ArticleAllergy and asthma proceedings2018
Improved diagnostic clarity in shrimp allergic non-dust-mite sensitized patients.
Article in Allergy and asthma proceedings, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Assessing diagnostic tests for shrimp allergy in children: A multicenter trial.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2025Article
- Clinical Relevance of Immunologic Diagnosis of Shrimp Allergy in Adults.Allergy, asthma & immunology research · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Decision Points of Specific Immunoglobulin E Concentrations for Seafood Allergies in Korean Children: A Nationwide Multicenter Study.Allergy, asthma & immunology research · 2025Article
- Exploring the Role of Allergenic Components in Children with House Dust Mite-Induced Allergic Diseases.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2025Article
- Fish and shellfish allergy: Presentation and management differences in the UK and US-analysis of 945 patients.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2024Article
- [Characteristics of allergen component in dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis patients].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2023Article
- Shrimp-allergic patients in a multi-food oral immunotherapy trial.Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · 2022Article
- A WAO - ARIA - GAThe World Allergy Organization journal · 2020Article
- Hereditary angioedema revisited.Allergy and asthma proceedings · 2018Article
- Shrimp sensitization in house dust mite allergic patients.International journal of immunopathology and pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAllergen specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) levels predictive of shrimp allergy have not been identified, but these may be helpful in identifying patients at risk for shrimp-induced allergic reactions.
objectiveThis study sought to identify component resolved diagnostic tests useful for diagnosis of shrimp allergy in patients with or without house-dust mite (HDM) sensitization to the major allergen cysteine protease (Der p 1).
methodsPatients with positive skin-prick test (SPT) results and/or sIgE values were recruited. Shrimp allergy was classified by oral food challenge (OFC) or by a clear history of anaphylaxis after shrimp ingestion. Patients with shrimp allergy and patients who were tolerant were further classified based on HDM sensitivity (Der p 1 > 0.35 kUA/L). Testing for sIgE to total shrimp, and shrimp and HDM components was performed. The Fisher exact test, Wilcoxon sum rank test, and receiver operating characteristics analyses were used to compare sIgE levels in patients with allergy and patients who were tolerant.
resultsOf 79 patients recruited, 12 patients with shrimp allergy (7 with positive OFC results and 5 with a history of anaphylaxis) and 18 patients who were shrimp tolerant were enrolled. Of the patients not HDM sensitized, sIgE levels to shrimp (10.5 kUA/L, p = 0.012) and Der p 10 (4.09 kUA/L, p = 0.035) were higher in patients with shrimp allergy. Shrimp sIgE of ≥3.55 kUA/L had 100% diagnostic sensitivity and 85.7% specificity (receiver operating characteristic 0.94 [0.81, 1.0] 95% CI) and Der p 10 sIgE levels of ≥3.98 kUA/L had a diagnostic sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 100% (receiver operating characteristic 0.86 [0.57, 1.0] 95% CI) for prediction of clinical reactivity.
conclusionHDM sensitization influences shrimp and HDM component sIgE levels and, consequently, their diagnostic accuracy in shrimp allergy. In our series, in the patients who were non-HDM sensitized, a shrimp sIgE level of >3.55 kUA/L showed 100% sensitivity and, Der p 10 sIgE of >3.98 kUA/L showed 100% specificity for the diagnosis of shrimp allergy. These levels may not be applicable to every patient and, therefore, may not obviate the need for OFC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.