Literature DB >> 15668987

Flow cytometric analysis of in vitro activated basophils, specific IgE and skin tests in the diagnosis of pollen-associated food allergy.

Didier G Ebo1, Margo M Hagendorens, Chris H Bridts, Annemie J Schuerwegh, Luc S De Clerck, Wim J Stevens.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) and commercially available skin prick tests have been demonstrated to be unreliable methods to diagnose pollen-associated food allergy. To evaluate the predictive value of the basophil activation test (BAT) in pollen-associated food allergy, the apple-mediated oral allergy syndrome (OAS) in patients with birch pollinosis was chosen as a representative model.
METHODS: Patients with birch pollen allergy and a history of apple-mediated OAS (OAS(+), n = 29), patients with birch allergic without OAS (OAS(-), n = 22), and healthy controls (HC, n = 10) without birch pollen allergy and OAS were included. Apple IgE was quantified by the CAP FEIA method. Skin prick tests were performed with a Jonagold apple extract. Flow cytometric analysis of basophils activated with the same Jonagold extract was based on double staining with anti-IgE/anti-CD63 monoclonal antibodies.
RESULTS: Comparison between OAS(+) subjects and HC showed sensitivities and specificities of 96% and 100% for apple IgE and 88% and 100% for the apple skin prick test, respectively. For the BAT, sensitivity and specificity were 100%. In contrast, when nonresponders on the BAT were considered, sensitivity decreased to 90%. In a separate analysis between OAS(+) and OAS(-) subjects, specificities decreased to 30% for apple IgE and to 80% for the apple skin test, respectively. The BAT reached a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 75%.
CONCLUSION: Flow cytometry-assisted quantification of in vitro basophil activation seems to be a reliable instrument in the diagnosis of this model of pollen-associated food allergy. In addition, this study reemphasizes that the specificity of diagnostic allergy tests decreases considerably when, apart from HC, control individuals with cross-reactive antibodies are included.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15668987     DOI: 10.1002/cyto.b.20042

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cytometry B Clin Cytom        ISSN: 1552-4949            Impact factor:   3.058


  14 in total

Review 1.  Pros and Cons of Clinical Basophil Testing (BAT).

Authors:  Hans Jürgen Hoffmann; Edward F Knol; Martha Ferrer; Lina Mayorga; Vito Sabato; Alexandra F Santos; Bernadette Eberlein; Anna Nopp; Donald MacGlashan
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 4.806

2.  Utility of Basophil Activation Test for monitoring the acquisition of clinical tolerance after oral desensitization to cow's milk: Pilot study.

Authors:  Eleonora Nucera; Valentina Pecora; Alessandro Buonomo; Angela Rizzi; Arianna Aruanno; Lucilla Pascolini; Anna G Ricci; Alessia Di Rienzo; Simona Mezzacappa; Manuela Ferraironi; Giampiero Patriarca; Giovanni Gasbarrini; Domenico Schiavino
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 4.623

3.  Mediator release assay for assessment of biological potency of German cockroach allergen extracts.

Authors:  Anna H Nowak-Wegrzyn; Ramon Bencharitiwong; John Schwarz; Gloria David; Peyton Eggleston; Peter J Gergen; Andrew H Liu; Jacqueline A Pongracic; Sampson Sarpong; Hugh A Sampson
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 10.793

4.  Basophil activation test for investigation of IgE-mediated mechanisms in drug hypersensitivity.

Authors:  Markus Steiner; Andrea Harrer; Roland Lang; Michael Schneider; Tima Ferreira; Thomas Hawranek; Martin Himly
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2011-09-16       Impact factor: 1.355

5.  Measurement of IgE to hazelnut allergen components cannot replace hazelnut challenge in Dutch adults.

Authors:  Sarah A Lyons; Paco M J Welsing; Mariam Hakobyan; Hannah M Kansen; Edward F Knol; Henny G Otten; Ronald van Ree; André C Knulst; Thuy-My Le
Journal:  Allergy       Date:  2021-11-16       Impact factor: 14.710

6.  Basophil activation test shows high accuracy in the diagnosis of peanut and tree nut allergy: The Markers of Nut Allergy Study.

Authors:  Lucy Duan; Alper Celik; Jennifer A Hoang; Klara Schmidthaler; Delvin So; Xiaojun Yin; Christina M Ditlof; Marta Ponce; Julia E M Upton; Jean-Soo Lee; Lisa Hung; Heimo Breiteneder; Chiara Palladino; Adelle R Atkinson; Vy H D Kim; Alireza Berenjy; Maria Asper; David Hummel; Samantha Wong; Mara Alexanian-Farr; Ahuva Magder; Sharon R Chinthrajah; Kaori Mukai; Mindy Tsai; Kari Nadeau; Stephen J Galli; Arun K Ramani; Zsolt Szepfalusi; Thomas Eiwegger
Journal:  Allergy       Date:  2020-12-29       Impact factor: 14.710

7.  The basophil activation test by flow cytometry: recent developments in clinical studies, standardization and emerging perspectives.

Authors:  Radhia Boumiza; Anne-Lise Debard; Guillaume Monneret
Journal:  Clin Mol Allergy       Date:  2005-06-30

8.  Use of a basophil activation test as a complementary diagnostic tool in the diagnosis of severe peanut allergy in adults.

Authors:  Georgios Rentzos; Vanja Lundberg; Christina Lundqvist; Rui Rodrigues; Jenny van Odijk; Anna-Carin Lundell; Teet Pullerits; Esbjörn Telemo
Journal:  Clin Transl Allergy       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 5.871

9.  Basophil activation test discriminates between allergy and tolerance in peanut-sensitized children.

Authors:  Alexandra F Santos; Abdel Douiri; Natalia Bécares; Shih-Ying Wu; Alick Stephens; Suzana Radulovic; Susan M H Chan; Adam T Fox; George Du Toit; Victor Turcanu; Gideon Lack
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2014-07-25       Impact factor: 10.793

10.  Basophil activation test with food additives in chronic urticaria patients.

Authors:  Min-Gyu Kang; Woo-Jung Song; Han-Ki Park; Kyung-Hwan Lim; Su-Jung Kim; Suh-Young Lee; Sae-Hoon Kim; Sang-Heon Cho; Kyung-Up Min; Yoon-Seok Chang
Journal:  Clin Nutr Res       Date:  2014-01-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.