Influence of profilin on sensitisation profiles determined by cutaneous tests and IgE to major allergens in polysensitised patients. Issue 1 (29th June 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Segura, Nieves; Abos, Teresa; Compaired, José A.; Compés, Esther; Guallar, Isabel; Morales, Manuel; Monzón, Susana; Mozota, José; Muñoz, Pilar; Pola, Jesús; Quintana, Macarena; Rojas, Beatriz; Juan, Sara San; Villa, Felicitas; Zapata, Cristina; Jimeno, Lucía; de la Torre, Fernando
• Is Part Of: Clinical and translational allergy. Volume 6:Issue 1(2016)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2016-06-29
• Subjects: Component‐resolved diagnosis -- Skin prick test -- Profilin -- Polysensitisation; Allergy -- Periodicals; Immunology -- Periodicals; Allergy and Immunology -- Periodicals; Hypersensitivity -- Periodicals; Immune System Phenomena -- Periodicals; 616.97005
• DOI: 10.1186/s13601-016-0114-y
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2045-7022

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Profilin sensitisation is considered a diagnostic confounding factor in areas where patients are exposed to multiple pollens. The aim of this study is to assess pollen sensitisation profiles in adults and children and to evaluate, by means of component‐resolved diagnosis (CRD) and skin prick testing (SPT), which pollens may be considered as risk factors of profilin sensitisation in order to establish the best diagnostic approach in polysensitised patients. Methods: A total of 231 pollen‐allergic patients (adults and children) were included, out of the pollen season, from an area with similar levels of pollen exposure. Allergological diagnosis was performed by SPT and determination of specific IgE (sIgE) to major allergen components (ADVIA‐Centaur™). Patients had not received immunotherapy in the last 5 years and had to reside in the area for 5 consecutive years before entering the study. Results: The relation between sensitisation measured by SPT and by sIgE was studied using a model of cases (patients with +sIgE to a specific allergen) and controls (patients with −sIgE to the same allergen). The outcome, in terms of odds‐ratios (OR), was statistically significant for Olea (Ole e 1) (p = 0.0005), Salsola (Sal k 1) (p = 0.0118) and Platanus (Pla a 1+ 2) (p = 0.0372). While positivity of SPT to most pollens was statistically associated with a risk of profilin sensitisation, by CRD the association was statistically significant only for Ole e 1 (OR 3.5, CI 95 %, 1.6–7.6, p = 0.0014), and Phl p 5 (OR 11.9, CI 95 %, 4.1–35.2, p < 0.001). When analysing this association using a logistic regression model, Phl p 5 was the only allergen associated with the risk of being sensitised to profilin (p = 0.0023). Conclusions: In patients sensitised to profilin, the concordance between SPT and CRD is much lower than in those not sensitised to profilin. CRD is able to provide refined information about which pollens increase the risk of sensitisation to profilin.