IgE-epitope profiling can accurately diagnose clinical peanut allergy.
We sought to determine whether sequential (linear) epitope-specific IgE (ses-IgE) profiling can provide probabilities of tolerating discrete doses of peanut protein in allergic subjects undergoing double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges utilizing PRACTALL dosing.
Sixty four ses-IgE antibodies were quantified in blood samples using a bead-based epitope assay. A pair of ses-IgEs that predicts Cumulative Tolerated Dose (CTD) was determined using regression in 75 subjects from the discovery cohort. This epitope-based predictor was validated on 331 subjects from five independent cohorts (ages 4-25 years). Subjects were grouped based on their predicted values and probabilities of reactions at each CTD threshold were calculated.
In discovery, an algorithm using two ses-IgE antibodies was correlated with CTDs (rho = 0.61, p < .05); this correlation was 0.51 (p < .05) in validation. Using the ses-IgE-based predictor, subjects were assigned into \"high,\" \"moderate,\" or \"low\" dose-reactivity groups. On average, subjects in the \"high\" group were four times more likely to tolerate a specific dose, compared with the \"low\" group. For example, predicted probabilities of tolerating 4, 14, 44, and 144 or 444 mg in the \"low\" group were 92%, 77%, 53%, 29%, and 10% compared with 98%, 95%, 94%, 88%, and 73% in the \"high\" group.
Accurate predictions of food challenge thresholds are complex due to factors including limited responder sample sizes at each dose and variations in study-specific challenge protocols. Despite these limitations, an epitope-based predictor was able to accurately identify CTDs and may provide a useful surrogate for peanut challenges.

Clinical management of shrimp allergy is hampered by the lack of accurate tests. Molecular diagnosis has been shown to more accurately reflect the clinical reactivity but the full spectrum of shrimp allergens and their clinical relevance are yet to be established. We therefore sought to comprehend the allergen repertoire of shrimp, investigate and compare the sensitization pattern and diagnostic value of the allergens in allergic subjects of two distinct populations.
Sera were collected from 85 subjects with challenge-proven or doctor-diagnosed shrimp allergy in Hong Kong and Thailand. The IgE-binding proteins of Penaeus monodon were probed by Western blotting and identified by mass spectrometry. Recombinant shrimp allergens were synthesized and analyzed for IgE sensitization by ELISA.
Ten IgE-binding proteins were identified, and a comprehensive panel of 11 recombinant shrimp allergens was generated. The major shrimp allergens among Hong Kong subjects were troponin C (Pen m 6) and glycogen phosphorylase (Pen m 14, 47.1%), tropomyosin (Pen m 1, 41.2%) and sarcoplasmic-calcium binding protein (Pen m 4, 35.3%), while those among Thai subjects were Pen m 1 (68.8%), Pen m 6 (50.0%) and fatty acid-binding protein (Pen m 13, 37.5%). Component-based tests yielded significantly higher area under curve values (0.77-0.96) than shrimp extract-IgE test (0.70-0.75). Yet the best component test differed between populations; Pen m 1-IgE test added diagnostic value only in the Thai cohort, whereas sensitizations to other components were better predictors of shrimp allergy in Hong Kong patients.
Pen m 14 was identified as a novel shrimp allergen predictive of challenge outcome. Molecular diagnosis better predicts shrimp allergy than conventional tests, but the relevant component is population dependent.

The diagnosis of shellfish allergy currently relies on patient history, skin prick test (SPT), and serum specific IgE (sIgE) quantification. These methods lack sufficient diagnostic accuracy, whereas the gold standard of oral food challenges is risky and burdensome. Markers of reactivity and severity of allergic reactions to shellfish will improve clinical care of these patients.
This study compared the diagnostic performance of SPT, sIgE, basophil activation test (BAT), and IgE crosslinking-induced luciferase expression (EXiLE) test for shrimp allergy.
Thirty-five subjects with documented history of shrimp allergic reactions were recruited and grouped according to results of double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). In addition to routine diagnostics, BAT (Flow CAST) and EXiLE test with shrimp extract and tropomyosin were performed.
Of 35 subjects, 15 were shrimp allergic with pruritus, urticaria, and itchy mouth on DBPCFC, whereas 20 were tolerant to shrimp. Tropomyosin only accounted for 53.3% of sensitization among subjects with challenge-proven shrimp allergy. BAT using shrimp extract as stimulant showed the highest area under curve value (0.88), Youden Index (0.81), likelihood ratio (14.73), odds ratio (104), and variable importance (4.27) when compared with other assays and tropomyosin diagnosis. Results of BAT significantly correlated with those of EXiLE (r = 0.664, P < .0001).
BAT is a more accurate diagnostic marker for shrimp allergy than SPT and shrimp sIgE, whereas the EXiLE test based on an IgE crosslinking assay is a good alternative to BAT. Tropomyosin may not be the most important shrimp allergen in Chinese, which warrants further investigation to search for other major allergens and diagnostic markers.

暂无摘要。

Seafood allergy is a hypersensitive disorder with increasing prevalence worldwide. Effective and accurate diagnostic workup for seafood allergy is essential for clinicians and patients. Parvalbumin and tropomyosin are the most common fish and shellfish allergens, respectively. The diagnosis of seafood allergies is complicated by cross-reactivity among fish allergens and between shellfish allergens and other arthropods. Current clinical diagnosis of seafood allergy is a complex algorithm that includes clinical assessment, skin prick test, specific IgE measurement, and oral food challenges. Emerging diagnostic strategies, such as component-resolved diagnosis (CRD), which uses single allergenic components for assessment of epitope specific IgE, can provide critical information in predicting individualized sensitization patterns and risk of severe allergic reactions. Further understanding of the molecular identities and characteristics of seafood allergens can advance the development of CRD and lead to more precise diagnosis and improved clinical management of seafood allergies.

Tree nuts as a group cause a significant number of fatal anaphylactic reactions to foods. Walnuts (Juglans spp.) are one of the leading causes of allergic reactions to tree nuts in the U.S. and Japan. The purpose of this study was to purify and characterize potential food allergens from black walnut. Here, we report the isolation of the black walnuts allergen Jug n 4 (an 11S globulin) by ammonium sulfate precipitation, hydrophobic interaction, and size exclusion chromatography. Reducing SDS-PAGE analysis indicated that purified Jug n 4 consists of three major bands. N-Terminal sequencing data of these bands indicated that they were the results of a post-transcriptional protease cleavage of the mature protein at a site that consists of a known conserved protease recognition motif, NGXEET. Western blot experiments revealed that 32% of the sera from 25 patients with double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical walnut allergy contained IgE antibodies that recognized Jug n 4, indicating that it is a walnut allergen. Identifying this and additional allergens may facilitate the understanding of the allergenicity of seed storage proteins in tree nuts and their cross-reactivity.

BACKGROUND: Multicentre trials investigating food allergies by double blind placebo controlled food challenges (DBPCFC) need standardized procedures, challenge meals and evaluation criteria. We aimed at developing a standardized approach for identifying patients with birch related soy allergy by means of DBPCFC to soy, including determination of threshold levels, in a multicentre setting.
METHODS: Microbiologically stable soy challenge meals were composed of protein isolate with consistent Gly m 4 levels. Patients sensitized to main birch allergen Bet v 1 and concomitant sensitization to its soy homologue Gly m 4 underwent DBPCFC. Outcome was defined according to presence and/or absence of ten objective signs and intensity of eight subjective symptoms as measured by visual analogue scale (VAS).
RESULTS: 138 adult subjects (63.8% female, mean age 38 years) underwent DBPCFC. Challenge meals and defined evaluation criteria showed good applicability in all centres involved. 45.7% presented with objective signs and 65.2% with subjective symptoms at soy challenge. Placebo challenge meals elicited non-cardiovascular objective signs in 11.6%. In 82 (59.4%) subjects DBPCFC was judged as positive. 70.7% of DPBCFC+ showed objective signs and 85.4% subjective symptoms at soy challenge. Subjective symptoms to soy challenge meal in DBPCFC+ subjects started at significantly lower dose levels than objective signs (p < 0.001). Median cumulative eliciting doses for first objective signs in DBPCFC+ subjects were 4.7 g [0.7-24.7] and 0.7 g [0.2-4.7] total soy protein for first subjective symptoms (p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: We present the hitherto largest group of adults with Bet v 1 and Gly m 4 sensitization being investigated by DBPCFC. In this type of food allergy evaluation of DBPCFC outcome should not only include monitoring of objective signs but also scoring of subjective symptoms. Our data may contribute to standardize DBPCFC in pollen-related food allergy in multicentre settings.
BACKGROUND: EudraCT: 2009-011737-27.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether food allergy (FA) in an unselected population is comparable to those from an outpatient clinic population.
OBJECTIVE: To discover if FA in a random sample from the Dutch community is comparable to that of outpatients.
METHODS: This study was part of the Europrevall-project. A random sample of 6600 adults received a questionnaire. Those with symptoms to one of 24 defined priority foods were tested for sIgE. Participants with a positive case history and elevated sIgE were evaluated by double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). Outpatients with a suspicion of FA were evaluated by questionnaire, sIgE and DBPCFC.
RESULTS: In the community, severe symptoms were reported less often than in outpatients (39.3% vs. 54.3%). Participants in the community were less commonly sensitized to any of the foods. When selecting only those with a probable FA (i.e. symptoms of priority food and elevation of sIgE to the respective food), no major differences were observed with respect to severity, causative foods, sensitization and DBPCFC between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In the Netherlands, there are large differences in self-reported FA between community and outpatients. However, Dutch community and outpatients with a probable FA do not differ with respect to severity, causative foods, sensitization and DBPCFC-outcome.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of shellfish allergy remains a challenge for clinicians. Several shellfish allergens have been characterized and their IgE epitopes identified. However, the clinical relevance of this sensitization is still not clear.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify allergens and epitopes associated with clinical reactivity to shrimp.
METHODS: Shrimp-sensitized subjects were recruited and grouped based on the history of shrimp-allergic reactions and challenge outcome. IgE reactivity to recombinant crustacean allergens, and IgE and IgG4 reactivity to peptides were determined. Subjects sensitized to dust mites and/or cockroach without shrimp sensitization or reported allergic reactions, as well as nonatopic individuals, were used as controls.
RESULTS: A total of 86 subjects were recruited with a skin prick test to shrimp; 74 reported shrimp-allergic reactions, 58 were allergic (38 positive double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge and 20 recent anaphylaxis), and 16 were tolerant. All subjects without a history of reactions had negative challenges. The individuals with a positive challenge more frequently recognized tropomyosin and sarcoplasmic calcium-binding proteins than those found tolerant by the challenge. Especially a sarcoplasmic-calcium-binding-protein positive test is very likely to result in a positive challenge, though the frequency of recognition is low. Subjects with dust mite and/or cockroach allergy not sensitized to shrimp recognized arginine kinase and hemocyanin. Several epitopes of these allergens may be important in predicting clinical reactivity.
CONCLUSIONS: Tropomyosin and sarcoplasmic-calcium-binding-protein sensitization is associated with clinical reactivity to shrimp. Myosin light chain testing may help in the diagnosis of clinical reactivity. Arginine kinase and hemocyanin appear to be cross-reacting allergens between shrimp and arthropods. Detection of IgE to these allergens and some of their epitopes may be better diagnostic tools in the routine workup of shrimp allergy.

BACKGROUND: A negative double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) should normally be followed by reintroduction of the food. However, reintroduction fails in a subset of children. The observed reintroduction problems could be due to refusal of the food that long has been avoided, to other behavioural/psychological factors or to false negative DBPCFC outcome. This study analyses the frequency, causes and risk factors for reintroduction failure in children after negative peanut DBPCFC.
METHODS: A retrospective study of children with a negative DBPCFC for peanut was performed. During follow-up after DBPCFC, parents were systematically interviewed about the current diet, symptoms and problems during reintroduction, and reactions to peanut after the reintroduction period. Successful reintroduction was defined as eating peanut or products containing peanut as ingredient on a regular basis.
RESULTS: Follow-up data were obtained in 103 children with a negative peanut challenge. In 70 (68%) children, reintroduction was successful (54 children tolerated peanut, 16 children tolerated peanut as ingredient). Reintroduction failed in 33 (32%) children. Food refusal (45%) and peanut-related symptoms (33%) were the most reported reasons. Risk factors for reintroduction failure were an elimination diet for more than three other foods (p = 0.019), a long elimination diet for peanut (p = 0.048) and peanut-related symptoms at home (p = 0.002).
CONCLUSIONS: Reintroduction failure is a common problem in children after negative peanut challenge. To guide reintroduction and identify potential peanut-related symptoms at home, careful follow-up after negative DBPCFC is advised. When symptoms occur or persist, food challenge outcome needs to be reconsidered.