Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology · 2014
Concomitant sensitization to ragweed and mugwort pollen: who is who in clinical allergy?
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Asero Riccardo, Bellotto Emanuele, Ghiani Alessandra, Aina Roberta, Villalta Danilo, Citterio Sandra
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In many areas of Europe, double sensitization to ragweed and mugwort is common, and because of the overlapping flowering periods of the 2 plants, it is not possible to diagnose the primary sensitizing allergen source and hence to determine the proper immunotherapy.
OBJECTIVES: To elucidate whether double-sensitized patients are cosensitized or cross-sensitized and, in the latter case, to define the primary sensitizer.
METHODS: Serum samples from 34 patients with late summer respiratory allergy underwent skin prick testing with whole ragweed, and mugwort extracts were analyzed for their reactivity to recombinant Art v 1 and Amb a 1 by ImmunoCAP and then to Amb a 1, Art v 6, and Art v 1 isoforms by a proteomic approach. In double reactors, the primary sensitizing sources were detected by inhibition experiments.
RESULTS: Serum samples from patients monosensitized to ragweed contained IgE to epitopes specific of all Amb a 1 isoforms. In contrast, serum samples from double reactors found to be primarily sensitized to mugwort reacted to Art v 1 and Art v 6 and cross-reacted to a few Amb a 1 isoforms. Finally, serum samples from double reactors found to be primarily sensitized to ragweed contained IgE reacting to all Amb a 1 isoforms, part of which cross-reacted to Art v 6. We did not find cosensitized patients.
CONCLUSION: This study found that Art v 6 plays an important role in mugwort allergy and that the cross-reactivity between Art v 6 and Amb a 1 is frequent, bidirectional, and clinically relevant in the area of Milan.
OBJECTIVES: To elucidate whether double-sensitized patients are cosensitized or cross-sensitized and, in the latter case, to define the primary sensitizer.
METHODS: Serum samples from 34 patients with late summer respiratory allergy underwent skin prick testing with whole ragweed, and mugwort extracts were analyzed for their reactivity to recombinant Art v 1 and Amb a 1 by ImmunoCAP and then to Amb a 1, Art v 6, and Art v 1 isoforms by a proteomic approach. In double reactors, the primary sensitizing sources were detected by inhibition experiments.
RESULTS: Serum samples from patients monosensitized to ragweed contained IgE to epitopes specific of all Amb a 1 isoforms. In contrast, serum samples from double reactors found to be primarily sensitized to mugwort reacted to Art v 1 and Art v 6 and cross-reacted to a few Amb a 1 isoforms. Finally, serum samples from double reactors found to be primarily sensitized to ragweed contained IgE reacting to all Amb a 1 isoforms, part of which cross-reacted to Art v 6. We did not find cosensitized patients.
CONCLUSION: This study found that Art v 6 plays an important role in mugwort allergy and that the cross-reactivity between Art v 6 and Amb a 1 is frequent, bidirectional, and clinically relevant in the area of Milan.