Premium
Comparison of fiberglass‐based histamine assay with a conventional automated fluorometric histamine assay, case history, skin prick test, and specific serum IgE in patients with milk and egg allergic reactions
Author(s) -
KleineTebbe J.,
Werfel S.,
Roedsgaard D.,
Nolte H.,
Skov P. S.,
Wahn U.,
Kunkel G.
Publication year - 1993
Publication title -
allergy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.363
H-Index - 173
eISSN - 1398-9995
pISSN - 0105-4538
DOI - 10.1111/j.1398-9995.1993.tb02174.x
Subject(s) - histamine , autoanalyzer , immunoglobulin e , allergen , basophil , immunology , allergy , chemistry , medicine , antibody
A microfiberglass‐based histamine assay (HR M ) was compared with an automated flourometric histamine assay (HR A ). Twenty‐four with and 24 without a case history (CH) of milk and/or egg allergy were tested by HR M and HR A , skin prick test (SPT), and specific serum IgE (RAST). Six different concentrations of milk, egg, and anti‐IgE to stimulate washed leukocytes (250 μ for HR A and whole blood samples (25 μ for HR M ) in parallel. When we compared scores representing basophil senditivity, correlation coefficients (r s ) were positive (r( anti‐IgE ))=0.88, r( egg ) = 0.95, r( milk ) = 0.88, P< 0.001), but no significant correlation were found after found after exclusion of the negatives in both tests. In some individual dose‐response curves, the scores obtained by HR M were shifted to higher allergen and anti‐IgE concentrations. A high degree of concordance was found in positive and negative responses between the two: anti‐IgE 91%, egg 92%, milk 86%. Finally, we found a good concordance between, on one other, CH, SPT, and RAST (HR M vs. CH/SPT/RAST) 92/82/82%; milk 89/74/67%. We conclude that HR M is in good qualitative, but poor quantitative, agreement with the autoanalyzer‐based fluorometric histamine assay.