...
首页> 外文期刊>Allergy >A comparative study on basophil activation test, histamine release assay, and passive sensitization histamine release assay in the diagnosis of peanut allergy
【24h】

A comparative study on basophil activation test, histamine release assay, and passive sensitization histamine release assay in the diagnosis of peanut allergy

机译:嗜碱性激活试验,组胺释放测定和被动敏化组胺释放测定对花生过敏诊断的比较研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Abstract Background Allergy can be diagnosed using basophil tests. Several methods measuring basophil activation are available. This study aimed at comparing basophil activation test ( BAT ), histamine release assay ( HR ), and passive sensitization histamine release assay (passive HR ) in the diagnosis of peanut allergy. Methods BAT , HR , and passive HR were performed on 11 peanut‐allergic and 14 nonallergic subjects. Blood was incubated with peanut extract or anti‐IgE and tests were performed as follows: BAT — CD 63 upregulation was assessed by flow cytometry; HR —released histamine was quantified by a glass fiber‐based fluorometric method; passive HR —IgE‐stripped donor basophils were incubated with participants' serum and histamine release was quantified as HR . Results CD sens, a measure of basophil allergen sensitivity, was significantly higher for BAT (80.1±17.4) compared to HR (23.4±10.31) and passive HR (11.1±2.0). BAT , HR , and passive HR had a clinical sensitivity of 100%, 100%, and 82% and specificity of 100%, 100%, and 100%, respectively, when excluding inconclusive results. BAT identified 11 of 11 allergic patients, HR 10, and passive HR 9. Likewise, BAT recognized 12 of 14 nonallergic subjects, HR 10, and passive HR 13. However, the tests' diagnostic performances were not statistically different. Interestingly, nonreleasers in HR but not in BAT had lower basophil count compared to releasers (249 vs 630 counts/min). Conclusion BAT displayed a significantly higher CD sens compared to HR and passive HR . The basophil tests' diagnostic performances were not significantly different. Still, BAT could diagnose subjects with low basophil number in contrast to HR .
机译:摘要可以使用嗜碱性测试诊断出来的背景过敏。有几种测量嗜碱性激活的方法可用。该研究旨在比较嗜碱性激活试验(BAT),组胺释放测定(HR)和被动敏感组胺释放测定(被动人力资源)在花生过敏的诊断中。方法蝙蝠,人力资源和无源HR在11种花生过敏性和14个非实体对象上进行。用花生提取物孵育血液或如下进行抗IgE和试验:通过流式细胞仪评估BAT - CD 63上调;通过基于玻璃纤维的荧光法定量HR -Released组胺;与参与者的血清和组胺释放量孵育被动HR -IgE汽提的供体嗜碱性粒细胞量化为HR。结果CD Sens,蝙蝠(80.1±17.4)与HR(23.4±10.31)和无源HR(11.1±2.0)相比,嗜碱性过敏原敏感性的衡量标准显着高。蝙蝠,人力资源和被动人力资源的临床敏感性为100%,100%和82%,分别在不确定的结果时分别100%,100%和100%的特异性。 BAT鉴定了11个过敏患者,HR 10和被动HR 9中的11个。同样,BAT认可的14个非过敏性受试者,HR 10和被动HR13。然而,测试的诊断表演没有统计学意义。有趣的是,与释放者相比,人力资源单位但不含蝙蝠的非嗜碱性计数(249 Vs 630 / min)。结论与人力资源和无源HR相比,BAT显示出明显更高的CD Sens。嗜碱性检查诊断性能没有显着差异。尽管如此,蝙蝠可以诊断与HR相比的低嗜碱性粒细胞数。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Allergy》 |2018年第1期|共8页
  • 作者单位

    Allergy ClinicCopenhagen University Hospital GentofteCopenhagen Denmark;

    Allergy ClinicCopenhagen University Hospital GentofteCopenhagen Denmark;

    Allergy ClinicCopenhagen University Hospital GentofteCopenhagen Denmark;

    Division of Infection Immunity and RespiratoryThe University of ManchesterManchester UK;

    Departments of Experimental Immunology and of OtorhinolaryngologyUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdam;

    Allergy ClinicCopenhagen University Hospital GentofteCopenhagen Denmark;

    Allergy ClinicCopenhagen University Hospital GentofteCopenhagen Denmark;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 医学免疫学;
  • 关键词

    allergy tests; basophil; food allergy; IgE; peanut;

    机译:过敏测试;嗜碱性粒细胞;食物过敏;IgE;花生;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号