Guangqiao Zeng1,2,3, Haisheng Hu1,2, Peiyan Zheng1,2,3,4,5, Ge Wu1,2, Nili Wei1,2,3,4,5, Xueqing Liang1,2, Baoqing Sun1,2,3,4,5, Xiaowen Zhang1,2,3,6. 1. State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou 510120, China. 2. National Clinical Research Center of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou 510120, China. 3. Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, Guangzhou 510120, China. 4. Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510120, China. 5. Sino-French Hoffmann Institute, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510120, China. 6. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Phadiatop test is a variant of ImmunoCAP assay that covers a mixture of common aeroallergens. Its diagnostic efficiency in Chinese population remains so far inadequate. We validated Phadiatop testing with ImmunoCAP assays in a Chinese cohort. METHODS: Phadiatop test was performed for serum samples from 290 asthmatics and 92 healthy controls previously tested with "classic" ImmunoCAP for house dust mix (hx2), molds and yeasts mix (mx2), tree pollen mix (tx4) and weed mix (wx5). RESULTS: Phadiatop positivity was shown in 46.2% of 290 asthmatic patients. Using ImmunoCAP as the gold standard, the concordance rate was 91.7%; negative predictive value, 92.9%; and positive predictive value, 90.2%. The sensitivity of Phadiatop test was high for hx2 (98.2%), tx4 (100%) and wx5 (95.5%), but not for mx2 (78.4%). Yet the mx2 allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) level in all missed cases was relatively low (0.35 to 0.90 kUA/L). The total Phadiatop sIgE level was correlated with the ImmunoCAP sIgE levels for all allergen mixes combined (rs =0.941, P<0.001) or each allergen mix, particularly the hx2 (rs =0.924) (all P<0.001), 0.53 kUA/L used as a cut-off would optimize the diagnostic performance of Phadiatop testing, yielding 89.4% sensitivity and 97.5% specificity in indentifying serums positive to any of these allergen mixes. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, Phadiatop test may efficiently detect sensitization to common aeroallergen mixes. In light of the currently rigorous administration on crude extracts for skin tests in China, using Phadiatop as the first-line test for suspected atopy can be cost-effective.
BACKGROUND: Phadiatop test is a variant of ImmunoCAP assay that covers a mixture of common aeroallergens. Its diagnostic efficiency in Chinese population remains so far inadequate. We validated Phadiatop testing with ImmunoCAP assays in a Chinese cohort. METHODS: Phadiatop test was performed for serum samples from 290 asthmatics and 92 healthy controls previously tested with "classic" ImmunoCAP for house dust mix (hx2), molds and yeasts mix (mx2), tree pollen mix (tx4) and weed mix (wx5). RESULTS: Phadiatop positivity was shown in 46.2% of 290 asthmatic patients. Using ImmunoCAP as the gold standard, the concordance rate was 91.7%; negative predictive value, 92.9%; and positive predictive value, 90.2%. The sensitivity of Phadiatop test was high for hx2 (98.2%), tx4 (100%) and wx5 (95.5%), but not for mx2 (78.4%). Yet the mx2 allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) level in all missed cases was relatively low (0.35 to 0.90 kUA/L). The total Phadiatop sIgE level was correlated with the ImmunoCAP sIgE levels for all allergen mixes combined (rs =0.941, P<0.001) or each allergen mix, particularly the hx2 (rs =0.924) (all P<0.001), 0.53 kUA/L used as a cut-off would optimize the diagnostic performance of Phadiatop testing, yielding 89.4% sensitivity and 97.5% specificity in indentifying serums positive to any of these allergen mixes. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, Phadiatop test may efficiently detect sensitization to common aeroallergen mixes. In light of the currently rigorous administration on crude extracts for skin tests in China, using Phadiatop as the first-line test for suspected atopy can be cost-effective.
Entities:
Keywords:
ImmunoCAP; Phadiatop test; allergen; allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE); asthma
Authors: Carey C Linden; Rana T Misiak; Ganesa Wegienka; Suzanne Havstad; Dennis R Ownby; Christine C Johnson; Edward M Zoratti Journal: Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 6.347
Authors: A Leimgruber; B Mosimann; M Claeys; M Seppey; Y Jaccard; V Aubert; R Peitrequin; M P Nisoli; A Pécoud Journal: Clin Exp Allergy Date: 1991-01 Impact factor: 5.018
Authors: E D Bateman; S S Hurd; P J Barnes; J Bousquet; J M Drazen; J M FitzGerald; P Gibson; K Ohta; P O'Byrne; S E Pedersen; E Pizzichini; S D Sullivan; S E Wenzel; H J Zar Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Didier G Ebo; Lennart Venemalm; Chris H Bridts; Frederik Degerbeck; Hans Hagberg; Luc S De Clerck; Wim J Stevens Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Ivo S Muskens; Mi Zhou; Lucie Mccoy; Paige M Bracci; Helen M Hansen; W James Gauderman; John K Wiencke; Margaret R Wrensch; Joseph L Wiemels Journal: Neurooncol Adv Date: 2019-09-29
Authors: Veronika Naumova; Evgeny Beltyukov; Katarzyna Niespodziana; Peter Errhalt; Rudolf Valenta; Alexander Karaulov; Darina Kiseleva Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2022-09-21 Impact factor: 8.786