Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30410550›Full record

ArticleAllergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology2018

Anaphylactic reaction in patient allergic to mango.

Natalia Ukleja-Sokołowska, Ewa Gawrońska-Ukleja, Kinga Lis, Magdalena Żbikowska-Gotz, Łukasz Sokołowski, Zbigniew Bartuzi

Open access · goldAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Anaphylaxis to mango fruit.Postepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2022
    Article
  10. Contact Allergy Induced by Mango (Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Natalia Ukleja-Sokołowska1Department and Clinic of Allergology, Clinical Immunology and Internal Diseases, Ludwik Rydygier Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, NCU, Bydgoszcz, Poland.
Ewa Gawrońska-Ukleja1Department and Clinic of Allergology, Clinical Immunology and Internal Diseases, Ludwik Rydygier Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, NCU, Bydgoszcz, Poland.
Kinga Lis1Department and Clinic of Allergology, Clinical Immunology and Internal Diseases, Ludwik Rydygier Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, NCU, Bydgoszcz, Poland.
Magdalena Żbikowska-Gotz1Department and Clinic of Allergology, Clinical Immunology and Internal Diseases, Ludwik Rydygier Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, NCU, Bydgoszcz, Poland.
Łukasz Sokołowski2Division of Ergonomics and Exercise Physiology, Department of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Ergonomics, Ludwik Rydygier Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, NCU, Bydgoszcz, Poland.
Zbigniew Bartuzi1Department and Clinic of Allergology, Clinical Immunology and Internal Diseases, Ludwik Rydygier Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, NCU, Bydgoszcz, Poland.
Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn allergy to mango is extremely rare. The antigenic composition of the fruit is not fully known. Profilin from mango has a structure similar to birch tree profiling: it is responsible for cross-reactions between mango and pear, apple, and peach. A panallergen with a structure similar to mugwort defensin (Art v 1) which cross-reacts with celery, carrot, peanuts, pepper, aniseed, and caraway has been previously described. CASE STUDY: A female patient, 30 years old, was admitted in February 2017 because of recurrent allergic reactions following consumption of various foods. The most severe allergic reaction in the patient's life occurred after eating a mango fruit. Within several minutes the patient developed a generalised urticaria, followed by facial oedema, strong stomach pain and watery diarrhoea. The diagnostics involved skin tests with a set of inhalatory and food allergens, including native skin tests. The patient also experienced symptoms of recurrent, generalized urticaria in connection with consumption of various types of food, especially complex dishes containing many different ingredients. Additionally, an interview revealed that the patient was experiencing symptoms of the oral allergy syndrome after ingesting various fruit and vegetables, especially during late summer and fall. Diagnostics was extended by determining the levels of IgE specific for allergen components, using the ImmunoCap ISAC method. In order to confirm the occurence of a cross-reaction between mugwort and mango allergens, we performed the inhibition test of IgE specific for mugwort using a mango allergen extract and ImmunoCap matrix.

resultsSkin prick tests (SPT) were positive for allergens of grass 7 mm; weeds 8 mm; cat's fur 5 mm; mugwort 6 mm. SPT were also positive for mango. The level of specific IgE was increased for allergens of mugwort, grass, celery, pepper, carrot, mango, banana, peach, and apple. The ImmunoCap ISAC test demonstrated a high level of specific IgE rPhl p 1 (timothy grass) and Art v 1 (mugwort). We also performed the IgE inhibition test using both mango extract and ImmunoCap matrix and confirmed a cross-reaction with Art v 1 in the pathogenesis of symptoms observed in the patient.

conclusionsAn anaphylactic reaction to consumed mango, resulting from cross-allergy with mugwort Art v 1 was diagnosed in the patient. Acute urticarial in this case is a manifestation of IgE-mediated food allergy. During in vitro diagnostic procedures we found an elevated concentration of IgE specific to several food allergens (including celery, peppers, carrot, banana, peach, apple, shrimp). The elimination diet removing allergens the patient was allergic to was recommended. Considering the anaphylactic reaction the patient was instructed to carry a rescue set composed of an adrenaline autosyringe, steroids, and antihistamines.

Indexed as

AllergyArt v 1Inhibition testMangoMugwort

Identifiers

PMID30410550
PMCPMC6211424
OpenAlexW2899211256

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.