36
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Letter to the Editor: Two Major Phenotypes of Sulfite Hypersensitivity: Asthma and Urticaria

      letter

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The sulfites are widely used as anti-browning agents and preservatives in food, cosmetics and medicine. The use and amount of sulfites in products have recently been regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Korean FDA; however, sulfite hypersensitivity reactions, ranging from bronchoconstriction,1 urticaria,2 contact dermatitis3 to life threatening anaphylaxis,4 are still being reported.5 To date, this is the first study to compare two major phenotypes of sulfite hypersensitivity, asthma and urticaria, in this country. Moreover, we carefully analyzed the clinical features of sulfite sensitive asthma, and compared them with those of sulfite tolerant asthma. We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 26 sulfite hypersensitivity subjects confirmed by a sulfite oral provocation test (OPT). As a control group, 61 asthmatic patients negative to sulfite OPT were enrolled from Ajou University Hospital, Suwon, Korea. We performed sulfite oral provocation test on the subjects who were resistant to conventional treatment of asthma/urticaria or who had histories of allergy to sulfite containing food such as wine, dried fruits, or salads from buffet. To confirm sulfite sensitivity, we conducted single blind placebo controlled provocation test. After the asthmatic patients showed no response to gelatin capsule (EMBO CAPS lot. 051A51-22306, Suheung Capsule, Seoul, Korea) with 2 hours observation, they were administered sodium metabisulfite (Na2S2O5; Sigma Co., St. Louis, MO, USA) starting from 40 mg and increasing to 100-200 mg via gelatin capsule vehicle. The reactions were observed for 2 hours each until the hypersensitivity reactions developed,1 maximally 6 hours. Especially for bronchoconstriction reaction, 1) a decline in FEV1 of 20% or greater, or 2) a decline in FEV1 of 15% to 20% compared to the baseline with definite symptoms/signs of sulfite hypersensitivities (such as wheezing, cough or dyspnea) were considered positive. Pulmonary function tests were repeated at 30 minute intervals.6 In the case of urticarial reaction, sulfite OPT was defined as positive when hives arise; however, it was classified as negative if subjective pruritus developed. Subjects were classified into group I: sulfite sensitive asthma, group II: sulfite sensitive urticaria and group III: sulfite tolerant asthma according to their sulfite OPT reaction. In addition, group I included two patients with concurrent sulfite anaphylaxis. Sulfite sensitive asthma was a more common phenotype of sulfite hypersensitivity than sulfite sensitive urticaria (69.2% vs. 30.8%). Chronic asthma was more common in group I, as previously reported;6 however, chronic urticaria was more common in group II. Group II subjects required significantly higher provocative dosage of sulfite (187.5±35.4 mg vs. 114.4±60.0 mg, p=0.006) and a longer time (100±37.4 min vs. 54.2±34.8 min, p=0.008) to induce hypersensitivity reactions compared with group I subjects. A previous history of adverse reactions was found in 44.4% of group I and 62.5% of group II, being different from previous studies that enrolled subjects with a history of sulfite hypersensitivities (Table 1).1,7 There were no significant differences in asthma-related parameters-such as atopic status, total IgE level, peripheral eosinophil count, FEV1% and metacholine PC20 level when the clinical characteristics were compared between group I and group III. The prevalence of severe asthma according to American Thoracic Society guidelines was significantly higher in group I than as previously reported in group III (44% vs. 16%, p=0.023).1,8 The asthma exacerbation related hospitalization rate (≥1 times/yr), emergency room visit (≥1 times/yr) and oral steroid burst (≥3 times/yr) were significantly higher in group I than in group III (66.7% vs. 24.6%, p=0.001; 66.7% vs. 24.6%, p=0.001; 55.6% vs. 17.3%, p=0.003). Many potential mechanisms of sulfite hypersensitivity have been postulated. Sulfite oxidase deficiency has been suggested as one of the mechanisms.5 Most asthmatic patients could show a sensitivity to SO2 exposure due to bronchial hypersensitivity.9 However, not all asthmatic patients with severe clinical symptoms presented sulfite hypersensitivity in this study, due to their higher prevalence of severe asthma and more frequent episodes of acute exacerbation compared to sulfite tolerant asthma. We speculate that these findings are due to individual variability of sulfite oxidase inactivity.1 It would, therefore, be helpful to investigate individual factors, including genetic factors, in order to better understand the mechanism of sulfite hypersensitivity. We report herein two major phenotypes of sulfite hypersensitivity, asthma and urticaria in Korea. Considering high prevalence of severe asthma and frequent health care utilization rate in patients with sulfite sensitive asthma, sulfite OPT can be considered as a screening test to identify exacerbating factors for severe asthma patients regardless of history of hypersensitivity reaction.

          Related collections

          Most cited references10

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Clinical effects of sulphite additives.

          Sulphites are widely used as preservative and antioxidant additives in the food and pharmaceutical industries. Topical, oral or parenteral exposure to sulphites has been reported to induce a range of adverse clinical effects in sensitive individuals, ranging from dermatitis, urticaria, flushing, hypotension, abdominal pain and diarrhoea to life-threatening anaphylactic and asthmatic reactions. Exposure to the sulphites arises mainly from the consumption of foods and drinks that contain these additives; however, exposure may also occur through the use of pharmaceutical products, as well as in occupational settings. While contact sensitivity to sulphite additives in topical medications is increasingly being recognized, skin reactions also occur after ingestion of or parenteral exposure to sulphites. Most studies report a 3-10% prevalence of sulphite sensitivity among asthmatic subjects following ingestion of these additives. However, the severity of these reactions varies, and steroid-dependent asthmatics, those with marked airway hyperresponsiveness, and children with chronic asthma, appear to be at greater risk. In addition to episodic and acute symptoms, sulphites may also contribute to chronic skin and respiratory symptoms. To date, the mechanisms underlying sulphite sensitivity remain unclear, although a number of potential mechanisms have been proposed. Physicians should be aware of the range of clinical manifestations of sulphite sensitivity, as well as the potential sources of exposure. Minor modifications to diet or behaviour lead to excellent clinical outcomes for sulphite-sensitive individuals.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Allergic contact dermatitis caused by sodium metabisulfite: a challenging allergen: a case series and literature review.

            Sulfites, preservatives and antioxidants used in the cosmetic, pharmaceutical and food industry are contact allergens whose relevance seems to be difficult to establish. To perform a retrospective study on patients patch tested with a sulfite. Materials and methods. Between 1990 and 2010, 2763 patients were patch tested with sodium metabisulfite. The reactions were considered to be relevant if there was a clear relationship between the dermatitis and sulfite exposure. One hundred and twenty-four (4.5%) of 2763 patients patch tested positively to sodium metabisulfite. The most frequent localizations of the lesions were the face (40.3%) and the hands (24.2%). Six patients also reported systemic symptoms. Thirteen cases (10.5%) were occupational, 10 of them presenting with hand eczema. Sodium metabisulfite was the single allergen found in 76 cases (61.3%). The reactions were considered to be relevant in 80 cases (64.5%), of which 11 were occupational. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by sulfites is frequent and often relevant. One should be aware of possible relevant sources of exposure, particularly in occupational settings such as hairdressing and the food industry, and in pharmaceutical and cosmetic products. Patch testing with sodium metabisulfite, which seems to be the best indicator for sulfite contact allergy, is also useful in cases of immediate reactions to sulfite-containing products. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sensitivity to ingested metabisulfites in asthmatic subjects.

              While ingesting selected foods and drinks in restaurants, four asthmatic patients reported the sudden onset of severe wheezing and associated anaphylactoid symptoms and signs. Single-blind placebo and potassium metabisulfite (K2S2O5) oral challenges documented asthmatic responses 15 to 30 min after ingestion of K2S2O5. Laboratory investigations failed to demonstrate specific reaginic antibody recognition of K2S2O5 in these patients. Furthermore, their peripheral basophils did not release histamine during in vitro challenges with K2S2O5. It seems likely that additional asthmatic subjects have such sensitivities but are currently assumed to have "food allergies." Such individuals can be suspected of having this sensitivity by history, and oral K2S2O5 challenges can identify asthmatics who are sensitive.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Yonsei Med J
                Yonsei Med. J
                YMJ
                Yonsei Medical Journal
                Yonsei University College of Medicine
                0513-5796
                1976-2437
                01 March 2014
                10 February 2014
                : 55
                : 2
                : 542-544
                Affiliations
                Department of Allergy & Clinical Immunology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea.
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Dr. Hae-Sim Park, Department of Allergy & Clinical Immunology, Ajou University School of Medicine, 164 World cup-ro, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon 443-380, Korea. Tel: 82-31-219-5150, Fax: 82-31-219-5154, hspark@ 123456ajou.ac.kr
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2614-0303
                Article
                10.3349/ymj.2014.55.2.542
                3936650
                24532531
                cceac689-2724-467a-9eeb-b0773dd8feb2
                © Copyright: Yonsei University College of Medicine 2014

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 30 September 2013
                : 04 November 2013
                : 26 November 2013
                Funding
                Funded by: Ministry of Health & Welfare
                Award ID: A111218-11-PG01
                Categories
                Correspondence

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article