TY - JOUR
T1 - Diagnostic evaluation of grass- and birch-allergic patients with oral allergy syndrome
AU - Anhoej, C
AU - Backer, V
AU - Nolte, H
PY - 2001/6
Y1 - 2001/6
N2 - BACKGROUND: Patients with birch and grass allergy often suffer from oral allergy symptoms when ingesting cross-reacting fresh fruits and vegetables. However, fruit and vegetable allergen extracts are often readily degradable or contain clinically irrelevant cross-reacting epitopes, resulting in diagnostic discrepancies when fruit and vegetable allergic reactions are evaluated. The risk of using nonstandardized fresh food extracts for skin testing may also be of concern. The objective was to compare and evaluate the clinical utility of selected recombinant grass and birch cross-reacting food allergens with fresh and commercial melon, hazelnut, and apple extracts.METHODS: Thirty-six grass- and or birch-allergic patients and 17 control subjects consented to participate in the study. All subjects were skin prick tested and had basophil histamine-release tests done with fresh fruits and various extracts of hazelnut, apple, and melon. The diagnosis of oral allergy syndrome was confirmed by oral challenges. In addition, histamine release to recombinant Bet v 1 and Bet v 2, and recombinant Phl p 1 and Phl p 2, Phl p 5 was performed.RESULTS: The skin prick test with fresh hazelnut, apple, and melon showed sensitivities of 0.97, 0.92, and 0.89, respectively. The corresponding specificities were 0.78, 0.72, and 0.82, respectively. In contrast, the histamine-release test with hazelnut, apple, and melon gave sensitivities of 0.87, 0.71, and 1.00, respectively. The corresponding specificities were 0.65, 0.93, and 0.43. The skin prick test showed excellent negative predictive value (> 90%). No added value of recombinant allergen testing was noted. Oral challenge did not result in severe systemic reactions, and no systemic reactions were observed with skin prick tests with fresh fruits.CONCLUSION: The skin prick test showed an almost optimal diagnostic value with a satisfactory sensitivity (> 89%) and excellent negative predictive value with fresh fruits. When the skin prick test with fresh nut and apple cannot be performed, histamine release is a diagnostic alternative. Histamine release with melon showed lack of specificity. This was probably due to extensive IgE cross-reactivity with pollen, since these patients also responded to recombinant Phl p 1 and Bet v 1. Skin testing and challenges with fresh fruits were safe.
AB - BACKGROUND: Patients with birch and grass allergy often suffer from oral allergy symptoms when ingesting cross-reacting fresh fruits and vegetables. However, fruit and vegetable allergen extracts are often readily degradable or contain clinically irrelevant cross-reacting epitopes, resulting in diagnostic discrepancies when fruit and vegetable allergic reactions are evaluated. The risk of using nonstandardized fresh food extracts for skin testing may also be of concern. The objective was to compare and evaluate the clinical utility of selected recombinant grass and birch cross-reacting food allergens with fresh and commercial melon, hazelnut, and apple extracts.METHODS: Thirty-six grass- and or birch-allergic patients and 17 control subjects consented to participate in the study. All subjects were skin prick tested and had basophil histamine-release tests done with fresh fruits and various extracts of hazelnut, apple, and melon. The diagnosis of oral allergy syndrome was confirmed by oral challenges. In addition, histamine release to recombinant Bet v 1 and Bet v 2, and recombinant Phl p 1 and Phl p 2, Phl p 5 was performed.RESULTS: The skin prick test with fresh hazelnut, apple, and melon showed sensitivities of 0.97, 0.92, and 0.89, respectively. The corresponding specificities were 0.78, 0.72, and 0.82, respectively. In contrast, the histamine-release test with hazelnut, apple, and melon gave sensitivities of 0.87, 0.71, and 1.00, respectively. The corresponding specificities were 0.65, 0.93, and 0.43. The skin prick test showed excellent negative predictive value (> 90%). No added value of recombinant allergen testing was noted. Oral challenge did not result in severe systemic reactions, and no systemic reactions were observed with skin prick tests with fresh fruits.CONCLUSION: The skin prick test showed an almost optimal diagnostic value with a satisfactory sensitivity (> 89%) and excellent negative predictive value with fresh fruits. When the skin prick test with fresh nut and apple cannot be performed, histamine release is a diagnostic alternative. Histamine release with melon showed lack of specificity. This was probably due to extensive IgE cross-reactivity with pollen, since these patients also responded to recombinant Phl p 1 and Bet v 1. Skin testing and challenges with fresh fruits were safe.
KW - Adult
KW - Allergens
KW - Antigens, Plant
KW - Contractile Proteins
KW - Cucurbitaceae/adverse effects
KW - Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures
KW - Female
KW - Food Hypersensitivity/diagnosis
KW - Humans
KW - Male
KW - Microfilament Proteins
KW - Middle Aged
KW - Nuts/adverse effects
KW - Plant Proteins
KW - Poaceae/adverse effects
KW - Pollen/adverse effects
KW - Predictive Value of Tests
KW - Profilins
KW - Respiratory Hypersensitivity/diagnosis
KW - Rosales/adverse effects
KW - Sensitivity and Specificity
KW - Skin Tests/methods
KW - Syndrome
U2 - 10.1034/j.1398-9995.2001.056006548.x
DO - 10.1034/j.1398-9995.2001.056006548.x
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 11421902
SN - 0105-4538
VL - 56
SP - 548
EP - 552
JO - Allergy
JF - Allergy
IS - 6
ER -