Literature DB >> 28913989

Patterns of Inhalant Allergen Sensitization and Geographical Variation in Korean Adults: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.

Min Gyu Kang1,2, Mi Yeong Kim1,3, Woo Jung Song1,4, Sujeong Kim5, Eun Jung Jo6, Seung Eun Lee7, Jae Woo Kwon8, Sang Min Lee9, Chan Sun Park10, Hye Kyung Park6, Heung Woo Park1,4, Yoon Seok Chang1,4,11, Jaechun Lee12, Young Min Lee3, Young Koo Jee13, Jong Myung Lee5, Inseon S Choi14, Sang Heon Cho1,15.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Inhalant allergen sensitization is one of the major factors involved in the pathogenesis of allergic respiratory diseases. However, the sensitization is determined by interactions between genetic and environmental factors. Thus, testing panels of inhalant allergens may differ among geographical areas. Here we aimed to determine 10 common inhalant allergens in Korean adult patients with suspected respiratory allergies and to examine the variation between different geographical locations.
METHODS: A total of 28,954 patient records were retrieved for retrospective analysis, from 12 referral allergy clinics located in 9 different areas. Inclusion criteria were Korean adults (≥18 years old) who underwent the inhalant allergen skin prick test for suspected history of respiratory allergy. The primary outcome was inhalant allergen skin prick response. Demographic and clinical information were also collected. Positive skin prick responses to allergens were defined as allergen-to-histamine wheal ratio ≥1. Based on skin test results, the most prevalent aeroallergens were determined.
RESULTS: The overall prevalence of allergic sensitization was 45.3%. Dermatophagoides farinae and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus were the most commonly sensitized allergens. Other common inhalant allergens were cat epithelium (8.1%), birch (7.7%), mugwort (6.9%), alder (6.7%), hazel (6.7%), beech (6.7%), oak (6.6%), and Tyrophagus putres (6.2%), in decreasing order frequency. These 10 inhalant allergens explained 90% of inhalant allergen sensitization in the study participants. However, distinct patterns of the 10 inhalant sensitization were observed in patients living in Chungnam and Jeju. American cockroach, Gernam cockroach, and Trichophyton metagrophytes were unique in Chungnam. Orchard, Japanese cedar, and Velvet were unique in Jeju.
CONCLUSIONS: The present analysis suggests a panel of 10 most common inhalant allergens in Korean adult patients with suspected respiratory allergies, which explained 90% of inhalant allergen sensitization. This panel can be utilized as a practical and convenient tool for primary practice and epidemiological surveys of respiratory allergic diseases.
Copyright © 2017 The Korean Academy of Asthma, Allergy and Clinical Immunology · The Korean Academy of Pediatric Allergy and Respiratory Disease

Entities:  

Keywords:  Allergens; allergy; sensitization

Year:  2017        PMID: 28913989      PMCID: PMC5603478          DOI: 10.4168/aair.2017.9.6.499

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Allergy Asthma Immunol Res        ISSN: 2092-7355            Impact factor:   5.764


INTRODUCTION

IgE sensitization to inhalant allergens is one of the major components underlying the pathophysiology of allergic respiratory diseases like asthma and rhinitis. Among several tools to assess inhalant allergen-specific IgE sensitization, the skin prick test is one of the most useful tests for its high sensitivity and simplicity. The status of inhalant IgE sensitization is determined by interactions between genetic and environmental factors, and may differ between populations.123 Thus, testing panels of inhalant allergen need localization. Current panels of the inhalant allergen skin test in Korean adults were based on previous studies conducted a relative small number of institutions, such as a study involving 2,554 adult patients recruited from the referral centers located in 3 different areas (Seoul, Suwon, and Jeju) in 2001.4 These results have been also utilized in several community-based population surveys on allergic diseases in Korean adults.567 There have been several additional studies on the sensitization rates of inhalant allergens in Korean patients.891011 However, how the panels of skin prick testing for common inhalant allergens differ among areas was not addressed in those studies, as they were mostly restricted to specific centers or locations.891011 Here we performed a retrospective multicenter survey involving 12 referral allergy clinics located in 9 different areas in Korea, to identify recent common inhalant allergens in adult patients with allergic symptoms and to examine the regional difference in common inhalant allergen sensitization. Doing this, we aimed to suggest a panel of major inhalant allergens for skin prick testings to be used in further clinical practice and epidemiological surveys of Korean adults.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study design

A retrospective study of medical records was performed in 2014, as an integral part of the project of ‘Standardization of diagnostic tests for allergic diseases in adults.’ A total of 12 referral allergy clinics located in 9 different areas covering all provinces in Korea were enrolled (Fig. 1): Seoul National University Hospital (SNUH) in Seoul, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital (SNUBH) in Seongnam, Gacheon University Gil Medical Center (GUGMC) in Incheon, Kangwon National University Hospital (KWNUH) in Chuncheon, Dankook University Hospital (DKUH) in Cheonan, Kyungpook National University Hospital (KPNUH) in Daegu, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital (IUBPH), Inje University Haeundae Paik Hospital (IUHPH), Pusan National University Hospital (PNUH) in Busan and Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital (PNUYH) in Yangsan, Cheonnam National University Hospital (CNUH) in Gwangju, and Jeju National University Hospital (JNUH) in Jeju. The study period was slightly different between individual clinics, and detailed information on the study period was described in supplementary Table 1. A retrospective review was performed on adult patients (≥18 years old) who visited referral allergy clinics for their respiratory symptoms suggestive of asthma or rhinitis and underwent inhalant allergen skin prick testing. Medical record reviews included clinical history, demographics (age, gender, and residential areas), final diagnosis for allergic diseases and skin prick test results (the list of tested allergens and wheal sizes of allergens and controls). The patients were reclassified according to area for further analyses, depending on their registered residential places in electronic health records of each institution. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of each participating institution.
Fig. 1

The locations of the referral centers enrolled in this study.

Skin prick test

The skin prick test was performed by trained specialists in each institution with in-hospital protocol. The histamine (1.0 or 1.7 mg/mL) was used for a positive control and physiologic saline was used for a negative control. Participants who did not react to histamine or reacted to physiologic saline were excluded in the present analyses. The skin test results were interpreted after 15 minutes by measuring the mean size of flares and wheals for each allergen. Considering variations in the source and concentrations of allergen extracts and controls between centers, the allergen-to-histamine ratio was utilized to determine the positivity. A skin prick test was considered positive of the mean wheal size for any allergen was greater than or equal to that for histamine (A/H ratio≥1).12 Allergen extracts manufactured by the Allergopharma, Lofama and Allergy Therapeutics were used in our study population, which are listed in supplementary Table 1.

Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 20.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) and spreadsheet of Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA) made by Neyeloff.13 The regional prevalence of sensitization to each allergen, and overall sensitization were estimated with arithmetic mean and confidence intervals by using logistic regression for binary outcomes. Nationwide sensitization profile of allergens were also meta-analyzed after adjusting for the heterogeneity of population composition according to the 2010 Korean population and housing census.14

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics of study population and summary of allergens tested

A total of 28,954 adult patients were enrolled from the 12 allergy clinics of referral hospitals in 9 different areas. As described in the Materials and Method section, all the participants were re-classified based on their residential areas for further analyses of geographic difference, but not the location of the enrolled clinic. The clinical findings were summarized in Table 1. The mean age of the total population was 45.6±17.0 years and elderly participants who were older than 65 years accounted for 15.1% of the study population. The percentage of females was 53.3%. In total, 66.8% of patients were finally diagnosed with asthma or allergic rhinitis. The other diagnoses included chronic sinusitis, upper airway cough syndrome, and chronic idiopathic cough.
Table 1

Clinical findings of the study participants according to the residential area

Residential areaEnrolled, N (%)Female, N (%)Age (year)Diagnosed allergic disease
AsthmaARAsthma & AROthers
Seoul8,862 (30.6)4,466 (52.7)45.8±17.916.221.316.546.1
Gyeonggi10,169 (35.1)5,221 (53.3)44.3±16.613.236.419.131.3
Gangwon358 (1.2)195 (54.5)48.4±15.323.429.418.129.1
Chungbuk289 (1.0)148 (51.2)47.8±17.318.228.226.027.6
Chungnam/Daejeon861 (3.0)376 (43.7)39.9±17.110.757.412.919.0
Jeonbuk289 (1.0)63 (46.7)52.4±15.226.818.313.441.5
Gwangju/Jeonnam1,683 (5.8)714 (42.4)53.9±14.957.534.02.50
Daegu/Gyeongbuk1,718 (5.9)729 (42.4)40.1±17.68.667.67.915.9
Busan/Gyeongnam2,883 (9.9)1,723 (59.8)48.4±14.921.215.816.146.9
Jeju667 (2.3)342 (51.3)40.2±16.630.829.13.137.0
Incheon1,329 (4.6)821(61.8)47.3±13.664.335.700
Total28,95415,446 (53.3)45.6±17.020.431.614.833.2
Detailed information on commercial inhalant allergens tested in each hospital was listed in supplementary Table 1. A total of 92 different allergens were found to be utilized in at least 1 institution, which included 6 types of mite allergens, 2 types of cockroach allergens, 13 types of mold allergens, 11 types of animal allergens, 17 types of tree allergens, 10 types of grass allergens, and 8 types of weed allergens. Sixteen allergens were found to be utilized in all participating centers: Dermatophagoides farina (Der f), Dermatophagoides pteronysimus (Der p), German cockroach, Alternaria, Cladosporium berbarum and Aspergillus fumigatus, alder, ash, hazel, poplar, birch, rye, nettle, ragweed, mugwort, and Japanese hop. The following 18 allergens were found to be tested in most centers (9 of 12): Tyrophagus putrescentiae, Penicilliun notatum, cat epithelia and dog epithelia, elder, elm, willow tree, acacia, beech, pine, oak, plane tree, orchard, timothy, meadow and bermuda grass, dandelion, and plantain. The following 10 allergens were exclusively being used in Jeju: Panonychus citrus, Trychophyton metagrophytes, Helminthosporium, hay dust, Jeju cedar, rape, dog's tail grass, vernal grass, Johnson grass, and feather mix.

Sensitization profiles of inhalant allergens and their geographical difference

The sensitization profiles of individual allergens according to area were summarized in Table 2. A total of 45.3% of study participants had at least 1 positivity in their skin prick tests. The mean number of allergens in sensitized patients were 4.5±2.2, and 60.8% of the participants were sensitized to more than 3 allergens. The positivity rate was relatively high in Daegu (54.1%) and Jeju (53.8%), and relatively low in Incheon (36.3%), Jeonbuk (33.7%), and Jeonnam (26.8%). Fig. 2 shows the overall sensitization rate for each allergen tested. Der f and Der p were the most commonly sensitized allergens (29.0% and 28.2%, respectively).
Table 2

Sensitization rates to inhalant allergens according to the residential area

SeoulGyeonggiGangwonChungbukChungnam/DaejeonJeonbukJeonnam/GwangjuDaegu/GyeongbukBusan/GyeongnamJejuIncheon
Total45.8 (44.8–46.8)46.6 (45.7–47.6)37.1 (32.5–42)39.7 (34.5–45.2)48.9 (45.7–52.1)33.7 (26.9–41.3)26.8 (24.9–28.7)54.1 (51.9–56.3)41.3 (39.6–43)53.8 (50.2–57.3)36.3 (33.9–38.8)
Mites, any34.0 (33.1–35)34.9 (34–35.8)24.1 (20.1–28.5)30.5 (25.7–35.8)36.9 (33.9–40)23.5 (17.6–30.6)18.2 (16.6–20)38.5 (36.4–40.7)26.7 (25.2–28.2)38.5 (35.1–42.1)25.5 (23.3–27.8)
Dermatophagoides pteronysimus29.5 (28.6–30.4)30.6 (29.7–31.5)22.2 (18.3–26.5)25.0 (20.5–30.0)31.2 (28.3–34.2)20.7 (15.4–27.8)16.6 (15.0–18.2)32.3 (30.3–34.4)23.7 (22.2–25.2)36.7 (33.3–40.3)20.8 (18.8–23.0)
Dermatophagoides farinae30.3 (29.3–31.2)31.7 (30.8–32.6)20.8 (17.1–25.0)27.1 (22.5–32.3)33.7 (30.7–36.8)20.3 (14.8–27.1)16.1 (14.6–17.8)33.8 (31.8–35.9)23.3 (21.8–24.8)35.4 (32.0–38.9)22.3 (20.2–24.5)
Tyrophagus putres5.6 (5.1–6.0)7.1 (6.6–7.6)4.1 (2.5–6.5)7.6 (5.1–11.1)6.6 (5.2–8.4)2.5 (1.0–6.4)5.9 (3.7–9.3)4.8 (3.9–5.8)6.0 (5.3–6.9)13.8 (10.2–18.4)4.8 (3.8–6.1)
Tetranychus urticae9.0 (8.2–9.8)7.6 (6.3–9.1)6.2 (2.8–13.1)3.8 (1.2–11.1)9.7 (6.3–14.6)6.7 (2.3–17.6)2.8 (1–7.7)9 (5.4–14.6)5.8 (2.8–11.6)8.6 (3–22.5)
Cockroach, any4.6 (4.2–5)4.3 (3.9–4.7)3.4 (2–5.7)4.4 (2.7–7.3)7.7 (6.1–9.5)3.1 (1.3–7.1)2.2 (1.7–3)2.6 (2–3.4)4.4 (3.8–5.2)5 (3.6–6.8)4.6 (3.6–5.8)
German cockroach3.7 (3.3–4)3.3 (2.9–3.6)2.1 (1.1–4.1)3.6 (2.1–6.4)5.6 (4.3–7.2)3.1 (1.3–7.1)2.2 (1.7–3)2.5 (1.9–3.3)4.4 (3.7–5.2)5 (3.7–6.9)4.6 (3.7–5.8)
American cockroach2.8 (2.5–3.1)2.3 (2–2.6)2.4 (1.3–4.5)3.1 (1.6–5.7)6 (4.6–7.7)1.7 (0.5–5.4)2.9 (1.5–5.7)1.7 (0.8–3.6)0.8 (0.2–2.8)4.1 (1.4–11.6)
Outdoor mold, any5.7 (5.2–6.1)6.7 (6.2–7.2)5.9 (3.9–8.6)5.1 (3.2–8.2)6.2 (4.8–7.9)3.4 (1.5–7.5)3.1 (2.4–3.9)5.3 (4.4–6.3)2.3 (1.9–2.9)4.7 (3.4–6.5)4.8 (3.8–6)
Alternaria2.7 (2.4–3)2.9 (2.6–3.2)3.6 (2.1–5.9)3.1 (1.7–5.7)3.2 (2.2–4.5)0.7 (0.1–4.2)0.7 (0.4–1.2)3.7 (2.9–4.6)1.2 (0.9–1.6)3.7 (2.6–5.3)1.5 (1–2.3)
Candida albicans2.5 (2.1–2.9)1.7 (1.5–2)2 (0.9–4.3)2.2 (0.9–4.9)3.2 (2.1–4.6)1.5 (0.4–6.1)3.5 (1.6–7.5)3.7 (1.9–6.8)2.3 (1–4.9)4.5 (2.1–9.4)2.3 (1.7–3.2)
Cladosporium1.4 (1.2–1.7)2 (1.8–2.3)0.7 (0.2–2.3)1.5 (0.6–3.7)1.5 (0.9–2.5)2 (0.7–5.7)0.5 (0.3–0.9)1.3 (0.9–1.9)0.9 (0.6–1.3)1.8 (1–3.3)1.5 (1–2.3)
Fusarium moniliforme0.5 (0.4–0.7)0.8 (0.7–1)0.5 (0.1–1.9)0.2 (0–2.3)1 (0.2–4.5)0.1 (0–0.4)0.7 (0.4–1.1)0.6 (0.3–1.3)0.3 (0.1–0.8)
Mold I mixture3.2 (2.9–3.6)3.8 (3.5–4.2)4.3 (2.7–6.8)2.4 (1.1–4.8)3.7 (2.2–6)0.5 (0–4.3)1.7 (0.7–4)3.2 (1.8–5.7)3.5 (2.4–5)2.6 (1.3–5.4)36.3 (33.9–38.8)
Indoor molds3.9 (3.5–4.3)4.2 (3.8–4.6)4.3 (2.7–6.8)5.1 (3.2–8.1)7.6 (6–9.4)1.6 (0.5–5.3)1.6 (1.2–2.3)2.9 (2.2–3.7)2.3 (1.8–2.8)2.6 (1.7–4.1)3.7 (2.8–4.8)
Aspergillus fumigatus1.3 (1.1–1.5)1.9 (1.6–2.1)1.2 (0.5–2.9)1.3 (0.5–3.4)1.1 (0.6–2)1.1 (0.3–4.6)0.6 (0.3–1)1.1 (0.7–1.7)1 (0.7–1.4)1.2 (0.5–2.5)1.1 (0.7–1.8)
Aspergillus niger0.3 (0.2–0.5)1.5 (1.3–1.8)0.3 (0.1–2.2)1.2 (0.4–3.8)1 (0.3–3.4)0.9 (0.1–5.5)1.2 (0.3–4.5)0.7 (0.2–3)0.7 (0.2–3.5)
Mucor mucedo0.3 (0.2–0.5)0.3 (0.2–0.4)0.5 (0.1–2.1)0.7 (0.3–1.6)0.7 (0.2–3.0)0.7 (0.2–3.5)
Neurospora sitophilia0.7 (0.5–0.9)0.7 (0.5–0.8)0.5 (0.1–2)1.1 (0.4–3.2)1 (0.4–2.7)0.5 (0.1–4.2)0.5 (0.1–2.6)1.7 (1.2–2.3)0.8 (0.4–1.5)
Penicillium notatum1.6 (1.4–1.9)0.9 (0.8–1.1)2.1 (1–4)1 (0.3–3)1.9 (1.2–3)0.5 (0.1–4.2)0.3 (0.1–0.7)1.1 (0.4–2.9)1.1 (0.8–1.5)1.1 (0.5–2.4)
Trichophyton metagrophytes3.3 (1.3–8.1)6.7 (4.8–9.1)0.7 (0.4–1.3)1.8 (1.1–3.1)2.8 (2.1–3.8)
Mold II mixture1.2 (1–1.5)1.3 (0.9–1.8)1.1 (0.4–3.1)1.3 (0.6–3.2)0.6 (0.1–5.8)0.2 (0–3.5)0.2 (0–2.6)2.3 (1.1–4.8)2.5 (1.2–5.3)
Animal, any11.6 (11–12.3)11.1 (10.5–11.7)8.7 (6.3–11.9)8.2 (5.6–11.7)11.2 (9.3–13.3)6.5 (3.6–11.4)3.8 (3.1–4.7)8.7 (7.6–10)7.3 (6.4–8.2)8.1 (6.3–10.3)8.5 (7.2–10.1)
Cat epithelia9.6 (9–10.2)8.7 (8.2–9.3)7.4 (5.2–10.5)5.9 (3.7–9.2)8.7 (7.1–10.7)5.6 (2.9–10.5)3.2 (2.5–4.1)7 (5.9–8.2)7.4 (6.5–8.6)5.4 (3.8–7.7)5.8 (4.7–7.1)
Dog epithelia3.8 (3.4–4.2)4.7 (4.3–5.1)2.1 (1.1–4.1)3 (1.6–5.6)4.1 (3–5.6)0.7 (0.1–4.2)0.9 (0.6–1.4)2.6 (2–3.3)5.6 (4.6–6.8)3.7 (2.4–5.7)2.9 (2.1–3.9)
Hens epithelia0.3 (0.2–0.4)0.3 (0.2–0.5)0.5 (0.1–2.3)0.5 (0.1–2.9)0.7 (0.1–3)
Rabbit epithelia0.7 (0.5–0.9)0.4 (0.3–0.6)0.5 (0.1–3.9)0.5 (0.1–2.8)1.8 (1.1–3)1.3 (0.3–5.8)0.5 (0.1–3.3)1.1 (0.5–2.5)0.9 (0.5–1.5)
Tree, early blooming, any9.7 (9.1–10.3)9.9 (9.4–10.5)10.6 (7.9–14)8 (5.4–11.5)11.3 (9.4–13.4)5.4 (2.8–10.1)7.3 (6.3–8.5)18.4 (16.8–20.2)14.8 (13.6–16.1)4.2 (3–5.9)5.9 (4.8–7.3)
Alder6.4 (6–6.9)6.5 (6–6.9)9 (6.6–12.3)5 (3.1–8.1)5.7 (4.4–7.4)4.3 (2–8.7)4 (3.2–4.9)9.4 (8.2–10.8)14.5 (12.9–16.3)2.4 (1.4–4.1)2.5 (1.8–3.4)
Ash1.1 (0.9–1.3)0.9 (0.7–1.1)1.8 (0.9–3.8)1.4 (0.6–3.5)1.7 (1.1–2.8)0.6 (0.3–1)2.3 (1.7–3)3.2 (2.4–4.1)1.7 (0.9–3.2)1.2 (0.8–1.9)
Elder1.4 (1.2–1.6)1.2 (1–1.5)1 (0.4–2.7)1.7 (0.7–3.9)4.1 (3–5.6)1.2 (0.4–3.4)2.4 (1.3–4.6)6.1 (5.3–7)1.5 (0.2–8.7)2 (1.4–2.9)
Elm1.6 (1.4–1.9)1.5 (1.3–1.7)0.8 (0.2–2.3)0.7 (0.2–2.6)1 (0.6–1.9)0.2 (0–2.5)1.3 (0.9–1.9)1.9 (1.5–2.5)1.3 (0.6–2.6)0.7 (0.4–1.3)
Hazel6.7 (6.2–7.2)6.5 (6.1–7)8.5 (6.2–11.7)5.1 (3.2–8.2)5.5 (4.2–7.2)3.5 (1.6–7.8)5.7 (4.8–6.8)12.2 (10.9–13.7)7.7 (6.8–8.6)3.4 (2.2–5.3)2.1 (1.5–3)
Poplar1.6 (1.3–1.8)1.6 (1.4–1.9)0.8 (0.2–2.3)1.3 (0.5–3.3)2 (1.2–3.1)1 (0.6–1.5)1.7 (1.3–2.4)5.1 (4.4–5.9)1.4 (0.7–2.8)1 (0.6–1.7)
Willow tree1.4 (1.1–1.6)1.5 (1.3–1.7)0.2 (0–1.8)1.1 (0.4–3.1)1.6 (1–2.6)0.4 (0.2–0.8)1.5 (0.7–3.4)1.7 (1.1–2.4)1.1 (0.5–2.4)0.6 (0.3–1.2)
Tree I mixture7.6 (7.1–8.2)7.9 (7.4–8.4)7.6 (5–11.5)4.7 (2.8–7.7)5.9 (4–8.7)4.7 (2.3–9.3)9.3 (6.4–13.3)7.9 (5.5–11.1)6.1 (5.2–7)4.3 (2.5–7.5)2.8 (2–3.7)
Tree, mid blooming, any11.4 (10.8–12)11.7 (11.1–12.4)13.3 (10.3–17)10.2 (7.3–14)8.1 (6.6–10.1)5.7 (3–10.5)6.6 (5.6–7.8)14.5 (13–16.1)14.9 (13.7–16.2)15.9 (13.4–18.7)6.1 (5–7.4)
Acasia or locust1.3 (1.1–1.7)0.9 (0.7–1.1)1.1 (0.4–3.1)0.4 (0.1–2.7)0.2 (0–0.9)2.5 (1.9–3.3)0.9 (0.6–1.5)2.5 (1.4–4.2)1.4 (0.9–2.1)
Birch7.7 (7.1–8.4)7.6 (7.1–8.1)10.7 (7.7–14.6)4.7 (2.7–8.1)5.7 (4.3–7.5)3.6 (1.5–8.7)4.9 (4.1–6)9.2 (8–10.6)12.8 (11.7–14)2.2 (1.2–3.9)2.9 (2.2–3.9)
Beech7.1 (6.6–7.6)7 (6.5–7.5)8.6 (6.2–11.8)5.9 (3.8–9.1)4.4 (3.3–5.9)4.6 (2.3–9.1)4 (3.3–5)5.4 (4.5–6.5)12.3 (10.8–13.9)7.7 (3.5–15.9)2.4 (1.8–3.4)
Pine1.4 (1.2–1.6)1.4 (1.2–1.6)1.6 (0.8–3.5)1.3 (0.5–3.4)0.4 (0.1–1)0.7 (0.1–4.2)1 (0.3–3.2)2.3 (1.2–4.4)7.1 (6.2–8.2)2.1 (1.2–3.7)2.2 (1.5–3.1)
Oak7 (6.5–7.5)6.7 (6.3–7.2)7.2 (5–10.2)4.8 (2.9–7.8)5.2 (3.9–6.8)3.3 (1.4–7.5)4.3 (3.5–5.3)6.7 (5.7–7.8)9.3 (8.3–10.3)9.4 (4.7–18)2 (1.4–2.9)
Plane tree1.5 (1.2–1.7)1.5 (1.2–1.7)1.2 (0.5–2.9)2.2 (1–4.5)2 (1.2–3.1)1.7 (0.8–3.6)1.5 (1–2.2)1.4 (0.7–2.9)
Japanese ceda0.4 (0.3–0.5)0.7 (0.5–0.8)0.7 (0.2–2.3)0.8 (0.3–2.8)0.3 (0.1–1)0.7 (0.1–4.2)0.8 (0.2–2.9)0.5 (0.1–2.1)5.9 (5–7.1)12.1 (9.9–14.7)0.2 (0–0.6)
Tree II mixture8.7 (8.2–9.3)8.6 (8.1–9.2)9.3 (6.3–13.5)5.3 (3.3–8.5)6.4 (4.4–9.3)4.7 (2.3–9.3)9.4 (6.5–13.4)8.7 (6.2–12)5.4 (4.6–6.3)5.1 (3–8.4)3 (2.2–4)
Grasses, any5 (4.6–5.5)5.1 (4.7–5.5)3.6 (2.1–5.9)5.1 (3.2–8.2)7.4 (5.9–9.2)4.6 (2.3–9.1)4.2 (3.4–5.1)9 (7.8–10.3)9.9 (8.9–11)9.7 (7.8–12.1)5.9 (4.8–7.2)
Velvet2.7 (2.4–3)2.6 (2.3–2.9)2 (1–4)2.7 (1.4–5.3)2.4 (1.3–4.4)2 (0.7–5.8)0.3 (0–2.6)2.3 (1.2–4.4)1.4 (0.5–3.5)7.7 (5.7–10.2)
Orchard3.2 (2.9–3.6)2.8 (2.5–3.1)2 (1–4)3 (1.6–5.6)3.6 (2.6–5)3.3 (1.4–7.4)2.3 (1.7–3)1.4 (1–2)6.8 (6–7.7)14.5 (10.1–20.5)1.5 (1–2.3)
Rye3.1 (2.8–3.5)3 (2.6–3.3)2.2 (1.2–4.3)3.4 (1.9–6)3.4 (2.4–4.8)3.9 (1.8–8.2)1.9 (1.4–2.6)3 (2.4–3.9)3.5 (2.9–4.3)8.6 (6.5–11.3)1.5 (1–2.3)
Timothy2.7 (2.4–3.1)2.7 (2.4–3)2.2 (1.1–4.2)2.8 (1.5–5.4)3.6 (2.6–5)2.6 (1–6.5)1.8 (1.3–2.5)1.9 (1.4–2.6)3.2 (2.6–3.8)7 (5.1–9.4)1.5 (0.9–2.2)
Kentucky bluegrass2.9 (2.6–3.3)2.8 (2.5–3.1)1.9 (0.9–3.8)2.2 (1.1–4.6)4.6 (3.4–6.1)2.5 (1–6.5)0.9 (0.3–3)1.3 (0.5–3.1)3.1 (2.4–4)7.7 (5.7–10.2)1.7 (1.2–2.5)
Meadow2.9 (2.6–3.2)2.7 (2.4–3)1.6 (0.7–3.4)3 (1.6–5.6)3.2 (2.3–4.6)2.5 (1–6.5)2.2 (1.6–2.9)1.8 (1.3–2.4)3.6 (2.8–4.7)6.8 (5–9.3)1.2 (0.8–1.9)
Nettle0.8 (0.6–1.1)0.4 (0.3–0.6)0.5 (0.1–2.4)0.9 (0.2–3.2)1.6 (0.9–2.7)0.8 (0.1–5.4)0.8 (0.5–1.3)0.6 (0.3–1.1)2.1 (1.6–2.8)1.6 (0.8–3.1)0.8 (0.4–1.4)
Bermuda grass2 (1.7–2.4)1.2 (1–1.4)1.1 (0.4–3)1.5 (0.5–4)2.4 (1.5–3.7)0.8 (0.1–5.4)1.6 (1.1–2.3)3.4 (2.6–4.3)2.3 (1.8–2.9)3.5 (2.2–5.6)1.2 (0.7–1.9)
Grass mixture2.9 (2.6–3.2)2.2 (2–2.5)1.9 (0.8–4.6)1.6 (0.7–3.8)1.8 (0.8–3.7)2.6 (1–6.6)1.1 (0.4–3.3)1.4 (0.6–3.3)2.4 (1.7–3.4)8.6 (5.7–12.9)3.2 (2.4–4.2)
Weeds, any12.5 (11.8–13.1)14.3 (13.7–15)13.6 (10.5–17.3)11.8 (8.7–15.8)14.4 (12.3–16.7)10.5 (6.7–16.2)5.2 (4.3–6.2)16 (14.4–17.6)10.7 (9.7–11.9)11.8 (9.7–14.3)8.8 (7.5–10.4)
Ragweed3.8 (3.5–4.2)3.6 (3.2–4)5.8 (3.9–8.6)2.7 (1.4–5.2)2.8 (2–4.1)2.9 (1.2–7)1.5 (1.1–2.1)5 (4.1–6)3.2 (2.4–4.1)4.9 (3.6–6.8)2 (1.4–2.9)
Mugwort7.6 (7.1–8.1)7.6 (7.1–8.1)7.3 (5.1–10.3)5 (3.1–8.1)9.4 (7.7–11.5)4.4 (2.1–8.8)2.6 (2–3.4)6.5 (5.5–7.6)5.2 (4.5–6)7.2 (5.5–9.3)6.2 (5.1–7.6)
Hop Japanese4.1 (3.7–4.5)5.3 (4.9–5.7)4.1 (2.6–6.6)4.9 (3–7.9)6.1 (4.7–7.8)7.2 (4.1–12.3)1.8 (1.3–2.5)5.9 (4.9–7)3.6 (3–4.3)6.3 (4.2–9.2)2.3 (1.6–3.2)
Dandelion1.7 (1.5–2)2.4 (2.1–2.7)2.7 (1.5–4.9)1.2 (0.4–3.2)1.6 (0.7–3.4)0.4 (0.2–0.8)2.8 (2.2–3.6)4.6 (3.8–5.6)0.5 (0.1–3.9)0.8 (0.5–1.4)
Chrysanthemum5.5 (5–6.1)7.4 (6.9–8)5.2 (2.9–9)7 (4.4–10.7)6.2 (4–9.4)7.4 (3.9–13.6)4.3 (2.3–7.7)6.7 (4.4–10.1)3.9 (3.2–4.8)4.2 (1.3–12.7)
Goldenrod2.4 (2–2.8)1.8 (1.6–2.1)3.1 (1.7–5.8)0.9 (0.2–3.4)2.8 (1.3–5.8)0.9 (0.1–5.5)1.6 (0.5–5.1)2.7 (1.3–5.5)1.6 (1–2.5)4.2 (1–15.3)
Plantain1.6 (1.3–1.9)0.8 (0.7–1)1.1 (0.4–3.1)2.3 (1–5)1.6 (0.9–2.8)3.5 (1.4–8.5)0.5 (0.1–3.9)1.5 (1.1–2.2)1.4 (0.8–2.5)1.7 (0.9–3.3)1.2 (0.7–1.9)
Other uncommon allergens
Latex (Hevea brasiliensis)
Lepidoglyphus destructor
Acarus siro6.1 (3.1–11.6)25.1 (7.1–59.6)10.2 (7.9–13.1)7.7 (6.1–9.6)6.8 (5.6–8.2)
Panonychus citrus7 (4.1–11.5)
Trychophyton mentagrophytes25.1 (7.1–59.6)9 (6.8–11.7)
Tricepidermofiti mix
Cephalosporium2 (0.9–4.2)
Hormodendrum1.9 (0.8–4)
Helminthosporium3.4 (2–5.5)
Rat epithelia0.3 (0.2–0.4)0.4 (0.3–0.5)0.1 (0–0.8)1.6 (1–2.5)0.9 (0.4–2.2)0.8 (0.4–1.4)
Hamster epithelia2.9 (1.7–4.9)0.7 (0.4–1.3)
Horse epithelia2.6 (1.5–4.5)
Cow epithelia0.7 (0.3–1.6)0.4 (0.1–0.8)
Sheep's wool0.3 (0.1–0.7)
Animal hair I10.8 (8.1–14.3)5 (2.7–9.1)
Animal hair II0.4 (0.1–1.2)1.4 (0.4–4.5)
Maple1.9 (1.4–2.5)2.7 (0.8–8.7)1.9 (1.3–2.8)
Hay dust0.9 (0.3–2.3)
Sycamore2 (1–4.1)
Jeju Cedar11.6 (9.2–14.6)
Spruce (Picea excelsa)1 (0.6–1.6)
Rhizopus nigricans2.6 (1.6–4.1)1.5 (1.3–1.8)2.3 (0.5–9.3)3.8 (1.8–7.9)0.2 (0.1–1)
Lamb's quarter6.1 (3–12.3)1 (0.6–1.6)
Sorrel19 (3.3–61.8)1.4 (0.9–2.1)1 (0.6–1.7)1.4 (0.9–2.1)
Iron wood8.3 (0.9–48.1)4.7 (3.2–6.8)
Rape2.4 (0.7–8.4)
Cottonwood1.6 (0.7–3.7)
Dog's taill grass6.1 (4.2–8.7)
Vernal grass6.6 (4.7–9.3)
Johnson grass4.9 (3.2–7.4)
Kochia1.4 (0.6–3.5)
Hickory2 (0.9–4.2)
Feather3.3 (2–5.4)
Weed mixture9.9 (7.6–12.8)

*Sensitization rates to inhalant allergens are presented as mean (95% confidence interval).

Fig. 2

Overall sensitization profiles of inhalant allergens in decreasing order of frequency.

For allergen groups, about one-third (32.4%) of all the study participants were sensitized to mites. Among pollens, sensitization to tree pollens was found to be most prevalent (13.3%), followed by weed pollens (12.5%) and grass pollens (6.4%). Sensitization rate to the animal allergen group was about 10%. Sensitization rate to the other allergens except cat (8.1%) and dog (3.8%) were lower than 1.0%. Sensitization rates to outdoor molds were slightly higher than those to indoor molds (5.4% vs 3.7%). Seven out of 10 sensitized patients were sensitized to house dust mites (Dp or Df). Other common inhalant allergens were cat epithelium (8.1%), birch (7.7%), mugwort (6.9%), alder (6.7%), hazel (6.7%), beech (6.7%), oak (6.6%) and Tyrophagus putres (6.2%), in decreasing order of frequency. Ninety percent cases of inhalant allergen sensitization could be detected by testing these 10 inhalant allergens. The panel of 10 most commonly sensitized inhalant allergens was similar among areas, except Chungnam and Jeju (Table 3). Since Jeju Island is an island geographically separated from mainland Korea, its sensitization profile of inhalant allergens was considerably different from that of mainland Korea. Der f and Der p were also the most common inhalant allergens, accounting for 75% of inhalant allergen sensitization, and Tyrophagus Putrescentiae, Tetranychus urticae, and mugwort were also prevalent in Jeju. However, Japanese cedar, which is the fifth most common allergen was considerably more sensitized in participants from Jeju (12.4% vs 0.6%, P<0.001). Grass pollens, such as orchard, rye, and velvet, were considerably more sensitized in participants from Jeju. This Jeju-specific inhalant allergen panel could explain 9 of 10 patients who had atopy in Jeju, which were considerably higher than the other areas (only 75%). The types of top 10 allergens were also different between Chungnam and the other areas. American cockroach, German cockroach, and Trichophyton metagrophytes were found to be area-specific.
Table 3

Common inhalant allergen panel according to the residential area

1st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th9th10th
OverallDer pDer fCatBirchTetraHazelAlderMugwortBeechOak
SeoulDer fDer pCatTetraBirchMugwortBeechOakHazelAlder
GyeonggiDer fDer pCatBirchMugwortTetraChrysanTyroBeechOak
IncheonDer fDer pAcarusMugwortCatTyroG. cockBirchDogTricho
GangwonDer pDer fBirchAlderBeechHazelCatMugwortOakTetra
ChungbukDer fDer pTyroChrysanCatBeechHazelAlderMugwortHop J
ChungnamDer fDer pMugwortCatTyroChrysanHop JA. CockAlderBirch
Gyeongbuk/DaeguDer fDer pHazelAlderBirtchTetraCatOakChrysanMugwort
Busan/GyeongnamDer pDer fAlderBirchBeechOakHazelCatPineOrchard
JeonbukDer pDer fChrysanHop JTetraCatBeechMugwortAlderRye
Jeonnam/GwangjuDer pDer fTyroHazelBirchOakChrysanBeechAlderCat
JejuDer pDer fOrchardTyroJ. CedarOakRyeTetraVelvetBeech

Acarus (Acarus siro), A. cock (American cockroach), Cat (Cat epithelium), Chrysan (Chrysanthemum), Def f (Dermatophagoides farina), Der P (Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus), Dog (Dog epithelium), G. Cock (German cockroach), Hop J (Hop Japanese), J. cedar (Japanese cedar), Tetra (Tetranychus urticae), Tricho (Trichophyton metagrophytes), Tyro (Tyrophagus putres).

DISCUSSION

To get representativeness, we attempted to include areas evenly and adjusted for population according to 2010 Korean population and housing census.14 The number of subjects was about 11-fold larger than a previous multicenter study in Korea.4 The first aim of our study was to summarize variable allergens which were used in actual medical practice. Each hospital used its own inhalant panel which was not perfectly same as other hospitals. Thus, we could not determine the exact sensitization rate to each allergen. For example, Tetranychus urticae was included in not all hospitals despite belonging to the top 10 allergens. Only 3 hospitals performed skin testing for this allergen, and 1 hospital used this allergen regularly. Furthermore, despite their high antigenicity, beech, oak, orchard, and timothy were not used in 3 hospitals. Some hospitals did not use cat, beech, and oak that belong to top 10 allergens. Some patients were diagnosed with atopy in one hospital, but not in another hospital. We cannot test all inhalant allergens available, so we need to make a standardized allergen panel for clinical use by considering the significance of each allergen. The second aim of our study was to rank common sensitized inhalant allergens and to find their geographical and temporal difference. Over one-third of patients were sensitized to house dust mites (Der p and Der f). Among pollens, tree pollens was most common (tree, weed, and grass in decreasing order of frequency). Among animals, dog and cat epithelia were most common. This might be related to the frequency of exposure. For the same reason, patients were more sensitized to indoor molds than outdoor molds. In 2003, common allergens were mites (Der p, Der f, and Teranychns urticae), animals (cat, dog, and cockroach), tree pollen (mixtures I, and II), mugwort, ragweed, Japanese hop, chrysanthemum, and Jeju cedar.4 In our study, mites (Der p, Der f, and Tyrophagus), cat, tree pollen and mugwort showed higher sensitization rates. Japanese cedar or Jeju cedar was still considerably more sensitized in participants from Jeju.15 In Chungnam, cockroach and Trichophyton showed higher sensitization rates than in other areas. Compared to the previous 10 years, sensitization rate to mites is still higher than in other allergens.4 Among pollens, sensitization rate to tree pollens was higher than that to weed pollen. Temporal changes were also found geographically. The most common allergens in Seoul were Der p, Der f, Tetranychus urticae, Tyrophagus putrescentiae, and Panonychus citri in decreasing order of frequency.4 However, in our study, the most common allergens in Seoul were Der p, Der f, cat, Tetranychus urticae, and mugwort. There have been several studies showing temporal changes in sensitization.41617 We should investigate the reasons why the pattern of sensitization changes. One of the main reasons to specify the allergen panel nationally, regionally, and temporally is that amounts and types of exposure to allergens may vary among different climates and geographic characteristics.18 In our study, frequency and types of top 10 allergens were different among areas, especially in Chungnam and Jeju. In Jeju, many region-specific allergens found tested in many studies.41719 Without such studies, patients with atopy could be underdiagnosed in Jeju. In our study, the types of allergens were similar among the areas of mainland Korea except Chungnam, but were different between Jeju Island and them. This may due to differences in biological environment and climate. Not only current regional difference in inhalant allergens but also global warming would influence the change of allergen type in the future. More studies are needed to confirm our results. If the change is not completely determined, it may be necessary to change the panel at regular intervals. The third aim of our study was to find top 10 allergens. If these 10 allergens are used in the diagnosis of patients, we can detect 90% of patients with the allergen panel would be useful in hospitals with limited time and resources. Our study has several limitations. First, we enrolled patients who visited mainly tertiary hospitals. A larger number of patients who have mild to moderate allergic symptoms received medical treatment in local hospitals. This could be a bias to sensitized profiles. Further studies of patients who visit primary and secondary hospitals are needed. Second, some allergens were intermittently tested during the study period because of inadequate allergen supply from oversea manufacturers. Thus, the overall sensitization rate was difficult to analyze. It is important to maintain adequate allergen extract supply for further studies. In addition, it is necessary to develop allergen extracts suitable to domestic situations. Third, the difference in allergen extracts manufactured by Allergopharma, Lofama, and AllergyTherapeutics can cause the heterogeneity of sensitization profiles among institutions. This could be an important confounding. Actually, we diagnosed atopy using the same criteria irrespective of the manufacturers. Thus, we defined allergen sensitization as the allergen/histamine wheal ratio (AHR) ≥1, not as absolute mean allergen wheal size ≥3 mm. Most institutions used histamine manufactured by Allergopharma (Reinbeck, Germany) and the concentration of histamine (1.0 mg/mL) is nearly the same except 1 institution (1.7 mg/mL). The skin prick test was performed by trained specialists in each institution using their in-hospital protocol. Fortunately, most institutions used 10 common allergen extracts manufactured by Allergopharma. Further studies are needed to evaluate the allergenicity of the commercial allergen extracts. Finally, we could not evaluate clinically relevance of allergens tested. Only 67.5% of patients tested were diagnosed with allergic rhinitis or allergic asthma. It is difficult to correlate symptoms to positive skin test results. The aim of this study was to find the distribution of sensitized allergens in patients who were suspected to have allergic respiratory diseases at first visit. We are planning further study to evaluate clinically relevance of allergens in patients with allergic disease. The present multicenter study demonstrated the geographical pattern of inhalant allergen sensitization in Korean adult patients with suspected respiratory allergies. Our panel of 10 most common inhalant allergens may account for 90% of inhalant allergen sensitization in Korean adults. We hope that this panel could be utilized as a practical and convenient tool for primary practice and epidemiological surveys of respiratory allergic diseases.
  14 in total

1.  High prevalence of current asthma and active smoking effect among the elderly.

Authors:  Y K Kim; S H Kim; Y J Tak; Y K Jee; B J Lee; S H Kim; H W Park; J W Jung; J W Bahn; Y S Chang; D C Choi; S I Chang; K U Min; Y Y Kim; S H Cho
Journal:  Clin Exp Allergy       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 5.018

2.  Geographical variations in the prevalence of atopic sensitization in six study sites across Canada.

Authors:  M Chan-Yeung; N R Anthonisen; M R Becklake; D Bowie; A Sonia Buist; H Dimich-Ward; P Ernst; M R Sears; H C Siersted; L Sweet; L Van Til; J Manfreda
Journal:  Allergy       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 13.146

3.  Staphylococcal enterotoxin sensitization in a community-based population: a potential role in adult-onset asthma.

Authors:  W-J Song; Y-S Chang; M-K Lim; E-H Yun; S-H Kim; H-R Kang; H-W Park; P Tomassen; M-H Choi; K-U Min; S-H Cho; C Bachert
Journal:  Clin Exp Allergy       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 5.018

4.  Prevalence of allergic sensitization in the United States: results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2005-2006.

Authors:  Päivi M Salo; Samuel J Arbes; Renee Jaramillo; Agustin Calatroni; Charles H Weir; Michelle L Sever; Jane A Hoppin; Kathryn M Rose; Andrew H Liu; Peter J Gergen; Herman E Mitchell; Darryl C Zeldin
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2014-02-09       Impact factor: 10.793

5.  Clinical characteristics according to sensitized allergens in adult korean patients with bronchial asthma.

Authors:  Jae Woo Jung; Jae Chol Choi; Jong Wook Shin; Jae Yeol Kim; In Won Park; Byoung Whui Choi
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Immunol Res       Date:  2010-03-24       Impact factor: 5.764

6.  The revised edition of korean calendar for allergenic pollens.

Authors:  Jae-Won Oh; Ha-Baik Lee; Im-Joo Kang; Seong-Won Kim; Kang-Seo Park; Myung-Hee Kook; Bong-Seong Kim; Hey-Sung Baek; Joo-Hwa Kim; Ja-Kyung Kim; Dong-Jin Lee; Kyu-Rang Kim; Young-Jin Choi
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Immunol Res       Date:  2011-09-03       Impact factor: 5.764

7.  Meta-analyses and Forest plots using a microsoft excel spreadsheet: step-by-step guide focusing on descriptive data analysis.

Authors:  Jeruza L Neyeloff; Sandra C Fuchs; Leila B Moreira
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2012-01-20

8.  Variability of offending allergens of allergic rhinitis according to age: optimization of skin prick test allergens.

Authors:  Ji-Eun Lee; Jae-Chul Ahn; Doo Hee Han; Dong-Young Kim; Jung-Whun Kim; Sang-Heon Cho; Heung-Woo Park; Chae-Seo Rhee
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Immunol Res       Date:  2013-12-10       Impact factor: 5.764

9.  Japanese Cedar (Cryptomeria japonica) Pollinosis in Jeju, Korea: Is It Increasing?

Authors:  Jaechun Lee; Keun Hwa Lee; Hye Sook Lee; Sung Chul Hong; Jeong Hong Kim
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Immunol Res       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 5.764

10.  Geographical variation in the prevalence of sensitization to common aeroallergens in adults: the GA(2) LEN survey.

Authors:  R B Newson; R van Ree; B Forsberg; C Janson; J Lötvall; S-E Dahlén; E M Toskala; J Baelum; G M Brożek; L Kasper; M L Kowalski; P H Howarth; W J Fokkens; C Bachert; T Keil; U Krämer; J Bislimovska; M Gjomarkaj; C Loureiro; P G J Burney; D Jarvis
Journal:  Allergy       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 13.146

View more
  6 in total

1.  Spring and allergy.

Authors:  Yoon-Seok Chang
Journal:  Asia Pac Allergy       Date:  2018-04-30

Review 2.  House Dust Mite Allergy Under Changing Environments.

Authors:  Nathalie Acevedo; Josefina Zakzuk; Luis Caraballo
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Immunol Res       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 5.764

Review 3.  Allergens of Regional Importance in Korea.

Authors:  Kyoung Yong Jeong; Jung-Won Park
Journal:  Front Allergy       Date:  2021-03-05

4.  Aeroallergen Sensitization Status in South Korea From 2018 to 2021.

Authors:  Intae Kim; Dohsik Minn; Suhyun Kim; Jin Kook Kim; Jae Hoon Cho
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 3.340

5.  Sensitization profile to sawtooth oak component allergens and their clinical implications.

Authors:  Kyoung Yong Jeong; Jongsun Lee; Min Kyu Sang; Yong Seok Lee; Kyung Hee Park; Jae-Hyun Lee; Jung-Won Park
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2021-05-18       Impact factor: 2.352

6.  Molecular sensitization patterns in birch pollen-sensitized Korean children according to the presence of oral allergy syndrome.

Authors:  Hey-Sung Baek; Jae-Won Jeong; Ha-Baik Lee; Jae-Woo Kwon
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 1.817

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.