Literature DB >> 9920216

Interpreting skin prick tests in the evaluation of food allergy in children.

P A Eigenmann1, H A Sampson.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Skin prick tests (SPTs) are utilized routinely in the evaluation of food allergy and several authors have discussed their utility. Efforts to standardize SPT reagents and procedures have been made, but the accuracies of different recording techniques have not been clearly defined. The aim of this study was to compare different SPT recording methods with the outcome of oral food challenge and determine whether they offer any advantage over the criteria proposed by Bock and May (1). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Children suspected of IgE-mediated symptoms to any of five common food allergens (egg, milk, peanut, soy and wheat) were skin tested by the prick technique utilizing commercial extracts. The wheal reactions were recorded by two different methods: first by measuring the largest diameter of the wheal and the diameter orthogonal to it (mean wheal diameter), and second by recording the surface area of the wheal with a hand-held scanner. Wheal sizes above the 95% confidence interval of tolerant individuals were considered positive. The results of double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges were considered the "gold standard" for diagnosis. Cut-off values were compared for positive responses in our study population (mean diameter/surface area of wheal): 4 mm/16 mm2 for egg, 5 mm/29 mm2 for milk, 6 mm/40 mm2 for peanut, 3 mm/9 mm2 for soy, and 3 mm/7 mm2 for wheat.
RESULTS: Significant differences in wheal sizes were seen between individuals who were allergic or tolerant to egg (P < 0.001), milk (P < 0.001), wheat (P < 0.005), and peanut (P < 0.05). Reactivity to soy could not be predicted based on SPT results (P = n.s.). The sensitivities and the specificities of the two recording methods were similar. The predictive values were not significantly different from that of the commonly utilized method of grading SPTs (i.e. positive = mean diameter 3 mm or greater than the negative control).
CONCLUSIONS: Skin prick tests are a useful procedure for evaluating clinical reactivity to egg, milk, peanut and wheat, but not to soy. While the size of the SPT wheals may be interpreted utilizing mean diameter or surface area cut-offs, the predictive values of these measurement methods were no better than the commonly utilized grading method where a positive skin test was recorded as a mean wheal diameter 3 mm greater than the negative control.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9920216     DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3038.1998.tb00371.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Allergy Immunol        ISSN: 0905-6157            Impact factor:   6.377


  22 in total

Review 1.  Diagnosis of food allergy: epicutaneous skin tests, in vitro tests, and oral food challenge.

Authors:  Jay A Lieberman; Scott H Sicherer
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.806

Review 2.  A comprehensive review of legume allergy.

Authors:  Alok Kumar Verma; Sandeep Kumar; Mukul Das; Premendra D Dwivedi
Journal:  Clin Rev Allergy Immunol       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 8.667

3.  Harnessing the placebo effect: Exploring the influence of physician characteristics on placebo response.

Authors:  Lauren C Howe; J Parker Goyer; Alia J Crum
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 4.267

4.  Comparative dietary therapy effectiveness in remission of pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis.

Authors:  Carol J Henderson; J Pablo Abonia; Eileen C King; Philip E Putnam; Margaret H Collins; James P Franciosi; Marc E Rothenberg
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2012-04-26       Impact factor: 10.793

Review 5.  Food allergy in children.

Authors:  J O Hourihane; P K Smith; S Strobel
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 1.967

6.  Food allergy in adults: an over- or underrated problem?

Authors:  Cornelia S Seitz; Petra Pfeuffer; Petra Raith; Eva-B Bröcker; Axel Trautmann
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2008-10-17       Impact factor: 5.594

Review 7.  Peanut allergy: an overview.

Authors:  Saleh Al-Muhsen; Ann E Clarke; Rhoda S Kagan
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2003-05-13       Impact factor: 8.262

8.  World Allergy Organization (WAO) Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) Guidelines.

Authors:  Alessandro Fiocchi; Jan Brozek; Holger Schünemann; Sami L Bahna; Andrea von Berg; Kirsten Beyer; Martin Bozzola; Julia Bradsher; Enrico Compalati; Motohiro Ebisawa; Maria Antonieta Guzman; Haiqi Li; Ralf G Heine; Paul Keith; Gideon Lack; Massimo Landi; Alberto Martelli; Fabienne Rancé; Hugh Sampson; Airton Stein; Luigi Terracciano; Stefan Vieths
Journal:  World Allergy Organ J       Date:  2010-04-23       Impact factor: 4.084

Review 9.  Biomarkers in Food Allergy Immunotherapy.

Authors:  LaKeya C Hardy; Johanna M Smeekens; Michael D Kulis
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2019-12-04       Impact factor: 4.806

Review 10.  Food Intolerance and childhood asthma: what is the link?

Authors:  Janet L Beausoleil; Joel Fiedler; Jonathan M Spergel
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 3.022

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.