Natural rubber latex-specific IgE antibodies in non-healthcare workers: comparison of two FDA-cleared in vitro kits

Raymond E. Biagini, Barbara A. Mackenzie, Toni A. Bledsoe, Daniel M. Lewis, Lynne M. Pinkerton
{"title":"Natural rubber latex-specific IgE antibodies in non-healthcare workers: comparison of two FDA-cleared in vitro kits","authors":"Raymond E. Biagini,&nbsp;Barbara A. Mackenzie,&nbsp;Toni A. Bledsoe,&nbsp;Daniel M. Lewis,&nbsp;Lynne M. Pinkerton","doi":"10.1002/1099-1301(199907/09)1:3<147::AID-JEM25>3.0.CO;2-Z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Latex-specific IgE antibody immunoassays are heavily relied upon in the diagnosis of latex allergy in the United States. The goal of this study is to compare anti-latex IgE levels measured by two U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-cleared kits (CAP® System and AlaSTAT® Microplate) in sera obtained from employees in non-healthcare industries. Sera were obtained from 381 workers employed in several, non-healthcare industries over the past 10 years, and stored frozen. All 381 coded sera were analysed for latex-specific IgE using the Diagnostic Products Corporation microplate AlaSTAT® and the Pharmacia-UpJohn CAP® System. Concordance between methods and intra- and inter-assay reproducibility were evaluated. Twenty-six sera gave positive results using the AlaSTAT® assay (26/381, 6.82%), while 24 yielded CAP® positive results (6.30%). There were no significant differences (<i>p</i> = NS) between the assays' measurements of latex-specific IgE antibody levels for all 381 sera, yielding 0.28 ± 0.19 kU L<sup>−1</sup> and 0.34 ± 0.59 kU<sub>A</sub> L<sup>−1</sup>, respectively. AlaSTAT® and CAP® assays agreed on the positive status of 9 (9/381, 2.4%) sera, and the negative status of 340 sera (340/381, 89.2%). The assays yielded discordant results on some individual sera. CAP® discordant results occurred in 17/26 sera (65.4%) of AlaSTAT® positive sera, while AlaSTAT® discordant results were found in 15/24 (57.7%) of the CAP® positive sera. The CAP® System, for instance, detected 0.39–2.3 kU<sub>A</sub> l<sup>−1</sup> (1.03 ± 0.59, [mean ± SD]) of latex-specific IgE in the serum from 15 individuals that were all AlaSTAT® negative. In contrast, the AlaSTAT® detected 0.36–1.6 kU l<sup>−1</sup> (0.62 ± 0.31, [mean ± SD]) of IgE anti-latex in the serum from 17 subjects that were all CAP® negative. These data indicate that the <i>a priori</i> seroprevalence of latex-specific sera IgE is about 6%–7% in non-healthcare workers and that the CAP® and AlaSTAT® assays agree on the positive or negative status of the majority of sera (91.6%). However, caution should be exercised when applying FDA-cleared <i>in vitro</i> assays for latex-specific sera IgE in populations known to have potentially low concentrations of latex-specific IgE antibodies, as there appears to be a finite possibility for these assays to misclassify sera as being positive or negative for latex-specific IgE antibodies. Published in 1999 by John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</p>","PeriodicalId":100780,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Medicine","volume":"1 3","pages":"147-151"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/1099-1301(199907/09)1:3<147::AID-JEM25>3.0.CO;2-Z","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/1099-1301%28199907/09%291%3A3%3C147%3A%3AAID-JEM25%3E3.0.CO%3B2-Z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Latex-specific IgE antibody immunoassays are heavily relied upon in the diagnosis of latex allergy in the United States. The goal of this study is to compare anti-latex IgE levels measured by two U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-cleared kits (CAP® System and AlaSTAT® Microplate) in sera obtained from employees in non-healthcare industries. Sera were obtained from 381 workers employed in several, non-healthcare industries over the past 10 years, and stored frozen. All 381 coded sera were analysed for latex-specific IgE using the Diagnostic Products Corporation microplate AlaSTAT® and the Pharmacia-UpJohn CAP® System. Concordance between methods and intra- and inter-assay reproducibility were evaluated. Twenty-six sera gave positive results using the AlaSTAT® assay (26/381, 6.82%), while 24 yielded CAP® positive results (6.30%). There were no significant differences (p = NS) between the assays' measurements of latex-specific IgE antibody levels for all 381 sera, yielding 0.28 ± 0.19 kU L−1 and 0.34 ± 0.59 kUA L−1, respectively. AlaSTAT® and CAP® assays agreed on the positive status of 9 (9/381, 2.4%) sera, and the negative status of 340 sera (340/381, 89.2%). The assays yielded discordant results on some individual sera. CAP® discordant results occurred in 17/26 sera (65.4%) of AlaSTAT® positive sera, while AlaSTAT® discordant results were found in 15/24 (57.7%) of the CAP® positive sera. The CAP® System, for instance, detected 0.39–2.3 kUA l−1 (1.03 ± 0.59, [mean ± SD]) of latex-specific IgE in the serum from 15 individuals that were all AlaSTAT® negative. In contrast, the AlaSTAT® detected 0.36–1.6 kU l−1 (0.62 ± 0.31, [mean ± SD]) of IgE anti-latex in the serum from 17 subjects that were all CAP® negative. These data indicate that the a priori seroprevalence of latex-specific sera IgE is about 6%–7% in non-healthcare workers and that the CAP® and AlaSTAT® assays agree on the positive or negative status of the majority of sera (91.6%). However, caution should be exercised when applying FDA-cleared in vitro assays for latex-specific sera IgE in populations known to have potentially low concentrations of latex-specific IgE antibodies, as there appears to be a finite possibility for these assays to misclassify sera as being positive or negative for latex-specific IgE antibodies. Published in 1999 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

非医护人员的天然橡胶胶乳特异性IgE抗体:两种FDA批准的体外试剂盒的比较
在美国,乳胶特异性IgE抗体免疫测定在乳胶过敏的诊断中被严重依赖。本研究的目的是比较美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)批准的两种试剂盒(CAP®System和AlaSTAT®Microplate)在非医疗保健行业员工血清中测量的抗乳胶IgE水平。血清是从过去10年中受雇于几个非医疗行业的381名工人身上采集的,并冷冻保存。使用Diagnostic Products Corporation微孔板AlaSTAT®和Pharmacia UpJohn CAP®系统对所有381份编码血清进行乳胶特异性IgE分析。评估了方法与批内和批间再现性的一致性。26份血清使用AlaSTAT®检测得出阳性结果(26/381,6.82%),24份血清得出CAP®阳性结果(6.30%)。所有381份血清的乳胶特异性IgE抗体水平的检测结果之间没有显著差异(p=NS),分别得出0.28±0.19 kU L−1和0.34±0.59 kUA L−1。AlaSTAT®和CAP®检测对9份(9/381,2.4%)血清的阳性状态和340份(340/381,89.2%)血清的阴性状态达成一致。检测在一些个体血清上产生了不一致的结果。CAP®不一致结果出现在17/26份(65.4%)AlaSTAT®阳性血清中,而在15/24份(57.7%)CAP®阳性血清发现AlaSTAT™不一致结果。例如,CAP®系统在15名AlaSTAT®阴性个体的血清中检测到0.39–2.3 kUA l−1(1.03±0.59,[平均值±标准差])的胶乳特异性IgE。相反,AlaSTAT®在17名CAP®阴性受试者的血清中检测到0.36–1.6 kU l−1(0.62±0.31,[平均值±SD])的IgE抗乳胶。这些数据表明,乳胶特异性血清IgE在非医护人员中的先验血清流行率约为6%-7%,CAP®和AlaSTAT®检测对大多数血清的阳性或阴性状态一致(91.6%)。然而,在已知具有潜在低浓度乳胶特异性IgE抗体的人群中应用FDA批准的乳胶特异性血清IgE体外检测时应谨慎,因为这些检测将血清错误分类为乳胶特异性IgG抗体阳性或阴性的可能性似乎有限。1999年由John Wiley&;有限公司。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信