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?

RESUMEN

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)

ABSTRACT

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)