptoms andwith atopy. Nose, eye,orskin symptomswithout chest symptoms werenotassociated withatopy. There was aninverse relation between duration ofemployment atthefirm andLAAchest symptoms, suggesting selection ofaffected people outofemployment withanimals. Workersexposedto animals areat riskof occupational asthma, rhinitis, conjunctivitis, or urticaria, components oftheurinary protein ofrats andmicebeing majorallergens.' Several surveys have des.cribed prevalence ratesoflaboratory animal allergy (LAA)of15to30%'-8 andaprospective study hasestimated thecumulative incidence rate inthefirst yearofemployment as15%.' Thepresent survey was carried outaspartofamoregeneral assessment of occupational hazards atapharmaceutical company. Thecompanywasawareofafewcases ofLAAbutit wasnotconsidered tobeanimportant problem. Methods SUBJECTS Thesurvey tookplace in1984ataUnited Kingdom pharmaceutical company. Thefirm's laboratory safety officer identified 158workers whocameinto contact withanimals intheir work. Allworkers whosecurrent exposure wasatleast asgreat ashisownwereincluded. Ofthese, 138(87%)completed aquestionnaire, 133 (84%)hadskinprick tests, 130(82%)gaveablood sample, and129(82%)hadallthetests. We under- stand that someofthe20individuals wedidnotsee