Background: A conventional lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) was compared to the commercially available MELISA® (memory lymphocyte immuno-stimulation assay), a lymphoproliferative assay that has been suggested to be a valuable instrument for the diagnosis of metal allergy. Sensitivity and specificity of the two assays were calculated using a patch test as a reference method. Methods: 34 patients were patch-tested for gold sodium thiosulfate, palladium chloride and nickel sulfate, and the lymphocyte proliferation to these metals was tested in vitro using mononuclear cells from peripheral blood. Results: No significant differences regarding sensitivity and specificity were found between MELISA and conventional LTT. The sensitivity varied between 55 and 95% and the specificity between 17 and 79%. Conclusions: The low specificity of the two in vitro assays suggests that they are not useful for diagnosis of contact allergy to the metals gold, palladium and nickel, since a large number of false-positive results will be obtained.

Keywords:
Lymphocytes human, Skin test, Metals
This content is only available via PDF.
© 1997 S. Karger AG, Basel
1997
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.