两种不同检测方法的比较及屋尘螨过敏中过敏原成分的预测价值

Comparison of two different assays and the predictive value of allergen components in house dust mite allergy.

作者信息

Schulze Johannes, Leberkuehne Lisanne, Salzmann-Manrique Emilia, Schubert Ralf, Zielen Stefan, Rosewich Martin

机构信息

Department of Allergy, Pulmonology & Cystic Fibrosis, Children's Hospital, Goethe University, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

Department of Ophthalmology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

Immunotherapy. 2017 Nov;9(15):1253-1262. doi: 10.2217/imt-2017-0084.

DOI:10.2217/imt-2017-0084

PMID:29130795

Abstract

AIM

In house dust mite (HDM) allergy diagnostics, the IMMULITE, ImmunoCAP and assays for allergen components (nDer p 1 and rDer p 2) are available.

METHODS

Serum sIgE levels were compared and the predictive values for the detection of an early asthmatic response (EAR) were calculated with receiver operating characteristics and a log-logistic regression model.

RESULTS

sIgE levels of IMMULITE and ImmunoCAP were similar (Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus [D. pter.] 47.3 ± 35.7 and 42.9 ± 34.4 kU.l; p = 0.23). ImmunoCAP slgEs exhibited similar accuracy in detecting an EAR, area under the curves (AUCs): D. pter. (0.76); Dermatophagoides farinae (0.79); nDer p 1 (0.69); and rDer p 2 (0.72). At low sIgE concentrations (3.5 kU.l), rDer p 2 was more specific and better predicted an EAR (probability rDer p 2: 62%; D. pter.: 19%).

摘要

目的

在室内尘螨（HDM）过敏诊断中，可使用免疫发光分析仪（IMMULITE）、免疫化学发光法（ImmunoCAP）以及变应原成分检测法（nDer p 1和rDer p 2）。

方法

比较血清特异性免疫球蛋白E（sIgE）水平，并通过受试者工作特征曲线和对数逻辑回归模型计算检测早期哮喘反应（EAR）的预测值。

结果

免疫发光分析仪和免疫化学发光法的sIgE水平相似（屋尘螨[D. pter.]分别为47.3±35.7和42.9±34.4 kU/l；p = 0.23）。免疫化学发光法的sIgE在检测EAR方面表现出相似的准确性，曲线下面积（AUC）：屋尘螨（0.76）；粉尘螨（0.79）；nDer p 1（0.69）；rDer p 2（0.72）。在低sIgE浓度（3.5 kU/l）时，rDer p 2更具特异性，对EAR的预测更好（rDer p 2概率：62%；屋尘螨：19%）。