OBJECTIVE: Two simple, commercially available and semiquantitative dust mite allergen tests, namely, the Acarex test(®) and Mitey Checker(®), were compared using 2 and 10 μg of Der 1 allergen per gram of dust, as evaluated by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), to clarify which method is better suited for practical use. METHODS: Mite allergen exposure levels of 106 floor, bed and sofa surfaces were evaluated by the Acarex test(®), Mitey Checker(®), and ELISA. A template of 100 cm×100cm was placed on the same surfaces to identify the examined areas. A dust collection filter was attached to a vacuum cleaner, and the area in the template (1 m(2)) was vacuumed. Then, to evaluate the other two tests, samples from the two other areas in the template (1 m(2)) that neighbored each other and did not overlap were vacuumed. RESULTS: To predict Der 1 levels of 2 μg/g dust or higher, the sensitivity and specificity of the Acarex test(®) were 100% and 13.3%, and those, of Mitey Checker(®) were 91.8% and 71.1%, respectively. To predict Der 1 levels of 10 μg/g dust or higher, the sensitivity and specificity of the Acarex test(®) were 50.0% and 96.2%, and those of Mitey Checker(®) were 85.7% and 79.5%, respectively. Compared with Der 1<2.0, 2.0-9.9.≥10.0 (μg/g dust), the percent agreement and kappa of the Acarex test(®) were 47.2% and 0.234, and those of Mitey Checker(®) were 70.0% and 0.505, respectively. CONCLUSION: To evaluate mite allergen exposure level for practical use in Japanese living environments, Mitey Checker(®) is better than the Acarex test(®) because of its higher sensitivity and specificity.
OBJECTIVE: Two simple, commercially available and semiquantitative dust mite allergen tests, namely, the Acarex test(®) and Mitey Checker(®), were compared using 2 and 10 μg of Der 1 allergen per gram of dust, as evaluated by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), to clarify which method is better suited for practical use. METHODS: Mite allergen exposure levels of 106 floor, bed and sofa surfaces were evaluated by the Acarex test(®), Mitey Checker(®), and ELISA. A template of 100 cm×100cm was placed on the same surfaces to identify the examined areas. A dust collection filter was attached to a vacuum cleaner, and the area in the template (1 m(2)) was vacuumed. Then, to evaluate the other two tests, samples from the two other areas in the template (1 m(2)) that neighbored each other and did not overlap were vacuumed. RESULTS: To predict Der 1 levels of 2 μg/g dust or higher, the sensitivity and specificity of the Acarex test(®) were 100% and 13.3%, and those, of Mitey Checker(®) were 91.8% and 71.1%, respectively. To predict Der 1 levels of 10 μg/g dust or higher, the sensitivity and specificity of the Acarex test(®) were 50.0% and 96.2%, and those of Mitey Checker(®) were 85.7% and 79.5%, respectively. Compared with Der 1<2.0, 2.0-9.9.≥10.0 (μg/g dust), the percent agreement and kappa of the Acarex test(®) were 47.2% and 0.234, and those of Mitey Checker(®) were 70.0% and 0.505, respectively. CONCLUSION: To evaluate mite allergen exposure level for practical use in Japanese living environments, Mitey Checker(®) is better than the Acarex test(®) because of its higher sensitivity and specificity.
Entities:
Keywords:
allergy; house dust; mite allergen; sick building syndrome
Authors: Christine Cole Johnson; Dennis R Ownby; Suzanne L Havstad; Edward L Peterson Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: M Franchi; P Carrer; D Kotzias; E M A L Rameckers; O Seppänen; J E M H van Bronswijk; G Viegi; J A Gilder; E Valovirta Journal: Allergy Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 13.146
Authors: M Innes Asher; Stephen Montefort; Bengt Björkstén; Christopher K W Lai; David P Strachan; Stephan K Weiland; Hywel Williams Journal: Lancet Date: 2006-08-26 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Paul M Carter; Edward L Peterson; Dennis R Ownby; Edward M Zoratti; Christine C Johnson Journal: Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 6.347