BACKGROUND: Component-resolved diagnostics is gaining importance in allergy diagnostics. Allergen extracts contain components with different rates of prevalence and clinical relevance, which can be subdivided at molecular level into major and minor allergens. Clinical complaints are usually triggered by major allergens, while the role of sensitization to the panallergens profilin and polcalcin still remains unclear. METHODS: Eighty-six patients from southern Bavaria with sensitization to the panallergens profilin (Bet v 2/Phl p 12) and/or polcalcin (Bet v 4/Phl p 7) were examined in regard to their sensitization to the 4 main botanic denominations Betulaceae, Oleaceae, Poaceae and Asteraceae by skin prick test and measurement of specific immunoglobulin E antibodies to natural allergen extracts as well as major allergen components rPhl p 1/5, rBet v 1, rOle e 1 and nArt v 1. Sensitization was rated as clinically relevant or irrelevant depending on anamnesis or intranasal allergen challenge. RESULTS: Regarding the 4 botanic denominations, there was no significant difference in the incidence of sensitization to the panallergens profilin, polcalcin or both. The sensitization pattern does not alter when subdividing the cohort into clinically relevant and silent sensitization. We did not find clinically symptomatic sensitization to panallergens without cosensitization to a major allergen. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that sole sensitization to panallergens seems to have no clinical relevance in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Clinical complaints seem to be triggered manly by major allergens. Thus, component-resolved allergy diagnostics is crucial in the diagnosis and treatment of polysensitized patients.
BACKGROUND: Component-resolved diagnostics is gaining importance in allergy diagnostics. Allergen extracts contain components with different rates of prevalence and clinical relevance, which can be subdivided at molecular level into major and minor allergens. Clinical complaints are usually triggered by major allergens, while the role of sensitization to the panallergens profilin and polcalcin still remains unclear. METHODS: Eighty-six patients from southern Bavaria with sensitization to the panallergens profilin (Bet v 2/Phl p 12) and/or polcalcin (Bet v 4/Phl p 7) were examined in regard to their sensitization to the 4 main botanic denominations Betulaceae, Oleaceae, Poaceae and Asteraceae by skin prick test and measurement of specific immunoglobulin E antibodies to natural allergen extracts as well as major allergen components rPhl p 1/5, rBet v 1, rOle e 1 and nArt v 1. Sensitization was rated as clinically relevant or irrelevant depending on anamnesis or intranasal allergen challenge. RESULTS: Regarding the 4 botanic denominations, there was no significant difference in the incidence of sensitization to the panallergens profilin, polcalcin or both. The sensitization pattern does not alter when subdividing the cohort into clinically relevant and silent sensitization. We did not find clinically symptomatic sensitization to panallergens without cosensitization to a major allergen. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that sole sensitization to panallergens seems to have no clinical relevance in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Clinical complaints seem to be triggered manly by major allergens. Thus, component-resolved allergy diagnostics is crucial in the diagnosis and treatment of polysensitized patients.
Authors: Shadan Ghandizadeh Dezfouli; Nadine Mothes-Luksch; Annika N Jensen; Eva Untersmayr; Michael Kundi; Erika Jensen-Jarolim Journal: World Allergy Organ J Date: 2020-11-21 Impact factor: 4.084