Objectives Several studies have described peach tree (PT) as an occupational allergen. The aim of this work was to assess the effect of Prunus persica 9 (Pru p 9), a recently identified allergen from PT pollen, in exposed workers.
Methods The study included people who reported respiratory symptoms after handling PT in orchards during the flowering period (Blanca village, Murcia region, south-east Spain). After completing a detailed questionnaire, participants underwent skin prick test (SPT) and nasal provocation test (NPT). The IgE response was analysed by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting assays.
Results A total of 21 cases were included (mean age 45 years; 57% women). Most were polysensitised to common pollens, although one person was sensitised only to PT pollen. All cases had a positive SPT to this pollen, and 43% also to Pru p 9. All participants reported having rhinitis, and six participants reported having also asthma. Immunoblotting showed a heterogeneous IgE pattern for several proteins, with Pru p 9 recognised in nine cases. Most participants sensitised to PT pollen and Pru p 9 had positive NPTs, while those who were not sensitised to Pru p 9 tested negative.
Conclusions We demonstrate for the first time that Pru p 9, an allergen from PT pollen, can induce respiratory symptoms following occupational exposure. This must be considered a relevant allergen when people working with PT cultivars develop respiratory symptoms.
- occupational health practice
- occupational asthma
Statistics from Altmetric.com
LV-P and MLS contributed equally.
Contributors Laura Victorio-Puche and Maria Luisa Somoza contributed equally to the design of the work, clinical study, nasal provocation tests and the final elaboration of the manuscript.
Funding This work was supported by grants PI17/00615 and SAF2017-86483-R, awarded by the Ministry of Economy and Competiveness and the Institute of Health Carlos III, and co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) for the Thematic Networks and Co-operative Research Centres: ARADyAL (RD16/0006/0014 and RD16/0006/0024). It was also partially supported by Inmunotek laboratories (Madrid, Spain).
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Ethics approval The study was approved by our institutional Ethics Committee: Comité de ética de la investigación. Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data availability statement All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.