Ulrika Käck1, Anna Asarnoj2, Hans Grönlund3, Magnus P Borres4, Marianne van Hage5, Gunnar Lilja6, Jon R Konradsen2. 1. Department of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: ulrika.kack@sll.se. 2. Department of Medicine Solna Immunology and Allergy Unit, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 3. Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Thermo Fisher Scientific, Uppsala, Sweden; Department of Women's & Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. 5. Department of Medicine Solna Immunology and Allergy Unit, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 6. Department of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sensitization to dog dander is an important risk factor for rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma but is not sufficient for diagnosing dog allergy. Molecular allergy diagnostics offer new opportunities for refined characterization. OBJECTIVES: We sought to study the association between sensitization to all presently known dog allergen components and clinical symptoms of dog allergy in children evaluated by using nasal provocation tests (NPTs). METHODS: Sixty children (age, 10-18 years) sensitized to dog dander extract underwent NPTs with dog dander extract. Measurement of IgE levels to dog dander and to Can f 1, Can f 2, Can f 3, and Can f 5 was performed with ImmunoCAP, and measurement of IgE levels to Can f 4 and Can f 6 was performed with streptavidin ImmunoCAP. An IgE level of 0.1 kUA/L or greater was considered positive. RESULTS: There was an association between sensitization to an increasing number of dog allergen components and a positive nasal challenge result (P = .01). Sensitization to lipocalins (odds ratio [OR], 6.0; 95% CI, 1.04-34.5), in particular Can f 4 (OR, 6.80; 95% CI 1.84-25.2) and Can f 6 (OR, 5.69; 95% CI, 1.59-20.8), was associated with a positive NPT result. Monosensitization to Can f 5 was related to a negative NPT result (OR, 5.78; 95% CI, 1.01-33.0). CONCLUSION: Sensitization to an increasing number of dog allergen components and to lipocalins is associated with dog allergy. Monosensitization to Can f 5 should not be regarded primarily as a marker for dog allergy.
BACKGROUND: Sensitization to dog dander is an important risk factor for rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma but is not sufficient for diagnosing dogallergy. Molecular allergy diagnostics offer new opportunities for refined characterization. OBJECTIVES: We sought to study the association between sensitization to all presently known dog allergen components and clinical symptoms of dogallergy in children evaluated by using nasal provocation tests (NPTs). METHODS: Sixty children (age, 10-18 years) sensitized to dog dander extract underwent NPTs with dog dander extract. Measurement of IgE levels to dog dander and to Can f 1, Can f 2, Can f 3, and Can f 5 was performed with ImmunoCAP, and measurement of IgE levels to Can f 4 and Can f 6 was performed with streptavidin ImmunoCAP. An IgE level of 0.1 kUA/L or greater was considered positive. RESULTS: There was an association between sensitization to an increasing number of dog allergen components and a positive nasal challenge result (P = .01). Sensitization to lipocalins (odds ratio [OR], 6.0; 95% CI, 1.04-34.5), in particular Can f 4 (OR, 6.80; 95% CI 1.84-25.2) and Can f 6 (OR, 5.69; 95% CI, 1.59-20.8), was associated with a positive NPT result. Monosensitization to Can f 5 was related to a negative NPT result (OR, 5.78; 95% CI, 1.01-33.0). CONCLUSION: Sensitization to an increasing number of dog allergen components and to lipocalins is associated with dogallergy. Monosensitization to Can f 5 should not be regarded primarily as a marker for dogallergy.
Keywords:
Allergy; Can f 1; Can f 2; Can f 3; Can f 4; Can f 5; Can f 6; IgE; children; dog; molecular allergology; nasal provocation test; sensitization
Authors: Ulrika Käck; Elisabet Einarsdottir; Marianne van Hage; Anna Asarnoj; Anna James; Anna Nopp; Kaarel Krjutškov; Shintaro Katayama; Juha Kere; Gunnar Lilja; Cilla Söderhäll; Jon R Konradsen Journal: ERJ Open Res Date: 2021-04-19
Authors: Anastasia Filiou; Idun Holmdahl; Anna Asarnoj; Marianne van Hage; Tina Ekenkrantz; Niclas Rydell; Anders Sjölander; Katarina Stenberg-Hammar; Gunilla Hedlin; Jon R Konradsen; Cilla Söderhäll Journal: Int Arch Allergy Immunol Date: 2022-01-18 Impact factor: 3.767
Authors: Luis Caraballo; Rudolf Valenta; Leonardo Puerta; Anna Pomés; Josefina Zakzuk; Enrique Fernandez-Caldas; Nathalie Acevedo; Mario Sanchez-Borges; Ignacio Ansotegui; Luo Zhang; Marianne van Hage; Eva Fernández; Luisa Arruda; Susanne Vrtala; Mirela Curin; Hans Gronlund; Antonina Karsonova; Jonathan Kilimajer; Ksenja Riabova; Daria Trifonova; Alexander Karaulov Journal: World Allergy Organ J Date: 2020-04-29 Impact factor: 4.084