Sensitization to Gibberellin-Regulated Protein (Peamaclein) Among Italian Cypress Pollen-Sensitized Patients
Autor: | E Ferrarini, Enrico Scala, M Borro, Alessandro Farsi, A M Marra, G Scala, A Ciccarelli, G Cortellini, Elena Pinter, S Abbadessa, Danilo Villalta, R Asero, B R Polillo, F Murzilli, G Barilaro, G G Uasuf, Angela Rizzi, F Emiliani, Eleonora Nucera, Stefano Amato, A. Scarpa, B Yang, O Quercia, D. Bignardi, Gianni Mistrello, Arianna Aruanno, Francesca Buzzulini, C Barzaghi, Gaia Deleonardi, M Busa, Alex Ingrassia, Laura Michelina Losappio, Marina Mauro, Simonetta Masieri, Jan Walter Schroeder, V. Pravettoni, Jonas Lidholm, Maria Beatrice Bilò, D Lippolis, L Muratore, Carlo Cavaliere, Matteo Martini, F Cucinelli, M Bresciani, M Franchini, Lorenzo Cecchi, Elide A. Pastorello, M Russello, C Sacerdoti, M Mazzolini |
---|---|
Rok vydání: | 2020 |
Předmět: |
Allergy
Rosaceae Immunology Cross Reactions Immunoglobulin E 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Food allergy Immunology and Allergy Medicine Humans Cypress Sensitization 030304 developmental biology Plant Proteins Skin Tests 0303 health sciences biology business.industry food and beverages Allergens Antigens Plant Cupressus biology.organism_classification medicine.disease Gibberellins medicine.anatomical_structure 030228 respiratory system biology.protein Population study Pollen Gibberellin business Food Hypersensitivity |
Zdroj: | Journal of investigational allergologyclinical immunology. 32(1) |
ISSN: | 1018-9068 |
Popis: | Background: Peach gibberellin-regulated protein (peamaclein) has recently emerged as a relevant food allergen in cypress pollen–hypersensitive patients. Objective: We investigated monosensitization to peamaclein among Italian cypress pollen–allergic patients. Patients: A total of 835 cypress pollen–hypersensitive patients from 28 Italian allergy centers underwent a thorough work-up to determine food-allergic reactions and performed skin prick testing with a commercial peach extract containing peamaclein. IgE to rPru p 3 was measured in peach reactors, and those with negative results were enrolled as potentially monosensitized to peamaclein. IgE reactivity to rPru p 7 was evaluated using immunoblot and an experimental ImmunoCAP with rPru p 7. Results: Skin prick tests were positive to peach in 163 patients (19.5%); however, 127 (77.9%) were excluded because they reacted to Pru p 3. Twenty-four patients (14.7%) corresponding to 2.8% of the entire study population) were considered potentially monosensitized to peamaclein. No geographic preference was observed. Seventeen of the 24 patients (70.8%) had a history of food allergy, mainly to peach (n=15). Additional offending foods included other Rosaceae, citrus fruits, fig, melon, tree nuts, and kiwi. On peach immunoblot, only 3 of 18 putative peamaclein–allergic patients reacted to a band at about 7 kDa; an additional 4 patients reacted at about 50-60 kDa. Ten of 18 patients (56%) had a positive result for Pru p 7 on ImmunoCAP. Conclusion: Allergy and sensitization to peamaclein seem rare in Italy. Most patients react to peach, although other Rosaceae fruits and several citrus fruits may also be offending foods. Peach and cypress pollen probably also share cross-reacting allergens other than peamaclein. |
Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
Externí odkaz: |