ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2022
Basophil Activation Test Utility as a Diagnostic Tool in LTP Allergy.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Basophil Activation Test (BAT) for Diagnosing LTP Food Allergy: Where Do We Stand Now? A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Pooled it
- Bioassays in Allergy: Technical Characteristics, Limitations, and Pathways to Clinical Implementation-An EAACI Position Paper.Clinical and translational allergy · 2026Review
- Review
- Review
- An Assessment of the Currently Available Molecular Assay for the Diagnosis of Anisakis Sensitization.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- IgE-mediated lipid transfer protein allergy in children.Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · 2025Review
- Allergen extract outperforms molecular components in basophil activation test in a pediatric cohort.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Legume Allergens Pea, Chickpea, Lentil, Lupine and Beyond.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2024Review
- Real-Life Utility of Basophil Activation Test in the Diagnosis of Immediate Hypersensitivity Drug Reactions.Dermatology and therapy · 2023Article
- Allergenic Activity of Individual Cat Allergen Molecules.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Review
- Sensitization to nsLTP: A Retrospective Study in An Italian Pediatric Population over the Last Decade.Journal of immunology research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Plant-food allergy is an increasing problem, with nonspecific lipid transfer proteins (nsLTPs) triggering mild/severe reactions. Pru p 3 is the major sensitizer in LTP food allergy (FA). However, in vivo and in vitro diagnosis is hampered by the need for differentiating between asymptomatic sensitization and allergy with clinical relevance. The basophil activation test (BAT) is an ex vivo method able to identify specific IgE related to the allergic response. Thus, we aimed to establish the value of BAT in a precise diagnosis of LTP-allergic patients. Ninety-two individuals with peach allergy sensitized to LTP, Pru p 3, were finally included, and 40.2% of them had symptoms to peanut (n = 37). In addition, 16 healthy subjects were recruited. BAT was performed with Pru p 3 and Ara h 9 (peanut LTP) at seven ten-fold concentrations, and was evaluated by flow cytometry, measuring the percentage of CD63 (%CD63+) and CD203c (%CD203chigh) cells, basophil allergen threshold sensitivity (CD-Sens), and area under the dose−response curve (AUC). Significant changes in BAT parameters (%CD63+ and %CD203chigh) were found between the controls and patients. However, comparisons for %CD63+, %CD203chigh, AUC, and CD-Sens showed similar levels among patients with different symptoms. An optimal cut-off was established from ROC curves, showing a significant positive percentage of BAT in patients compared to controls and great values of sensitivity (>87.5%) and specificity (>85%). In addition, BAT showed differences in LTP-allergic patients tolerant to peanut using its corresponding LTP, Ara h 9. BAT can be used as a potential diagnostic tool for identifying LTP allergy and for differentiating peanut tolerance, although neither reactivity nor sensitivity can distinguish the severity of the clinical symptoms.
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.