Approach to Occupational Contact Dermatitis in an Industrialized Region of Spain

No disponible

Diagnostic capacity of commercial extracts vs prick-by-prick in the study of sensitization to peanut: which technique should we use?

No disponible

Successful desensitization to oxaliplatin after a single initial dose of omalizumab in a patient with elevated IgE levels

No disponible

Heterogeneity in allergy to mollusks: a clinical-immunological study in a population from the North of Spain

Background: Allergy to mollusks has been the focus of fewer studies than allergy to crustaceans. Furthermore, allergy to mollusks is less well characterized. Objectives: To describe the clinical characteristics of mollusk-allergic patients, to identify the responsible allergens, and to assess crossreactivity. Methods: We performed a prospective multicenter study including 45 patients with mollusk allergy, which was diagnosed based on a suggestive clinical history and a positive skin test result with the agent involved. Fractions were identified using SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting. The proteins responsible were subsequently identified using mass spectrometry. ELISA inhibition studies were performed with mollusks, dust mites, and crustaceans. Results: We found that 25 patients (55%) were allergic to cephalopods, 14 (31%) to bivalves, and 11 (24%) to gastropods. Limpet was the third most frequent cause of allergy (15% of cases). In 31 patients (69%), the manifestation was systemic; 10 (22%) exhibited oral allergy syndrome, and 7 (15%) experienced contact urticaria. Most major allergens were found between 27 kDa and 47 kDa. ELISA inhibition assays revealed a high degree of inhibition of cephalopods and bivalves from all the groups of mollusks, mites, and crustaceans. Mass spectrometry identified tropomyosin, actin, and myosin as the major allergens. Conclusions: Cephalopods, especially squid, are the mollusks that most frequently trigger allergic symptoms. The very frequent occurrence of allergy to limpets is striking, given their low consumption in our area. It is worth highlighting the heterogeneity observed, exemplified by the gastropods. Tropomyosin appears to be responsible for the high cross-reactivity found between mollusks, mites, and crustaceans. Three new mollusk allergens were also identified, namely, actin, enolase, and a putative C1q domain-containing protein (AU)

Introducción: La alergia a moluscos ha sido menos estudiada y está peor caracterizada que la alergia a crustáceos. Objetivo: Describir las características clínicas de pacientes alérgicos a moluscos, identificar los alérgenos responsables y estudiar la reactividad cruzada entre ellos. Métodos: Estudio multicéntrico, prospectivo. Se incluyen 45 pacientes con alergia a moluscos, definida como una clínica sugestiva y prueba cutánea positiva con el molusco sospechoso. Se identificaron las bandas alergénicas mediante SDS-PAGE e inmunodetección. Las proteínas responsables se identificaron utilizando espectrometría de masas. Se realizaron ensayos de inhibición de ELISA entre moluscos, ácaros y crustáceos. Resultados: Veinticinco (55%) de los pacientes eran alérgicos a cefalópodos, 14 (31%) a bivalvos y 11 (24%) a gasterópodos. La lapa resultó ser la tercera causa de alergia (15% de los casos). Los síntomas fueron sistémicos en 31 pacientes (69%), diez (22%) tuvieron síndrome de alergia oral y siete (15%) urticaria de contacto. La mayoría de las bandas alergénicas estaban entre 27 y 47 kDa. Los ensayos de inhibición de ELISA mostraron un alto grado de inhibición de cefalópodos y bivalvos por parte de moluscos, ácaros y crustáceos. Mediante espectometría de masas se identificaron tropomiosina, actina y miosina como los alérgenos mayoritarios. Conclusiones: Los moluscos que con más frecuencia provocan reacciones alérgicas son los cefalópodos, especialmente el calamar. Llama la atención la elevada frecuencia de alergia a la lapa, a pesar de su bajo consumo. También hay que resaltar la heterogeneidad observada, por ejemplo en los gasterópodos. La tropomiosina parece ser responsable de la elevada reactividad cruzada encontrada entre moluscos, ácaros y crustáceos. Se han identificado tres nuevos alérgenos en los moluscos: actina, enolasa y putative C1q domain-containing protein (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 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)

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)

Do skin prick test and in vitro techniques diagnose sensitization to peach lipid transfer protein and profilin equally well in allergy to plant food and pollen?

Objetivo: Comparar las pruebas cutáneas prick (PC) con técnicas in vitro (fluoro enzimoinmunoensayo –FEIA- en detección única y múltiple) para detectar sensibilización a profilina y a LTP. Métodos: Se estudiaron retrospectivamente 181 pacientes con alergia a polen y a alimentos vegetales y 61 controles. Se realizaron PC frente a profilina de palmera (Pho d 2) y LTP de melocotón (Pru p 3) y se analizó la IgE específica a Phl p 12 y Pru p 3 por FEIA y por micromatriz de proteínas alergénicas. Resultados: Quince de los 201 sujetos con PC negativa a LTP mostraron ensibilización a este alérgeno mediante IgE específica sérica y en 18 de 41 con PC positivas a LTP no se observó esta sensibilización por otras técnicas. Diecisiete de los 186 sujetos con PC negativa a profilina detectaron IgE específica sérica frente a Phl p 12 y en 30 de los 56 con PC positiva a profilina no se objetivó sensibilización a Phl p 12 en suero. Se observó un acuerdo moderado entre las tres técnicas estudiadas. Conclusiones: La PC frente e a LTP y profilina es un método sensible detectando estas sensibilizaciones y muestra un acuerdo aceptable con las técnicas in vitro, especialmente en los pacientes con negatividad de la PC frente a LTP y a profilina (AU)

Objective: To compare the skin prick test (SPT) with in vitro techniques (single and multiplex fluorescence enzyme-immunoassay [FEIA]) for detecting sensitization to profilin and lipid transfer protein (LTP). Methods: We retrospectively studied 181 patients with pollen and/or plant food allergy and 61 controls. SPT was performed with date palm profilin (Pho d 2) and peach LTP (Pru p 3), and specific IgE (sIgE) to Phl p 12 and Pru p 3 was analyzed using single FEIA and microarray. Results: Fifteen of 201 patients with negative results for LTP in the SPT were sensitized to this allergen in the in vitro tests, and 18 of 41 patients with positive results for LTP in the SPT were not sensitized according to the in vitro tests. Seventeen of 186 patients with negative results for profilin in the SPT were sensitized to Phl p 12 by serum sIgE, and 30 out of 56 patients with positive results for profilin in SPT were not sensitized to Phl p 12 according to the other tests. Moderate agreement was observed between the 3 techniques studied. Conclusions: SPT is a sensitive technique for detecting sensitization to LTP and profilin. Its results are similar to those of in vitro techniques, especially in patients with negative SPT results for peach LTP and palm tree profiling (AU)

In Vitro Production of Ag-Specific IFN-?? in Patients With Delayed Hypersensitivity to Amoxicillin

No disponible

Early Diagnosis of an Allergic Reaction to Cisatracurium

No disponible

The importance of in vitro component-resolved diagnosis in paediatric patients

In recent years, thanks to advances in molecular biology, allergological diagnosis has improved and specific IgE (sIgE) against an allergenic source has been transformed into sIgE against an allergenic protein or glycoprotein. This change, which has resulted in a more precise diagnosis of sensitisation, could explain the different dangers of certain molecular sensitisations and in many cases cross-reactivity phenomena, and could change indications for immunotherapy or clinical management. Here, we present two cases of children where the indication for immunotherapy and management of the disorder changed due to component-resolved diagnosis. However, the clinical history and skin prick tests should complement molecular in vitro diagnosis to improve routine clinical practice

No disponible