J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol. 2015;25(4):283-7.
To compare the skin prick test (SPT) with in vitro techniques (single and multiplex fluorescence enzyme-immunoassay [FEIA]) for detecting sensitization to profilin and lipid transfer protein (LTP).
We retrospectively studied 181 patients with pollen and/or plant food allergy and 61 controls. SPT was performed with date palm profilin (Pho d 2) and peach LTP (Pru p 3), and specific IgE (sIgE) to Phl p 12 and Pru p 3 was analyzed using single FEIA and microarray.
Fifteen of 201 patients with negative results for LTP in the SPT were sensitized to this allergen in the in vitro tests, and 18 of 41 patients with positive results for LTP in the SPT were not sensitized according to the in vitro tests. Seventeen of 186 patients with negative results for profilin in the SPT were sensitized to Phl p 12 by serum sIgE, and 30 out of 56 patients with positive results for profilin in SPT were not sensitized to Phl p 12 according to the other tests. Moderate agreement was observed between the 3 techniques studied.
SPT is a sensitive technique for detecting sensitization to LTP and profilin. Its results are similar to those of in vitro techniques, especially in patients with negative SPT results for peach LTP and palm tree profilin.
比较皮肤点刺试验（SPT）与体外技术（单和多重荧光酶免疫分析 [FEIA]）检测原肌球蛋白和脂转移蛋白（LTP）致敏的情况。
我们回顾性研究了 181 例花粉和/或植物食物过敏患者和 61 例对照者。使用 date palm profilin（Pho d 2）和 peach LTP（Pru p 3）进行 SPT，并用单 FEIA 和微阵列分析 Phl p 12 和 Pru p 3 的特异性 IgE（sIgE）。
201 例 LTP SPT 结果阴性的患者中，有 15 例在体外试验中对该过敏原呈致敏状态，而 41 例 LTP SPT 结果阳性的患者中，有 18 例根据体外试验未呈致敏状态。186 例 SPT 原肌球蛋白结果阴性的患者中有 17 例血清 sIgE 对 Phl p 12 呈致敏状态，而 56 例 SPT 原肌球蛋白结果阳性的患者中有 30 例根据其他试验未对 Phl p 12 呈致敏状态。研究的 3 种技术之间存在中度一致性。
SPT 是一种检测 LTP 和原肌球蛋白致敏的敏感技术。其结果与体外技术相似，尤其是在桃 LTP 和棕榈树原肌球蛋白 SPT 结果阴性的患者中。
