Department of Paediatrics, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
State Key Laboratory of Agrobiotechnology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Allergy. 2022 Oct;77(10):3041-3051. doi: 10.1111/all.15370. Epub 2022 May 27.
Clinical management of shrimp allergy is hampered by the lack of accurate tests. Molecular diagnosis has been shown to more accurately reflect the clinical reactivity but the full spectrum of shrimp allergens and their clinical relevance are yet to be established. We therefore sought to comprehend the allergen repertoire of shrimp, investigate and compare the sensitization pattern and diagnostic value of the allergens in allergic subjects of two distinct populations.
Sera were collected from 85 subjects with challenge-proven or doctor-diagnosed shrimp allergy in Hong Kong and Thailand. The IgE-binding proteins of Penaeus monodon were probed by Western blotting and identified by mass spectrometry. Recombinant shrimp allergens were synthesized and analyzed for IgE sensitization by ELISA.
Ten IgE-binding proteins were identified, and a comprehensive panel of 11 recombinant shrimp allergens was generated. The major shrimp allergens among Hong Kong subjects were troponin C (Pen m 6) and glycogen phosphorylase (Pen m 14, 47.1%), tropomyosin (Pen m 1, 41.2%) and sarcoplasmic-calcium binding protein (Pen m 4, 35.3%), while those among Thai subjects were Pen m 1 (68.8%), Pen m 6 (50.0%) and fatty acid-binding protein (Pen m 13, 37.5%). Component-based tests yielded significantly higher area under curve values (0.77-0.96) than shrimp extract-IgE test (0.70-0.75). Yet the best component test differed between populations; Pen m 1-IgE test added diagnostic value only in the Thai cohort, whereas sensitizations to other components were better predictors of shrimp allergy in Hong Kong patients.
Pen m 14 was identified as a novel shrimp allergen predictive of challenge outcome. Molecular diagnosis better predicts shrimp allergy than conventional tests, but the relevant component is population dependent.
虾过敏的临床管理受到缺乏准确测试的阻碍。分子诊断已被证明更能准确反映临床反应性,但虾过敏原的全貌及其临床相关性尚未确定。因此,我们试图了解虾的过敏原谱,调查和比较来自两个不同人群的过敏患者的过敏原致敏模式和诊断价值。
从香港和泰国的 85 名经挑战证实或医生诊断为虾过敏的患者中采集血清。通过 Western blot 探测斑节对虾的 IgE 结合蛋白,并通过质谱鉴定。合成重组虾过敏原,并通过 ELISA 分析 IgE 致敏情况。
鉴定出 10 种 IgE 结合蛋白,并生成了一个全面的 11 种重组虾过敏原面板。香港患者的主要虾过敏原是肌钙蛋白 C(Pen m 6)和糖原磷酸化酶(Pen m 14,47.1%)、肌球蛋白(Pen m 1,41.2%)和肌浆钙结合蛋白(Pen m 4,35.3%),而泰国患者的主要虾过敏原是 Pen m 1(68.8%)、Pen m 6(50.0%)和脂肪酸结合蛋白(Pen m 13,37.5%)。基于成分的测试比虾提取物-IgE 测试(0.70-0.75)产生了显著更高的曲线下面积值(0.77-0.96)。然而,最佳的成分测试在人群之间存在差异;仅在泰国队列中,Pen m 1-IgE 测试增加了诊断价值,而对其他成分的致敏反应是香港患者虾过敏的更好预测指标。
Pen m 14 被鉴定为一种预测挑战结果的新型虾过敏原。分子诊断比传统测试更能预测虾过敏,但相关成分取决于人群。