Sven F. Seys, Alina Gherasim, Florian Odul, Frank Dietsch, Zuzana Diamant, Philippe Gevaert, Peter W. Hellings, Dirk Loeckx, Senne Gorris, Frédéric de Blay
{"title":"桦树花粉和屋尘螨变应性鼻炎患者皮肤点刺自动测试(SPAT)切断值的验证","authors":"Sven F. Seys, Alina Gherasim, Florian Odul, Frank Dietsch, Zuzana Diamant, Philippe Gevaert, Peter W. Hellings, Dirk Loeckx, Senne Gorris, Frédéric de Blay","doi":"10.1111/all.16645","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionA novel device, Skin Prick Automated Test (SPAT), previously showed reduced variability and more consistent test results compared to conventional skin prick test (SPT) to identify allergic sensitisation. This study aimed to clinically validate the adjusted SPAT cut‐off in patients with confirmed birch or house dust mite (HDM) allergy.MethodsSeventy‐five adults were included: 25 non‐allergic subjects (confirmed by lack of allergy history and negative SPT), 25 birch and 25 HDM allergic rhinitis patients (both confirmed by positive SPT and nasal allergen challenge [NAC]). All subjects received a conventional SPT and an automated SPT for <jats:italic>B ver</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>D pter</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>D far</jats:italic> and control solutions.ResultsA cut‐off of 4.2 and 4.1 mm, respectively, resulted in the highest accuracy to detect birch or HDM allergy using SPAT. Referring to previous study results suggesting a reliable cut‐off value of 4.5 mm, it was decided to maintain 4.5 mm as SPAT cut‐off indicating allergic sensitisation. Accuracy did not significantly differ between SPAT (96% using 4.5 mm) and conventional SPT (98% using 3.0 mm) to detect HDM allergy or to detect birch pollen allergy (100% for SPAT and SPT). SPAT wheal measurements performed through a ruler on the forearm or through digital measurement on a composite image did not significantly differ for any of the patient groups analysed.ConclusionSPAT showed an equivalent accuracy to detect birch pollen or HDM allergy compared to conventional SPT, using the adjusted 4.5 mm SPAT cut‐off in patients with confirmed allergic rhinitis. The SPAT web viewer can be used easily and effectively for digital wheal measurement on a composite image.","PeriodicalId":122,"journal":{"name":"Allergy","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":12.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of the Skin Prick Automated Test (SPAT) Cut‐Off Value in Birch Pollen and House Dust Mite Allergic Rhinitis Patients\",\"authors\":\"Sven F. Seys, Alina Gherasim, Florian Odul, Frank Dietsch, Zuzana Diamant, Philippe Gevaert, Peter W. Hellings, Dirk Loeckx, Senne Gorris, Frédéric de Blay\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/all.16645\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"IntroductionA novel device, Skin Prick Automated Test (SPAT), previously showed reduced variability and more consistent test results compared to conventional skin prick test (SPT) to identify allergic sensitisation. This study aimed to clinically validate the adjusted SPAT cut‐off in patients with confirmed birch or house dust mite (HDM) allergy.MethodsSeventy‐five adults were included: 25 non‐allergic subjects (confirmed by lack of allergy history and negative SPT), 25 birch and 25 HDM allergic rhinitis patients (both confirmed by positive SPT and nasal allergen challenge [NAC]). All subjects received a conventional SPT and an automated SPT for <jats:italic>B ver</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>D pter</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>D far</jats:italic> and control solutions.ResultsA cut‐off of 4.2 and 4.1 mm, respectively, resulted in the highest accuracy to detect birch or HDM allergy using SPAT. Referring to previous study results suggesting a reliable cut‐off value of 4.5 mm, it was decided to maintain 4.5 mm as SPAT cut‐off indicating allergic sensitisation. Accuracy did not significantly differ between SPAT (96% using 4.5 mm) and conventional SPT (98% using 3.0 mm) to detect HDM allergy or to detect birch pollen allergy (100% for SPAT and SPT). SPAT wheal measurements performed through a ruler on the forearm or through digital measurement on a composite image did not significantly differ for any of the patient groups analysed.ConclusionSPAT showed an equivalent accuracy to detect birch pollen or HDM allergy compared to conventional SPT, using the adjusted 4.5 mm SPAT cut‐off in patients with confirmed allergic rhinitis. The SPAT web viewer can be used easily and effectively for digital wheal measurement on a composite image.\",\"PeriodicalId\":122,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Allergy\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":12.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Allergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/all.16645\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ALLERGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Allergy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/all.16645","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Validation of the Skin Prick Automated Test (SPAT) Cut‐Off Value in Birch Pollen and House Dust Mite Allergic Rhinitis Patients
IntroductionA novel device, Skin Prick Automated Test (SPAT), previously showed reduced variability and more consistent test results compared to conventional skin prick test (SPT) to identify allergic sensitisation. This study aimed to clinically validate the adjusted SPAT cut‐off in patients with confirmed birch or house dust mite (HDM) allergy.MethodsSeventy‐five adults were included: 25 non‐allergic subjects (confirmed by lack of allergy history and negative SPT), 25 birch and 25 HDM allergic rhinitis patients (both confirmed by positive SPT and nasal allergen challenge [NAC]). All subjects received a conventional SPT and an automated SPT for B ver, D pter, D far and control solutions.ResultsA cut‐off of 4.2 and 4.1 mm, respectively, resulted in the highest accuracy to detect birch or HDM allergy using SPAT. Referring to previous study results suggesting a reliable cut‐off value of 4.5 mm, it was decided to maintain 4.5 mm as SPAT cut‐off indicating allergic sensitisation. Accuracy did not significantly differ between SPAT (96% using 4.5 mm) and conventional SPT (98% using 3.0 mm) to detect HDM allergy or to detect birch pollen allergy (100% for SPAT and SPT). SPAT wheal measurements performed through a ruler on the forearm or through digital measurement on a composite image did not significantly differ for any of the patient groups analysed.ConclusionSPAT showed an equivalent accuracy to detect birch pollen or HDM allergy compared to conventional SPT, using the adjusted 4.5 mm SPAT cut‐off in patients with confirmed allergic rhinitis. The SPAT web viewer can be used easily and effectively for digital wheal measurement on a composite image.
期刊介绍:
Allergy is an international and multidisciplinary journal that aims to advance, impact, and communicate all aspects of the discipline of Allergy/Immunology. It publishes original articles, reviews, position papers, guidelines, editorials, news and commentaries, letters to the editors, and correspondences. The journal accepts articles based on their scientific merit and quality.
Allergy seeks to maintain contact between basic and clinical Allergy/Immunology and encourages contributions from contributors and readers from all countries. In addition to its publication, Allergy also provides abstracting and indexing information. Some of the databases that include Allergy abstracts are Abstracts on Hygiene & Communicable Disease, Academic Search Alumni Edition, AgBiotech News & Information, AGRICOLA Database, Biological Abstracts, PubMed Dietary Supplement Subset, and Global Health, among others.