4.7 Article

Human IgE antibody serology: A primer for the practicing North American allergist/immunologist

期刊

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2010.03.014

关键词

Allergy; human; IgE; concentration; specific activity; specific IgE to total IgE ratio; clonality; affinity

资金

  1. Internal Johns Hopkins University
  2. Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The allergist/immunologist judiciously diagnoses allergic disease by using confirmatory IgE antibody data from in vivo and in vitro assays after the collection of a clinical history. After an overview of historical events, clinically available allergen-specific IgE assays from Phadia, Siemens, and Hycor are contrasted by their design and performance characteristics. The assays share comparable working ranges, analytical sensitivities, and excellent precision, reproducibility, and linearity to a performance standard of <15% coefficients of variation. However, multiple interlaboratory studies have confirmed that the 3 IgE antibody assays either detect different populations of IgE antibody or do not measure the same antibodies with comparable efficiencies. The clinical consequence is that IgE antibody results from the 3 assays are not interchangeable or equivalent. Data generated with one assay cannot be directly extrapolated to published predictive outcomes based on IgE antibody levels from a different assay. The transition from allergen extract based to allergenic components reagents is discussed, emphasizing the chip-based microarray's strength in identifying IgE antibody cross-reactivity. US Food and Drug Administration cleared point-of-care IgE antibody lateral flow cassettes are overviewed. Finally, IgE antibody concentration, affinity, clonality (epitope specificity), and specific activity (specific/total IgE ratio) are examined as humoral immune response parameters measured by serologic assays that affect effector cell degranulation and ultimately allergic disease expression. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 2010;126:33-8.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据