2 resultados para IgE específica
em DI-fusion - The institutional repository of Université Libre de Bruxelles
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Positive skin prick tests (SPT) for food allergens and specific IgE (sIgE) in serum indicate sensitization but do not enable distinction between sensitized but tolerant and clinically allergic patients. OBJECTIVE: Herein, we evaluate the clinical relevance of basophil activation tests (BATs) for peanut or egg allergy diagnosis. METHODS: Thirty-two peanut-allergic, 14 peanut-sensitized (sIgE(+) and/or SPT(+) to peanuts) but tolerant children and 29 controls with no history of an adverse reaction to peanuts were included. Similarly, 31 egg-allergic, 14 egg-sensitized children (sIgE(+) and/or SPT(+) to egg white) and 22 controls were studied. Flow cytometric analysis of CD63 expression or CD203c upregulation on basophils and the production of leukotrienes (LT) were performed in response to an in vitro crude peanut extract or ovalbumin (OVA) challenge. RESULTS: After in vitro peanut challenge, the basophils from peanut-allergic children showed significantly higher levels of activation than those from controls (P<0.001). After OVA challenge, a similar distinction (P<0.001) was observed between egg-allergics and controls. Interestingly, the majority of egg- or peanut-sensitized children failed to activate basophils, respectively, in response to OVA and peanut challenge. The sensitivity of the CD63, CD203c and LT assay was 86.7%, 89.5% and 76.0% with a specificity of 94.1%, 97.1% and 94.6% for peanut allergy diagnosis. The corresponding performances of BATs applied to egg allergy diagnosis were 88.9%, 62.5% and 77.8% for the sensitivity and 100%, 96.4% and 96.4% for the specificity. CONCLUSION: Neither conventional tests nor BATs are sensitive and specific enough to predict food allergy accurately. However, BATs may helpfully complete conventional tests, especially SPT, allowing improved discrimination between allergic and non-allergic individuals.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND. Laboratory data suggest that insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGE-1) may stimulate the growth of different human tumors. At least in acromegalic patients, somatostatin (SMS) analogs, such as lanreotide, suppress the serum levels of growth hormone (GH) and IGE-1. METHODS. To evaluate the tolerability and biologic activity of different doses of lanreotide in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma, consecutive groups of 3 patients each were subcutaneous treated with lanreotide at doses of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 mg three times a day for 2 months. In the event of Grade 3 side effects, 3 additional patients were treated with the same dose before the next dose escalation. Serum samples were obtained on Days 0, 15, 30, and 60 for serum GH, IGF-1, and lanreotide assessment. RESULTS. Twenty-four patients were enrolled and all were evaluable. Except for the 3 and 6 mg doses, for which the observation of a Grade 3 side effect required that an additional three patients be treated, it was sufficient to treat 3 patients at each dose. The overall incidence of side effects was as follows: changes in bowel habits, 83%; abdominal cramps, 79%; diarrhea, 17%; vomiting, 17%; nausea, 21%; steatorrhea, 78%; hyperglycemia, 35%; laboratory hypothyroidism, 39%; gallstones, 13%; and weight loss, 17%. No evidence of an increase in the incidence, intensity, or duration of side effects was observed with dose escalation. Serum IGF-1 levels were as follows: Day 13: 63%, 60%, and 67% of the baseline values for the low (12 mg), intermediate (3-4 mg), and high (5- 6 mg) dose groups, respectively; Day 30: 63%, 59%, and 51%, respectively; and Day 60: 73%, 69%, and 47%, respectively. Serum lanreotide levels declined during treatment in all of the dose groups (90 ng/mL on Day 15, and 35 ng/mL on Day 60 for the 5-6 mg group; 10 ng/mL on Day 15, and 1.5 ng/mL on Day 60 for the 1-2 mg group). No antitumor activity or tumor marker reduction was observed. CONCLUSIONS. No increase in toxicity was observed when subcutaneous lanreotide doses were escalated to 6 mg three times a day for 2 months. The highest doses seemed to maintain reduced serum IGF-1 levels; with the lowest doses, a 'rebound' in serum IGF-1 levels was observed during treatment. Nevertheless, intermittent subcutaneous injections do not ensure constant serum drug concentrations over time.