Cargando…
Nasal Provocation Test with Cat and Dog Extracts: Results according to Molecular Components
BACKGROUND: IgE sensitization (atopy) to pets is commonly evaluated using pet dander extracts. However, the diagnosis by components seems to be more adequate to evaluate the clinical relevance (allergy) of sIgE sensitization. OBJECTIVE: To study the association between IgE sensitization to pet aller...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7001676/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32047667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/6365314 |
_version_ | 1783494287895298048 |
---|---|
author | Sánchez, Andres Cardona, Ricardo Munera, Marlon Calvo, Victor Tejada-Giraldo, Manuela Sánchez, Jorge |
author_facet | Sánchez, Andres Cardona, Ricardo Munera, Marlon Calvo, Victor Tejada-Giraldo, Manuela Sánchez, Jorge |
author_sort | Sánchez, Andres |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: IgE sensitization (atopy) to pets is commonly evaluated using pet dander extracts. However, the diagnosis by components seems to be more adequate to evaluate the clinical relevance (allergy) of sIgE sensitization. OBJECTIVE: To study the association between IgE sensitization to pet allergen components and clinical symptoms. Methodology. Dander extracts and sIgE levels to pet components (Can f 1, Can f 2, Can f 3, Can f 5, Fel d 1, Fel 2, and Fel 4) were measured in a rhinitis group (n = 101) and a control group (n = 101) and a control group ( RESULTS: Dog (34.6% vs. 23.5%) and cat dander (26.7% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.05) IgE sensitization was frequent among rhinitis and no-rhinitis subjects, and it was similar to dog (29.7% vs. 20.5%) and cat (18.8% vs. 8.8%) components. Polysensitization for dog (3.1, 95% CI: 1.5 to 6.1, p = 0.05) IgE sensitization was frequent among rhinitis and no-rhinitis subjects, and it was similar to dog (29.7% vs. 20.5%) and cat (18.8% vs. 8.8%) components. Polysensitization for dog (3.1, 95% CI: 1.5 to 6.1, p = 0.05) IgE sensitization was frequent among rhinitis and no-rhinitis subjects, and it was similar to dog (29.7% vs. 20.5%) and cat (18.8% vs. 8.8%) components. Polysensitization for dog (3.1, 95% CI: 1.5 to 6.1, CONCLUSIONS: Sensitization to pet dander extract identifies atopic patients, but its utility to predict clinical relevance is poor. Allergenic components could help to define the clinical relevance of sensitization to furry animals and could reduce the need for provocation test. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7001676 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Hindawi |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70016762020-02-11 Nasal Provocation Test with Cat and Dog Extracts: Results according to Molecular Components Sánchez, Andres Cardona, Ricardo Munera, Marlon Calvo, Victor Tejada-Giraldo, Manuela Sánchez, Jorge Pulm Med Research Article BACKGROUND: IgE sensitization (atopy) to pets is commonly evaluated using pet dander extracts. However, the diagnosis by components seems to be more adequate to evaluate the clinical relevance (allergy) of sIgE sensitization. OBJECTIVE: To study the association between IgE sensitization to pet allergen components and clinical symptoms. Methodology. Dander extracts and sIgE levels to pet components (Can f 1, Can f 2, Can f 3, Can f 5, Fel d 1, Fel 2, and Fel 4) were measured in a rhinitis group (n = 101) and a control group (n = 101) and a control group ( RESULTS: Dog (34.6% vs. 23.5%) and cat dander (26.7% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.05) IgE sensitization was frequent among rhinitis and no-rhinitis subjects, and it was similar to dog (29.7% vs. 20.5%) and cat (18.8% vs. 8.8%) components. Polysensitization for dog (3.1, 95% CI: 1.5 to 6.1, p = 0.05) IgE sensitization was frequent among rhinitis and no-rhinitis subjects, and it was similar to dog (29.7% vs. 20.5%) and cat (18.8% vs. 8.8%) components. Polysensitization for dog (3.1, 95% CI: 1.5 to 6.1, p = 0.05) IgE sensitization was frequent among rhinitis and no-rhinitis subjects, and it was similar to dog (29.7% vs. 20.5%) and cat (18.8% vs. 8.8%) components. Polysensitization for dog (3.1, 95% CI: 1.5 to 6.1, CONCLUSIONS: Sensitization to pet dander extract identifies atopic patients, but its utility to predict clinical relevance is poor. Allergenic components could help to define the clinical relevance of sensitization to furry animals and could reduce the need for provocation test. Hindawi 2020-01-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7001676/ /pubmed/32047667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/6365314 Text en Copyright © 2020 Andres Sánchez et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Sánchez, Andres Cardona, Ricardo Munera, Marlon Calvo, Victor Tejada-Giraldo, Manuela Sánchez, Jorge Nasal Provocation Test with Cat and Dog Extracts: Results according to Molecular Components |
title | Nasal Provocation Test with Cat and Dog Extracts: Results according to Molecular Components |
title_full | Nasal Provocation Test with Cat and Dog Extracts: Results according to Molecular Components |
title_fullStr | Nasal Provocation Test with Cat and Dog Extracts: Results according to Molecular Components |
title_full_unstemmed | Nasal Provocation Test with Cat and Dog Extracts: Results according to Molecular Components |
title_short | Nasal Provocation Test with Cat and Dog Extracts: Results according to Molecular Components |
title_sort | nasal provocation test with cat and dog extracts: results according to molecular components |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7001676/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32047667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/6365314 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sanchezandres nasalprovocationtestwithcatanddogextractsresultsaccordingtomolecularcomponents AT cardonaricardo nasalprovocationtestwithcatanddogextractsresultsaccordingtomolecularcomponents AT muneramarlon nasalprovocationtestwithcatanddogextractsresultsaccordingtomolecularcomponents AT calvovictor nasalprovocationtestwithcatanddogextractsresultsaccordingtomolecularcomponents AT tejadagiraldomanuela nasalprovocationtestwithcatanddogextractsresultsaccordingtomolecularcomponents AT sanchezjorge nasalprovocationtestwithcatanddogextractsresultsaccordingtomolecularcomponents |