Comparison of two basophil activation markers CD63 and CD203c in the diagnosis of amoxicillin allergy

Allergen screening bioassays: recent developments in lab-on-a-chip and lab-on-a-disc systems

Allergies occur when a person's immune system mounts an abnormal response with or without IgE to a normally harmless substance called an allergen. The standard skin-prick test introduces suspected allergens into the skin with lancets in order to trigger allergic reactions. This test is annoying and sometimes life threatening. New tools such as lab-on-a-chip and lab-on-a-disc, which rely on microfabrication, are designed for allergy testing. These systems provide benefits such as short analysis times, enhanced sensitivity, simplified procedures, minimal consumption of sample and reagents and low cost. This article gives a summary of these systems. In particular, a cell-based assay detecting both the IgE- and non-IgE-type triggers through the study of degranulation in a centrifugal microfluidic system is highlighted.

Basophil activation after nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs stimulation in patients with immediate hypersensitivity reactions to these drugs

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the drugs most frequently involved in allergic reactions of which two main types exist: IgE-mediated and crossintolerance. The diagnosis of crossintolerance reactions is often based on the drug provocation test. The potential value of the basophil activation test (BAT) was evaluated using different basophil markers in the diagnosis of patients with crossintolerance to NSAIDs and cutaneous symptoms. We studied 46 patients with crossintolerance to NSAIDs and 45 tolerant controls. BAT was performed with acetyl salicylic acid, paracetamol, diclofenac, dipyrone, naproxen, and ibuprofen at four different concentrations using CD193 and CD203c as basophil markers and CD63 as activation marker. We compared BAT results using CD193⁺ or CD193⁺ CD203c⁺ for basophil selection and found a significant increase in the stimulation index when using CD193⁺ CD203c⁺ in both patients and controls (P = 0.004 and P = 0.017, respectively). Selection of living cells only produced an increase in basophil stimulation in patients for both CD193⁺ and CD193⁺ CD203c⁺ (P < 0.001 for both), whereas in controls there was no change with CD193⁺ and a decrease with CD193⁺ CD203c⁺ (P = 0.001). We found that CD193⁺ CD203c⁺ increased the percentage of positive cases in patients and controls when compared with CD193⁺. When excluding dead cells, there was an increase of 21.7% in patients and 10% in controls. These results indicate that using CD193⁺ CD203⁺, excluding dead cells, is the best approach for BAT although this test is not recommended for the diagnosis of patients with crossintolerance to NSAIDs owing to its low sensitivity and specificity.

Recent applications of basophil activation tests in the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity

Immediate-type drug hypersensitivity is an increasingly significant clinical issue; however, the diagnosis is frequently hindered due to lack of safe and precise diagnostic tests. Flow cytometry-assisted basophil activation test is a safe in vitro diagnostic tool for assessing basophil activation upon allergen stimulation. In this review, we have summarized current literature on the diagnostic utilities, new indications, and methodological aspects of the basophil activation test for the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity.

An in vitro study on the risk of non-allergic type-I like hypersensitivity to Momordica charantia

BACKGROUND

Momordica charantia (MC) is a tropical plant that is extensively used in folk medicine. However, the knowledge about side effects of this plant is relatively little according to knowledge about its therapeutic effects. The aim of this study is to reveal the effects of non-allergic type-I like hypersensitivity to MC by an experiment which was designed in vitro.

METHODS

In the present study, the expression of CD63 and CD203c on peripheral blood basophils against different dilutions of MC extracts was measured using flow cytometry and compared with one another. In addition to this, intra-assay CV's of testing extracts were calculated for precision on reproducibility of test results.

RESULTS

It was observed that the fruit extract of MC at 1/100 and 1/1000 dilutions significantly increased active basophils compared to same extract at 1/10000 dilution.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, Momordica charantia may elicit a non-allergic type-I like hypersensitivity reaction in especially susceptible individuals.

Update on the performance and application of basophil activation tests

The basophil activation test (BAT) is a flow-cytometry-based functional assay that assesses the degree of cell activation after exposure to a stimuli. Though no standardized technique currently exists, recent advances have improved the performance of this assay, including identification of new basophil-specific markers and comparisons of the expression of CD63 to CD203c during activation. The basophil activation test has also been validated for many IgE-mediated disease conditions, which have been extensively reviewed elsewhere. This review focuses on the most recent applications of this test to the diagnosis of allergy to drugs, foods, venoms, and pollens, and the evolving role of the BAT in monitoring immunotherapy.

Immunologic evaluation of drug allergy

Hypersensitivity drug reactions (HDR) consist of an individual abnormal response with the involvement of the immunological system. In addition to specific immunological mechanisms where specific antibodies or sensitised T cells participate, release of inflammatory mediators by non-specific immunological recognition may also occur. Within this category are one of the most common groups of drugs, the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In addition to chemical drugs new emerging ones with an increasing protagonism are biological agents like humanised antibodies and others. For IgE dependent reactions both in vivo and in vitro tests can be used for the immunological evaluation. Sensitivity of these is not optimal and very often a drug provocation test must be considered for knowing the mechanism involved and/or establishing the diagnosis. For non-immediate reactions also both in vivo and in vitro tests can be used. Sensitivity for in vivo tests is generally low and in vitro tests may be needed for the immunological evaluation. Immunohistochemical studies of the affected tissue enable a more precise classification of non-immediate reactions. The monitorization of the acute response of the reactions has given clues for understanding these reactions and has promising results for the future of the immunological evaluation of HDR.

Blood basophils from cystic fibrosis patients with allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis are primed and hyper-responsive to stimulation by aspergillus allergens

INTRODUCTION

Fifteen to sixty percent of cystic fibrosis patients harbor Aspergillus fumigatus (Af) in their airways (CF-AC) and some will develop allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (CF-ABPA). Since basophils play a key role in allergy, we hypothesized that they would display alterations in CF-ABPA patients compared to CF-AC or patients without Af colonization (CF).

METHODS

Using flow cytometry, we measured CD203c, CD63 and CD123 levels on basophils from CF-ABPA (N=11), CF-AC (N=14), and CF (N=12) patients before and after ex vivo stimulation with Af allergens.

RESULTS

Baseline CD203c was increased in basophils from CF-ABPA compared to CF-AC and CF patients. Af extract and recombinant Aspf1 stimulated basophils from CF-ABPA patients to markedly upregulate CD203c, along with modest upregulation of CD63 and a CD123 downward trend. Plasma TARC/CCL17 at baseline and post-stimulation cell supernatant histamine levels were similar in the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In CF-ABPA, blood basophils are primed and hyperresponsive to Af allergen stimulation.

Reliability of basophil activation test using CD203c expression in diagnosis of pollen allergy

BACKGROUND

CD203c is a basophil surface marker and its expression is rapidly up-regulated after cross-linking of high-affinity immunoglobulin E (IgE) receptor (FcepsilonR1) by an allergen. CD203c basophil activation tests have been studied for the in vitro diagnosis of several allergic conditions. However, there is limited data about its diagnostic usefulness. The optimum allergen concentrations for stimulation and allergen specific cutoff values remain unknown for a number of allergens. This study was designed to investigate the efficacy of basophil activation test via CD203c in the diagnosis of pollen allergy.

METHODS

The CD203c basophil activation was determined in 31 allergic rhinitis patients with pollen allergy and 9 healthy nonatopic controls during the off-season. CD203c expression was evaluated using three-color staining protocol by flow cytometry.

RESULTS

After an in vitro stimulation with grass pollen extract, the CD203c assay clearly discriminated pollen-allergic patients from controls (p < 0.001). A dose-dependent increase in the percentages of CD203c-activated basophils was shown in rhinitis patients with pollen allergy (p < 0.001). The sensitivity and specificity was 100% and optimal cutoff values were 14.05 and 10.05% with 45.1 and 4.5 μg/mL Phl p 5 stimulation, respectively. Although the specificity was also 100%, the sensitivity was 93 and 87% and the cutoff values were 5.40 and 5.35% with 4.5 × 10(-4) and 4.5 × 10(-5) micrograms/mL Phl p 5 stimulation, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The CD203c basophil activation test seems to be a reliable tool in the diagnosis of grass pollen allergy. It could be used when conventional diagnostic tests fail or can not be performed.

The values of nasal provocation test and basophil activation test in the different patterns of ASA/NSAID hypersensitivity

BACKGROUND

The oral provocation test (OPT) is the current gold standard to diagnose aspirin hypersensitivity syndrome although it is time-consuming and contains some systemic risks. Other reliable methods with lower side effects and shorter test duration are being investigated.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the nasal provocation test (NPT) and the basophil activation test (BAT) in the diagnosis of different subtypes of aspirin sensitivity.

METHODS

Thirty aspirin sensitivity patients with cutaneous and respiratory manifestations underwent NPT and BAT with lysine-ASA. NPT result was interpreted as recommended in EAACI/GA2LEN guidelines and receiver operating characteristic analysis of BAT was performed by using 15 NSAIDs tolerant volunteers as a control group.

RESULTS

NPT was positive in 60% (18/30) of patients and BAT was positive in 76.7% (23/30) of patients. The incubation of basophils with 0.31 mg/ml of lysine-aspirin and using 4.6% activated basophils gives the best predictive values to diagnose aspirin sensitivity. The combination of both tests yielded positive results in 80% and 93.3% of aspirin-induced cutaneous and respiratory patterns. The agreement between NPT and BAT results was 63.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

NPT and BAT are beneficial to detect patients with aspirin sensitivity. The combination of both tests have additional diagnostic values; less time-consuming than OPT and their complications are negligible. A reliable alternative method with minimum side effects is needed to diagnose aspirin sensitivity in suspected patients who have contraindications for OPT.

Changes in basophil activation during grass-pollen sublingual immunotherapy do not correlate with clinical efficacy

BACKGROUND

Biomarkers predicting the safety and efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) remain to be established.

METHODS

Eighty-nine patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis to grass pollen received either a placebo or five-grass-pollen daily tablet sublingually for 4 months. Following exposure in an allergen challenge chamber, clinical responders and nonresponders were identified individually by evaluating their rhinoconjunctivitis total symptom score (RTSS). Activation of peripheral blood basophils was measured by cytofluorometry before and after 2 or 4 months of immunotherapy, based on CD203c surface expression following allergen stimulation.

RESULTS

Patients receiving the grass-pollen tablet had a relative mean improvement of 29.3% vs placebo in the average RTSS after 4 months of SLIT (P < 0.0003). No significant changes in basophil activation were noticed after 2 or 4 months of SLIT despite induction of specific IgGs. Among individual clinical responders, basophil activation was either decreased, increased, or unmodified during SLIT. Levels of basophil activation prior to immunotherapy were not predictive of local adverse reactions associated with immunotherapy. A moderate association was found between basophil activation and allergen-specific IgE levels, skin reactivity, or RTSS, suggesting that the former is, to some extent, indicative of disease severity. As such, patients with the highest level of basophil activation before treatment were more likely to benefit clinically from SLIT.

CONCLUSIONS

Allergen reactivity of peripheral blood basophils is not a biomarker for adverse events or early onset of clinical responses to SLIT.

Comparison of CD63 Upregulation Induced by NSAIDs on Basophils and Monocytes in Patients with NSAID Hypersensitivity

Background. An in vitro basophil activation test, based on the detection of CD63 upregulation induced by NSAIDs, has been described. Its clinical significance remains controversial. Objectives. In patients with a history of nonallergic NSAID hypersensitivity, stratified according to the severity of the symptoms, to assess with NSAIDs the predictive value of basophil (BAT) and monocyte (MAT) activation tests. Patients/Methods. Sixty patients who had NSAIDs-induced or exacerbated urticaria/angiooedema and 20 controls was included. After incubation with NSAIDs or acetaminophen, leukocytes were analysed for CD63 upregulation. Results. With aspirin, the sensitivity (37%) and specificity (90%) of BAT agree with already published results. In contrast, when patients had had cutaneous and visceral reactions, the frequency of positive BAT 14/22 (64%, P < 0.001) or MAT 10/22 (46%, P < 0.01) were increased. Conclusions. Positive tests were more frequent among patients having a severe hypersensitivity contrasting with the other patients who had results similar to controls.

The in vitro diagnosis of drug allergy: status and perspectives

Adverse drug reactions (ADR) can result from immune-mediated (drug allergy) and nonimmune-mediated mechanisms. In both types of reaction, conclusive diagnosis and appropriate management remain major problems in daily clinical practice. This review summarizes the potentials and shortcomings of the currently available in vitro tests in the diagnosis of immediate (mostly IgE mediated) and nonimmediate (mostly T-cell mediated) drug allergy, particularly quantification of specific IgE, flow-assisted analysis of in vitro activated lymphocytes and basophils and the enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot.

Allergy to betalactam antibiotics in children: results of a 20-year study based on clinical history, skin and challenge tests

Studies based on skin and challenge tests have shown that 12-60% of children with suspected betalactam hypersensitivity were allergic to betalactams. Responses in skin and challenge tests were studied in 1865 children with suspected betalactam allergy (i) to confirm or rule out the suspected diagnosis; (ii) to evaluate diagnostic value of immediate and non-immediate responses in skin and challenge tests; (iii) to determine frequency of betalactam allergy in those children, and (iv) to determine potential risk factors for betalactam allergy. The work-up was completed in 1431 children, of whom 227 (15.9%) were diagnosed allergic to betalactams. Betalactam hypersensitivity was diagnosed in 50 of the 162 (30.9%) children reporting immediate reactions and in 177 of the 1087 (16.7%) children reporting non-immediate reactions (p<0.001). The likelihood of betalactam hypersensitivity was also significantly higher in children reporting anaphylaxis, serum sickness-like reactions, and (potentially) severe skin reactions such as acute generalized exanthematic pustulosis, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and drug reaction with systemic symptoms than in other children (p<0.001). Skin tests diagnosed 86% of immediate and 31.6% of non-immediate sensitizations. Cross-reactivity and/or cosensitization among betalactams was diagnosed in 76% and 14.7% of the children with immediate and non-immediate hypersensitivity, respectively. The number of children diagnosed allergic to betalactams decreased with time between the reaction and the work-up, probably because the majority of children with severe and worrying reactions were referred for allergological work-up more promptly than the other children. Sex, age, and atopy were not risk factors for betalactam hypersensitivity. In conclusion, we confirm in numerous children that (i) only a few children with suspected betalactam hypersensitivity are allergic to betalactams; (ii) the likelihood of betalactam allergy increases with earliness and/or severity of the reactions; (iii) although non-immediate-reading skin tests (intradermal and patch tests) may diagnose non-immediate sensitizations in children with non-immediate reactions to betalactams (maculopapular rashes and potentially severe skin reactions especially), the diagnostic value of non-immediate-reading skin tests is far lower than the diagnostic value of immediate-reading skin tests, most non-immediate sensitizations to betalactams being diagnosed by means of challenge tests; (iv) cross-reactivity and/or cosensitizations among betalactams are much more frequent in children reporting immediate and/or anaphylactic reactions than in the other children; (v) age, sex and personal atopy are not significant risk factors for betalactam hypersensitivity; and (vi) the number of children with diagnosed allergy to betalactams (of the immediate-type hypersensitivity especially) decreases with time between the reaction and allergological work-up. Finally, based on our experience, we also propose a practical diagnostic approach in children with suspected betalactam hypersensitivity.

The diagnostic value of basophil activation test in patients with an immediate hypersensitivity reaction to radiocontrast media

BACKGROUND

No available test diagnoses allergic reactions to radiocontrast media (RCM). The basophil activation test (BAT) has been introduced for the diagnosis of both immunoglobulin (Ig) E and non-IgE-dependent mast cell degranulation, but its value to diagnose immediate RCM reactions is still unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic value of BAT in immediate RCM hypersensitivity.

METHODS

The BATs were performed in 26 patients with immediate RCM reactions and in 43 specimens from healthy volunteers. The sample's whole blood was incubated with the responsible RCM and % activated (CD63+/CCR3+) basophils were analyzed by flow cytometry. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis was performed to calculate the optimal cutoff value of activated basophils to diagnose patients with RCM hypersensitivity.

RESULTS

The incubation of blood with RCM yielded significantly higher activated basophil percentages in patients with a history of immediate RCM reactions than in normal controls with both 1:100 and 1:10 dilutions (13.11% vs. 2.71%, P value = .01; and 19.23% vs. 3.73%, P = .001, respectively). Both % activated basophils and stimulation index (SI) had acceptable discrimination powers to diagnose RCM hypersensitivity. The area under the curve was 0.79 (95% CI 0.67-0.91, P = .000) by using SI as the diagnostic criteria with 1:100 dilution of RCM. The specificity of the test ranged from 88.4% to 100%.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated the potential of BAT as a diagnostic tool for an immediate RCM hypersensitivity, particularly as a confirmation test. Further studies are required to confirm the test accuracy and identify a patient's predisposing factors.

In vitro evaluation of IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reactions to quinolones

BACKGROUND

  Hypersensitivity IgE-mediated reactions to quinolones are not easy to diagnose, with skin testing inducing false positive results. The aim of the study was to evaluate the in vitro-specific IgE response in patients with immediate allergic reactions to quinolones.

METHODS

  We evaluated 38 patients with confirmed immediate allergic reactions to quinolones. Those with anaphylaxis were considered allergic by clinical history, once other possible causes were ruled out, and those with urticaria by drug provocation. Sepharose-radioimmunoassay (RIA) and basophil activation test (BAT) with ciprofloxacin, moxifloxacin and levofloxacin were performed.

RESULTS

  The quinolones involved were moxifloxacin (N = 24), ciprofloxacin (N = 11) and levofloxacin (N = 3). Sepharose-RIA was positive in 12 cases (31.57%) and BAT in 27 (71.05%). With Sepharose-RIA, 8 (21%) were positive to ciprofloxacin, 7 (18.4%) to moxifloxacin and 7 (18.4%) to levofloxacin. With BAT, 23 (60.5%) were positive to ciprofloxacin, 12 (31.6%) to moxifloxacin and 8 (21%) to levofloxacin. The specificity of the Sepharose-RIA was demonstrated by inhibition tests. To confirm that the BAT results observed were IgE mediated, the PI3K inhibitor wortmannin was used, with this compound inhibiting the BAT when stimulated with anti-IgE and the different quinolones, but not when fMLP was used as the basophil stimulator. Sepharose-RIA and BAT were repeated in positive cases 1 year later, detecting a decrease in all cases, with four becoming negative.

CONCLUSION

  Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to quinolones do occur, with moxifloxacin being the drug most frequently involved. The BAT is a useful method for diagnosing patients. Specific IgE was demonstrated by Sepharose-RIA and inhibition assay.

Robust expression of CCR3 as a single basophil selection marker in flow cytometry

BACKGROUND

Basophil activation tests (BAT) rely on different combinations of basophil selection and activation markers. Whereas activation markers, especially CD63, are widely validated, the most suitable and robust marker for basophil selection is still a matter of debate.

AIMS

Comparison of cell surface expression of two commonly used basophil selection markers (IgE, CD123/HLA-DR) with CCR3 in an unselected group of atopic and nonatopic donors in resting and activated basophils.

METHODS

EDTA blood of 94 healthy adults, about half of them atopic by history, was analyzed using two different staining strategies: anti-CD123-PE/anti-HLA-DR-PerCP/anti-lin1-FITC and anti-IgE-FITC/anti-CD3-PerCP/anti-CCR3-PE. Additionally 40 pollen-allergic patients were recruited for the assessment of CCR3 expression after basophil activation.

RESULTS

In resting basophils, cell surface expression of the three basophil selection markers was most constant for CCR3. IgE gating strategy showed the highest variation and up to 80% of nonbasophils in the selected gate in certain donors. During basophil activation, a shift of the mean fluorescence intensity for CCR3 toward the lower third of the CCR3-positive population could be demonstrated, but neither were CCR3-positive cells significantly lost for further analysis nor was differentiation between CCR3-positive and CCR3-negative cell populations hampered by this shift.

CONCLUSIONS

CCR3 is a stable and highly expressed basophil selection marker, independent of the atopic background or basophil activation state and allows an accurate identification of basophils without need of a second marker. The basophil markers CD123/HLA-DR and IgE showed significantly higher interindividual variability in cell surface expression and are therefore less suited as selection markers.

Basophil CD203c levels are increased at baseline and can be used to monitor omalizumab treatment in subjects with nut allergy

RATIONALE

Basophils contribute to anaphylaxis and allergies. We examined the utility of assessing basophil-associated surface antigens (CD11b/CD63/CD123/CD203c/CD294) in characterizing and monitoring subjects with nut allergy.

METHODS

We used flow cytometry to analyze basophils at baseline (without any activation) and after ex vivo stimulation of whole blood by addition of nut or other allergens for 2, 10, and 30 min. We also evaluated whether basophil expression of CD11b/CD63/CD123/CD203c/CD294 was altered in subjects treated with anti-IgE monoclonal antibody (omalizumab) to reduce plasma levels of IgE.

RESULTS

We demonstrate that basophil CD203c levels are increased at baseline in subjects with nut allergy compared to healthy controls (13 subjects in each group, p < 0.0001). Furthermore, we confirm that significantly increased expression of CD203c occurs on subject basophils when stimulated with the allergen to which the subject is sensitive and can be detected rapidly (10 min of stimulation, n = 11, p < 0.0008). In 5 subjects with severe peanut allergy, basophil CD203c expression following stimulation with peanut allergen was significantly decreased (p < 0.05) after 4 and 8 weeks of omalizumab treatment but returned toward pretreatment levels after treatment cessation.

CONCLUSIONS

Subjects with nut allergy show an increase of basophil CD203c levels at baseline and following rapid ex vivo stimulation with nut allergen. Both can be reduced by omalizumab therapy. These results highlight the potential of using basophil CD203c levels for baseline diagnosis and therapeutic monitoring in subjects with nut allergy.

Validation of basophil CD164 upregulation for pollen allergy diagnosis

The aim of the study was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of allergen-induced basophil CD164 upregulation in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis caused by allergy to grass pollens. This study was performed in 24 patients with allergy to grass pollens, and in 25 healthy controls. The protocol for allergen-induced basophil CD164 upregulation consisted of whole blood samples processing and staining with anti-CCR3/anti-CD164 antibodies added to a buffer at the beginning of stimulation. We observed dose-dependent allergen-induced basophil CD164 upregulation with 100% of specificity in both used allergen concentrations (12 and 1.2 ng/ml). Higher allergen concentration resulted in 100% and lower concentration in only 70.83% sensitivity. We have observed in the patients statistically significant correlations between anti-IgE stimulation and both allergen concentrations (for 12 ng/ml, r = 0.71, p < 0.0001; and for 1.2 ng/ml, r = 0.64, p < 0.001). We conclude that assessment of allergen-induced basophil CD164 upregulation is a very useful method for in vitro determination of allergy to grass pollens. This method seems to be a very promising tool in laboratory testing of allergies to other allergens.

Role of minor determinants of amoxicillin in the diagnosis of immediate allergic reactions to amoxicillin

BACKGROUND

Skin testing of subjects with immediate hypersensitivity to amoxicillin is performed using major and minor determinants of benzylpenicillin plus amoxicillin. However, sensitivity is not optimal, and other determinants need to be considered. We assessed the sensitivity of stable, well-characterized minor determinants of amoxicillin in subjects with immediate allergic reactions to amoxicillin to improve skin test sensitivity.

METHODS

Amoxicillin, amoxicilloic acid, and diketopiperazine were prepared and characterized by reverse-phase HPLC, tested in vivo by skin testing and in vitro by basophil activation test and RAST inhibition assay.

RESULTS

Patients with immediate hypersensitivity to amoxicillin were selected: Group A (n = 32), skin test positive just to amoxicillin; Group B (n = 19), skin test positive to benzylpenicillin determinants; Group C (n = 10), skin test negative and amoxicillin drug provocation test positive. In Group A, 27 subjects (81.8%) were skin test positive to amoxicillin, ten (30.3%) to amoxicilloic acid, two (6.1%) to diketopiperacine, and six (18.2%) negative. In Group B, nine (50%) were positive to amoxicillin, eight (42.1%) to amoxicilloic acid, none to diketopiperacine, and nine (50%) negative. In Group C, skin tests were negative. BAT was positive to amoxicillin in 26 patients (50.9%), to amoxicilloic acid in 15 (29.1%), and diketopiperazine in four (7.8%). RAST inhibition studies showed > 50% inhibition in all sera, with the highest concentration of amoxicillin and amoxicilloic acid.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of minor determinants of amoxicillin, amoxicilloic acid, and diketopiperazine seems to be of no greater value than the use of amoxicillin alone. Further efforts are needed to find new structures to improve sensitivity in the diagnosis of immediate hypersensitivity to betalactams.

Update on the management of antibiotic allergy

Drug allergy to antibiotics may occur in the form of immediate or non-immediate (delayed) hypersensitivity reactions. Immediate reactions are usually IgE-mediated whereas non-immediate hypersensitivity reactions are usually non-IgE or T-cell mediated. The clinical manifestations of antibiotic allergy may be cutaneous, organ-specific (e.g., blood dyscracias, hepatitis, interstitial nephritis), systemic (e.g., anaphylaxis, drug induced hypersensitivity syndrome) or various combinations of these. Severe cutaneous adverse reactions manifesting as Stevens Johnson syndrome or toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) may be potentially life-threatening. The management of antibiotic allergy begins with the identification of the putative antibiotic from a detailed and accurate drug history, complemented by validated in-vivo and in-vitro allergological tests. This will facilitate avoidance of the putative antibiotic through patient education, use of drug alert cards, and electronic medical records with in-built drug allergy/adverse drug reaction prescription and dispensing checks. Knowledge of the evidence for specific antibiotic cross-reactivities is also important in patient education. Apart from withdrawal of the putative antibiotic, immunomodulatory agents like high-dose intravenous immunoglobulins may have a role in TEN. Drug desensitization where the benefits outweigh the risks, and where no alternative antibiotics can be used for various reasons, may be considered in certain situations. Allergological issues pertaining to electronic drug allergy alerts, computerized physician prescriptions and decision support systems, and antibiotic de-escalation in antimicrobial stewardship programmes are also discussed.

Developments in the field of allergy in 2008 through the eyes of Clinical & Experimental Allergy

In 2008, many thousands of articles were published on the subject of allergic disease with over 200 reviews, editorials and original papers in Clinical & Experimental Allergy alone. These represent a considerable amount of data and even the most avid reader could only hope to assimilate a small fraction of this knowledge. There is therefore a pressing need for the key messages that emerge from a journal such as Clinical & Experimental Allergy to be summarized by experts in the field in a form that highlights the significance of the developments and sets them in the context of important findings in the field published in other journals. This also has the advantage of making connections between new data in conditions such as asthma, where articles often appear in different sections of the journal. As can be seen from this review, the body of work is diverse both in terms of the disease of interest and the discipline that has been used to investigate it. However, taken as a whole, we hope that the reader will gain a flavour of where the field is mature, where there remain controversies and where the cutting edge is leading.

Basophil sensitivity through CD63 or CD203c is a functional measure for specific immunotherapy

Background

Subcutaneous Immunotherapy (SCIT) modifies the allergic response and relieves allergic symptoms. SCIT is the only and a very effective treatment for insect venom allergy. We hypothesized that basophil sensitivity, measured through the basophil activation test, would decrease during SCIT up dosing. Expression of CD203c was compared to CD63 as marker for basophil activation, using a Bland Altman plot and ROC curves.

Methods

Patients (n = 18) starting subcutaneous SCIT for wasp allergy with an up dosing scheme of 7 to 11 weeks were enrolled. Heparinised blood samples were drawn at weeks 1-4, 7 and at the first maintenance visit. Basophils were stimulated at 7 log dilutions of V. vespula allergen for 15 min, and were stained with CD203c and CD63. Basophils were identified as CD203c⁺ leukocytes, and the proportion of CD63⁺ and CD203c⁺ cells were plotted against allergen concentration. A sigmoid curve was fitted to the points, and the allergen concentration at which half of the maximal activation was achieved, LC50, was calculated. In another series of experiments, LC50 calculated in whole blood (AP) was subtracted from LC50 calculated with basophils suspended in plasma from a nonatopic donor (HS) to determine the protective effect of soluble factors in blood of patients treated with SCIT.

Results

Heparin blood basophil activation was similar through CD63 and CD203c. Basophils were significantly more sensitized three weeks after initiation of SCIT compared to baseline (p < 0,01). The difference in LC50 increased by 1,04 LC50 units (p = 0,04) in patients that had just achieved maintenance dose compared with patients before initiating SCIT. When maintenance allergen concentrations had been reached, an increase in the protective plasma component was documented. Blood basophil concentration was marginally reduced by SCIT.

Conclusion

Basophil activation is a versatile and sensitive tool that measures changes in the humoral immune response to allergen during SCIT.

The basophil activation test in immediate-type drug allergy

Diagnosis of drug allergy involves first the recognition of sometimes unusual symptoms as drug allergy and, second, the identification of the eliciting drug. This is an often difficult task, as the clinical picture and underlying pathomechanisms are heterogeneous. In clinical routine, physicians frequently have to rely upon a suggestive history and eventual provocation tests, both having their specific limitations. For this reason both in vivo (skin tests) and in vitro tests are investigated intensively as tools to identify the disease-eliciting drug. One of the tests evaluated in drug allergy is the basophil activation test (BAT). Basophils with their high-affinity IgE receptors are easily accessible and therefore can be used as indicator cells for IgE-mediated reactions. Upon allergen challenge and cross-linking of membrane-bound IgE antibodies (via Fc-epsilon-RI) basophils up-regulate certain activation markers on their surface such as CD63 and CD203c, as well as intracellular markers (eg, phosphorylated p38MAPK). In BAT, these alterations can be detected rapidly on a single-cell basis by multicolor flow cytometry using specific monoclonal antibodies. Combining this technique with in vitro passive sensitization of donor basophils with patients' serum, one can prove the IgE dependence of a drug reaction. This article summarizes the authors' current experience with the BAT in the diagnostic management of immediate-type drug allergy mediated by drug-specific IgE antibodies.

The basophil activation test in the diagnosis of allergy: technical issues and critical factors

BACKGROUND

The basophil activation test (BAT) is a widely validated and reliable tool especially for the diagnosis of hymenoptera venom allergy. Nevertheless, several pitfalls have to be considered and outcomes may differ because of diverse in-house protocols and commercially available kits. We aimed to identify the factors that may influence results of the CD63-based BAT.

METHODS

Basophil responses to monoclonal anti-IgE (clone E124.2.8) and bee and wasp venom were determined by BAT based on CD63. The effect of stimulating factors such as, IL-3, cytochalasin B and prewarming of the samples was investigated. Furthermore, we compared two different flow cytometer systems and evaluated the influence of storage time, different staining protocols and anti-allergic drugs on the test results.

RESULTS

Interleukin-3 enhanced the reactivity of basophils at 300 pM, but not at 75 and 150 pM. Prewarming of samples and reagents did not affect basophil reactivity. CD63 expression assayed after storage time of up to 48 h showed that basophil reactivity already started to decline after 4 h. Basophils stained with HLA-DR-PC5 and CD123-PE antibodies gated as HLA-DR(neg)/CD123(pos) cells showed the highest reactivity. No effect on test outcomes was observed at therapeutic doses of dimetindene and desloratadine. Finally, slight differences in the percentage of activated basophils, depending on the cytometer system used, were found.

CONCLUSION

Basophil activation test should be performed as early as possible after taking the blood sample, preferably within 4 h. In contrast to the skin test, BAT can be performed in patients undergoing treatment with antihistamines. For reasons of multiple influencing factors, BAT should be performed only at validated laboratories.

The basophil activation test in immediate drug allergy

Diagnosis of drug allergy is not always straight forward for several reasons. First, a broad spectrum of drugs can elicit various immune-mediated diseases with distinct pathomechanism, secondly, although exact epitope identification is not mandatory for clinical diagnosis, the epitope that causes the reaction is frequently unknown, thirdly in vitro or in vivo test results might not be predictive of a clinical situation, and finally the gold standard or reference test for diagnosis, the drug challenge, is a complicated and sometimes dangerous endeavour. Upon challenge with specific allergens that cross-link membrane-bound IgE antibodies, basophils upregulate the expression of different activation markers such as CD63 and CD203c. These immunophenotypic alterations can be detected on a single-cell basis by multicolour flow cytometry using specific monoclonal antibodies in the basophil activation test (BAT). This review intends to summarise our current experience with the BAT in the diagnostic management of immediate-type allergy to drugs and related compounds that are generally (but not always) mediated by drug-specific IgE antibodies.

Differential response of human basophil activation markers: a multi-parameter flow cytometry approach

BACKGROUND

Basophils are circulating cells involved in hypersensitivity reactions and allergy but many aspects of their activation, including the sensitivity to external triggering factors and the molecular aspects of cell responses, are still to be focused. In this context, polychromatic flow cytometry (PFC) is a proper tool to investigate basophil function, as it allows to distinguish the expression of several membrane markers upon activation in multiple experimental conditions.

METHODS

Cell suspensions were prepared from leukocyte buffy coat of K2-EDTA anticoagulated blood specimens; about 1500-2500 cellular events for each tested sample, gated in the lymphocyte CD45dim area and then electronically purified as HLADRnon expressing/CD123bright, were identified as basophilic cells. Basophil activation with fMLP, anti-IgE and calcium ionophore A23187 was evaluated by studying up-regulation of the indicated membrane markers with a two-laser six-color PFC protocol.

RESULTS

Following stimulation, CD63, CD13, CD45 and the ectoenzyme CD203c up-regulated their membrane expression, while CD69 did not; CD63 expression occurred immediately (within 60 sec) but only in a minority of basophils, even at optimal agonist doses (in 33% and 14% of basophils, following fMLP and anti-IgE stimulation respectively). CD203c up-regulation occurred in the whole basophil population, even in CD63non expressing cells. Dose-dependence curves revealed CD203c as a more sensitive marker than CD63, in response to fMLP but not in response to anti-IgE and to calcium ionophore.

CONCLUSION

Use of polychromatic flow cytometry allowed efficient basophil electronic purification and identification of different behaviors of the major activation markers. The simultaneous use of two markers of activation and careful choice of activator are essential steps for reliable assessment of human basophil functions.