Effectiveness of allergy testing in milk induced eosinophilic esophagitis. Description and follow-up of patients

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, local immune-mediated esophageal disease that has been on the increase lately. There is currently enough evidence to conclude that EoE is an allergic disorder triggered by food allergens, with cow's milk (CM) being the most frequent. Dietary intervention is the first-line approach. This study aimed to assess the clinical characteristics, the diagnostic method, and the prognosis of patients whose culprit food was CM, as opposed to other triggers. METHODS: Children with EoE evaluated in our pediatric Allergy Department were retrospectively studied from 2004 to 2017. We collected clinical variables, diagnostic protocol, treatment, and follow-up data. We compared patients whose culprit food was CM and patients with EoE due to other causative agents. RESULTS: We analyzed 31 children with EoE and found the causative food to be cow's milk in 14 (45%). Clinical characteristics were similar in patients with EoE due to milk or any other cause. Eight of 14 patients with milk-induced EoE (57.14%) presented positive skin prick test results against cow's milk. All patients had positive IgE against cow's milk. None of the patients had any other food as the trigger. The median follow-up was 2.68 years (6 months to 9 years) with initial remission of 100%. CONCLUSION: Testing-based elimination diets effectively treated all of the patients with milk-induced EoE. The advantage of this diagnostic protocol is that it required a mean of only two foods to be tested, significantly smaller number than in empiric diets

No disponible

Effectiveness of allergy testing in milk induced eosinophilic esophagitis. Description and follow-up of patients.

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, local immune-mediated esophageal disease that has been on the increase lately. There is currently enough evidence to conclude that EoE is an allergic disorder triggered by food allergens, with cow's milk (CM) being the most frequent. Dietary intervention is the first-line approach. This study aimed to assess the clinical characteristics, the diagnostic method, and the prognosis of patients whose culprit food was CM, as opposed to other triggers. METHODS: Children with EoE evaluated in our pediatric Allergy Department were retrospectively studied from 2004 to 2017. We collected clinical variables, diagnostic protocol, treatment, and follow-up data. We compared patients whose culprit food was CM and patients with EoE due to other causative agents. RESULTS: We analyzed 31 children with EoE and found the causative food to be cow's milk in 14 (45%). Clinical characteristics were similar in patients with EoE due to milk or any other cause. Eight of 14 patients with milk-induced EoE (57.14%) presented positive skin prick test results against cow's milk. All patients had positive IgE against cow's milk. None of the patients had any other food as the trigger. The median follow-up was 2.68 years (6 months to 9 years) with initial remission of 100%. CONCLUSION: Testing-based elimination diets effectively treated all of the patients with milk-induced EoE. The advantage of this diagnostic protocol is that it required a mean of only two foods to be tested, significantly smaller number than in empiric diets.

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy: A Spanish guideline. Egg and milk immunotherapy Spanish guide (ITEMS GUIDE). Part 2: Maintenance phase of cow milk (CM) and egg oral immunotherapy (OIT), special treatment dosing schedules. Models of dosing schedules of OIT with CM and EGG

Introduction: Cow's milk and egg are the most frequent causes of food allergy in the first years of life. Treatments such as oral immunotherapy (OIT) have been investigated as an alternative to avoidance diets. No clinical practice guides on the management of OIT with milk and egg are currently available. Objectives: To develop a clinical guide on OIT based on the available scientific evidence and the opinions of experts. Methods: A review was made of studies published in the period between 1984 and June 2016, Doctoral Theses published in Spain, and summaries of communications at congresses (SEAIC, SEICAP, EAACI, AAAAI), with evaluation of the opinion consensus established by a group of experts pertaining to the scientific societies SEICAP and SEAIC. Results: Recommendations have been established regarding the indications, requirements and practical aspects of the different phases of OIT, as well as special protocols for patients at high risk of suffering adverse reactions. Conclusions: A clinical practice guide is presented for the management of OIT with milk and egg, based on the opinion consensus of Spanish experts (AU)

No disponible

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy: A Spanish guideline. Immunotherapy egg and milk Spanish guide (items guide). Part I: Cow milk and egg oral immunotherapy: Introduction, methodology, rationale, current state, indications contraindications and oral immunotherapy build-up phase

Introduction: Cow's milk and egg are the most frequent causes of food allergy in the first years of life. Treatments such as oral immunotherapy (OIT) have been investigated as an alternative to avoidance diets. No clinical practice guides on the management of OIT with milk and egg are currently available. Objectives: To develop a clinical guide on OIT based on the available scientific evidence and the opinions of experts. Methods: A review was made of studies published in the period between 1984 and June 2016, Doctoral Theses published in Spain, and summaries of communications at congresses (SEAIC, SEICAP, EAACI, AAAAI), with evaluation of the opinion consensus established by a group of experts pertaining to the scientific societies SEICAP and SEAIC. Results: Recommendations have been established regarding the indications, requirements and practical aspects of the different phases of OIT, as well as special protocols for patients at high risk of suffering adverse reactions. Conclusions: A clinical practice guide is presented for the management of OIT with milk and egg, based on the opinion consensus of Spanish experts (AU)

No disponible

Oral Immunotherapy for Food Allergy: A Spanish Guideline. Immunotherapy Egg and Milk Spanish Guide (ITEMS Guide). Part I: Cow Milk and Egg Oral Immunotherapy: Introduction, Methodology, Rationale, Current State, Indications, Contraindications, and Oral Immunotherapy Build-up Phase.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Cow milk and egg are the most frequent causes of food allergy in the first years of life. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been investigated as an alternative to avoidance diets. No clinical practice guidelines on the management of OIT with milk and egg are currently available. Objectives: To develop clinical guidelines for OIT based on available scientific evidence and the opinions of experts. METHODS: A review was made of studies published between 1984 and June 2016, doctoral theses published in Spain, summaries of communications at scientific meetings (SEAIC, SEICAP, EAACI, and AAAAI), and the consensus of opinion established by a group of experts from the scientific societies SEICAP and SEAIC. RESULTS: Recommendations were established regarding the indications, requirements and practical aspects of the different phases of OIT, as well as special protocols for patients at high risk of adverse reactions. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical practice guidelines based on the consensus reached between Spanish experts are presented for the management of OIT with milk and egg.

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy: A Spanish guideline. Egg and milk immunotherapy Spanish guide (ITEMS GUIDE). Part 2: Maintenance phase of cow milk (CM) and egg oral immunotherapy (OIT), special treatment dosing schedules. Models of dosing schedules of OIT with CM and EGG.

INTRODUCTION: Cow's milk and egg are the most frequent causes of food allergy in the first years of life. Treatments such as oral immunotherapy (OIT) have been investigated as an alternative to avoidance diets. No clinical practice guides on the management of OIT with milk and egg are currently available. OBJECTIVES: To develop a clinical guide on OIT based on the available scientific evidence and the opinions of experts. METHODS: A review was made of studies published in the period between 1984 and June 2016, Doctoral Theses published in Spain, and summaries of communications at congresses (SEAIC, SEICAP, EAACI, AAAAI), with evaluation of the opinion consensus established by a group of experts pertaining to the scientific societies SEICAP and SEAIC. RESULTS: Recommendations have been established regarding the indications, requirements and practical aspects of the different phases of OIT, as well as special protocols for patients at high risk of suffering adverse reactions. CONCLUSIONS: A clinical practice guide is presented for the management of OIT with milk and egg, based on the opinion consensus of Spanish experts.

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy: A Spanish guideline. Immunotherapy egg and milk Spanish guide (items guide). Part I: Cow milk and egg oral immunotherapy: Introduction, methodology, rationale, current state, indications contraindications and oral immunotherapy build-up phase.

INTRODUCTION: Cow's milk and egg are the most frequent causes of food allergy in the first years of life. Treatments such as oral immunotherapy (OIT) have been investigated as an alternative to avoidance diets. No clinical practice guides on the management of OIT with milk and egg are currently available. OBJECTIVES: To develop a clinical guide on OIT based on the available scientific evidence and the opinions of experts. METHODS: A review was made of studies published in the period between 1984 and June 2016, Doctoral Theses published in Spain, and summaries of communications at congresses (SEAIC, SEICAP, EAACI, AAAAI), with evaluation of the opinion consensus established by a group of experts pertaining to the scientific societies SEICAP and SEAIC. RESULTS: Recommendations have been established regarding the indications, requirements and practical aspects of the different phases of OIT, as well as special protocols for patients at high risk of suffering adverse reactions. CONCLUSIONS: A clinical practice guide is presented for the management of OIT with milk and egg, based on the opinion consensus of Spanish experts.

Oral Immunotherapy for Food Allergy: A Spanish Guideline. Egg and Milk Immunotherapy Spanish Guide (ITEMS GUIDE). Part II: Maintenance Phase of Cow Milk (CM) and Egg Oral Immunotherapy (OIT), Special Treatment Dosing Schedules. Models of Dosing Schedules of OIT With CM and Egg.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Cow milk and egg are the most frequent causes of food allergy in the first years of life. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been investigated as an alternative to avoidance diets. No clinical practice guidelines on the management of OIT with milk and egg are currently available. Objectives: To develop clinical guidelines for OIT based on available scientific evidence and the opinions of experts. METHODS: A review was made of studies published between 1984 and June 2016, doctoral theses published in Spain, summaries of communications at scientific meetings (SEAIC, SEICAP, EAACI, and AAAAI), and the consensus of opinion established by a group of experts from the scientific societies SEICAP and SEAIC. RESULTS: Recommendations were established regarding the indications, requirements and practical aspects of the different phases of OIT, as well as special protocols for patients at high risk of adverse reactions. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical practice guidelines based on the consensus reached between Spanish experts are presented for the management of OIT with milk and egg.

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy: a Spanish Guideline. Egg and milk immunotherapy Spanish Guide (ITEMS GUIDE). Part II: Maintenance phase of cow milk (CM) and egg oral immunotherapy (OIT), special treatment dosig schedules. Models of dosing Schedules of OIT with CM and egg

Introduction: Cow milk and egg are the most frequent causes of food allergy in the first years of life. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been investigated as an alternative to avoidance diets. No clinical practice guidelines on the management of OIT with milk and egg are currently available. Objectives: To develop clinical guidelines for OIT based on available scientific evidence and the opinions of experts. Methods: A review was made of studies published between 1984 and June 2016, doctoral theses published in Spain, summaries of communications at scientific meetings (SEAIC, SEICAP, EAACI, and AAAAI), and the consensus of opinion established by a group of experts from the scientific societies SEICAP and SEAIC. Results: Recommendations were established regarding the indications, requirements and practical aspects of the different phases of OIT, as well as special protocols for patients at high risk of adverse reactions. Conclusions: Clinical practice guidelines based on the consensus reached between Spanish experts are presented for the management of OIT with milk and egg (AU)

Introducción: El huevo y la leche de vaca son la causa más frecuente de alergia alimentaria en los primeros años de vida. Como alternativa terapéutica a la dieta de eliminación se han investigado otras formas de tratamiento como la inmunoterapia oral (ITO). Actualmente no existen guías de práctica clínica para el manejo de la ITO con leche y huevo. Objetivos: Elaborar una guía clínica para el tratamiento con ITO basada en la evidencia científica disponible y en la opinión de expertos. Métodos: Revisión de estudios publicados desde el año 1984 hasta junio de 2016, tesis doctorales publicadas en España, resúmenes de comunicaciones en congresos (SEAIC, SEICAP, EAACI, AAAAI) y consenso de opinión de un grupo de expertos de las sociedades científicas SEICAP y SEAIC. Resultados: Se establecen recomendaciones acerca de la indicación, requerimientos, aspectos prácticos del tratamiento en las diferentes fases de la ITO, y pautas especiales para pacientes de alto riesgo de reacciones adversas. Conclusiones: Se presenta una guía con las directrices para el manejo en la práctica clínica de la ITO con leche y huevo que aúna la opinión consensuada de expertos españoles (AU)

Oral immunotherapy for food allergy: a Spanish Guideline. Immunotherapy Egg and Milk Spanish Guide (ITEMS Guide). Part I: cow milk and egg oral immunotherapy: introduction, methodology, rationale, current state, indications, contraindications, and oral immunotherapy build-up phase

Introduction: Cow milk and egg are the most frequent causes of food allergy in the first years of life. Oral immunotherapy (OIT) has been investigated as an alternative to avoidance diets. No clinical practice guidelines on the management of OIT with milk and egg are currently available. Objectives: To develop clinical guidelines for OIT based on available scientific evidence and the opinions of experts. Methods: A review was made of studies published between 1984 and June 2016, doctoral theses published in Spain, summaries of communications at scientific meetings (SEAIC, SEICAP, EAACI, and AAAAI), and the consensus of opinion established by a group of experts from the scientific societies SEICAP and SEAIC. Results: Recommendations were established regarding the indications, requirements and practical aspects of the different phases of OIT, as well as special protocols for patients at high risk of adverse reactions. Conclusions: Clinical practice guidelines based on the consensus reached between Spanish experts are presented for the management of OIT with milk and egg (AU)

Introducción: El huevo y la leche de vaca son la causa más frecuente de alergia alimentaria en los primeros años de vida. Como alternativa terapéutica a la dieta de eliminación se han investigado otras formas de tratamiento como la inmunoterapia oral (ITO). Actualmente no existen guías de práctica clínica para el manejo de la ITO con leche y huevo. Objetivos: Elaborar una guía clínica para el tratamiento con ITO basada en la evidencia científica disponible y en la opinión de expertos. Métodos: Revisión de estudios publicados desde el año 1984 hasta junio de 2016, tesis doctorales publicadas en España, resúmenes de comunicaciones en congresos (SEAIC, SEICAP, EAACI, AAAAI) y consenso de opinión de un grupo de expertos de las sociedades científicas SEICAP y SEAIC. Resultados: Se establecen recomendaciones acerca de la indicación, requerimientos, aspectos prácticos del tratamiento en las diferentes fases de la ITO, y pautas especiales para pacientes de alto riesgo de reacciones adversas. Conclusiones: Se presenta una guía con las directrices para el manejo en la práctica clínica de la ITO con leche y huevo que aúna la opinión consensuada de expertos españoles (AU)

Is the ISAC 112 Microarray Useful in the Diagnosis of Pollinosis in Spain?

BACKGROUND: Multiple sensitization is frequent among pollen-allergic patients. The goal of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the ImmunoCAP ISAC 112 (ISAC112) microarray in allergy to pollen from several taxa and its clinical utility in a Spanish population. METHODS: Specific IgE was determined in 390 pollen-allergic patients using the ISAC112 microarray. Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and area under the ROC curve) was calculated for the diagnosis of allergy to pollen from grass (n=49), cypress (n=75), olive tree (n=33), plane tree (n=63), and pellitory of the wall (n=17) and compared with that of the singleplex ImmunoCAP immunoassay. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the ISAC112 microarray ranged from 68.2% for allergy to plane tree pollen to 93.9% for allergy to grass pollen. The specificity was >90%. The AUC for the diagnosis of allergy to plane tree pollen was 0.798, whereas the AUC for the remaining cases was ≥0.876. The accuracy of ISAC112 was higher than that of ImmunoCAP for plane tree pollen and similar for the remaining pollens. The frequency of sensitization to most species-specific allergenic components and profilins varied between the different geographical regions studied. A total of 73% of pollen-allergic patients were sensitized to species-specific components of more than 1 pollen type. CONCLUSIONS: The ISAC112 microarray is an accurate tool for the diagnosis of allergy to pollen from grass, cypress, olive tree, plane tree, and pellitory of the wall. The features of the ISAC112 microarray are similar or superior (in the case of plane tree pollen) to those of ImmunoCAP. This microarray is particularly useful for the etiologic diagnosis of pollinosis in patients sensitized to multiple pollen species whose pollination periods overlap.

Is Microarray Analysis Really Useful and Sufficient to Diagnose Nut Allergy in the Mediterranean Area?

BACKGROUND: Component-based diagnosis on multiplex platforms is widely used in food allergy but its clinical performance has not been evaluated in nut allergy. OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic performance of a commercial protein microarray in the determination of specific IgE (sIgE) in peanut, hazelnut, and walnut allergy. METHODS: sIgE was measured in 36 peanut-allergic, 36 hazelnut-allergic, and 44 walnut-allergic patients by ISAC 112, and subsequently, sIgE against available components was determined by ImmunoCAP in patients with negative ISAC results. ImmunoCAP was also used to measure sIgE to Ara h 9, Cora 8, and Jug r 3 in a subgroup of lipid transfer protein (LTP)-sensitized nut-allergic patients (positive skin prick test to LTP-enriched extract). sIgE levels by ImmunoCAP were compared with ISAC ranges. RESULTS: Most peanut-, hazelnut-, and walnut-allergic patients were sensitized to the corresponding nut LTP (Ara h 9, 66.7%; Cor a 8, 80.5%; Jug r 3, 84% respectively). However, ISAC did not detect sIgE in 33.3% of peanut-allergic patients, 13.9% of hazelnut-allergic patients, or 13.6% of walnut-allergic patients. sIgE determination by ImmunoCAP detected sensitization to Ara h 9, Cor a 8, and Jug r 3 in, respectively, 61.5% of peanut-allergic patients, 60% of hazelnut-allergic patients, and 88.3% of walnut-allergic patients with negative ISAC results. In the subgroup of peach LTP-sensitized patients, Ara h 9 sIgE was detected in more cases by ImmunoCAP than by ISAC (94.4% vs 72.2%, P < .05). Similar rates of Cora 8 and Jug r 3 sensitization were detected by both techniques. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic performance of ISAC was adequate for hazelnut and walnut allergy but not for peanut allergy. sIgE sensitivity against Ara h 9 in ISAC needs to be improved.

Is microarray analysis really useful and sufficient to diagnose nut allergy in the mediterranean area?

Background: Component-based diagnosis on multiplex platforms is widely used in food allergy but its clinical performance has not been evaluated in nut allergy. Objective: To assess the diagnostic performance of a commercial protein microarray in the determination of specific IgE (sIgE) in peanut, hazelnut, and walnut allergy. Methods: sIgE was measured in 36 peanut-allergic, 36 hazelnut-allergic, and 44 walnut-allergic patients by ISAC 112, and subsequently, sIgE against available components was determined by ImmunoCAP in patients with negative ISAC results. ImmunoCAP was also used to measure sIgE to Ara h 9, Cor a 8, and Jug r 3 in a subgroup of lipid transfer protein (LTP)-sensitized nut-allergic patients (positive skin prick test to LTP-enriched extract). sIgE levels by ImmunoCAP were compared with ISAC ranges. Results: Most peanut-, hazelnut-, and walnut-allergic patients were sensitized to the corresponding nut LTP (Ara h 9, 66.7%; Cor a 8, 80.5%; Jug r 3, 84% respectively). However, ISAC did not detect sIgE in 33.3% of peanut-allergic patients, 13.9% of hazelnut-allergic patients, or 13.6% of walnut-allergic patients. sIgE determination by ImmunoCAP detected sensitization to Ara h 9, Cor a 8, and Jug r 3 in, respectively, 61.5% of peanut-allergic patients, 60% of hazelnut-allergic patients, and 88.3% of walnut-allergic patients with negative ISAC results. In the subgroup of peach LTP-sensitized patients, Ara h 9 sIgE was detected in more cases by ImmunoCAP than by ISAC (94.4% vs 72.2%, P<.05). Similar rates of Cor a 8 and Jug r 3 sensitization were detected by both techniques. Conclusions: The diagnostic performance of ISAC was adequate for hazelnut and walnut allergy but not for peanut allergy. sIgE sensitivity against Ara h 9 in ISAC needs to be improved (AU)

Introducción: La utilidad clínica del diagnóstico por componentes no ha sido evaluada en el estudio de la alergia a frutos secos (FS). Objetivo: Evaluar la capacidad diagnóstica de una micromatriz comercial de proteínas alergénicas en la alergia a cacahuete, avellana y nuez. Métodos: Se determinó la sIgE en pacientes alérgicos a FS mediante la micromatriz ISAC 112, e ImmunoCAP en los pacientes con sIgE negativa frente a los componentes de ISAC. Además, se realizó ImmunoCAP frente a Ara h 9, Cor a 8 y Jug r 3 en un subgrupo de pacientes sensibilizados a LTP. La sIgE detectada por ImmunoCAP fue comparada con los rangos de ISAC. Resultados: La mayoría de los alérgicos a cacahuete (66,7%), avellana (80,5%) y nuez (84%) estaba sensibilizados a su LTP. Sin embargo, no se detectó sIgE frente a los componentes de ISAC en el 33,3% de alérgicos a cacahuete, 13,9% de alérgicos a avellana y 13,6% de los alérgicos a nuez. El ImmunoCAP permitió detectar sIgE a Ara h 9 en 61,5%, Cor a 8 en 60% y Jug r 3 en 83,3% de los ISAC negativo. En el subgrupo LTP, ImmunoCAP (94,4%) fue superior a ISAC (72,2%) en la detección de sIgE a Ara h 9 (p<0,05). La sIgE frente a Cor a 8 y Jug r 3 fue detectada de forma similar por ambas técnicas. Conclusiones: La micromatriz ISAC es adecuada para el diagnóstico de alergia a avellana y nuez. La sensibilidad del componente Ara h 9 de ISAC debe ser mejorada (AU)

Clinical performance of commercial ISAC 112 allergen microarray versus noncommercial RIRAAF platform for the diagnosis of plant food and olive pollen allergies

No disponible

Is the ISAC 112 microarray useful in the diagnosis of pollinosis in Spain?

Background: Multiple sensitization is frequent among pollen-allergic patients. The goal of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the ImmunoCAP ISAC 112 (ISAC112) microarray in allergy to pollen from several taxa and its clinical utility in a Spanish population. Methods: Specific IgE was determined in 390 pollen-allergic patients using the ISAC112 microarray. Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and area under the ROC curve) was calculated for the diagnosis of allergy to pollen from grass (n=49), cypress (n=75), olive tree (n=33), plane tree (n=63), and pellitory of the wall (n=17) and compared with that of the singleplex ImmunoCAP immunoassay. Results: The sensitivity of the ISAC112 microarray ranged from 68.2% for allergy to plane tree pollen to 93.9% for allergy to grass pollen. The specificity was >90%. The AUC for the diagnosis of allergy to plane tree pollen was 0.798, whereas the AUC for the remaining cases was ≥0.876. The accuracy of ISAC112 was higher than that of ImmunoCAP for plane tree pollen and similar for the remaining pollens. The frequency of sensitization to most species-specific allergenic components and profilins varied between the different geographical regions studied. A total of 73% of pollen-allergic patients were sensitized to species-specific components of more than 1 pollen type. Conclusions: The ISAC112 microarray is an accurate tool for the diagnosis of allergy to pollen from grass, cypress, olive tree, plane tree, and pellitory of the wall. The features of the ISAC112 microarray are similar or superior (in the case of plane tree pollen) to those of ImmunoCAP. This microarray is particularly useful for the etiologic diagnosis of pollinosis in patients sensitized to multiple pollen species whose pollination periods overlap (AU)

Introducción: La sensibilización a múltiples pólenes es frecuente entre los pacientes alérgicos a polen. El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar la exactitud diagnóstica de la micromatriz ImmunoCAP ISAC 112 (ISAC112) en alergia a polen de diversos taxones y su utilidad clínica en una población española. Métodos: Se determinó IgE específica mediante ISAC112 en 390 pacientes polínicos. Se calculó su exactitud diagnóstica (sensibilidad, especificidad, valores predictivos y área bajo la curva ROC) para el diagnóstico de alergia a polen de gramíneas (n=49), ciprés (n=75), olivo (n=33), plátano de sombra (n=63) y parietaria (n=17) y se comparó con la de ImmunoCAP monocomponente (CAP). Resultados: La sensibilidad de ISAC112 osciló entre 68,2% para alergia a polen de plátano de sombra y 93,9% a polen de gramíneas. La especificidad se situó por encima del 90% en todos los casos. El área bajo la curva (AUC) de la curva ROC para diagnóstico de alergia a polen de plátano fue de 0,798. El resto de AUC fueron ≥ 0,876. La exactitud diagnóstica de ISAC112 fue superior a la de CAP para la alergia a polen de plátano de sombra y similar para el resto de pólenes estudiados. La frecuencia de sensibilización a la mayoría de componentes alergénicos genuinos y a profilinas varió entre las diferentes zonas. El 73 % de los pacientes polínicos estaban sensibilizados a componentes genuinos de más de un tipo polínico. Conclusiones: ISAC112 es una herramienta exacta para el diagnóstico de alergia al polen de gramíneas, ciprés, olivo, plátano de sombra y parietaria, con prestaciones similares o superiores, en el caso de alergia a polen de plátano de sombra, a las de CAP. Es especialmente útil para el diagnóstico etiológico de la polinosis en pacientes con sensibilizaciones a múltiples pólenes con periodos de polinización solapados (AU)

Determination of IgE in the serum of patients with allergic reactions to four species of fish-parasite anisakids.

This study investigates cross-reactions between somatic and metabolic antigens of various anisakids in the serum of patients with allergic processes. Twenty patients with allergic reactions after eating fish were studied using the skin-prick test for sensitivity to four species of anisakids. IgE was also determined, by blotting, in the serum of these patients when confronted with somatic and metabolic antigens of Anisakis simplex s.l. and Hysterothylacium aduncum, and somatic antigens of A. physeteris and H. fabri. The results obtained with both techniques basically agree, the following facts being of particular note: four patients presented specific IgE for A. simplex s.l. and 1 for Hysterothylacium sp. only, eight patients presented cosensitivity for A. simplex s.l. and A. physeteris, two for A. simplex s.l. and Hysterothylacium sp., one for A. physeteris and Hysterothylacium sp., and two for A. simplex s.l., A. physeteris and Hysterothylacium sp. Given the results obtained, it should be considered that other species of fish-parasite anisakids, apart from A. simplex s.l., may be involved in the allergic reactions presented by a large number of patients.

The presence of latex can induce false-positive skin tests in subjects tested with penicillin determinants.

Latex allergens are ubiquitous, and exposure may occur from different sources in the medical environment and in daily life. The observation that subjects with latex allergy were skin test positive to major and minor determinants of penicillins led our group to carry out an investigation to try to explain these findings. A group of 20 subjects with a history of allergy to latex and with positive skin tests for, but good tolerance of, penicillins was studied. The presence of latex contaminants was studied by RAST and RAST inhibition. Sixteen of the subjects were positive to at least one of the penicillin determinants used, and 14 (87%) of these were positive to at least two determinants. Repetition of skin tests using the container without a stopper changed the skin test results to negative in almost all cases, indicating that some trace contaminants had still been present. RAST-inhibition studies showed that in all penicillin determinants there were trace amounts of latex allergens varying between 3 and 0.03 micrograms/ml. These results indicate that skin tests with penicillin in subjects allergic to latex may give false-positive results and lead to such patients being falsely diagnosed as allergic to betalactams when penicillins are stored in containers with rubber stoppers.

Studies of the specificities of IgE antibodies found in sera from subjects with allergic reactions to penicillins.

Penicillins are immunogenic when administered to humans and in some instances they can also be allergenic, inducing specific IgE antibodies. Whilst the major haptenic group, the penicilloyl, is well characterised, less is known about the relative importance of the different parts of the structure for antibody binding and how this can influence the specificity of patients response. In order to investigate this further, sera from subjects who had suffered an IgE-mediated reaction to penicillins were studied using the radioallergosorbent test (RAST) and RAST inhibition. The assays employed reagents related to the penicillins causing the reaction. Using 173 sera, positive RAST results were only found with reagents based on benzyl penicillin (BP) and amoxicillin (AX). Fifty-three positive sera were selected for further studies and categorized into three groups: (A) sera only RAST positive to AX, (B) sera only positive to BP and (C) sera positive to both penicillins. RAST inhibition studies were then carried out using monomeric penicilloyl conjugates and compounds representing parts of the penicilloyl structures of BP and AX. For all three groups, monomeric penicilloyl conjugates were the most efficient inhibitors but there were differences for the other compounds. Group A sera were also inhibited by the side chain amoxicillin, whereas group B sera were poorly inhibited by all other inhibitors. Group C sera showed two patterns of inhibition, both consistent with their more cross-reactive profile.

Nonimmediate reactions to betalactams: prevalence and role of the different penicillins.

In patients treated with penicillins, adverse cutaneous reactions can occur within minutes or may take several days to develop. IgE antibody-mediated reactions are well documented, but other mechanisms may also be involved. In particular, nonimmediate reactions have not been studied extensively, and the purpose of the present work was to establish the incidence of such reactions among a large group of patients and to study the penicillins involved. A total of 380 subjects with a history of a cutaneous reaction following administration of a penicillin antibiotic was included in the study. Skin tests and specific IgE measurements (RAST) were carried out using various penicillins and penicillin-related reagents, and patients were also challenged with various penicillins. In some patients with delayed skin test responses, skin biopsies were carried out. The tests confirmed that 74 subjects (19.4% of total investigated) had suffered a cutaneous reaction to a penicillin derivative, and 29 of these subjects (7.6% of total or 39% of confirmed) showed evidence of having suffered a nonimmediate reaction. The latter group were identified by giving a positive delayed direct challenge, and in 65% of the cases a delayed skin test response was detected. In most cases, these responses were to amino penicillins. Skin biopsies showed a lymphomonocytic cell infiltrate. Nonimmediate reactions to penicillins are a reproducible phenomenon, suggesting that a specific mechanism is responsible. By direct challenge, 93% of responders were positive to amino penicillins (10.3% ampicillin, 82.7% amoxicillin), indicating a major role for these penicillins in nonimmediate reactions.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)