Basophil activation test as predictor of severity and threshold of allergic reactions to egg.

BACKGROUND: Identifying patients at risk of severe allergic reactions and/or low threshold of reactivity is very important, particularly for staple foods like egg. METHODS: One hundred and fifty children underwent double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) to baked egg (BE), skin prick testing and blood collection for serology and basophil activation test (BAT). Patients who passed BE DBPCFC underwent loosely cooked egg (LCE) DBPCFC. Severity of allergic reactions was classified following Practall guidelines and threshold dose was determined during DBPCFC. RESULTS: Sixty out of 150 (40%) children reacted to BE and 16 out of 77 (21%) to LCE on DBPCFC. Considering DBPCFC to BE, 23 children (38%) had severe reactions and 33 (55%) reacted to 0.13 g or less of egg protein (low threshold group). Two children (2 out of 16 = 12%) had severe reactions to LCE. Demographic, clinical and most immunological features were not significantly different between severe/non-severe BE reactors or low/high threshold groups. Severe BE reactors had higher ovomucoid-sIgE (p = .009) and higher BAT to BE (p = .001). Patients with lower threshold to BE had higher IgE-specific activity (p = .027) and BAT to egg (p = .007) but lower severity score (p = .008). Optimal cut-offs for ovomucoid-sIgE had 100% sensitivity, 35% specificity and 60% accuracy and for BAT 76% sensitivity, 74% specificity and 75% accuracy to identify BE severe reactors. Optimal cut-offs for specific activity had 70% sensitivity, 68% specificity and 69% accuracy and for BAT 70% sensitivity, 72% specificity and 71% accuracy to identify low threshold patients. CONCLUSIONS: BAT was the best biomarker to predict severity and threshold of allergic reactions to BE and can be useful when making decisions about management of egg allergy.

Partial Egg Consumption Modifies the Diagnostic Performance of Allergy Tests to Predict Outcome of Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Food Challenges to Egg.

BACKGROUND: Many children are consuming some egg when they are diagnosed with egg allergy. We hypothesized that egg consumption could modify the diagnostic performance of allergy tests. OBJECTIVE: To stratify diagnostic performance of tests according to egg consumption status. METHODS: The BAT2 study (NCT03309488) participants underwent oral food challenge (OFC), food-frequency questionnaires, skin prick test (SPT), specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) and specific immunoglobulin G4 (sIgG4) and basophil activation test (BAT). RESULTS: At study entry, 45% of participants reported partial egg consumption ("consumers") and 55% were avoiding egg strictly ("avoiders"). Avoiders had larger SPT (P < .001), higher BAT to egg (P < .001), sIgE to egg white (EW; P = .001) and to ovalbumin (OVA; P = .001), but not to ovomucoid (P = .231). Consumers had higher levels of sIgG4 to all egg allergens (P < .001) than avoiders. In consumers, the test with the best diagnostic performance was BAT (area under the curve [AUC] = .912) followed by SPT to raw egg (AUC = 0.805), EW-sIgE (AUC = 0.738), and OVA-sIgE (AUC = 0.732). In avoiders, the best tests were BAT (AUC = 0.834) and EW-sIgE (AUC = 0.833) followed by OVA-sIgE (AUC = 0.793) and SPT to EW (AUC=0.789). Using 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity cut-offs, the proportion of patients requiring OFC were 33% for BAT, 53% for SPT to raw egg, 61% for OVA-sIgE, and 73% for EW-sIgE for consumers; and 73% for BAT, 79% for EW-sIgE, and 93% for SPT to EW for avoiders. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic performance of tests is influenced by the immunomodulatory effect of egg consumption. BAT is the most reliable test and reduced the need for OFC, particularly in partial egg consumers.

Diagnostic utility of allergy tests to predict baked egg and lightly cooked egg allergies compared to double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges.

BACKGROUND: Double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFC) are the gold-standard to diagnose food allergy. However, they can cause allergic reactions of unpredictable severity. We assessed accuracy of current and new diagnostic tests compared to DBPCFC to baked egg (BE) and to lightly cooked egg (LCE). METHODS: Children aged 6 months to 15 years were assessed for possible egg allergy as part of the BAT2 study (NCT03309488). They underwent clinical assessment, skin prick test (SPT), specific IgE (sIgE) and basophil activation test (BAT). The results of the tests were compared with DBPCFC outcomes to both BE and LCE. RESULTS: A total of 150 children underwent DBPCFC to BE, 60 (40%) reacted to and 85 (57%) tolerated BE and 5 (3%) had inconclusive oral food challenges (OFC). Seventy-seven children tolerant to BE had DBPCFC to LCE and 16 reacted. The test within each modality with the best diagnostic performance for BE allergy was as follows: SPT to egg white (EW) (AUC = 0.726), sIgE to EW (AUC = 0.776) and BAT to egg (AUC = 0.783). BAT (AUC = 0.867) was the best test in the younger than 2 years age group. Applying 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity cut-offs, followed by OFC, resulted in 100% diagnostic accuracy. BAT enabled the greatest reduction in OFC (41%). Using sIgE followed by BAT allowed to reduce the number of BATs performed by about 30% without significantly increasing the number of OFC. CONCLUSIONS: The best diagnostic test was BAT to egg in terms of diagnostic accuracy and reduction in number of OFC. Using sIgE to EW followed by BAT required fewer BATs with sustained OFC reduction and diagnostic accuracy.

Ara h 2-Specific IgE Presence Rather Than Its Function Is the Best Predictor of Mast Cell Activation in Children.

BACKGROUND: Ara h 2-specific IgE (Arah2-sIgE) is an excellent serologic marker for peanut allergy. However, not all subjects with detectable Arah2-sIgE react clinically. OBJECTIVE: To assess the importance of functional characteristics of Arah2-sIgE for Ara h 2-induced mast cell activation. METHODS: We studied a cohort of children assessed for peanut allergy. We determined Arah2-sIgE levels, Ara h 2/total IgE ratios and IgE avidity for Ara h 2 using ImmunoCAP (Thermo Fisher) and mast cell activation to Ara h 2 using flow cytometry. RESULTS: Samples from 61 of 100 children (46 peanut-allergic [PA] and 15 peanut-sensitized tolerant) who had Arah2-sIgE levels 0.10 kU/L or greater were studied. Arah2-sIgE and Ara h 6-specific IgE levels, Ara h 2/total IgE ratios, and the diversity of IgE for Ara h 2 epitopes were higher in PA compared with peanut-sensitized tolerant samples. The levels of IgE to peanut, Ara h 1, and Ara h 3 were not significantly different between groups. Results from the mast cell activation test to Ara h 2 strongly correlated with Arah2-sIgE levels (r = 0.722; P < .001) and Ara h 2/total IgE ratios (r = 0.697; P < .001) and moderately with Arah2-sIgE diversity (r = 0.540; P < .001). On a linear regression model, Arah2-sIgE levels (standardized ß-coefficient = 0.396; P = .008) and Ara h 2/total IgE ratios (standardized ß-coefficient = 0.0.669; P = .002) were the main determinants of mast cell response to Ara h 2. CONCLUSIONS: Most children sensitized to Ara h 2 are PA. Ara h 2-specific IgE titers and specific activity are the major determinants of mast cell response to Ara h 2.

Basophil activation test has high reproducibility and is feasible in the clinical setting.

BACKGROUND: The basophil activation test (BAT) has high accuracy to diagnose peanut allergy and can reduce the need for oral food challenges (OFC); however, so far it has not been incorporated in clinical practice. METHODS: We assessed the reproducibility of BAT within the same laboratory and between two different laboratories and the feasibility of using BAT in the clinical setting. RESULTS: One hundred and two children being assessed for peanut allergy were tested on BAT (72 allergic, 30 sensitized tolerant). There was little internal variation (coefficient of variation <15%) in the BAT and a very strong correlation (Rs > .95) between BAT performed across laboratories. The 2 BAT methods were strongly correlated but not interchangeable. In the cases of discrepancy, our in house BAT method was 100% accurate. BAT was feasible and well-accepted by clinicians: no patient with positive BAT was referred for OFC, leading to reduction in the number of OFC required. Twenty one percent of patients who underwent OFC reacted to peanut. A negative BAT also encouraged the performance of OFC in sensitized children who would otherwise be considered allergic, 50% of whom did not react and incorporated peanut in the diet. CONCLUSIONS: The BAT is a robust test that can reliably be transferred between laboratories; however, different BAT methods are not interchangeable. BAT was well integrated in the clinical decision-making process in a specialized center.