ReviewCells2026
The Basophil Activation Test in Allergy Diagnostics: Clinical Applications, Methodological Challenges, and Proposed Clinical Frameworks.
Review in Cells, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Are Basophil Activation Test (BAT) and IgE Levels Useful Tools in Confirming Penicillin Allergy? Novel Diagnostic Approach in Beta-Lactams Hypersensitivity Reactions: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The basophil activation test (BAT) is a modern in vitro functional assay used for the diagnosis of immunoglobulin E-mediated allergic reactions. The method is based on flow cytometric assessment of activation marker expression on peripheral blood basophils after stimulation with specific allergens. BAT has gained increasing clinical relevance in allergology, particularly in patients with anaphylaxis risk, polysensitization, drug hypersensitivity, and inconclusive skin or serological test results. This narrative review summarizes current evidence on the diagnostic performance and clinical applications of BAT in food allergy, drug hypersensitivity, Hymenoptera venom allergy, latex sensitization, and allergen immunotherapy monitoring. The review discusses the immunological mechanisms of basophil activation, the role of CD63 and CD203c, methodological aspects of the assay, sensitivity and specificity data, and advantages and limitations compared with conventional diagnostic approaches. Particular attention is given to protocol standardization, interpretation criteria, and the problem of non-responder patients. Current evidence indicates that BAT demonstrates high specificity and provides functional assessment of clinically relevant allergic reactions. In addition, this review proposes practical clinical frameworks for integrating BAT into allergy diagnostic pathways and for managing inconclusive or non-responder BAT results. Further standardization, multiplex formats, and automated analytical approaches may expand its role in personalized allergy diagnostics.
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.