Literature DB >> 18384428

Detection of chromium allergy by cellular in vitro methods.

M Lindemann1, F Rietschel, M Zabel, H Grosse-Wilde.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The standard assay for the detection of chromium sensitization, the patch test, does not allow discrimination between patients with and without clinical symptoms of allergy.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to prove whether cellular in vitro tests are predictive of chromium allergy.
METHODS: Chromium-sensitized volunteers with and without clinically manifest allergy and non-sensitized healthy controls (n=37, 19, and 26, respectively) were analysed by cellular in vitro methods using tri- and hexavalent chromium (chromium chloride and potassium dichromate) as stimuli. The results were correlated with clinical and anamnestic data.
RESULTS: Sensitized individuals with an allergy displayed significantly higher lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) responses than sensitized volunteers without allergy and controls (P<0.05 and P<0.01, respectively). 12.5 microg/mL of chromium chloride and 50 ng/mL of potassium dichromate were found to be optimal to discriminate between sensitized individuals with and without allergy. Combining the results of chromium chloride and potassium dichromate LTT, a positive reaction to at least one of the stimuli was highly predictive of allergy [sensitization with vs. without allergy: Odds ratio (OR)=6.4, P=0.004; sensitization with allergy vs. controls: OR=11.5, P<0.0001]. On the contrary, IFN-gamma, IL-2, IL-4, IL-10, and IL-12 production to the ELISpot, patch test results, sensitization against other metals, and atopy score did not significantly discriminate between sensitization with and without allergy. However, IFN-gamma responses towards chromium chloride were significantly correlated with the strength of patch test reactivity (r=0.49, P=0.002). By IFN-gamma ELISpot, the average precursor cell frequency reactive to trivalent chromium could be defined as 26, 15, and 11 : 10(6) in volunteers with sensitization and allergy, with sensitization without allergy, and controls, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to the patch test, the LTT appears to be a method that is predictive of chromium allergy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18384428     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2008.02970.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Exp Allergy        ISSN: 0954-7894            Impact factor:   5.018


  5 in total

Review 1.  The role of lymphocyte proliferation tests in assessing occupational sensitization and disease.

Authors:  Stella E Hines; Karin Pacheco; Lisa A Maier
Journal:  Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2012-04

2.  A review of the biologic effects of spine implant debris: Fact from fiction.

Authors:  Nadim James Hallab
Journal:  SAS J       Date:  2009-12-01

3.  Cytokine detection for the diagnosis of chromium allergy.

Authors:  Luis Eduardo Agner Machado Martins; Vitor Manoel Silva dos Reis
Journal:  An Bras Dermatol       Date:  2013 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.896

4.  Use of graphene as protection film in biological environments.

Authors:  Weixia Zhang; Sudarat Lee; Kelly L McNear; Ting Fung Chung; Seunghyun Lee; Kyunghoon Lee; Scott A Crist; Timothy L Ratliff; Zhaohui Zhong; Yong P Chen; Chen Yang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2014-02-14       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Non-heat inactivated autologous serum increases accuracy of in vitro CFSE lymphocyte proliferation test (LPT) for nickel.

Authors:  Niels P J de Graaf; Hetty J Bontkes; Sanne Roffel; Cornelis J Kleverlaan; Thomas Rustemeyer; Sue Gibbs; Albert J Feilzer
Journal:  Clin Exp Allergy       Date:  2020-04-14       Impact factor: 5.018

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.