Role of the quaternary ammonium ion determinants in allergy to muscle relaxants

A quarter of a century fundamental and translational research in perioperative hypersensitivity and anaphylaxis at the Antwerp university hospital, a Belgian Centre of Excellence of the World Allergy Organization

Perioperative hypersensitivity constitutes an important health issue, with potential dramatic consequences of diagnostic mistakes. However, safe and correct diagnosis is not always straightforward, mainly because of the application of incorrect nomenclature, absence of easy accessible in-vitro/ex-vivo tests and uncertainties associated with the non-irritating skin test concentrations. In this editorial we summarize the time line, seminal findings, and major realizations of 25 years of research on the mechanisms, diagnosis, and management of perioperative hypersensitivity.

Quaternary ammonium compounds in hypersensitivity reactions

Quaternary ammonium compounds (QAC) are commonly used disinfectants, antiseptics, preservatives, and detergents due to their antibacterial property and represent the first used biocides before phenolic or nitrogen products. Their common structure consists of one or more quaternary ammonium bound with four lateral substituents. Their amphiphilic structure allows them to intercalate into microorganism surfaces which induces an unstable and porous membrane that explains their antimicrobial activity towards bacteria, fungi, and viruses. QAC are thus found in many areas, such as household products, medicines, hygiene products, cosmetics, agriculture, or industrial products but are also used in medical practice as disinfectants and antiseptics and in health care facilities where they are used for cleaning floors and walls. QAC exposure has already been involved in occupational asthma in healthcare workers or professional cleaners by many authors. They also have been suggested to play a role in contact dermatitis (CD) and urticaria in workers using cosmetics such as hairdressers or healthcare workers, inciting reglementary agencies to make recommendations regarding those products. However, distinguishing the irritant or sensitizing properties of chemicals is complex and as a result, the sensitizing property of QAC is still controverted. Moreover, the precise mechanisms underlying the possible sensitization effect are still under investigation, and to date, only a few studies have documented an immunological mechanism. Besides, QAC have been suggested to be responsible for neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) sensitization by cross-reactivity. This hypothesis is supported by a higher prevalence of quaternary ammonium (QA)-specific IgE in the professionally exposed populations, such as hairdressers, cleaners, or healthcare workers, suggesting that the sensitization happens with structurally similar compounds present in the environment. This review summarizes the newest knowledge about QAC and their role in hypersensitivities. After describing the different QAC, their structure and use, the most relevant studies about the effects of QAC on the immune system will be reviewed and discussed.

Assessing cross-reactivity to neuromuscular blocking agents by skin and basophil activation tests in patients with neuromuscular blocking agent anaphylaxis

BACKGROUND

Following diagnosis of neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA) anaphylaxis, identifying safe alternatives for subsequent anaesthesia is critical. A patient with anaphylaxis to one NMBA can also have an allergic reaction to other NMBAs (cross-reactivity). Whilst drug provocation testing is standard for identifying or excluding allergy, there is significant risk. In vitro, after an allergen activates basophils, basophils express surface activation markers that can be measured by basophil activation testing (BAT). We compared cross-reactivity between NMBAs assessed by BAT against that by skin testing.

METHODS

All patients attending an anaesthetic allergy clinic in Sydney, Australia between May 2017 and July 2018 diagnosed with NMBA anaphylaxis qualified for this study comparing intradermal skin tests and BAT with a panel of NMBAs (rocuronium, vecuronium, pancuronium, suxamethonium, cisatracurium).

RESULTS

Of the 61 patients participating, sensitisation on skin testing and on BAT completely matched in only nine patients (15%). Sensitisation was not in agreement for pancuronium, cisatracurium and rocuronium, but was in agreement for vecuronium and suxamethonium. Nine patients with negative skin tests subsequently tolerated cisatracurium, and one false positive on BAT to cisatracurium was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

The utility of BAT in identifying safe NMBAs for subsequent anaesthesia needs further evaluation. BAT detects a different cross-reactivity profile to skin tests. Negative skin testing and BAT might increase confidence in performing drug provocation testing, but this and follow-up of subsequent anaesthesia in our cohort is necessary to determine the clinical significance of BAT sensitisation.

Focus on the agents most frequently responsible for perioperative anaphylaxis

Adverse reactions (ARs) to drugs administered during general anesthesia may be very severe and life-threatening, with a mortality rate ranging from 3 to 9%. The adverse reactions to drugs may be IgE and non-IgE-mediated. Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) represent the first cause of perioperative reactions during general anesthesia followed by latex, antibiotics, hypnotic agents, opioids, colloids, dyes and antiseptics (chlorhexidine). All these substances (i.e. NMBA, anesthetics, antibiotics, latex devices) may cause severe systemic non-IgE-mediated reactions or fatal anaphylactic events even in the absence of any evident risk factor in the patient's anamnesis. For this reason, in order to minimize perioperative anaphylactic reactions, it is important to have rapid, specific, sensitive in vitro diagnostic tests able to confirm the clinical diagnosis of acute anaphylaxis.

In Vitro Diagnosis of Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity Anno 2017: Potentials and Limitations

Background

For most physicians, quantification of drug-specific immunoglobulin E (drug-sIgE) antibodies constitutes the primary in vitro measure to document immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHR). Unfortunately, this is often insufficient to correctly identify patients with IgE-mediated IDHR and impossible for non-IgE-mediated IDHR that result from alternative routes of basophil and mast cell activation. In these difficult cases, diagnosis might benefit from cellular tests such as basophil activation tests (BAT).

Aim

The aim was to review the potential and limitations of quantification of sIgE and BAT in diagnosing IDHR. The utility of quantification of serum tryptase is discussed.

Methods

A literature search was conducted using the key words allergy, basophil activation, CD63, CD203c, diagnosis, drugs, hypersensitivity, flow cytometry, specific IgE antibodies; this was complemented by the authors’ own experience.

Results

The drugs that have been most studied with both techniques are β-lactam antibiotics and curarizing neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA). For sIgE morphine, data are available on the value of this test as a biomarker for sensitization to substituted ammonium structures that constitute the major epitope of NMBA, especially rocuronium and suxamethonium. For the BAT, there are also data on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and iodinated radiocontrast media. For β-lactam antibiotics, sensitivity and specificity of sIgE varies between 0 and 85% and 52 and 100%, respectively. For NMBA, sensitivity and specificity varies between 38.5 and 92% and 85.7 and 100%, respectively. Specific IgE to morphine should not be used in isolation to diagnose IDHR to NMBA nor opiates. For the BAT, sensitivity generally varies between 50 and 60%, whereas specificity attains 80%, except for quinolones and NSAIDs.

Conclusions

Although drug-sIgE assays and BAT can provide useful information in the diagnosis of IDHR, their predictive value is not absolute. Large-scale collaborative studies are mandatory to harmonize and optimize test protocols and to establish drug-specific decision thresholds.

Quantification of specific IgE antibodies in immediate drug hypersensitivity: More shortcomings than potentials?

BACKGROUND

For many physicians, quantification of serum drug-specific IgE (sIgE) antibodies constitutes the first measure in the diagnostic approach of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHR).

AIM

To review the accuracy and limitations of the main drug-sIgE tests, especially those that are commercially available.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted, using the key-words allergy, diagnosis, drugs, hypersensitivity, specific IgE antibodies; this was complemented by the authors' own experience.

RESULTS

The drugs that have mostly been studied appeared to be β-lactam antibiotics, neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) and morphine, the latter as a biomarker for sensitisation to substituted ammonium structures that constitute the major epitope of NMBA. For β-lactams sensitivity and specificity varied between 0-85% and 52-100%, respectively. For NMBA, sensitivity and specificity varied between 38.5-92% and 92-100%, respectively. With respect to sIgE to morphine it appears this drug to be a sensitive biomarker for sensitisation to rocuronium and suxamethonium but not for atracurium. However, sIgE morphine should not be applied in isolation to diagnose IDHR to NMBA nor opiates.

CONCLUSIONS

Although drug-sIgE assay can provide valuable information they should not be performed in isolation to establish correct diagnosis, as their predictive value is not per se absolute. Larger comprehensive studies are urgently required to determine the accuracy of drug-sIgE assays.

Immediate-type hypersensitivity drug reactions

Hypersensitivity reactions including anaphylaxis have been reported for nearly all classes of therapeutic reagents and these reactions can occur within minutes to hours of exposure. These reactions are unpredictable, not directly related to dose or the pharmacological action of the drug and have a relatively high mortality risk. This review will focus on the clinical presentation, immune mechanisms, diagnosis and prevention of the most serious form of immediate onset drug hypersensitivity reaction, anaphylaxis. The incidence of drug-induced anaphylaxis deaths appears to be increasing and our understanding of the multiple and complex reasons for the unpredictable nature of anaphylaxis to drugs is also expanding. This review highlights the importance of enhancing our understanding of the biology of the patient (i.e. immune response, genetics) as well as the pharmacology and chemistry of the drug when investigating, diagnosing and treating drug hypersensitivity. Misdiagnosis of drug hypersensitivity leads to substantial patient risk and cost. Although oral provocation is often considered the gold standard of diagnosis, it can pose a potential risk to the patient. There is an urgent need to improve and standardize diagnostic testing and desensitization protocols as other diagnostic tests currently available for assessment of immediate drug allergy are not highly predictive.

Exploring the link between pholcodine exposure and neuromuscular blocking agent anaphylaxis

Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) are the most commonly implicated drugs in IgE-mediated anaphylaxis during anaesthesia that can lead to perioperative morbidity and mortality. The rate of NMBA anaphylaxis shows marked geographical variation in patients who have had no known prior exposure to NMBAs, suggesting that there may be external or environmental factors that contribute to the underlying aetiology and pathophysiology of reactions. Substituted ammonium ions are shared among NMBAs and are therefore thought to be the main allergenic determinant of this class of drugs. Substituted ammonium ions are found in a wide variety of chemical structures, including prescription medications, over-the-counter medications and common household chemicals, such as the quaternary ammonium disinfectants. Epidemiological studies have shown parallels in the consumption of pholcodine, a nonprescription antitussive drug which contains a tertiary ammonium ion, and the incidence of NMBA anaphylaxis. This link has prompted the withdrawal of pholcodine in some countries, with an ensuing fall in the observed rate of NMBA anaphylaxis. While such observations are compelling in their suggestion of a relationship between pholcodine exposure and NMBA hypersensitivity, important questions remain regarding the mechanisms by which pholcodine is able to sensitize against NMBAs and whether there are other, as yet unidentified, agents that can elicit similar hypersensitivity reactions. This review aims to explore the evidence linking pholcodine exposure to NMBA hypersensitivity and discuss the implications for our understanding of the pathophysiology of these reactions.

Anaphylaxis during the perioperative period

The incidence of anaphylaxis during anesthesia has been reported to range from 1 in 4000 to 1 in 25,000. Anaphylaxis during anesthesia can present as cardiovascular collapse, airway obstruction, and/or skin manifestation. It can be difficult to differentiate between immune and nonimmune mast cell-mediated reactions and pharmacologic effects from the variety of medications administered during general anesthesia. In addition, cutaneous manifestations of anaphylaxis are less likely to be apparent when anaphylaxis occurs in this setting. The evaluation of IgE-mediated reactions to medications used during anesthesia can include skin testing to a variety of anesthetic agents. Specifically, thiopental allergy has been documented by skin tests. Neuromuscular blocking agents such as succinylcholine can cause nonimmunologic histamine release, but there have also been reports of IgE-mediated reactions in some patients. Reactions to opioid analgesics are usually caused by direct mast cell mediator release rather than IgE-dependent mechanisms. Antibiotics that are administered perioperatively can cause immunologic or nonimmunologic reactions. Protamine can cause severe systemic reactions through IgE-mediated or nonimmunologic mechanisms. Blood transfusions can elicit a variety of systemic reactions, some of which might be IgE-mediated or mediated through other immunologic mechanisms. The management of anaphylactic reactions that occur during general anesthesia is similar to the management of anaphylaxis in other situations.

Successful resuscitation in a case of sudden cardiac arrest in an epileptic patient posted for spinal surgery

A 17-year-old girl was posted for spinal surgery for traumatic spinal injury. The patient was a well-controlled epileptic with history of seizure since 8 years of her age. She was induced with thiopentone sodium and muscle relaxant atracurium was administered. Minutes after that, she had an episode of ventricular tachycardia, this converted to ventricular fibrillation despite of institution of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). CPR was continued for a prolonged period of 45 minutes and after 45 minutes, QRS complexes appeared and later sinus rhythm restored. Next 24 hours, she was kept on mechanical ventilation. Within 24 hours, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) improved and patient was conscious and extubated. We suggest that the neuromuscular blocking drug contributed to an anaphylactic reaction which might be the cause of cardiac arrest and highlight the importance of prolonged resuscitation and successful outcome in this scenario.

Negative predictive value of skin tests to neuromuscular blocking agents

Allergy to neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) is the most important caue of perioperative anaphylaxis in France. The diagnosis relies on a careful clinical history, the search of serum IgE antibodies, and the realization of skin tests. Although the skin tests are the most important tool and their sensitivity is widely recognized, the lack of information about their negative predictive value represents an important issue in the management of patients who require a new procedure with NMBA injection. We present a series of 49 patients with confirmed allergy to NMBAs, six of whom required a subsequent surgery with neuromuscular blockade. Negative skin tests allowed the selection of an alternative NMBA, which was well tolerated in all 6 cases. We found an excellent negative predictive value of skin tests in our series but larger studies are required to properly address this question.

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.

Educational case series: Mechanisms of drug allergy

Once administered, a drug can activate the immune system by various mechanisms and lead to a large range of clinical manifestations closely related to the type of immune reaction elicited. Administration of the drug can classically result in an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-type sensitization, but can also result in more complex activation of the immune system potentially resulting in severe syndromes, such as the drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DIHS). Although there has been a major increase in our knowledge over the last years, the exact mechanisms of drug allergy are not well understood for most clinical manifestations. A complex interaction between individual characteristics, environmental factors, and the drug itself is usually responsible for adverse reactions to drugs. In this educational review series, we described three cases of drug allergy: first, a child with a typical IgE-mediated drug allergy, second, a child with a non-immediate reaction to penicillin, and in the third patient, we will discuss the drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome, which is rare but potentially fatal. These cases are correlated to the immune mechanism potentially involved.

Allergy to rocuronium: from clinical suspicion to correct diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Allergy to rocuronium can be life-threatening. Correct diagnosis is a prerequisite because of serious consequences of diagnostic error.

OBJECTIVE

To assess skin testing, quantification of specific IgE (sIgE) and flow-assisted activation of basophils [basophil activation test (BAT)] in the diagnosis of rocuronium allergy.

METHODS

This study comprises 104 curarized patients with a history of profound hypotension and severe bronchospasm immediately after induction of anaesthesia. All patients had skin tests, quantification of sIgE and BAT to rocuronium, together with investigations for all relevant compounds administered during anaesthesia that could have evoked the reaction. Diagnosis of rocuronium allergy was considered definite when the patient demonstrated a positive outcome for at least two of the three aforementioned tests.

RESULTS

The positive predictive value for skin testing, BAT and sIgE was 98% (CI 95%: 92-99%), 97% (CI 95%: 88-100%) and 83% (CI 95%: 74-89%), respectively. The negative predictive value for skin testing, BAT and sIgE was 96% (CI 95%: 86-99%), 75% (CI 95%: 67-75%) and 72% (CI 95%: 58-83%), respectively. Cross-reactivity with vecuronium was documented in 69% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

Skin testing merits the status of primary diagnostic investigation to document rocuronium allergy and cannot be substituted by quantification of sIgE or BAT. SIgE can offer a diagnostic advantage in cases where skin tests yield negative results. However, additional tests (e.g. BAT) are of capital importance in patients with negative skin tests and positive sIgE results to help in interpreting the clinical significance of a positive sIgE result. Optimal assessment of cross-reactivity between rocuronium and vecuronium implies both skin testing and BAT.

Anaphylaxis during anaesthesia: diagnostic approach

Correct management of anaphylaxis during anaesthesia requires a multidisciplinary approach with prompt recognition and treatment of the acute event by the attending anaesthesiologist, and subsequent determination of the responsible agent(s) with strict avoidance of subsequent administration of all incriminated and/or cross-reacting compounds. However, correct identification of the causative compound(s) and safe alternatives is not always straightforward and, too often, not done. This review is not intended to discuss acute management of anaesthesia-related anaphylaxis but summarizes the major causes of anaphylaxis during anaesthesia and the diagnostic approach of this rare but potentially life-threatening complication. Apart from general principles about the diagnostic approach, history taking and importance of tryptase quantification, more specific confirmatory diagnostic procedures are organized on the basis of the major causes of perioperative anaphylactic reactions.

Allergic reactions occurring during anaesthesia: diagnostic approach

Anaphylactic and anaphylactoid reactions to anaesthetic and associated agents used during the perioperative period have been increasingly reported during the last 3 decades. The frequency of life-threatening hypersensitivity reactions occurring during anaesthesia has been estimated to vary between 1/1.000 and 1/25.0000 procedures, with muscle relaxants being involved in almost three quarters of the cases. The mortality from these reactions is in the range of 3-6%. Nowadays, natural rubber latex also accounts for a significant number of perioperative anaphylaxis, particularly in children. Clinical manifestations do not allow to differentiate between IgE-mediated anaphylaxis and anaphylactoid reactions resulting from non-specific mediator release. Successful management of these patients requires multidisciplinary approach and includes prompt recognition and stabilisation of the acute event by the attending anaesthetist, determination of the responsible agent(s) with avoidance of subsequent administration of incriminated compound(s). The latter is based upon correct identification of the responsible drug and potentially cross-reactive compounds by the allergist and requires a detailed review of the anaesthetic report as well as appropriate in vitro and in vivo allergy tests. At present, the overall performance of skin tests makes them the "gold standard" for diagnosis of muscle relaxant-induced perioperative hypersensitivity reactions. In addition, given their good negative predictive value, skin tests have been proven to be a useful tool to tailor the appropriate therapeutic alternative. For other compounds diagnosis is more difficult but newer techniques such as analysis of in vitro activated basophils can be helpful.

Rocuronium and cisatracurium-positive skin tests in non-allergic volunteers: determination of drug concentration thresholds using a dilution titration technique

BACKGROUND

Muscle relaxants are believed to be responsible for 2/3 of the cases of anaphylactic reactions during anesthesia. This assumption is based mainly on positive skin tests obtained in individuals that have experienced anesthesia-related anaphylaxis. A positive skin test is supposed to be associated with mast cell degranulation of vasoactive amines. In the present study we tested the frequency of positive skin tests with two commonly used muscle relaxants, rocuronium and cisatracurium, in a selected group of volunteers with low potential for allergic reactions.

METHODS

Thirty healthy volunteers without known allergy or previous exposure to muscle relaxants were studied. Low potential for allergic reactions was determined prior to inclusion in the study, using various allergy tests. Each individual was tested with intradermal and skin prick tests, and molar drug concentration thresholds for positive skin reactions were determined using a dilution titration technique. The presence or absence of mast cell degranulation was tested by electron microscopic investigation of skin biopsies obtained from positive and negative skin reactions.

RESULTS

None of the volunteers had a positive skin prick test. More than 90% of the volunteers had a positive intradermal test with both rocuronium and cisatracurium. The highest molar drug concentration that was not associated with a positive intradermal test was 10(-6) M (rocuronium) and 10(-7) M (cisatracurium), equivalent to vial dilution 1 : 1000 for both drugs. In none of the volunteers was mast cell degranulation detected.

CONCLUSION

Non-mast-cell-mediated positive intradermal skin reactions are frequently occurring with rocuronium and cisatracurium, even at vial dilution 1 : 1000. A clinically applicable test technique is needed that is able to separate positive skin tests associated with mast cell degranulation from non-mast-cell-mediated reactions.

Anaphylactic reactions during induction of anaesthesia using rocuronium for muscle relaxation: a report including 3 cases

Anaphylaxis during induction of anaesthesia is a dreaded complication with a mortality rate of 3-6%, most frequently associated with the use of muscle relaxants. Current knowledge on this matter is reviewed in relation to the presentation of 3 cases of anaphylaxis and bronchospasm associated with the use of the recently released nondepolarizing muscle relaxant rocuronium. Bronchospasm may be the sole sign of a serious drug reaction, triggered by precipitation of insoluble thiopental crystals when mixed with a muscle relaxant in the intravenous (iv) line. It is recommended that these drugs are administered via different injection ports. The hypotension requires immediate treatment with oxygen, epinephrine and large amounts of iv fluids. Epinephrine infusion may be needed for hours. It is recommended that serum tryptase is measured approximately 2 h after debut of the serious drug reaction. Allergy testing should be performed for all the drugs the patient was exposed to, 4-8 weeks after the incident, and due to cross-reactivity, including all available muscle relaxants. Doctors are urged to inform their patients, and systematically register adverse drug reactions.

Immunoassays in the diagnosis of anaphylaxis to neuromuscular blocking drugs: the value of morphine for the detection of IgE antibodies in allergic subjects

Radioimmunoassays (RIAs) for IgE antibodies to specific neuromuscular blocking drugs (NMBDs) are an important tool in the diagnosis of anaphylaxis during anaesthesia although they are performed in only a few laboratories throughout the world. NMBDs bind to antibodies by their substituted ammonium ions. We measured serum IgE antibodies to morphine and specific NMBDs in 347 patients with suspected anaphylaxis using blood specimens sent for mast cell tryptase assays. Morphine, which has a single substituted ammonium group, avidly binds in vitro to antibodies that react with NMBDs. The morphine RIA proved to be both a more sensitive and efficient test for the detection of IgE antibodies to NMBDs than the specific NMBD RIAs. We have adopted the morphine RIA in our laboratory in preference to the specific RIAs and predict that use of this single assay will become widespread for the in vitro diagnosis of allergic sensitivities to NMBDs.

Subsequent general anaesthesia in patients with a history of previous anaphylactoid/anaphylactic reaction to muscle relaxant

Of 151 patients with a possible anaphylactoid/anaphylactic reaction to a muscle relaxant investigated over a 20-year period, follow-up for any subsequent general anaesthesia was complete in 145 (96%). One hundred and twenty-two anaesthetics in 72 patients were documented. There were no anaesthetic-related deaths. No subsequent reactions were seen if muscle relaxants were not used in the subsequent anaesthetic, nor were they in patients with severe reactions if the original intradermal test had been equivocal or negative. In the patients with a severe reaction and a positive intradermal test to one or more muscle relaxants, six out of 40 later anaesthetics using muscle relaxants were associated with clinical problems, three being probable anaphylactic reactions, whilst three were minor. Intradermal testing should be performed prior to surgery in this group of patients for the muscle relaxant(s) planned, or an anaesthetic technique which avoids relaxants should be used. This review should encourage other centres to undertake similar follow-up.

IgE-binding and histamine-release capabilities of the main carbohydrate component isolated from the major allergen of olive tree pollen, Ole e 1

BACKGROUND

Pollen from olive trees (Olea europaea ) is a cause of pollinosis and an aggravating of asthma in Mediterranean regions. Recently, Ole e 1, the major allergen from olive tree pollen, has been isolated and its amino acid sequence has been elucidated. It is a glycoprotein whose carbohydrate moiety is involved in an IgE-binding epitope responsible for cross-reactivity among plant glycoproteins. However, the allergenicity of the free carbohydrate side chains remains to be clarified.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to isolate the main carbohydrate component of Ole e 1 allergen and analyze its IgE-binding and histamine-release capabilities.

METHODS

Deglycosylation treatment of Ole e 1 with PNGase F and gel exclusion chromatography were used to isolate the main sugar component of the allergen. Sera of patients who are allergic to olive pollen and sera sensitive to Ole e 1 have been used in dot blotting assays of IgE binding to the isolated carbohydrate. Heparinized whole blood obtained from patients sensitive to Ole e 1 were stimulated by the free carbohydrate; the resulting histamine release was measured.

RESULTS

The main sugar component of Ole e 1 has been isolated. Free carbohydrate was able to bind IgE from sera of patients allergic to olive pollen; the sera of 65% of these patients contained anticarbohydrate reacting IgE, and 100% of those patients were sensitive to Ole e 1. The free carbohydrate promoted in vitro histamine release from basophils of sensitized patients.

CONCLUSION

The carbohydrate moieties of allergenic glycoproteins can constitute significant determinants on the binding to IgE of the sera from patients who are hypersensitive and can be responsible for inducing histamine release from blood cells.

Detection of IgE antibody to a radiocontrast medium

BACKGROUND

Very little is known about the mechanisms underlying adverse reactions to radiocontrast medium. On the basis of the clinical features of the adverse reactions, it has generally been considered that an IgE-dependent mechanism is not involved in these adverse reactions, and only a few studies have demonstrated the presence of IgE antibody to radiocontrast medium in patient sera.

METHODS

We assayed for IgE antibody to ioxaglic acid (Hexabrix), a representative radiocontrast medium, in the sera of patients who had developed adverse reactions to ioxaglic acid. A conjugate was prepared by coupling succinyl ioxaglic acid to human serum albumin. Enzyme immunoassay and radioimmunoassay for the detection of IgE antibody to ioxaglic acid in patient sera were constructed by physical adsorption or by covalent coupling of the conjugate on solid supports.

RESULTS

When the radioactivity or the absorbance exceeding the mean plus 3 SD for normal healthy subjects was regarded as positive, IgE antibody was detected in the sera of 47.1% of the patients who had a past history of adverse reactions to ioxaglic acid and 16.2% of those who had experienced adverse reactions to ioxaglic acid within 24 h before the blood collection, although the IgE antibody levels were low. On the other hand, IgE antibody to ioxaglic acid was not detected in the sera of patients with no history of adverse reactions to ioxaglic acid. Inhibition experiments revealed the presence of IgE antibody specific to ioxaglic acid in the serum defined as positive for IgE antibody to ioxaglic acid. The presence of IgE antibody to ioxaglic acid did not always correlate with the activation of mast cells due to the occurrence of adverse reactions to ioxaglic acid.

CONCLUSIONS

A small amount of IgE antibody to ioxaglic acid was detected in the sera of some patients with a history of adverse reactions to ioxaglic acid, and these adverse reactions may be partly explained by the presence of IgE antibody in the serum of at least some patients.