Molecular diagnosis and the Italian Board for ISAC.

The Component Resolved Diagnostic (CRD) approach has been developed when highly purified or recombinant allergen molecules have become available. These molecules are the allergenic proteins toward which the specific and clinically relevant IgE immune response is directed. So, the identification of protein families and cross-reactivity patterns of importance in allergy have been possible. The Italian advisory BOARD for ISAC was born: to evaluate the advantages, disadvantages and placement in diagnosis of CRD studying its application in allergic patients; to facilitate the interpretation of molecular diagnostics for clinical allergists; to evaluate the effectiveness of CRD in improving diagnostic risk assessment and early preventive treatment of allergic diseases. In the last years, its fields of interest have been: the evaluation of the performance of CRD on multi-sensitized allergic patients with respiratory symptoms and on poly-sensitized athletes; the evolution of IgE repertoire directed to single allergenic components by evaluating allergic patients with different age at a molecular level; the relevance of results obtained using allergen microarray technique for describing the IgE repertoire in allergic patients by reviewing the main articles focused on CRD published in the last 2 years; the need for an educational program focused on this new diagnostic tool also through the creation of an exhaustive and interactive explanation of the laboratory report molecular allergy; the investigation of the performance and potential additional diagnostic values of the ISAC microarray in a real-life clinical setting, taking into account also the economic values.

Determination of sIgE to rPhl p 1 is sufficient to diagnose grass pollen allergy.

BACKGROUND: New diagnostic tools such as the basophil activation test (BAT) and component-resolved diagnosis (CRD) are promising for Hymenoptera venom or food allergy. A clear benefit for inhalant allergens has not yet been shown. Our aim was to compare new and established tests for grass pollen allergy. METHODS: Forty-nine patients with grass pollen allergy and 47 controls were prospectively enrolled in the study. A symptom score was calculated for each patient. Conjunctival provocation tests (CPT), skin prick tests (SPT), BAT, and sIgE determination including CRD were performed. Sensitivity and specificity were compared and results were correlated with the symptom score. RESULTS: Single determination of sIgE to rPhl p 1 showed the best balance between sensitivity (98%) and specificity (92%). Use of additional components, such as rPhl p 2 and 5, did not increase sensitivity. Generally, sensitivity of tests was high: SPT 100%, ISAC-112 100%, sIgE to timothy grass 98%, BAT 98%, ISAC-103 84%, and CPT 83%. Specificity ranged from 79% (SPT) to 96% (CPT). All test results and calculated values (e.g. ratio sIgE/tIgE) did not correlate with symptom severity. Asymptomatic sensitization to timothy grass in controls was rare in the CAP (11%) and predominantly due to Phl p 1 sensitization. CONCLUSION: rPhl p 1 was sufficient to diagnose grass pollen allergy, and sIgE patterns were the same in symptomatically and asymptomatically sensitized subjects. The testing of multiple components was of minor importance, and no test correlated with symptom severity.