Integrated Diagnostic Approach Using Basophil Activation Test and IgE Assays for Shrimp and Prawn Allergy
<i>Background and Objectives</i>: Shellfish allergies are common in Vietnam. The basophil activation test (BAT) is a powerful tool in the diagnosis of food allergies. We aimed to evaluate the application of BAT to distinguish shrimp allergy in comparison with skin prick test and specific...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-06-01
|
| Series: | Medicina |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/61/6/1040 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | <i>Background and Objectives</i>: Shellfish allergies are common in Vietnam. The basophil activation test (BAT) is a powerful tool in the diagnosis of food allergies. We aimed to evaluate the application of BAT to distinguish shrimp allergy in comparison with skin prick test and specific IgE measurement. <i>Materials and Methods</i>: We recruited adult shrimp- or prawn-allergic subjects from the University Medical Center (Vietnam). BAT was performed using the in-house crude extracts for two allergens: black tiger shrimp <i>Penaeus monodon</i> (shrimp) and giant freshwater prawn <i>Macrobrachium rosenbergii</i> (prawn). The percentages of CD63 in response to shrimp and prawn were recorded. The results of skin prick tests (SPT) and the specific IgE (sIgE) levels in response to commercial shrimp/prawn were noted. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. <i>Results</i>: Of 43 recruited subjects, 9 (26.5%) subjects had a specific allergy to shrimp, 2 (5.9%) subjects had a specific allergy to prawn, and 23 (67.6%) subjects had both shrimp and prawn allergy. Basophil CD63% was significantly increased in subjects with allergy to shrimp and prawn (<i>p</i> < 0.05% for all). Compared with SPT and sIgE, CD63 expression-based BAT was better in discriminating subjects with allergies to these species from their non-allergic counterparts (AUC/sensitivity/specificity = 0.88/77%/89% for shrimp, and 0.74/88%/77% for prawn, <i>p</i> < 0.05 for all). The addition of SPT and BAT improved the diagnostic power. A positive BAT could help identify shrimp/prawn allergy among cases with negative SPT/sIgE to shrimp/prawn. BAT facilitated the diagnosis of shrimp allergy among prawn-allergic subjects (100% accurate). <i>Conclusions</i>: The BAT test can help predict clinical reactions to shrimp and prawn in allergic patients, and enhance diagnostic accuracy in cases where SPT or specific IgE tests yield negative results. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1010-660X 1648-9144 |