Risk of Enzyme Allergy in the Detergent Industry
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Occup Environ Med 2000;57:121–125 121 Occup Environ Med: first published as 10.1136/oem.57.2.121 on 1 February 2000. Downloaded from Risk of enzyme allergy in the detergent industry Markku Vanhanen, Timo Tuomi, Ulla Tiikkainen, Outi Tupasela, Risto Voutilainen, Henrik Nordman Abstract sation to enzymes and the levels of exposure to Objectives—To assess the prevalence of protease in a detergent factory. enzyme sensitisation in the detergent industry. Material and methods Methods—A cross sectional study was DETERGENT FACTORY conducted in a detergent factory. Sensiti- The study was carried out in a factory produc- sation to enzymes was examined by skin ing laundry detergents and automatic dish prick and radioallergosorbent (RAST) washing detergents. The factory had been tests. 76 Workers were tested; 40 in manu- operating since the 1960s. New facilities were facturing, packing, and maintenance, and built in the mid-1980s. Detergents for laundry 36 non-exposed people in management and dish washing were produced in separate and sales departments. The workers were departments. The manufacturing of laundry interviewed for work related respiratory detergents includes mixing of raw materials and skin symptoms. Total dust concentra- with water and subsequent spray drying of the tions were measured by a gravimetric slurry, followed by addition of heat labile com- method, and the concentration of protease ponents such as enzymes. The addition of in air by a catalytic method. enzyme to the hopper took place manually a Results—Nine workers (22%) were sensi- few times in a shift. Further mixing to the tised to enzymes in the exposed group of detergent was automated. The packing ma- 40, whereas none were sensitised in the chines were controlled and operated by pack- non-exposed group. All the sensitised ers. The factory had modern manufacturing people had symptoms at work; all had techniques and attention had been paid to dust rhinitis and one had asthma. control—for example, by installing local ex- Protease concentrations were generally haust ventilation in enzyme adding sites. The 3 <20 ng/m , but occasional peak values up manufacturing of the dish washing detergents 3 to 80 ng/m were detected in the packing diVered from that of the laundry detergents, and maintenance tasks, and high values of comprising mechanical mixing of the raw >1 µg/m3 in the mixing area. materials and packing of the product. Use of Conclusion—Despite the use of encapsu- respiratory protective equipment among mix- lated enzyme preparations, high enzyme ers was occasional until recent years. At the concentrations in workplace air are possi- time of the study personal protection was http://oem.bmj.com/ ble, resulting in a higher risk of sensitisa- always used during weighing and adding of tion than expected. enzymes. (Occup Environ Med 2000;57:121–125) Keywords: detergent enzymes; occupational exposure; ENZYMES allergy Proteases derived from Bacillus subtilis were used since the 1960s. Of newer enzymes, lipase had been used for about 5 years before our on September 27, 2021 by guest. Protected copyright. The detergent industry was the first to give rise study, and á-amylase and cellulase for about 2 to the protease enzyme allergy problem in the years. All enzymes were encapsulated. En- late 1960s.1–5 Later, other enzymes, such as zymes form only a small part (0.5%–2%) of the á-amylases and cellulases emerged as final detergent formula. Other components sensitisers—for example, in the baking include a complex variety of chemicals such as industry.6–9 In the detergent industry, the alkylbenzenesulphonate, fatty alcohol sulphate, Finnish Institute of allergy problem has been considered to be zeolite A, polycarboxylates, sodium carbonate, Occupational Health, under control since the mid-1970s, due to sodium silicate, tetraacetylethylendiamine, so- Helsinki, Finland dium perborate, fragrances, etc. M Vanhanen development of encapsulated protease prepara- T Tuomi tions and improvements in industrial 41011 U Tiikkainen hygiene. It was, however, reported that PARTICIPANTS O Tupasela sensitisation could not be totally prevented by All the employees were invited to the tests; par- R Voutilainen encapsulation of enzymes,12 and some cases of ticipation rate was 95%. Altogether 76 employ- H Nordman respiratory allergy have been reported.13 Re- ees were investigated. These were in process Correspondence to: cently, new enzymes have been introduced in work (n=17), packing (n=7), maintenance Markku Vanhanen, Finnish the detergent industry—such as lipases in the (n=5), laboratory work (n=6), storage work Institute of Occupational late 1980s, and later cellulases and (n=4), and cleaning (n=1), totalling 40 em- Health, Topeliuksenkatu 41 aA, FIN-00250 Helsinki, á-amylases—although the proteases derived ployees in manufacturing, and there were 36 Finland. from Bacillus subtilis are still the most impor- non-exposed employees in management and email Markku.Vanhanen@ tant enzymes. Because of the history of enzyme sales departments. The 40 employees are occuphealth.fi allergy and the increased range of enzymes in referred to later in the text as the process group Accepted 16 September 1999 the field, we assessed the prevalence of sensiti- and the 36 employees as the oYce group. 122 Vanhanen,Tuomi,Tiikkainen, et al Occup Environ Med: first published as 10.1136/oem.57.2.121 on 1 February 2000. Downloaded from Table 1 Sex, age, smoking, and duration of employment of the employees Age (y) Duration of Sex Men Women Smoking employment (y) Men Women Mean Range Mean Range n % <10 >10 Process workers (n=40) 26 14 42 20–59 47 24–60 14 35 16 24 OYce workers (n=36) 7 29 47 30–60 41 26–56 13 36 22 14 Detailed data of the employees’ age, sex, and sensitivity. The questionnaire was a modifica- work history are given in table 1. tion of sets of questionnaires that have been used in several epidemiological studies about DUST MEASUREMENT work related allergies in Finland.9 The samples for total dust measurement and for the protease assay were collected by a SKIN PRICK TESTS standardised method in the breathing zone of Atopy was assessed by skin prick tests (SPTs) the workers on the work shift at a flow rate of 2 with a panel of common environmental aller- l/min, and by area sampling at a flow rate of 20 gens: cat, dog, timothy, birch, alder, mugwort, l/min, with 37 mm Millipore AA filters in an and house dust mite (Dermatophagoides pteron- open face Millipore cassette for gravimetric yssinus) (Allergologisk Laboratorium, ALK, measurement of the dust. Sampling times were Copenhagen, Denmark). Histamine hydro- about 4 hours in the breathing zone samples chloride (10 mg/ml) was used as the positive and 2–5 hours in the area samples. The detec- control. A person with one or more positive 3 tion limit of this method is 0.1 mg/m for total skin prick test reactions to environmental aller- dust. For measurement of protease 37 mm gens was defined as atopic. GF/A fibreglass filters (Whatman Inter- To assess enzyme sensitisation, SPTs were national, Kent, USA) were used. performed with enzyme preparations, including Filters were homogenised and the samples two proteases: Maxapem CX 20 (Genencor, extracted into 10 ml ice cold buVer (0.02 M Finland) and Esperase (Novo Nordisk, Den- Na-thiosulphate, 0.1 M Tris, 0.01 M CaCl2, mark), a cellulase, Celluzyme 0.7 T (Novo), an 0.005 % Tween, pH 8.4) with Sonifier B-12 á-amylase, Termamyl 60T (Novo), and a lipase, sonicator (Branson Sonic Power, Danbury, Lipolase 30T (Novo), at a protein concentration USA) with 90 W power for 30 seconds. The of 100 µg/ml. The test extracts were prepared extracts were centrifuged for 30 minutes at and the tests were performed as described by 2200g. Sterile filtered buVer (Millex-GV, Milli- Vanhanen et al.9 A weal >3 mm diameter and > pore, France) and disposable equipment were half of that of the histamine were defined as used. After centrifugation the clear supernatant positive, indicating sensitisation. was collected and the protease activity was measured with a modification of the sensitive IgE MEASUREMENTS end point assay for airborne proteases from 14 Specific IgE antibodies to enzymes were http://oem.bmj.com/ Genencor International. measured by the radioallergosorbent test The standard was a Durazym preparation (RAST). Proteins of commercial enzyme with activity 8.39 DPU/g (Durazym Protease preparations were conjugated to cyanogen bro- Units, Novo Nordisk) and the protein content mide activated paper discs by the method of of the standard was 0.082 mg protein/mg 16 15 Ceska et al. Values >0.35 kU/l were defined Durazym (Lowry method). The detection positive, indicating sensitisation. The RAST limit of this assay was 0.25 µDPU/ml (2.5 tests were performed if a person reacted to one µDPU/filter) which equals 20 ng Durazym or more enzymes in the skin prick test. protein/filter. Protease concentrations were on September 27, 2021 by guest. Protected copyright. expressed as ng/m3 based on the enzyme activ- ity per protein content of the Durazym Results standard. AIR CONCENTRATIONS OF TOTAL DUST AND ENZYMES QUESTIONNAIRE In production of the detergents the total dust The employees answered a questionnaire on concentration was generally <0.4 mg/m3 but work history, history of atopy, smoking habits, could be up to 1.3 mg/m3. In the personal sam- and work related symptoms indicating hyper- ples the total dust values were <0.5 mg/m3 Table 2 Total dust and protease concentrations in the detergent factory Area samples Personal samples Samples Samples (n) Mean Median Range (people) (n) Mean Median Range DET 1: Total dust (mg/m3) 10 0.2 0.1 0.05–1.1 12 (6) 0.4 0.2 <0.07–1.3 Protease (ng/m3) 10 ND ND <4.0–15* 12 (6) ND ND <55–70* DET 2: Total dust (mg/m3) 5 0.4 0.2 0.1-1.3 6 (3) 0.4 0.3 <0.3–1.2 Protease (ng/m3) 3 500 16 11-1500 3 (3) 510 170 <55–1300 *Only one result over detection limit.