Early incidence of occupational asthma among young bakers, pastry-makers and hairdressers: design of a retrospective cohort study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Occupational exposures are thought to be responsible for 10-15% of new-onset asthma cases in adults, with disparities across sectors. Because most of the data are derived from registries and cross-sectional studies, little is known about incidence of occupational asthma (OA) during the first years after inception of exposure. This paper describes the design of a study that focuses on this early asthma onset period among young workers in the bakery, pastry making and hairdressing sectors in order to assess early incidence of OA in these "at risk" occupations according to exposure duration, and to identify risk factors of OA incidence.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The study population is composed of subjects who graduated between 2001 and 2006 in these sectors where they experience exposure to organic or inorganic allergenic or irritant compounds (with an objective of 150 subjects by year) and 250 young workers with no specific occupational exposure. A phone interview focusing on respiratory and 'Ear-Nose-Throat' (ENT) work-related symptoms screen subjects considered as "possibly OA cases". Subjects are invited to participate in a medical visit to complete clinical and lung function investigations, including fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FE_NO) and carbon monoxide (CO) measurements, and to collect blood samples for IgE (Immunoglobulin E) measurements (total IgE and IgE for work-related and common allergens). Markers of oxidative stress and genetic polymorphisms exploration are also assessed. A random sample of 200 "non-cases" (controls) is also visited, following a nested case-control design.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study may allow to describ a latent period between inception of exposure and the rise of the prevalence of asthma symptoms, an information that would be useful for the prevention of OA. Such a time frame would be suited for conducting screening campaigns of this emergent asthma at a stage when occupational hygiene measures and adapted therapeutic interventions might be effective.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Clinical trial registration number is NCT01096537.</p

High Diversity, Low Disparity and Small Body Size in Plesiosaurs (Reptilia, Sauropterygia) from the Triassic–Jurassic Boundary

Invasion of the open ocean by tetrapods represents a major evolutionary transition that occurred independently in cetaceans, mosasauroids, chelonioids (sea turtles), ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs. Plesiosaurian reptiles invaded pelagic ocean environments immediately following the Late Triassic extinctions. This diversification is recorded by three intensively-sampled European fossil faunas, spanning 20 million years (Ma). These provide an unparalleled opportunity to document changes in key macroevolutionary parameters associated with secondary adaptation to pelagic life in tetrapods. A comprehensive assessment focuses on the oldest fauna, from the Blue Lias Formation of Street, and nearby localities, in Somerset, UK (Earliest Jurassic: 200 Ma), identifying three new species representing two small-bodied rhomaleosaurids (Stratesaurus taylori gen et sp. nov.; Avalonnectes arturi gen. et sp. nov) and the most basal plesiosauroid, Eoplesiosaurus antiquior gen. et sp. nov. The initial radiation of plesiosaurs was characterised by high, but short-lived, diversity of an archaic clade, Rhomaleosauridae. Representatives of this initial radiation were replaced by derived, neoplesiosaurian plesiosaurs at small-medium body sizes during a more gradual accumulation of morphological disparity. This gradualistic modality suggests that adaptive radiations within tetrapod subclades are not always characterised by the initially high levels of disparity observed in the Paleozoic origins of major metazoan body plans, or in the origin of tetrapods. High rhomaleosaurid diversity immediately following the Triassic-Jurassic boundary supports the gradual model of Late Triassic extinctions, mostly predating the boundary itself. Increase in both maximum and minimum body length early in plesiosaurian history suggests a driven evolutionary trend. However, Maximum-likelihood models suggest only passive expansion into higher body size categories

A critical appraisal of appendage disparity and homology in fishes

Fishes are both extremely diverse and morphologically disparate. Part of this disparity can be observed in the numerous possible fin configurations that may differ in terms of the number of fins as well as fin shapes, sizes and relative positions on the body. Here, we thoroughly review the major patterns of disparity in fin configurations for each major group of fishes and discuss how median and paired fin homologies have been interpreted over time. When taking into account the entire span of fish diversity, including both extant and fossil taxa, the disparity in fin morphologies greatly complicates inferring homologies for individual fins. Given the phylogenetic scope of this review, structural and topological criteria appear to be the most useful indicators of fin identity. We further suggest that it may be advantageous to consider some of these fin homologies as nested within the larger framework of homologous fin‐forming morphogenetic fields. We also discuss scenarios of appendage evolution and suggest that modularity may have played a key role in appendage disparification. Fin modules re‐expressed within the boundaries of fin‐forming fields could explain how some fins may have evolved numerous times independently in separate lineages (e.g., adipose fin), or how new fins may have evolved over time (e.g., anterior and posterior dorsal fins, pectoral and pelvic fins). We favour an evolutionary scenario whereby median appendages appeared from a unique field of competence first positioned throughout the dorsal and ventral midlines, which was then redeployed laterally leading to paired appendages.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151971/1/faf12402_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151971/2/faf12402.pd

EAACI position paper on occupational rhinitis

The present document is the result of a consensus reached by a panel of experts from European and non-European countries on Occupational Rhinitis (OR), a disease of emerging relevance which has received little attention in comparison to occupational asthma. The document covers the main items of OR including epidemiology, diagnosis, management, socio-economic impact, preventive strategies and medicolegal issues. An operational definition and classification of OR tailored on that of occupational asthma, as well as a diagnostic algorithm based on steps allowing for different levels of diagnostic evidence are proposed. The needs for future research are pointed out. Key messages are issued for each item

Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: A Critical review

Methyl methacrylate (MMA) is a respiratory irritant and dermal sensitizer that has been associated with occupational asthma in a small number of case reports. Those reports have raised concern that it might be a respiratory sensitizer. To better understand that possibility, we reviewed the in silico, in chemico, in vitro, and in vivo toxicology literature, and also epidemiologic and occupational medicine reports related to the respiratory effects of MMA. Numerous in silico and in chemico studies indicate that MMA is unlikely to be a respiratory sensitizer. The few in vitro studies suggest that MMA has generally weak effects. In vivo studies have documented contact skin sensitization, nonspecific cytotoxicity, and weakly positive responses on local lymph node assay; guinea pig and mouse inhalation sensitization tests have not been performed. Cohort and cross-sectional worker studies reported irritation of eyes, nose, and upper respiratory tract associated with short-term peaks exposures, but little evidence for respiratory sensitization or asthma. Nineteen case reports described asthma, laryngitis, or hypersensitivity pneumonitis in MMA-exposed workers; however, exposures were either not well described or involved mixtures containing more reactive respiratory sensitizers and irritants.The weight of evidence, both experimental and observational, argues that MMA is not a respiratory sensitizer