JoVE Journal > Medicine
Summary
Abstract
Introduction
Protocol
Results
Discussion
Disclosures
Acknowledgements
Materials
References
Automatic Translation
Please note that all translations are automatically generated. Click here for the English version.
Medicine

アレルギー診断のための好塩基球活性化試験

Published: May 31, 2021
doi:
10.3791/62600
, , ,
1Allergy Unit,Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, 2Allergy Research Group,Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga-IBIMA, 3Universidad de Málaga, Departamento de Biología celular, Genética y Fisiología,Universidad de Málaga, 4Departamento de Medicina,Universidad de Málaga, 5Nanostructures for Diagnosing and Treatment of Allergic Diseases Laboratory,Andalusian Center for Nanomedicine and Biotechnology-BIONAND

Summary

好塩基球活性化試験は、フローサイトメトリーによる活性化マーカーの測定による特定の刺激の存在下での好塩基球活性化の検出に基づいて、IgEを介したアレルギー反応を評価するための補完的な 体外 診断試験です。

Abstract

好塩基球活性化試験(BAT)は、食物、昆虫毒、薬物、およびある種の慢性蕁麻疹に対するIgE媒介アレルギー反応の評価において、病歴、皮膚試験(ST)、および特異的IgE(sIgE)測定に加えて使用できる補完的な 体外 診断試験です。ただし、診断アルゴリズムにおけるこの手法の役割は非常に変動し、十分に決定されていません。

BATは、フローサイトメトリーによる活性化マーカー(CD63、CD203cなど)の測定によるアレルゲン/薬物架橋IgE活性化に対する好塩基球応答の決定に基づいています。この検査は、特に重度の生命を脅かす反応を経験している被験者において、アレルギー診断を確認するための制御されたチャレンジテストを回避するための有用で補完的なツールになる可能性があります。一般に、BATの性能は、i)アレルゲン/薬物がSTで偽陽性の結果を生成する場合に考慮する必要があります。ii)STまたはsIgEの測定に使用するアレルゲン/薬物源がない。iii)患者の病歴とSTまたはsIgEの決定との間に不一致がある。iv)症状は、STが全身反応を引き起こす可能性があることを示唆しています。v)原因のアレルゲン/薬物を確認するためにCCTを検討する前。テストの主な制限は、特に薬物アレルギーにおける最適でない感度、サンプル抽出後24時間以内にテストを実行する必要性、および手順、濃度、および細胞マーカーに関するラボ間の標準化の欠如に関連しています。

Introduction

IgEを介したアレルギー診断は、病歴、皮膚検査(ST)、血清特異的IgE(sIgE)の定量、および必要かつ必要に応じて対照群チャレンジテスト(CCT)に基づいています1、2、3、4、5、6。ただし、正確な情報が不足している可能性があるため、病歴は信頼できない可能性があり、STおよびCCTは、重度の生命を脅かす反応を経験している被験者に禁忌となる可能性のあるリスクのない手順ではありません1,2,3,4,5,6 .これらの問題は、検証済みおよび市販のフルオロ酵素イムノアッセイによるsIgEの測定が少数のアレルゲンおよび薬物に対してのみ利用可能であるという事実とともに、好塩基球活性化試験(BAT)などの他のin vitro機能アッセイの重要な役割を浮き彫りにしました。

好塩基球は、アレルゲン/薬物曝露後に細胞表面の高親和性受容体(FcεRI)に結合した隣接するsIgEが架橋すると活性化される、IgEを介したアレルギー反応に関与する重要なエフェクター細胞です。好塩基球の活性化は、細胞質内分泌顆粒に含まれる細胞脱顆粒および新規合成炎症メディエーターの放出を引き起こす7、8、9。BATは、刺激(アレルゲンまたは薬物)の存在下で好塩基球活性化を模倣しようとし、フローサイトメトリーによって好塩基球活性化マーカーの発現の変化を決定するin vitro法である7,10。好塩基球(IgE+、CCR3+、CRTH2+、CD203c+)を同定し、蛍光色素標識抗体の組み合わせを使用して細胞活性化(主にCD63およびCD203cのアップレギュレーション)を測定するためのさまざまな戦略があります7,10。臨床的に検証された最良の活性化マーカーであるCD631,12,13,14は、ヒスタミンを含む分泌顆粒に固定された膜タンパク質であり、細胞活性化および顆粒と膜との融合後、好塩基球表面に発現する15,16,17,18,19,20,21.CD203cは、好塩基球上に構成的に発現し、FcεRI刺激後にアップレギュレーションされる表面マーカーであり、BAT15、22、23、24、25においても信頼できる結果を示している。また、CD6326と共発現しているようです。

過去数十年で、BATは、以下に説明するように、薬物、食品、吸入剤などのさまざまなトリガーによって引き起こされるIgEを介したアレルギー反応、およびいくつかの形態の慢性蕁麻疹の診断に役立つことが示されています。ただし、診断アルゴリズムにおけるこの手法の位置は非常に変動し、十分に決定されていません。

薬物過敏症
BATは、選択された薬物および患者、特にSTの診断値がほとんどの薬物で十分に確立されていないという事実のために重篤な反応を経験する人々にとって、限られた数の薬物について検証および標準化されているため、補完的な検査として有用であることが示されている27,28,29,30。さらに、sIgEの定量は、ST 27、28、29、30、31、32よりも感度が低く、限られた数の薬物に対してのみ利用可能です。したがって、薬物過敏症の診断は通常、薬物誘発試験に依存しており、これは重度の生命を脅かす反応を経験している被験者には禁忌である可能性があります33。

ベタラクタム(BL)20,34,35,36,37,38,39、神経筋遮断薬(NMBA)19,22,40,41,42などのさまざまな薬物に対する即時過敏反応を報告する選択された患者におけるBATの使用について有望な結果が報告されています。43,44,45,フルオロキノロン類46,47,48,49,ピラゾロン類50,51,52,放射線造影剤(RCM)53,54,55,56,白金化合物57,58,59.BATの感度と特異度はそれぞれ51.7〜66.9%と89.2〜97.8%であると報告されています。陽性および陰性的中率は、それぞれ93.4%から66.3%の範囲であると説明されています27,31。さらに、BATは、薬物脱感作中の副作用のリスクが高い患者においてCD203c発現がCD63と比較して増加するため、白金化合物による脱感作中の画期的な反応の予測バイオマーカーとして提案されている57。

BATは、反応が好塩基球脱顆粒を伴う場合にのみ薬物過敏症において有用であることは注目に値する。したがって、シクロオキシゲナーゼ 142の酵素的阻害から生じる反応には有用ではない。

食物アレルギー
BATは、アレルゲン抽出物全体または単一アレルゲンに対する血清sIgEの決定がしばしば曖昧であり、診断を確認するために経口食品チャレンジを必要とするため、食物アレルギーの潜在的な診断ツールとして浮上しており、これは薬物過敏症と同様に、費用がかかり、リスクのない手順ではありません60。いくつかの研究は、牛乳61,62、卵61,63、小麦64,65,66,67,68、ピーナッツ63,69,70,71,72、ヘーゼルナッツ73,74,75,76に関連する結果を示しています。、77、貝78、桃79,80,81、リンゴ21、セロリ、ニンジン82,83。

血清中のSTsやsIgEと比較して食物アレルギーの診断におけるBATの主な付加価値は、より高い特異性と類似の感度を示すことです。したがって、BATは、臨床的にアレルギー患者を、高い特異性(75-100%)と感度(77-98%)の両方を有する感作されたが耐性のある被験者と区別するための有用なツールである63,69,84。感度および特異度の値は、表現型(例えば、口腔アレルギー症候群対アナフィラキシー)、年齢、および地理関連の感作パターンとしてのアレルゲンおよび他の要因に依存する63,85。

単一のアレルゲン成分を使用するBATは、一部の食物アレルゲンの診断精度を向上させる可能性があります61,80。種子貯蔵タンパク質(例えば、落花生由来のAra h 1、Ara h 2、Ara h 3およびAra h 6)を用いた研究がある86;脂質伝達タンパク質(例えば、モモ由来のPru p 3および落花生由来のAra h 9)80,86;ベットv1ホモログ(例えば、ピーナッツのAra h 8)87。他の潜在的な有用性は、花粉食物アレルギー症候群21,87,88、赤身肉アレルギー89、または食物依存性運動誘発アナフィラキシー66の場合の原因アレルゲンの特定に関連しています。

興味深いことに、BATは、ピーナッツおよび牛乳アレルギー患者の研究で観察されるように、より重篤な反応を有する患者が活性化好塩基球の割合が高いため、アレルギー反応の重症度および閾値に関する情報を提供することができる84,90,91;微量のアレルゲンに反応する患者は、より大きな好塩基球感受性を示す84、90、92。これらのデータは、BATがより綿密なフォローアップとより強化された教育を必要とする高リスクアレルギー患者を特定するのに役立つ可能性があることを示唆しています93。さらに、BATは、食品チャレンジ応答70,91,92,94および反応性の閾値90,95を予測して、食品を安全に(再)導入できる時期を決定するのに役立つことが報告されています84。ただし、これらの調査結果はいくつかの研究では物議を醸しており63,96、さらに研究が必要です。

一方、BATは、自然または免疫調節治療下での食物アレルギーの解決を経時的に監視するために使用されてきましたが、これまでは経口食品チャレンジによってのみ評価されており、関連するリスクとコストがあります84,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106、107,108。さらに、好塩基球の活性化はオマリズマブによる治療中に減少するが、治療の中止後に増加するため、食物アレルギーにおけるオマリズマブの効果を監視するためにも使用されている109。

吸入剤アレルギー
BATは、sIgE定量とSTによって日常的に診断を確立することができるため、吸入アレルギーにおいてめったに有益ではありません。しかし、局所アレルギー性鼻炎(鼻誘発検査陽性のsIgEおよび陰性STの検出不能レベル)の場合、BATは症例の50%で診断を可能にした110。さらに、好塩基球感受性と鼻/気管支誘発試験への反応、および喘息の重症度とオマリズマブ111,112による治療の有効性との相関が報告されています。

BATは、おそらくIgG抗体113,114,115,116,117の遮断の干渉のために、免疫療法中に好塩基球感受性が低下するため、イエダニおよび花粉のアレルゲン免疫療法のモニタリングにも使用されています。

膜翅目毒アレルギー
膜翅目毒アレルギーの診断は、日常的にSTおよび血清sIgEに基づいています。BATは高い感度(85-100%)と特異度(83-100%)を示しており、曖昧な結果が得られる場合、または毒アレルギーの示唆的な病歴があるが検出できないsIgEおよび陰性のST118,119の患者に有用であることが報告されています。しかしながら、BATはこれらの反応の重症度を予測していないようである120,121。

患者の最大60%がスズメバチとハチ毒の両方にsIgEを示し、優勢なアレルゲンの同定は適切な免疫療法治療に不可欠です。これらの場合、BATは、優性アレルゲン119,122,123,124の同定に有用であることが報告されている。ハチおよびスズメバチ毒の主要なアレルゲンに対するsIgEは、両方の毒に対して二重陽性の患者におけるBATの有用性を低下させる可能性があるが、主にsIgE決定において陰性の結果を有する被験者において有用な情報を提供する123。

いくつかの研究は、BATがこの治療オプションが好塩基球感受性を低下させることが報告されているため、毒免疫療法の蓄積段階での副作用の予測バイオマーカーとして有用である可能性があることを示唆しています。しかし、反応性は低下せず、このBATユーティリティは現在物議を醸しています13,120,125,126,127,128,129,130。

じんましんと血管浮腫
慢性蕁麻疹患者のサブセットは、自己アレルゲンに対するIgE自己抗体および肥満細胞表面に存在するFcεRIまたはIgE−FcεRI複合体を標的とするIgG自己抗体に起因する自己免疫病態生理機能を有する131,132。臨床診療では、このタイプの慢性蕁麻疹の診断は、偶発的な感染のリスクがある陽性の自家血清STに依存してきました。BATは、慢性蕁麻疹が疑われる患者を診断および監視するためのin vitro検査として提案されています。好塩基球の表面上のCD63およびCD203c発現の両方が、慢性蕁麻疹患者からの血清による刺激後に増加すると報告されており、活性自己抗体の検出を示している133,134,135,136,137。最近、BAT陽性の患者は、蕁麻疹活動性スコアによって評価される最も活発な病状を経験することが多く、BAT138陰性の患者と比較して、サードライン治療(シクロスポリンAまたはオマリズマブ)と一緒に高用量の抗ヒスタミン薬を必要とすることが報告されています。

Protocol

プロトコルの履行は、ヘルシンキ宣言の原則に従って実施され、地元の倫理委員会(スペイン、マラガ州調査委員会)によって承認されました。すべての被験者は調査研究について口頭で知らされ、対応するインフォームドコンセントフォームに署名しました。 注:現在のプロトコルは、著者が毎日使用するBAT手順を詳述しています。ただし、これは標準化された方?…

Representative Results

アレルゲンまたは薬物を用いて実施されるBATは、IgE依存性過敏反応の調査を可能にする。好塩基球反応性は、最良の結果を得るために少なくとも2つの最適濃度で測定されるべきであり34 、活性化は、細胞表面上のCD63のアップレギュレーションによって視覚化される。アレルゲンの場合、さらに、好塩基球反応性を確認するために、好塩基球感受性は、複数の減少アレルゲ?…

Discussion

BATは、IgEを介したアレルギー反応を評価するための補完的な 体外 診断用検査であり、薬物、食品、吸入剤などのさまざまなトリガーによって引き起こされる反応の診断、および一部の形態の慢性蕁麻疹に有用であることが示されています。一般に、BAT性能は、i)アレルゲン/薬物がSTで偽陽性の結果を生成する場合に考慮する必要があります。ii)アレルゲン/薬物をSTまたはsIgE定量に使?…

Disclosures

The authors have nothing to disclose.

Acknowledgements

クラウディア・コラッツァの貴重な英語サポートに感謝します。この作業は、MINICOの保健研究所「カルロスIII」(ISCIII)の支援を受けました(ERDFが共同出資した助成金:「Una manera de hacer Europa」;助成金番号PI20 / 01715;PI18/00095;PI17/01410;PI17/01318;PI17 / 01237およびレティックアラディヤルRD16 / 0006 / 0001;アンダルシア地域保健省(助成金番号PI-0127-2020、PIO-0176-2018;PE-0172-2018;PE-0039-2018;PC-0098-2017;PI-0075-2017;PI-0241-2016)。IDは臨床研究者(B-0001-2017)であり、AAは上級ポスドク契約(RH-0099-2020)を保持しており、どちらもアンダルシア地域保健省(ESFが共同出資:「アンダルシアセムエベコンヨーロッパ」)によってサポートされています。

Materials

5 mL Round Bottom Polystyrene Test Tube, without Cap, Nonsterile Corning 352008
APC anti-human CD193 (CCR3) Antibody BioLegend 310708
BD FACSCalibur Flow Cytometer BD Biosciences
Calcium chloride Sigma-Aldrich C1016
FITC anti-human CD63 Antibody BioLegend 353006
HEPES (1 M) Thermo-Fisher 15630106
Lysing Solution 10x concentrated BD Biosciences 349202
Magnesium chloride Sigma-Aldrich M8266
N-Formyl-Met-Leu-Phe Sigma-Aldrich F3506
PE anti-human CD203c (E-NPP3) Antibody BioLegend 324606
Potassium chloride Sigma-Aldrich P9541
Purified Mouse Anti-Human IgE BD Biosciences 555857
Recombinant Human IL-3 R&D Systems 203-IL
Sheath Fluid BD Biosciences 342003
Sodium chloride Sigma-Aldrich S3014
TUBE 9 mL LH Lithium Heparin Greiner Bio-One 455084
Tween 20 Sigma-Aldrich P1379
DOWNLOAD MATERIALS LIST

References

  1. Mayorga, C., et al. In vitro tests for drug hypersensitivity reactions: an ENDA/EAACI Drug Allergy Interest Group position paper. Allergy. 71 (8), 1103-1134 (2016).
  2. Romano, A., et al. Towards a more precise diagnosis of hypersensitivity to beta-lactams – an EAACI position paper. Allergy. 75 (6), 1300-1315 (2020).
  3. Garvey, L. H., et al. An EAACI position paper on the investigation of perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions. Allergy. 74 (10), 1872-1884 (2019).
  4. Gomes, E. R., et al. Drug hypersensitivity in children: report from the pediatric task force of the EAACI Drug Allergy Interest Group. Allergy. 71 (2), 149-161 (2016).
  5. Ansotegui, I. J., et al. IgE allergy diagnostics and other relevant tests in allergy, a World Allergy Organization position paper. World Allergy Organization Journal. 13 (2), 100080 (2020).
  6. Jeebhay, M. F., et al. Food processing and occupational respiratory allergy- An EAACI position paper. Allergy. 74 (10), 1852-1871 (2019).
  7. Ebo, D. G., et al. Flow-assisted allergy diagnosis: current applications and future perspectives. Allergy. 61 (9), 1028-1039 (2006).
  8. Bochner, B. S. Systemic activation of basophils and eosinophils: markers and consequences. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 106 (5), 292-302 (2000).
  9. Ghannadan, M., et al. Detection of novel CD antigens on the surface of human mast cells and basophils. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 127 (4), 299-307 (2002).
  10. Hoffmann, H. J., et al. The clinical utility of basophil activation testing in diagnosis and monitoring of allergic disease. Allergy. 70 (11), 1393-1405 (2015).
  11. Sainte-Laudy, J., Sabbah, A., Drouet, M., Lauret, M. G., Loiry, M. Diagnosis of venom allergy by flow cytometry. Correlation with clinical history, skin tests, specific IgE, histamine and leukotriene C4 release. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 30 (8), 1166-1171 (2000).
  12. Sturm, G. J., et al. The CD63 basophil activation test in Hymenoptera venom allergy: a prospective study. Allergy. 59 (10), 1110-1117 (2004).
  13. Erdmann, S. M., et al. The basophil activation test in wasp venom allergy: sensitivity, specificity and monitoring specific immunotherapy. Allergy. 59 (10), 1102-1109 (2004).
  14. De Weck, A. L., et al. Diagnostic tests based on human basophils: more potentials and perspectives than pitfalls. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 146 (3), 177-189 (2008).
  15. Buhring, H. J., Streble, A., Valent, P. The basophil-specific ectoenzyme E-NPP3 (CD203c) as a marker for cell activation and allergy diagnosis. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 133 (4), 317-329 (2004).
  16. Knol, E. F., Mul, F. P., Jansen, H., Calafat, J., Roos, D. Monitoring human basophil activation via CD63 monoclonal antibody 435. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 88 (3), 328-338 (1991).
  17. Fureder, W., Agis, H., Sperr, W. R., Lechner, K., Valent, P. The surface membrane antigen phenotype of human blood basophils. Allergy. 49 (10), 861-865 (1994).
  18. Sanz, M. L., et al. Allergen-induced basophil activation: CD63 cell expression detected by flow cytometry in patients allergic to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and Lolium perenne. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 31 (7), 1007-1013 (2001).
  19. Monneret, G., et al. Monitoring of basophil activation using CD63 and CCR3 in allergy to muscle relaxant drugs. Clin Immunol. 102 (2), 192-199 (2002).
  20. Sanz, M. L., et al. Flow cytometric basophil activation test by detection of CD63 expression in patients with immediate-type reactions to betalactam antibiotics. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 32 (2), 277-286 (2002).
  21. Ebo, D. G., et al. Flow cytometric analysis of in vitro activated basophils, specific IgE and skin tests in the diagnosis of pollen-associated food allergy. Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry. 64 (1), 28-33 (2005).
  22. Sudheer, P. S., Hall, J. E., Read, G. F., Rowbottom, A. W., Williams, P. E. Flow cytometric investigation of peri-anaesthetic anaphylaxis using CD63 and CD203c. Anaesthesia. 60 (3), 251-256 (2005).
  23. Binder, M., Fierlbeck, G., King, T., Valent, P., Buhring, H. J. Individual hymenoptera venom compounds induce upregulation of the basophil activation marker ectonucleotide pyrophosphatase/phosphodiesterase 3 (CD203c) in sensitized patients. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 129 (2), 160-168 (2002).
  24. Hauswirth, A. W., et al. Recombinant allergens promote expression of CD203c on basophils in sensitized individuals. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 110 (1), 102-109 (2002).
  25. Boumiza, R., et al. Marked improvement of the basophil activation test by detecting CD203c instead of CD63. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 33 (2), 259-265 (2003).
  26. Macglashan, D. Expression of CD203c and CD63 in human basophils: relationship to differential regulation of piecemeal and anaphylactic degranulation processes. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 40 (9), 1365-1377 (2010).
  27. Mayorga, C., Dona, I., Perez-Inestrosa, E., Fernandez, T. D., Torres, M. J. The Value of In Vitro Tests to DiminishDrug Challenges. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 18 (6), (2017).
  28. Brockow, K., et al. General considerations for skin test procedures in the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity. Allergy. 57 (1), 45-51 (2002).
  29. Brockow, K., et al. Skin test concentrations for systemically administered drugs — an ENDA/EAACI Drug Allergy Interest Group position paper. Allergy. 68 (6), 702-712 (2013).
  30. Torres, M. J., et al. Approach to the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity reactions: similarities and differences between Europe and North America. Clinical and Translational Allergy. 7, 7 (2017).
  31. Mayorga, C., et al. In vitro tests for drug hypersensitivity reactions: an ENDA/EAACI Drug Allergy Interest Group position paper. Allergy. 71 (8), 1103-1134 (2016).
  32. Mayorga, C., et al. Controversies in drug allergy: In vitro testing. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 143 (1), 56-65 (2019).
  33. Aberer, W., et al. Drug provocation testing in the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity reactions: general considerations. Allergy. 58 (9), 854-863 (2003).
  34. De Week, A. L., et al. Diagnosis of immediate-type beta-lactam allergy in vitro by flow-cytometric basophil activation test and sulfidoleukotriene production: a multicenter study. Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology. 19 (2), 91-109 (2009).
  35. Abuaf, N., et al. Comparison of two basophil activation markers CD63 and CD203c in the diagnosis of amoxicillin allergy. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 38 (6), 921-928 (2008).
  36. Torres, M. J., et al. The diagnostic interpretation of basophil activation test in immediate allergic reactions to betalactams. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 34 (11), 1768-1775 (2004).
  37. Torres, M. J., et al. Clavulanic acid can be the component in amoxicillin-clavulanic acid responsible for immediate hypersensitivity reactions. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 125 (2), 502-505 (2010).
  38. Eberlein, B., et al. A new basophil activation test using CD63 and CCR3 in allergy to antibiotics. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 40 (3), 411-418 (2010).
  39. Sanchez-Morillas, L., et al. Selective allergic reactions to clavulanic acid: a report of 9 cases. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 126 (1), 177-179 (2010).
  40. Leysen, J., et al. Allergy to rocuronium: from clinical suspicion to correct diagnosis. Allergy. 66 (8), 1014-1019 (2011).
  41. Ebo, D. G., et al. Flow-assisted diagnostic management of anaphylaxis from rocuronium bromide. Allergy. 61 (8), 935-939 (2006).
  42. Kvedariene, V., et al. Diagnosis of neuromuscular blocking agent hypersensitivity reactions using cytofluorimetric analysis of basophils. Allergy. 61 (3), 311-315 (2006).
  43. Hagau, N., Gherman-Ionica, N., Sfichi, M., Petrisor, C. Threshold for basophil activation test positivity in neuromuscular blocking agents hypersensitivity reactions. Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol. 9 (1), 42 (2013).
  44. Uyttebroek, A. P., et al. Flowcytometric diagnosis of atracurium-induced anaphylaxis. Allergy. 69 (10), 1324-1332 (2014).
  45. Abuaf, N., et al. Validation of a flow cytometric assay detecting in vitro basophil activation for the diagnosis of muscle relaxant allergy. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 104 (2), 411-418 (1999).
  46. Aranda, A., et al. In vitro evaluation of IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reactions to quinolones. Allergy. 66 (2), 247-254 (2011).
  47. Fernandez, T. D., et al. Hypersensitivity to fluoroquinolones: The expression of basophil activation markers depends on the clinical entity and the culprit fluoroquinolone. Medicine (Baltimore). 95 (23), 3679 (2016).
  48. Mayorga, C., et al. Fluoroquinolone photodegradation influences specific basophil activation. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 160 (4), 377-382 (2013).
  49. Rouzaire, P., et al. Negativity of the basophil activation test in quinolone hypersensitivity: a breakthrough for provocation test decision-making. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 157 (3), 299-302 (2012).
  50. Hagau, N., Longrois, D., Petrisor, C. Threshold for positivity and optimal dipyrone concentration in flow cytometry-assisted basophil activation test. Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research. 5 (6), 383-388 (2013).
  51. Gamboa, P. M., et al. Use of CD63 expression as a marker of in vitro basophil activation and leukotriene determination in metamizol allergic patients. Allergy. 58 (4), 312-317 (2003).
  52. Gomez, E., et al. Immunoglobulin E-mediated immediate allergic reactions to dipyrone: value of basophil activation test in the identification of patients. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 39 (8), 1217-1224 (2009).
  53. Pinnobphun, P., Buranapraditkun, S., Kampitak, T., Hirankarn, N., Klaewsongkram, J. The diagnostic value of basophil activation test in patients with an immediate hypersensitivity reaction to radiocontrast media. Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. 106 (5), 387-393 (2011).
  54. Salas, M., et al. Diagnosis of immediate hypersensitivity reactions to radiocontrast media. Allergy. 68 (9), 1203-1206 (2013).
  55. Chirumbolo, S. Basophil activation test (BAT) in the diagnosis of immediate hypersensitivity reactions to radiocontrast media. Allergy. 68 (12), 1627-1628 (2013).
  56. Dona, I., et al. Hypersensitivity Reactions to Multiple Iodinated Contrast Media. Frontiers in Pharmacology. 11, 575437 (2020).
  57. Giavina-Bianchi, P., Galvao, V. R., Picard, M., Caiado, J., Castells, M. C. Basophil Activation Test is a Relevant Biomarker of the Outcome of Rapid Desensitization in Platinum Compounds-Allergy. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Practice. 5 (3), 728-736 (2017).
  58. Iwamoto, T., et al. Evaluation of basophil CD203c as a predictor of carboplatin-related hypersensitivity reaction in patients with gynecologic cancer. Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin. 35 (9), 1487-1495 (2012).
  59. Iwamoto, T., et al. Carboplatin-induced severe hypersensitivity reaction: role of IgE-dependent basophil activation and FcepsilonRI. Cancer Science. 105 (11), 1472-1479 (2014).
  60. Muraro, A., et al. EAACI food allergy and anaphylaxis guidelines: diagnosis and management of food allergy. Allergy. 69 (8), 1008-1025 (2014).
  61. Sato, S., et al. Basophil activation marker CD203c is useful in the diagnosis of hen’s egg and cow’s milk allergies in children. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 152, 54-61 (2010).
  62. Ciepiela, O., et al. Basophil activation test based on the expression of CD203c in the diagnostics of cow milk allergy in children. European Journal of Medical Research. 15, 21-26 (2010).
  63. Ocmant, A., et al. Basophil activation tests for the diagnosis of food allergy in children. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 39 (8), 1234-1245 (2009).
  64. Carroccio, A., et al. A comparison between two different in vitro basophil activation tests for gluten- and cow’s milk protein sensitivity in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)-like patients. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. 51 (6), 1257-1263 (2013).
  65. Tokuda, R., et al. Antigen-induced expression of CD203c on basophils predicts IgE-mediated wheat allergy. Allergology International. 58 (2), 193-199 (2009).
  66. Chinuki, Y., et al. CD203c expression-based basophil activation test for diagnosis of wheat-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 129 (5), 1404-1406 (2012).
  67. Carroccio, A., et al. Non-celiac wheat sensitivity diagnosed by double-blind placebo-controlled challenge: exploring a new clinical entity. Am J Gastroenterol. 107 (12), 1898-1906 (2012).
  68. Carroccio, A., et al. A cytologic assay for diagnosis of food hypersensitivity in patients with irritable bowel syndrome. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 8 (3), 254-260 (2010).
  69. Santos, A. F., et al. Basophil activation test discriminates between allergy and tolerance in peanut-sensitized children. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 134 (3), 645-652 (2014).
  70. Glaumann, S., et al. Basophil allergen threshold sensitivity, CD-sens, IgE-sensitization and DBPCFC in peanut-sensitized children. Allergy. 67 (2), 242-247 (2012).
  71. Javaloyes, G., et al. Performance of different in vitro techniques in the molecular diagnosis of peanut allergy. Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology. 22 (7), 508-513 (2012).
  72. Glaumann, S., Nopp, A., Johansson, S. G., Borres, M. P., Nilsson, C. Oral peanut challenge identifies an allergy but the peanut allergen threshold sensitivity is not reproducible. PLoS One. 8 (1), 53465 (2013).
  73. Elizur, A., et al. NUT Co Reactivity – ACquiring Knowledge for Elimination Recommendations (NUT CRACKER) study. Allergy. 73 (3), 593-601 (2018).
  74. Cucu, T., De Meulenaer, B., Bridts, C., Devreese, B., Ebo, D. Impact of thermal processing and the Maillard reaction on the basophil activation of hazelnut allergic patients. Food Chem Toxicol. 50 (5), 1722-1728 (2012).
  75. Worm, M., et al. Impact of native, heat-processed and encapsulated hazelnuts on the allergic response in hazelnut-allergic patients. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 39 (1), 159-166 (2009).
  76. Brandstrom, J., et al. Basophil allergen threshold sensitivity and component-resolved diagnostics improve hazelnut allergy diagnosis. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 45 (9), 1412-1418 (2015).
  77. Lotzsch, B., Dolle, S., Vieths, S., Worm, M. Exploratory analysis of CD63 and CD203c expression in basophils from hazelnut sensitized and allergic individuals. Clinical and Translational Allergy. 6, 45 (2016).
  78. Ebo, D. G., Bridts, C. H., Hagendorens, M. M., De Clerck, L. S., Stevens, W. J. Scampi allergy: from fancy name-giving to correct diagnosis. Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology. 18 (3), 228-230 (2008).
  79. Gamboa, P. M., et al. Component-resolved in vitro diagnosis in peach-allergic patients. Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology. 19 (1), 13-20 (2009).
  80. Gamboa, P. M., et al. Two different profiles of peach allergy in the north of Spain. Allergy. 62 (4), 408-414 (2007).
  81. Diaz-Perales, A., et al. Recombinant Pru p 3 and natural Pru p 3, a major peach allergen, show equivalent immunologic reactivity: a new tool for the diagnosis of fruit allergy. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 111 (3), 628-633 (2003).
  82. Erdmann, S. M., Heussen, N., Moll-Slodowy, S., Merk, H. F., Sachs, B. CD63 expression on basophils as a tool for the diagnosis of pollen-associated food allergy: sensitivity and specificity. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 33 (5), 607-614 (2003).
  83. Erdmann, S. M., et al. In vitro analysis of birch-pollen-associated food allergy by use of recombinant allergens in the basophil activation test. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 136 (3), 230-238 (2005).
  84. Rubio, A., et al. Benefit of the basophil activation test in deciding when to reintroduce cow’s milk in allergic children. Allergy. 66 (1), 92-100 (2011).
  85. Decuyper, I. i., et al. Performance of basophil activation test and specific IgG4 as diagnostic tools in nonspecific lipid transfer protein allergy: Antwerp-Barcelona comparison. Allergy. 75 (3), 616-624 (2020).
  86. Mayorga, C., et al. Basophil response to peanut allergens in Mediterranean peanut-allergic patients. Allergy. 69 (7), 964-968 (2014).
  87. Glaumann, S., et al. Evaluation of basophil allergen threshold sensitivity (CD-sens) to peanut and Ara h 8 in children IgE-sensitized to Ara h 8. Clinical and Molecular Allergy. 13 (1), 5 (2015).
  88. Wolbing, F., et al. The clinical relevance of birch pollen profilin cross-reactivity in sensitized patients. Allergy. 72 (4), 562-569 (2017).
  89. Commins, S. P., et al. Delayed clinical and ex vivo response to mammalian meat in patients with IgE to galactose-alpha-1,3-galactose. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 134 (1), 108-115 (2014).
  90. Santos, A. F., et al. Distinct parameters of the basophil activation test reflect the severity and threshold of allergic reactions to peanut. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 135 (1), 179-186 (2015).
  91. Song, Y., et al. Correlations between basophil activation, allergen-specific IgE with outcome and severity of oral food challenges. Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. 114 (4), 319-326 (2015).
  92. Chinthrajah, R. S., et al. Development of a tool predicting severity of allergic reaction during peanut challenge. Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. 121 (1), 69-76 (2018).
  93. Santos, A. F., Shreffler, W. G. Road map for the clinical application of the basophil activation test in food allergy. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 47 (9), 1115-1124 (2017).
  94. Santos, A. F., et al. Biomarkers of severity and threshold of allergic reactions during oral peanut challenges. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 146 (2), 344-355 (2020).
  95. Reier-Nilsen, T., et al. Predicting reactivity threshold in children with anaphylaxis to peanut. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 48 (4), 415-423 (2018).
  96. Chapuis, A., et al. h 2 basophil activation test does not predict clinical reactivity to peanut. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Practice. 6 (5), 1772-1774 (2018).
  97. Patil, S. U., et al. Early decrease in basophil sensitivity to Ara h 2 precedes sustained unresponsiveness after peanut oral immunotherapy. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 144 (5), 1310-1319 (2019).
  98. Chinthrajah, R. S., et al. Sustained outcomes in oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy (POISED study): a large, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study. Lancet. 394 (10207), 1437-1449 (2019).
  99. Kim, E. H., et al. Long-term sublingual immunotherapy for peanut allergy in children: Clinical and immunologic evidence of desensitization. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 144 (5), 1320-1326 (2019).
  100. Tsai, M., Mukai, K., Chinthrajah, R. S., Nadeau, K. C., Galli, S. J. Sustained successful peanut oral immunotherapy associated with low basophil activation and peanut-specific IgE. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 145 (3), 885-896 (2020).
  101. Nachshon, L., et al. Efficacy and Safety of Sesame Oral Immunotherapy-A Real-World, Single-Center Study. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Practice. 7 (8), 2775-2781 (2019).
  102. Goldberg, M. R., et al. Efficacy of baked milk oral immunotherapy in baked milk-reactive allergic patients. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 136 (6), 1601-1606 (2015).
  103. Keet, C. A., et al. The safety and efficacy of sublingual and oral immunotherapy for milk allergy. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 129 (2), 448-455 (2012).
  104. Matsui, T., et al. Changes in passively-sensitized basophil activation to alphaS1-casein after oral immunotherapy. Immunity, Inflammation and Disease. 8 (2), 188-197 (2020).
  105. Giavi, S., et al. Oral immunotherapy with low allergenic hydrolysed egg in egg allergic children. Allergy. 71 (11), 1575-1584 (2016).
  106. Jones, S. M., et al. Clinical efficacy and immune regulation with peanut oral immunotherapy. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 124 (2), 292-300 (2009).
  107. Burks, A. W., et al. Oral immunotherapy for treatment of egg allergy in children. New England Journal of Medicine. 367 (3), 233-243 (2012).
  108. Elizur, A., et al. Clinical and laboratory 2-year outcome of oral immunotherapy in patients with cow’s milk allergy. Allergy. 71 (2), 275-278 (2016).
  109. Gernez, Y., et al. Basophil CD203c levels are increased at baseline and can be used to monitor omalizumab treatment in subjects with nut allergy. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 154 (4), 318-327 (2011).
  110. Gomez, E., et al. Role of the basophil activation test in the diagnosis of local allergic rhinitis. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 132 (4), 975-976 (2013).
  111. Nopp, A., et al. Basophil allergen threshold sensitivity: a useful approach to anti-IgE treatment efficacy evaluation. Allergy. 61 (3), 298-302 (2006).
  112. Dahlen, B., et al. Basophil allergen threshold sensitivity, CD-sens, is a measure of allergen sensitivity in asthma. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 41 (8), 1091-1097 (2011).
  113. Lalek, N., Kosnik, M., Silar, M., Korosec, P. Immunoglobulin G-dependent changes in basophil allergen threshold sensitivity during birch pollen immunotherapy. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 40 (8), 1186-1193 (2010).
  114. Schmid, J. M., Wurtzen, P. A., Dahl, R., Hoffmann, H. J. Early improvement in basophil sensitivity predicts symptom relief with grass pollen immunotherapy. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 134 (3), 741-744 (2014).
  115. Sharif, H., et al. Immunologic mechanisms of a short-course of Lolium perenne peptide immunotherapy: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 144 (3), 738-749 (2019).
  116. Kim, S. H., et al. Changes in basophil activation during immunotherapy with house dust mite and mugwort in patients with allergic rhinitis. Asia Pacific Allergy. 8 (1), 6 (2018).
  117. Feng, M., et al. Allergen Immunotherapy-Induced Immunoglobulin G4 Reduces Basophil Activation in House Dust Mite-Allergic Asthma Patients. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology. 8, 30 (2020).
  118. Korosec, P., et al. Clinical routine utility of basophil activation testing for diagnosis of hymenoptera-allergic patients with emphasis on individuals with negative venom-specific IgE antibodies. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 161 (4), 363-368 (2013).
  119. Ebo, D. G., Hagendorens, M. M., Bridts, C. H., De Clerck, L. S., Stevens, W. J. Hymenoptera venom allergy: taking the sting out of difficult cases. Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology. 17 (6), 357-360 (2007).
  120. Ebo, D. G., et al. Flow-assisted quantification of in vitro activated basophils in the diagnosis of wasp venom allergy and follow-up of wasp venom immunotherapy. Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry. 72 (3), 196-203 (2007).
  121. Ott, H., Tenbrock, K., Baron, J., Merk, H., Lehmann, S. Basophil activation test for the diagnosis of hymenoptera venom allergy in childhood: a pilot study. Klin Padiatr. 223 (1), 27-32 (2011).
  122. Eberlein-Konig, B., Rakoski, J., Behrendt, H., Ring, J. Use of CD63 expression as marker of in vitro basophil activation in identifying the culprit in insect venom allergy. Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology. 14 (1), 10-16 (2004).
  123. Eberlein, B., Krischan, L., Darsow, U., Ollert, M., Ring, J. Double positivity to bee and wasp venom: improved diagnostic procedure by recombinant allergen-based IgE testing and basophil activation test including data about cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 130 (1), 155-161 (2012).
  124. Sturm, G. J., et al. Inconsistent results of diagnostic tools hamper the differentiation between bee and vespid venom allergy. PLoS One. 6 (6), 20842 (2011).
  125. Zitnik, S. E., et al. Monitoring honeybee venom immunotherapy in children with the basophil activation test. Pediatric Allergy and Immunology. 23 (2), 166-172 (2012).
  126. Kosnik, M., Silar, M., Bajrovic, N., Music, E., Korosec, P. High sensitivity of basophils predicts side-effects in venom immunotherapy. Allergy. 60 (11), 1401-1406 (2005).
  127. Celesnik, N., et al. Short-term venom immunotherapy induces desensitization of FcepsilonRI-mediated basophil response. Allergy. 67 (12), 1594-1600 (2012).
  128. Nullens, S., et al. Basophilic histamine content and release during venom immunotherapy: insights by flow cytometry. Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry. 84 (3), 173-178 (2013).
  129. Bidad, K., Nawijn, M. C., Van Oosterhout, A. J., Van Der Heide, S., Elberink, J. N. Basophil activation test in the diagnosis and monitoring of mastocytosis patients with wasp venom allergy on immunotherapy. Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry. 86 (3), 183-190 (2014).
  130. Eberlein-Konig, B., Schmidt-Leidescher, C., Behrendt, H., Ring, J. Predicting side-effects in venom immunotherapy by basophil activation. Allergy. 61 (7), 897 (2006).
  131. Kikuchi, Y., Kaplan, A. P. Mechanisms of autoimmune activation of basophils in chronic urticaria. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 107 (6), 1056-1062 (2001).
  132. Huston, D. P., Sabato, V. Decoding the Enigma of Urticaria and Angioedema. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Practice. 6 (4), 1171-1175 (2018).
  133. Netchiporouk, E., et al. Positive CD63 Basophil Activation Tests Are Common in Children with Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria and Linked to High Disease Activity. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 171 (2), 81-88 (2016).
  134. Irinyi, B., et al. Extended diagnostic value of autologous serum skin test and basophil CD63 expression assay in chronic urticaria. British Journal of Dermatology. 168 (3), 656-658 (2013).
  135. Chen, Q., et al. Basophil CD63 expression in chronic spontaneous urticaria: correlation with allergic sensitization, serum autoreactivity and basophil reactivity. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. 31 (3), 463-468 (2017).
  136. Wedi, B., Novacovic, V., Koerner, M., Kapp, A. Chronic urticaria serum induces histamine release, leukotriene production, and basophil CD63 surface expression–inhibitory effects ofanti-inflammatory drugs. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 105 (3), 552-560 (2000).
  137. Yasnowsky, K. M., et al. Chronic urticaria sera increase basophil CD203c expression. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 117 (6), 1430-1434 (2006).
  138. Curto-Barredo, L., et al. Basophil Activation Test identifies the patients with Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria suffering the most active disease. Immunity, Inflammation and Disease. 4 (4), 441-445 (2016).
  139. Santos, A. F., Alpan, O., Hoffmann, H. J. Basophil activation test: Mechanisms and considerations for use in clinical trials and clinical practice. Allergy. , (2021).
  140. Boumiza, R., Debard, A. L., Monneret, G. The basophil activation test by flow cytometry: recent developments in clinical studies, standardization and emerging perspectives. Clinical and Molecular Allergy. 3, 9 (2005).
  141. Aljadi, Z., et al. Activation of basophils is a new and sensitive marker of biocompatibility in hemodialysis. Artif Organs. 38 (11), 945-953 (2014).
  142. Rasmussen, P., Spillner, E., Hoffmann, H. J. Inhibiting phosphatase SHIP-1 enhances suboptimal IgE-mediated activation of human blood basophils but inhibits IgE-mediated activation of cultured human mast cells. Immunology Letters. 210, 40-46 (2019).
  143. Mueller-Wirth, N., et al. IgE-mediated chlorhexidine allergy-Cross-reactivity with other biguanide disinfectants. Allergy. 75 (12), 3237-3247 (2020).
  144. Johansson, S. G., et al. Passive IgE-sensitization by blood transfusion. Allergy. 60 (9), 1192-1199 (2005).
  145. Ariza, A., et al. Basophil activation after nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs stimulation in patients with immediate hypersensitivity reactions to these drugs. Cytometry A. 85 (5), 400-407 (2014).
  146. Sturm, G. J., et al. The basophil activation test in the diagnosis of allergy: technical issues and critical factors. Allergy. 64 (9), 1319-1326 (2009).
  147. Iqbal, K., Bhargava, K., Skov, P. S., Falkencrone, S., Grattan, C. E. A positive serum basophil histamine release assay is a marker for ciclosporin-responsiveness in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria. Clinical and Translational Allergy. 2 (1), 19 (2012).
  148. Korosec, P., et al. high-affinity IgE receptors, and CCL2 in human anaphylaxis. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 140 (3), 750-758 (2017).
  149. Fernandez, T. D., et al. Negativization rates of IgE radioimmunoassay and basophil activation test in immediate reactions to penicillins. Allergy. 64 (2), 242-248 (2009).
  150. Kwok, M., Lack, G., Santos, A. F. Improved standardisation of the whole blood basophil activation test to peanut. Clinical and Translational Allergy. 8 (26), 15-16 (2017).
  151. Mukai, K., et al. Assessing basophil activation by using flow cytometry and mass cytometry in blood stored 24 hours before analysis. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 139 (3), 889-899 (2017).
  152. Sousa, N., Martinez-Aranguren, R., Fernandez-Benitez, M., Ribeiro, F., Sanz, M. L. Comparison of basophil activation test results in blood preserved in acid citrate dextrose and EDTA. Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology. 20 (6), 535-536 (2010).
  153. Knol, E. F., Koenderman, L., Mul, F. P., Verhoeven, A. J., Roos, D. Differential activation of human basophils by anti-IgE and formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine. Indications for protein kinase C-dependent and -independent activation pathways. European Journal of Immunology. 21 (4), 881-885 (1991).
  154. Macglashan, D. W. Basophil activation testing. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 132 (4), 777-787 (2013).
  155. Macglashan, D., Moore, G., Muchhal, U. Regulation of IgE-mediated signalling in human basophils by CD32b and its role in Syk down-regulation: basic mechanisms in allergic disease. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 44 (5), 713-723 (2014).
  156. Macglashan, D. Subthreshold desensitization of human basophils re-capitulates the loss of Syk and FcepsilonRI expression characterized by other methods of desensitization. Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 42 (7), 1060-1070 (2012).
  157. Grochowy, G., Hermiston, M. L., Kuhny, M., Weiss, A., Huber, M. Requirement for CD45 in fine-tuning mast cell responses mediated by different ligand-receptor systems. Cell Signaling. 21 (8), 1277-1286 (2009).
  158. Schroeder, J. T., Chichester, K. L., Bieneman, A. P. Human basophils secrete IL-3: evidence of autocrine priming for phenotypic and functional responses in allergic disease. Journal of Immunology. 182 (4), 2432-2438 (2009).
  159. Ocmant, A., et al. Flow cytometry for basophil activation markers: the measurement of CD203c up-regulation is as reliable as CD63 expression in the diagnosis of cat allergy. Journal of Immunology Methods. 320 (1-2), 40-48 (2007).
  160. Gentinetta, T., et al. Individual IL-3 priming is crucial for consistent in vitro activation of donor basophils in patients with chronic urticaria. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 128 (6), 1227-1234 (2011).
  161. Sturm, E. M., et al. CD203c-based basophil activation test in allergy diagnosis: characteristics and differences to CD63 upregulation. Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry. 78 (5), 308-318 (2010).
  162. Hausmann, O. V., et al. Robust expression of CCR3 as a single basophil selection marker in flow cytometry. Allergy. 66 (1), 85-91 (2011).
  163. Nucera, E., et al. Utility of Basophil Activation Test for monitoring the acquisition of clinical tolerance after oral desensitization to cow’s milk: Pilot study. United European Gastroenterol Journal. 3 (3), 272-276 (2015).
  164. Imoto, Y., et al. Peripheral basophil reactivity, CD203c expression by Cryj1 stimulation, is useful for diagnosing seasonal allergic rhinitis by Japanese cedar pollen. Immunity, Inflammation and Disease. 3 (3), 300-308 (2015).
  165. Konstantinou, G. N., et al. EAACI taskforce position paper: evidence for autoimmune urticaria and proposal for defining diagnostic criteria. Allergy. 68 (1), 27-36 (2013).
  166. Santos, A. F., Becares, N., Stephens, A., Turcanu, V., Lack, G. The expression of CD123 can decrease with basophil activation: implications for the gating strategy of the basophil activation test. Clinical and Translational Allergy. 6, 11 (2016).
  167. Dijkstra, D., et al. Identification and quantification of basophils in the airways of asthmatics following segmental allergen challenge. Cytometry A. 85 (7), 580-587 (2014).
  168. Dijkstra, D., Meyer-Bahlburg, A. Human Basophils Modulate Plasma Cell Differentiation and Maturation. Journal of Immunology. 198 (1), 229-238 (2017).
  169. Sihra, B. S., Kon, O. M., Grant, J. A., Kay, A. B. Expression of high-affinity IgE receptors (Fc epsilon RI) on peripheral blood basophils, monocytes, and eosinophils in atopic and nonatopic subjects: relationship to total serum IgE concentrations. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 99 (5), 699-706 (1997).
  170. Dehlink, E., Baker, A. H., Yen, E., Nurko, S., Fiebiger, E. Relationships between levels of serum IgE, cell-bound IgE, and IgE-receptors on peripheral blood cells in a pediatric population. PLoS One. 5 (8), 12204 (2010).
  171. Hoffmann, H. J., Frandsen, P. M., Christensen, L. H., Schiotz, P. O., Dahl, R. Cultured human mast cells are heterogeneous for expression of the high-affinity IgE receptor FcepsilonRI. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 157 (3), 246-250 (2012).
  172. Ebo, D. G., et al. Analyzing histamine release by flow cytometry (HistaFlow): a novel instrument to study the degranulation patterns of basophils. Journal of Immunology Methods. 375 (1-2), 30-38 (2012).
  173. Macglashan, D. Marked differences in the signaling requirements for expression of CD203c and CD11b versus CD63 expression and histamine release in human basophils. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. 159 (3), 243-252 (2012).
  174. Torres, M. J., et al. Clavulanic acid can be the component in amoxicillin-clavulanic acid responsible for immediate hypersensitivity reactions. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 125 (2), 502-505 (2010).
  175. Ariza, A., et al. Pyrazolones metabolites are relevant for identifying selective anaphylaxis to metamizole. Scientific Reports. 6, 23845 (2016).

Tags

Basophil Activation TestAllergy DiagnosisIgE-mediated Allergic ReactionsFlow CytometryActivation MarkersDrug AllergyAllergenPositive ControlFMLPAnti-IgEStaining MixCCR3-APCCD203c-PECD63-FITCPBS-T
check_url/62600?article_type=t

Play Video
PDF
DOI
DOWNLOAD MATERIALS LIST
Cite This Article
Doña, I., Ariza, A., Fernández, T. D., Torres, M. J. Basophil Activation Test for Allergy Diagnosis. J. Vis. Exp. (171), e62600, doi:10.3791/62600 (2021).
Download Citation
Reprints and Permissions

View Video

✖

To prove you're not a robot, please enter the text in the image below

CAPTCHA Image
Play CAPTCHA Audio
Refresh Image