Moneret-Vautrin D A, Kanny G, Frémont S
Department of Internal Medicine, Clinical Immunology and Allergology, University Hospital, Avenue de Lattre de Tassigny-54035, Nancy.
Eur Ann Allergy Clin Immunol. 2003 Apr;35(4):113-9.
Numerous biological tests point to the diagnosis of food sensitization: detection of specific IgEs by Rast techniques, multi-detection assays, immunoblotting, screening of basophil activation (BAT or FAST), assays for leukotriene LTC4 release (CAST), measurement of plasma histamine, serum tryptase, serum ECP, urinary EDN, completed by mannitol-lactulose test evaluating intestinal permeability, assay of fecal IgEs, Rast for specific IgG4. Primary screening for anti-food IgEs by multi-detection assays seeks justification from insufficient clinical data and false positive tests are common in patients sensitized to pollens or latex, on account of in vitro cross reactivities (CR). Multiple CR explain positive Rast to vegetal food allergens in such patients. Biological tests should not be performed as the first line of diagnosis. In vivo sensitisation is assessed by positive prick-tests, demonstrating the bivalence of allergens, as well as the affinity of specific IgEs, two conditions necessary to bridge membrane bound specific IgEs, leading to the release of mediators. Prick-tests are closer to clinical symptoms than biological tests. However, the diagnosis of food allergy is based on standardised oral challenges. Exceptions are high levels of specific IgEs to egg (> 6 kUl/l), peanut (> 15 kUl/l), fish (> 20 kUl/l) and milk (> 32 kUl/l), reaching a 95% predictive positive value. Rast inhibition tests are useful to identify masked allergens in foods. Research developments will have impact on the development of new diagnostic tools: allergen mixes reinforcing a food extract by associated recombinant major allergens, multiple combination of recombinant allergens (chips) or tests with synthetic epitopes aimed a the prediction of recovery. Laboratory tests take place in the decision free for the diagnosis for the food allergy and the follow-up of the levels specific IgEs is a tool to assess outcome and contributes to predict recovery or persistent allergy. Up to now the significance of positive laboratory tests showing the implication of IgEs is at the crossroads of the allergist's and biologist's expertise.
通过放射变应原吸附试验(RAST)技术检测特异性IgE、多检测分析、免疫印迹、嗜碱性粒细胞活化筛查(BAT或FAST)、白三烯LTC4释放检测(CAST)、血浆组胺测量、血清类胰蛋白酶、血清嗜酸性粒细胞阳离子蛋白(ECP)、尿嗜酸性粒细胞衍生神经毒素(EDN)检测,并辅以评估肠道通透性的甘露醇 - 乳果糖试验、粪便IgE检测、特异性IgG4的RAST检测。通过多检测分析对抗食物IgE进行初步筛查,因临床数据不足而缺乏依据,且在对花粉或乳胶致敏的患者中假阳性检测很常见,这是由于体外交叉反应(CR)所致。多种交叉反应解释了此类患者对植物性食物过敏原RAST检测呈阳性的原因。生物学检测不应作为诊断的第一线。通过阳性点刺试验评估体内致敏情况,点刺试验证明了过敏原的双价性以及特异性IgE的亲和力,这是连接膜结合特异性IgE从而导致介质释放的两个必要条件。点刺试验比生物学检测更接近临床症状。然而,食物过敏的诊断基于标准化的口服激发试验。例外情况是对鸡蛋(>6 kU/L)、花生(>15 kU/L)、鱼类(>20 kU/L)和牛奶(>32 kU/L)的特异性IgE水平较高时,其预测阳性值可达95%。RAST抑制试验有助于识别食物中的隐蔽过敏原。研究进展将对新诊断工具的开发产生影响:通过相关重组主要过敏原强化食物提取物的过敏原混合物、重组过敏原的多种组合(芯片)或针对恢复预测的合成表位检测。实验室检测在食物过敏诊断的决策中进行,特异性IgE水平的随访是评估结果的工具,有助于预测恢复或持续性过敏。到目前为止,显示IgE参与的阳性实验室检测的意义处于过敏症专科医生和生物学家专业知识的交叉点上。