Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients
Background: The best diagnostic method for latex allergy is still controversial. This investigation was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting in comparison with established in vitro and in vivo test systems. Methods: A total of 108 spina bifida patients were investigated b...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Grüber, C. [verfasserIn] Buck, D. [verfasserIn] Wahn, U. [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erschienen: |
Copenhagen: Munksgaard International Publishers ; 2000 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Umfang: |
Online-Ressource |
|---|
| Reproduktion: |
2008 ; Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Allergy - Oxford : Blackwell Munksgaard, 1978, 55(2000), 5, Seite 0 |
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:55 ; year:2000 ; number:5 ; pages:0 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
NLEJ242303668 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLEJ242303668 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230506164756.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 120427s2000 xx |||||o 00| ||und c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLEJ242303668 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Grüber, C. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients |
| 264 | 1 | |a Copenhagen |b Munksgaard International Publishers |c 2000 | |
| 300 | |a Online-Ressource | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Background: The best diagnostic method for latex allergy is still controversial. This investigation was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting in comparison with established in vitro and in vivo test systems. Methods: A total of 108 spina bifida patients were investigated by questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT). Specific serum IgE to latex was analyzed by the Pharmacia CAP FEIA immunoassay, DPC AlaSTAT microplate immunoassay, and DPC AlaBLOT immunoblot. Patients were regarded as latex allergic if they reacted positively to challenge by the latex glove wearing test. Results: Thirty-four patients reacted positively to challenge. The sensitivity rates were 97% (SPT), 94% (immunoblot, CAP), 74% (AlaSTAT), and 35% (clinical history). The specificity rates were 92% (clinical history), 88% (AlaSTAT), 77% (SPT), 76% (CAP), and 69% (immunoblot). If two methods were combined, efficiency rates were highest for SPT combined with CAP (sensitivity 94%, specificity 82%), with AlaSTAT (sensitivity 74%, specificity 92%), or with immunoblot (sensitivity 91%, specificity 84%). The sera of challenge-positive patients recognized more immunoblot bands than challenge-negative patients, and the severity of symptoms correlated with the number of recognized bands. Conclusions: The diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting is not superior to that of SPT. However, immunoblotting may serve as an additional tool to increase slightly the specificity of SPT and specific serum IgE tests. | ||
| 533 | |d 2008 |f Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |7 |2008|||||||||| | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a diagnosis | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Buck, D. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Wahn, U. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Niggemann, B. |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Allergy |d Oxford : Blackwell Munksgaard, 1978 |g 55(2000), 5, Seite 0 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)NLEJ243926979 |w (DE-600)2003114-2 |x 1398-9995 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:55 |g year:2000 |g number:5 |g pages:0 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x |q text/html |x Verlag |z Deutschlandweit zugänglich |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a ZDB-1-DJB | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NL_ARTICLE | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 55 |j 2000 |e 5 |h 0 | ||
| author_variant |
c g cg d b db u w uw |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:13989995:2000----::shraoeoimnbosnhdanssfaealrynemtocmaiooivtoniv |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2000 |
| publishDate |
2000 |
| allfields |
10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242303668 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Grüber, C. verfasserin aut Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients Copenhagen Munksgaard International Publishers 2000 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Background: The best diagnostic method for latex allergy is still controversial. This investigation was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting in comparison with established in vitro and in vivo test systems. Methods: A total of 108 spina bifida patients were investigated by questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT). Specific serum IgE to latex was analyzed by the Pharmacia CAP FEIA immunoassay, DPC AlaSTAT microplate immunoassay, and DPC AlaBLOT immunoblot. Patients were regarded as latex allergic if they reacted positively to challenge by the latex glove wearing test. Results: Thirty-four patients reacted positively to challenge. The sensitivity rates were 97% (SPT), 94% (immunoblot, CAP), 74% (AlaSTAT), and 35% (clinical history). The specificity rates were 92% (clinical history), 88% (AlaSTAT), 77% (SPT), 76% (CAP), and 69% (immunoblot). If two methods were combined, efficiency rates were highest for SPT combined with CAP (sensitivity 94%, specificity 82%), with AlaSTAT (sensitivity 74%, specificity 92%), or with immunoblot (sensitivity 91%, specificity 84%). The sera of challenge-positive patients recognized more immunoblot bands than challenge-negative patients, and the severity of symptoms correlated with the number of recognized bands. Conclusions: The diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting is not superior to that of SPT. However, immunoblotting may serve as an additional tool to increase slightly the specificity of SPT and specific serum IgE tests. 2008 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2008|||||||||| diagnosis Buck, D. verfasserin aut Wahn, U. verfasserin aut Niggemann, B. oth In Allergy Oxford : Blackwell Munksgaard, 1978 55(2000), 5, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243926979 (DE-600)2003114-2 1398-9995 nnns volume:55 year:2000 number:5 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 55 2000 5 0 |
| spelling |
10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242303668 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Grüber, C. verfasserin aut Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients Copenhagen Munksgaard International Publishers 2000 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Background: The best diagnostic method for latex allergy is still controversial. This investigation was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting in comparison with established in vitro and in vivo test systems. Methods: A total of 108 spina bifida patients were investigated by questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT). Specific serum IgE to latex was analyzed by the Pharmacia CAP FEIA immunoassay, DPC AlaSTAT microplate immunoassay, and DPC AlaBLOT immunoblot. Patients were regarded as latex allergic if they reacted positively to challenge by the latex glove wearing test. Results: Thirty-four patients reacted positively to challenge. The sensitivity rates were 97% (SPT), 94% (immunoblot, CAP), 74% (AlaSTAT), and 35% (clinical history). The specificity rates were 92% (clinical history), 88% (AlaSTAT), 77% (SPT), 76% (CAP), and 69% (immunoblot). If two methods were combined, efficiency rates were highest for SPT combined with CAP (sensitivity 94%, specificity 82%), with AlaSTAT (sensitivity 74%, specificity 92%), or with immunoblot (sensitivity 91%, specificity 84%). The sera of challenge-positive patients recognized more immunoblot bands than challenge-negative patients, and the severity of symptoms correlated with the number of recognized bands. Conclusions: The diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting is not superior to that of SPT. However, immunoblotting may serve as an additional tool to increase slightly the specificity of SPT and specific serum IgE tests. 2008 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2008|||||||||| diagnosis Buck, D. verfasserin aut Wahn, U. verfasserin aut Niggemann, B. oth In Allergy Oxford : Blackwell Munksgaard, 1978 55(2000), 5, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243926979 (DE-600)2003114-2 1398-9995 nnns volume:55 year:2000 number:5 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 55 2000 5 0 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242303668 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Grüber, C. verfasserin aut Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients Copenhagen Munksgaard International Publishers 2000 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Background: The best diagnostic method for latex allergy is still controversial. This investigation was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting in comparison with established in vitro and in vivo test systems. Methods: A total of 108 spina bifida patients were investigated by questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT). Specific serum IgE to latex was analyzed by the Pharmacia CAP FEIA immunoassay, DPC AlaSTAT microplate immunoassay, and DPC AlaBLOT immunoblot. Patients were regarded as latex allergic if they reacted positively to challenge by the latex glove wearing test. Results: Thirty-four patients reacted positively to challenge. The sensitivity rates were 97% (SPT), 94% (immunoblot, CAP), 74% (AlaSTAT), and 35% (clinical history). The specificity rates were 92% (clinical history), 88% (AlaSTAT), 77% (SPT), 76% (CAP), and 69% (immunoblot). If two methods were combined, efficiency rates were highest for SPT combined with CAP (sensitivity 94%, specificity 82%), with AlaSTAT (sensitivity 74%, specificity 92%), or with immunoblot (sensitivity 91%, specificity 84%). The sera of challenge-positive patients recognized more immunoblot bands than challenge-negative patients, and the severity of symptoms correlated with the number of recognized bands. Conclusions: The diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting is not superior to that of SPT. However, immunoblotting may serve as an additional tool to increase slightly the specificity of SPT and specific serum IgE tests. 2008 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2008|||||||||| diagnosis Buck, D. verfasserin aut Wahn, U. verfasserin aut Niggemann, B. oth In Allergy Oxford : Blackwell Munksgaard, 1978 55(2000), 5, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243926979 (DE-600)2003114-2 1398-9995 nnns volume:55 year:2000 number:5 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 55 2000 5 0 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242303668 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Grüber, C. verfasserin aut Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients Copenhagen Munksgaard International Publishers 2000 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Background: The best diagnostic method for latex allergy is still controversial. This investigation was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting in comparison with established in vitro and in vivo test systems. Methods: A total of 108 spina bifida patients were investigated by questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT). Specific serum IgE to latex was analyzed by the Pharmacia CAP FEIA immunoassay, DPC AlaSTAT microplate immunoassay, and DPC AlaBLOT immunoblot. Patients were regarded as latex allergic if they reacted positively to challenge by the latex glove wearing test. Results: Thirty-four patients reacted positively to challenge. The sensitivity rates were 97% (SPT), 94% (immunoblot, CAP), 74% (AlaSTAT), and 35% (clinical history). The specificity rates were 92% (clinical history), 88% (AlaSTAT), 77% (SPT), 76% (CAP), and 69% (immunoblot). If two methods were combined, efficiency rates were highest for SPT combined with CAP (sensitivity 94%, specificity 82%), with AlaSTAT (sensitivity 74%, specificity 92%), or with immunoblot (sensitivity 91%, specificity 84%). The sera of challenge-positive patients recognized more immunoblot bands than challenge-negative patients, and the severity of symptoms correlated with the number of recognized bands. Conclusions: The diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting is not superior to that of SPT. However, immunoblotting may serve as an additional tool to increase slightly the specificity of SPT and specific serum IgE tests. 2008 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2008|||||||||| diagnosis Buck, D. verfasserin aut Wahn, U. verfasserin aut Niggemann, B. oth In Allergy Oxford : Blackwell Munksgaard, 1978 55(2000), 5, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243926979 (DE-600)2003114-2 1398-9995 nnns volume:55 year:2000 number:5 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 55 2000 5 0 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242303668 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Grüber, C. verfasserin aut Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients Copenhagen Munksgaard International Publishers 2000 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Background: The best diagnostic method for latex allergy is still controversial. This investigation was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting in comparison with established in vitro and in vivo test systems. Methods: A total of 108 spina bifida patients were investigated by questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT). Specific serum IgE to latex was analyzed by the Pharmacia CAP FEIA immunoassay, DPC AlaSTAT microplate immunoassay, and DPC AlaBLOT immunoblot. Patients were regarded as latex allergic if they reacted positively to challenge by the latex glove wearing test. Results: Thirty-four patients reacted positively to challenge. The sensitivity rates were 97% (SPT), 94% (immunoblot, CAP), 74% (AlaSTAT), and 35% (clinical history). The specificity rates were 92% (clinical history), 88% (AlaSTAT), 77% (SPT), 76% (CAP), and 69% (immunoblot). If two methods were combined, efficiency rates were highest for SPT combined with CAP (sensitivity 94%, specificity 82%), with AlaSTAT (sensitivity 74%, specificity 92%), or with immunoblot (sensitivity 91%, specificity 84%). The sera of challenge-positive patients recognized more immunoblot bands than challenge-negative patients, and the severity of symptoms correlated with the number of recognized bands. Conclusions: The diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting is not superior to that of SPT. However, immunoblotting may serve as an additional tool to increase slightly the specificity of SPT and specific serum IgE tests. 2008 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2008|||||||||| diagnosis Buck, D. verfasserin aut Wahn, U. verfasserin aut Niggemann, B. oth In Allergy Oxford : Blackwell Munksgaard, 1978 55(2000), 5, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243926979 (DE-600)2003114-2 1398-9995 nnns volume:55 year:2000 number:5 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 55 2000 5 0 |
| source |
In Allergy 55(2000), 5, Seite 0 volume:55 year:2000 number:5 pages:0 |
| sourceStr |
In Allergy 55(2000), 5, Seite 0 volume:55 year:2000 number:5 pages:0 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
diagnosis |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Allergy |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Grüber, C. @@aut@@ Buck, D. @@aut@@ Wahn, U. @@aut@@ Niggemann, B. @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2000-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
NLEJ243926979 |
| id |
NLEJ242303668 |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ242303668</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230506164756.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">120427s2000 xx |||||o 00| ||und c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ242303668</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grüber, C.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Copenhagen</subfield><subfield code="b">Munksgaard International Publishers</subfield><subfield code="c">2000</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background: The best diagnostic method for latex allergy is still controversial. This investigation was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting in comparison with established in vitro and in vivo test systems. Methods: A total of 108 spina bifida patients were investigated by questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT). Specific serum IgE to latex was analyzed by the Pharmacia CAP FEIA immunoassay, DPC AlaSTAT microplate immunoassay, and DPC AlaBLOT immunoblot. Patients were regarded as latex allergic if they reacted positively to challenge by the latex glove wearing test. Results: Thirty-four patients reacted positively to challenge. The sensitivity rates were 97% (SPT), 94% (immunoblot, CAP), 74% (AlaSTAT), and 35% (clinical history). The specificity rates were 92% (clinical history), 88% (AlaSTAT), 77% (SPT), 76% (CAP), and 69% (immunoblot). If two methods were combined, efficiency rates were highest for SPT combined with CAP (sensitivity 94%, specificity 82%), with AlaSTAT (sensitivity 74%, specificity 92%), or with immunoblot (sensitivity 91%, specificity 84%). The sera of challenge-positive patients recognized more immunoblot bands than challenge-negative patients, and the severity of symptoms correlated with the number of recognized bands. Conclusions: The diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting is not superior to that of SPT. However, immunoblotting may serve as an additional tool to increase slightly the specificity of SPT and specific serum IgE tests.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">2008</subfield><subfield code="f">Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005</subfield><subfield code="7">|2008||||||||||</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">diagnosis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Buck, D.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wahn, U.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Niggemann, B.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Allergy</subfield><subfield code="d">Oxford : Blackwell Munksgaard, 1978</subfield><subfield code="g">55(2000), 5, Seite 0</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ243926979</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2003114-2</subfield><subfield code="x">1398-9995</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:55</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2000</subfield><subfield code="g">number:5</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x</subfield><subfield code="q">text/html</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="z">Deutschlandweit zugänglich</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-DJB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">55</subfield><subfield code="j">2000</subfield><subfield code="e">5</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| series2 |
Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |
| author |
Grüber, C. |
| spellingShingle |
Grüber, C. misc diagnosis Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients |
| authorStr |
Grüber, C. |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)NLEJ243926979 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut |
| collection |
NL |
| publishPlace |
Copenhagen |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1398-9995 |
| topic_title |
Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients diagnosis |
| publisher |
Munksgaard International Publishers |
| publisherStr |
Munksgaard International Publishers |
| topic |
misc diagnosis |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc diagnosis |
| topic_browse |
misc diagnosis |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
b n bn |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Allergy |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
NLEJ243926979 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Allergy |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)NLEJ243926979 (DE-600)2003114-2 |
| title |
Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)NLEJ242303668 |
| title_full |
Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients |
| author_sort |
Grüber, C. |
| journal |
Allergy |
| journalStr |
Allergy |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2000 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
0 |
| author_browse |
Grüber, C. Buck, D. Wahn, U. |
| container_volume |
55 |
| physical |
Online-Ressource |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Grüber, C. |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x |
| author2-role |
verfasserin |
| title_sort |
is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo ige assays in spina bifida patients |
| title_auth |
Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients |
| abstract |
Background: The best diagnostic method for latex allergy is still controversial. This investigation was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting in comparison with established in vitro and in vivo test systems. Methods: A total of 108 spina bifida patients were investigated by questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT). Specific serum IgE to latex was analyzed by the Pharmacia CAP FEIA immunoassay, DPC AlaSTAT microplate immunoassay, and DPC AlaBLOT immunoblot. Patients were regarded as latex allergic if they reacted positively to challenge by the latex glove wearing test. Results: Thirty-four patients reacted positively to challenge. The sensitivity rates were 97% (SPT), 94% (immunoblot, CAP), 74% (AlaSTAT), and 35% (clinical history). The specificity rates were 92% (clinical history), 88% (AlaSTAT), 77% (SPT), 76% (CAP), and 69% (immunoblot). If two methods were combined, efficiency rates were highest for SPT combined with CAP (sensitivity 94%, specificity 82%), with AlaSTAT (sensitivity 74%, specificity 92%), or with immunoblot (sensitivity 91%, specificity 84%). The sera of challenge-positive patients recognized more immunoblot bands than challenge-negative patients, and the severity of symptoms correlated with the number of recognized bands. Conclusions: The diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting is not superior to that of SPT. However, immunoblotting may serve as an additional tool to increase slightly the specificity of SPT and specific serum IgE tests. |
| abstractGer |
Background: The best diagnostic method for latex allergy is still controversial. This investigation was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting in comparison with established in vitro and in vivo test systems. Methods: A total of 108 spina bifida patients were investigated by questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT). Specific serum IgE to latex was analyzed by the Pharmacia CAP FEIA immunoassay, DPC AlaSTAT microplate immunoassay, and DPC AlaBLOT immunoblot. Patients were regarded as latex allergic if they reacted positively to challenge by the latex glove wearing test. Results: Thirty-four patients reacted positively to challenge. The sensitivity rates were 97% (SPT), 94% (immunoblot, CAP), 74% (AlaSTAT), and 35% (clinical history). The specificity rates were 92% (clinical history), 88% (AlaSTAT), 77% (SPT), 76% (CAP), and 69% (immunoblot). If two methods were combined, efficiency rates were highest for SPT combined with CAP (sensitivity 94%, specificity 82%), with AlaSTAT (sensitivity 74%, specificity 92%), or with immunoblot (sensitivity 91%, specificity 84%). The sera of challenge-positive patients recognized more immunoblot bands than challenge-negative patients, and the severity of symptoms correlated with the number of recognized bands. Conclusions: The diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting is not superior to that of SPT. However, immunoblotting may serve as an additional tool to increase slightly the specificity of SPT and specific serum IgE tests. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Background: The best diagnostic method for latex allergy is still controversial. This investigation was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting in comparison with established in vitro and in vivo test systems. Methods: A total of 108 spina bifida patients were investigated by questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT). Specific serum IgE to latex was analyzed by the Pharmacia CAP FEIA immunoassay, DPC AlaSTAT microplate immunoassay, and DPC AlaBLOT immunoblot. Patients were regarded as latex allergic if they reacted positively to challenge by the latex glove wearing test. Results: Thirty-four patients reacted positively to challenge. The sensitivity rates were 97% (SPT), 94% (immunoblot, CAP), 74% (AlaSTAT), and 35% (clinical history). The specificity rates were 92% (clinical history), 88% (AlaSTAT), 77% (SPT), 76% (CAP), and 69% (immunoblot). If two methods were combined, efficiency rates were highest for SPT combined with CAP (sensitivity 94%, specificity 82%), with AlaSTAT (sensitivity 74%, specificity 92%), or with immunoblot (sensitivity 91%, specificity 84%). The sera of challenge-positive patients recognized more immunoblot bands than challenge-negative patients, and the severity of symptoms correlated with the number of recognized bands. Conclusions: The diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting is not superior to that of SPT. However, immunoblotting may serve as an additional tool to increase slightly the specificity of SPT and specific serum IgE tests. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE |
| container_issue |
5 |
| title_short |
Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Buck, D. Wahn, U. Niggemann, B. |
| author2Str |
Buck, D. Wahn, U. Niggemann, B. |
| ppnlink |
NLEJ243926979 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth |
| doi_str |
10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T01:31:48.491Z |
| _version_ |
1803791377096507393 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ242303668</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230506164756.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">120427s2000 xx |||||o 00| ||und c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ242303668</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grüber, C.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Is there a role for immunoblots in the diagnosis of latex allergy? Intermethod comparison of in vitro and in vivo IgE assays in spina bifida patients</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Copenhagen</subfield><subfield code="b">Munksgaard International Publishers</subfield><subfield code="c">2000</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background: The best diagnostic method for latex allergy is still controversial. This investigation was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting in comparison with established in vitro and in vivo test systems. Methods: A total of 108 spina bifida patients were investigated by questionnaire and skin prick test (SPT). Specific serum IgE to latex was analyzed by the Pharmacia CAP FEIA immunoassay, DPC AlaSTAT microplate immunoassay, and DPC AlaBLOT immunoblot. Patients were regarded as latex allergic if they reacted positively to challenge by the latex glove wearing test. Results: Thirty-four patients reacted positively to challenge. The sensitivity rates were 97% (SPT), 94% (immunoblot, CAP), 74% (AlaSTAT), and 35% (clinical history). The specificity rates were 92% (clinical history), 88% (AlaSTAT), 77% (SPT), 76% (CAP), and 69% (immunoblot). If two methods were combined, efficiency rates were highest for SPT combined with CAP (sensitivity 94%, specificity 82%), with AlaSTAT (sensitivity 74%, specificity 92%), or with immunoblot (sensitivity 91%, specificity 84%). The sera of challenge-positive patients recognized more immunoblot bands than challenge-negative patients, and the severity of symptoms correlated with the number of recognized bands. Conclusions: The diagnostic efficiency of immunoblotting is not superior to that of SPT. However, immunoblotting may serve as an additional tool to increase slightly the specificity of SPT and specific serum IgE tests.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">2008</subfield><subfield code="f">Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005</subfield><subfield code="7">|2008||||||||||</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">diagnosis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Buck, D.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wahn, U.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Niggemann, B.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Allergy</subfield><subfield code="d">Oxford : Blackwell Munksgaard, 1978</subfield><subfield code="g">55(2000), 5, Seite 0</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ243926979</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2003114-2</subfield><subfield code="x">1398-9995</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:55</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2000</subfield><subfield code="g">number:5</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1398-9995.2000.00364.x</subfield><subfield code="q">text/html</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="z">Deutschlandweit zugänglich</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-DJB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">55</subfield><subfield code="j">2000</subfield><subfield code="e">5</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.398144 |