The extract, the molecular allergen or both for the in vitro diagnosis of peach and peanut sensitization?

INTRODUCTION: Identifying the target molecule in food allergies, helps to assess the risk of anaphylaxis in a patient. Lipid Transfer Protein is the most frequent cause of food allergies in the Mediterranean area. The diagnosis based on allergenic extracts, suffers from a high variability in the results because some important allergenic molecules are lacking. This study was disegned to assess whether Pru p 3 and Ara h 9 molecules are quantitative and qualitative enough present in their whole allergenic extracts. METHODS: 943 patients with a clinical history of suspected peach and/or peanut food allergies were recruited and underwent measurement of a specific serum IgE (ImmunoCAP system (Thermofisher/Phadia Diagnostics, Uppsala, Sweden) to the following allergens and molecules: peach (f95) and/or peanut (f13), Pru p 3 (f420), Pru p 1 (f419), Pru p 4 (f421), Ara h 1 (f422), Ara h 2 (f423) Ara h 3 (f424) and Ara h 9 (f427). RESULTS: Out of the 943 patients included in this study, 122 were positive to sIgE to peanut extract. At a cut-off point of 0.35 kIU/L, 62 patients were positive to sIgE to Ara h 9 but negative to peanut extract. Increasing the cut-off point of Ara h 9 at 10 kIU/L, 15 patients were only positive to sIgE to Ara h 9. 244 out of the 943 patients were positive to sIgE to peach extract. At a cut-off point of 0.35 kIU/L, 27 patients were negative to sIgE to Pru p 3 and positive to sIgE to peach extract, whilst 11 patients were peach extract sIgE positive and sIgE negative to Pru p 1, Pru p 3 and Pru p 4. Only 12 patients resulted positive to Pru p1 and/or Pru p 4. CONCLUSION: Our data strongly suggests to include the measurement of sIgE to Ara h 9 into the diagnostic algorithm of peanut sensitization. 4.5% of the sicilian population suspected of peach sensitization were positive to peach extract and negative to all the available molecules.

Allergen component specific ige measurement with the Immulite™ 2000 system: diagnostic accuracy and intermethod comparison.

BACKGROUND: The identification of the allergenic molecules, associated to the advances in the field of recombinant allergens, led to the development of a new concept in allergy diagnosis called component-resolved diagnosis. The aim of our study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of different allergen components using the full automatic singleplex quantitative platform Immulite™ 2000. METHODS: One hundred ninety-five allergic outpatients (35 to olive pollen, 35 to birch pollen, 35 to profilin, 35 to house dust mites, 35 to peach, and 20 to shrimp) and 20 negative controls were enrolled for the study. Bet v 1, Bet v 2, Ole e 1, Der p 1, Der p 2, Der f 1, Der f 2, Pru p 3, tropomyosin were tested both with Immulite™ 2000 and ImmunoCAP™ (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Uppsala, Sweden). RESULTS: Sensitivity of allergen-specific Immunoglobulin E (sIgE) to Ole e 1, Bet v 1, Der p 1, Der p 2, Der f 1, Der f 2, Pen m 1, and Pru p 3 with Immulite™ 2000 was 100%, 100%, 77.1%, 94.3%, 71.4%, 94%, 75%, and 97.1%, respectively, and the specificity was 100% for all the allergens. The overall agreement between Immulite™ 2000 and ImmunoCAP™ (Thermo Fisher Scientific) platforms was 98.6% (Cohen's kappa = 0.979; confidence interval [CI] 95%: 0.960-0.997). From moderate to strong, positive linear correlations between the assays (r(2) from 0.322 to 0.860, and Spearman's rho from 0.824 to 0.971) were showed. CONCLUSIONS: A high diagnostic accuracy of the sIgE to allergen components measurement with Immulite™ 2000 and a high agreement with ImmunoCAP™ platforms were shown in this study.

Diagnostic efficacy of the ELISA test for the detection of deamidated anti-gliadin peptide antibodies in the diagnosis and monitoring of celiac disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We evaluated the diagnostic performance of an ELISA test for anti-gliadin IgA and IgG antibodies, which uses synthetic deamidated gliadin peptides (anti-gliadin antibodies, AGAs) as coating; the results were compared with a test that uses extracted gliadin (AGAe). METHODS: The study was conducted on the sera of 144 patients suffering from celiac disease (CD), including 20 patients with IgA deficiency and 9 who were following a gluten-free diet (GFD), and 129 controls. RESULTS: In the 115 CD patients (without IgA deficiency), the sensitivity of AGAe IgA and IgG was 32.2 and 60.9%, whereas that of AGAs IgA and IgG was 59.1 and 72.2%. The specificity for AGAe IgA and IgG, and AGAs IgA and IgG was 93.8 and 89.9%, and 96.9% and 99.2%, respectively. Of the 20 patients with CD and IgA deficiency, 7 tested positive for AGAe IgG and 14 for AGAs IgG. The test using deamidated gliadin peptides performed better in terms of sensitivity and specificity than the AGA tests with extracted antigen. CONCLUSIONS: The very high specificity of the AGAs IgG test (99.2%) also suggests that patients who test positive with this assay require a thorough followup, even if the anti-tissue transglutaminase antibodies (anti-tTG) and anti-endomysial autoantibodies (EMA) assays are negative.

[Systemic lupus erythematosus between clinical practice and the laboratory: state of the art and new findings on anti-DNA autoantibodies]. / Il lupus eritematoso sistemico tra clinica e laboratorio: stato dell'arte e nuove acquisizioni sugli autoanticorpi anti DNA.

Identification of autoantibodies directed against nuclear antigens is a very important finding in the assessment of autoimmune rheumatic diseases. In particular, the anti-DNA autoantibodies have assumed a fundamental importance, both speculative and clinical, in the study of the systemic lupus erythemathous. The aim of the present review is to focalize on anti-DNA the mechanisms of both induction and production of anti-DNA autoantibodies, pathophysiologic and diagnostic and clinical aspects. For this purpose, forty years of studies on this topic have been reviewed. Aspects on different conformational shapes of double-stranded DNA have been discussed such as related pathogenetic and diagnostic ones. Finally, the review has dealt with experimental therapies, focusing on both animal models and the most recent clinical trials according to Evidence Based Medicine.