Displaying all 5 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Bakhtiar MF, Too CL, Tang MM, Sulaiman S, Tan LK, Ahmad-Fauzi NA, et al.
    Clin Exp Allergy, 2019 04;49(4):537-540.
    PMID: 30693574 DOI: 10.1111/cea.13347
    Matched MeSH terms: Drug Hypersensitivity/immunology
  2. Czuppon AB, Chen Z, Rennert S, Engelke T, Meyer HE, Heber M, et al.
    J Allergy Clin Immunol, 1993 Nov;92(5):690-7.
    PMID: 8227860
    BACKGROUND: Allergy to latex-containing articles is becoming more and more important because it can result in unexpected life-threatening anaphylactic reactions in sensitized individuals.

    METHODS: A protein of 58 kd with an isoelectric point of 8.45 was purified from raw latex and from latex gloves and identified as the major allergen, completely blocking specific IgE antibodies in the serum of latex-sensitized subjects. The allergen is a noncovalent homotetramer molecule, in which the 14.6 kd monomer was identified, by amino acid composition and sequence homologies of tryptic peptides, to be the rubber elongation factor found in natural latex of the Malaysian rubber tree.

    RESULTS: Competitive immunoinhibition tests showed that the starch powder covering the finished gloves is the airborne carrier of the allergen, resulting in bronchial asthma on inhalation. The purified allergen can induce allergic reactions in the nanogram range.

    CONCLUSION: The identification of the allergen (Hev b I) may help to eliminate it during the production of latex-based articles in the future.

    Matched MeSH terms: Drug Hypersensitivity/immunology*
  3. Sunderasan E, Bahari A, Arif SA, Zainal Z, Hamilton RG, Yeang HY
    Clin Exp Allergy, 2005 Nov;35(11):1490-5.
    PMID: 16297147 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2005.02371.x
    BACKGROUND:
    Hev b 4 is an allergenic natural rubber latex (NRL) protein complex that is reactive in skin prick tests and in vitro immunoassays. On SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE), Hev b 4 is discerned predominantly at 53-55 kDa together with a 57 kDa minor component previously identified as a cyanogenic glucosidase. Of the 13 NRL allergens recognized by the International Union of Immunological Societies, the 53-55 kDa Hev b 4 major protein is the only candidate that lacks complete cDNA and protein sequence information.

    OBJECTIVE:
    We sought to clone the transcript encoding the Hev b 4 major protein, and characterize the native protein and its recombinant form in relation to IgE binding.

    METHODS:
    The 5'/3' rapid amplification of cDNA ends method was employed to obtain the complete cDNA of the Hev b 4 major protein. A recombinant form of the protein was over-expressed in Escherichia coli. The native Hev b 4 major protein was deglycosylated by trifluoromethane sulphonic acid. Western immunoblots of the native, deglycosylated and recombinant proteins were performed using both polyclonal antibodies and sera from latex-allergic patients.

    RESULTS:
    The cDNA encoding the Hev b 4 major protein was cloned. Its open reading frame matched lecithinases in the conserved domain database and contained 10 predicted glycosylation sites. Detection of glycans on the Hev b 4 lecithinase homologue confirmed it to be a glycoprotein. The deglycosylated lecithinase homologue was discerned at 40 kDa on SDS-PAGE, this being comparable to the 38.53 kDa mass predicted by its cDNA. Deglycosylation of the lecithinase homologue resulted in the loss of IgE recognition, although reactivity to polyclonal rabbit anti-Hev b 4 was retained. IgE from latex-allergic patients also failed to recognize the non-glycosylated E. coli recombinant lecithinase homologue.

    CONCLUSION:
    The IgE epitopes of the Hev b 4 lecithinase homologue reside mainly in its carbohydrate moiety, which also account for the discrepancy between the observed molecular weight of the protein and the value calculated from its cDNA.
    Matched MeSH terms: Drug Hypersensitivity/immunology
  4. Hamilton RG, Adkinson NF
    J Allergy Clin Immunol, 1996 Nov;98(5 Pt 1):872-83.
    PMID: 8939150
    BACKGROUND: Nonammoniated latex, ammoniated latex, and rubber glove extracts are the only sources of natural rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) latex that have potential for use as skin testing reagents in the diagnosis of latex allergy. Their diagnostic sensitivity and specificity as skin test reagents are unknown.

    OBJECTIVE: We conducted a phase 1/2 clinical study to examine the safety and diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) of nonammoniated latex, ammoniated latex, and rubber glove extracts as skin test extracts to identify the most efficacious source material for future skin test reagent development.

    METHODS: Twenty-four adults not allergic to latex, 19 adults with hand dermatitis or pruritus, and 59 adults with a latex allergy were identified by clinical history. All provided blood and then received puncture skin tests and intradermal skin tests with nonammoniated latex, ammoniated latex, and rubber glove extracts from Malaysian H. brasiliensis latex by use of sequential titration. A glove provocation test and IgE anti-latex RAST were used to clarify positive history-negative skin test response and negative history-positive skin test response mismatches.

    RESULTS: All three extracts were biologically safe and sterile. After normalization to 1 mg/ml of total protein, all three extracts produced equivalent diagnostic sensitivity and specificity in puncture skin tests and intradermal skin tests at various extract concentrations. Optimal diagnostic accuracy was safely achieved at 100 micrograms/ml for intradermal skin tests (e.g., nonammoniated latex: puncture skin test sensitivity 96%, specificity 100%; intradermal skin test sensitivity 93%, specificity 96%). The presence of IgE antibody in skin was highly correlated with IgE anti-latex in serum (nonammoniated latex: r = 0.98, p < 0.001; ammoniated latex: r = 0.94, p < 0.001; rubber glove extract: r = 0.96, p < 0.001). All five available subjects with a positive history, negative skin test response, and absence of IgE antibody in serum had a negative glove provocation test response, indicating no clinical evidence of latex allergy. No systemic or large local allergic reactions were observed with puncture skin tests or intradermal skin tests.

    CONCLUSIONS: Equivalent diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were observed with the nonammoniated latex, ammoniated latex, and rubber glove extract skin test reagents after normalization for total protein; nonammoniated latex may be considered the reagent of choice on the basis of practical quality control and reproducibility considerations.

    Matched MeSH terms: Drug Hypersensitivity/immunology
  5. Leecyous B, Bakhtiar F, Tang MM, Yadzir ZHM, Abdullah N
    Allergol Immunopathol (Madr), 2020 06 09;48(6):626-632.
    PMID: 32532468 DOI: 10.1016/j.aller.2020.01.006
    INTRODUCTION: Basophil activation test (BAT) and immunoassays are the most widely used in vitro tests to diagnose IgE-mediated allergic reactions to penicillin. However, studies to determine if one test is interdependent from another are limited.

    OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to measure the agreement between BAT and immunoassay in diagnosis of penicillin allergy.

    METHOD: BAT was performed using penicillin G (Pen G), penicillin V (Pen V), penicilloyl-polylysine (PPL), minor determinant mix (MDM), amoxicillin (Amx) and ampicillin (Amp) in 25 patients. Immunoassay of total IgE (tIgE) and specific IgE (sIgE) antibodies to Pen G, Pen V, Amx and Amp were quantified. Skin prick test (SPT) using PPL-MDM, Amx, Amp and Clavulanic acid were also performed.

    RESULTS: Minimal agreement was observed between BAT and immunoassay (k=0.25). Of two BAT-positive patients, one patient is positive to Amx (59.27%, SI=59) and Amp (82.32%, SI=82) but sIgE-negative to all drug tested. This patient is also SPT-positive to both drugs. Another patient is BAT-positive to Pen G (10.18%, SI=40), Pen V (25.07%, SI=100) and Amp (19.52%, SI=79). In sIgE immunoassay, four patients were sIgE-positive to at least one of the drugs tested. The sIgE level of three patients was between low and moderate and they were BAT-negative. One BAT-positive patient had a high level of sIgE antibodies (3.50-17.5kU/L) along with relatively high specific to total IgE ratio ≥0.002 (0.004-0.007).

    CONCLUSIONS: The agreement between BAT and immunoassay is minimal. Performing both tests provides little increase in the sensitivity of allergy diagnosis work-up for immediate reactions to penicillin.

    Matched MeSH terms: Drug Hypersensitivity/immunology
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links