Background: Clinically meaningful specific IgE determination is an important step in the diagnosis of allergic diseases. While patient’s history and skin prick tests are available during the medical visit, most IgE immunoassays require hours to several days to be available. Recent developments in the field of nanofluidic technology open new horizons for point-of-care management of this unmet medical need. Objective: This study aimed to compare IgE diagnostic agreement between a nanofluidic assay (abioSCOPE®) and a laboratory reference method (Phadia Laboratory System®) in a real-world clinical setting. Methods: Sera from 105 patients whose routine allergy diagnostic workup required a blood sampling were used to compare the novel nanofluidic IgE assay to a reference method in a blind manner for a panel of five respiratory allergens. To assess the agreement between methods, patient records were reviewed by four independent experts to establish the final diagnosis. Experts were blinded to the IgE serological method used, but had access to patient history, skin prick tests, and blood test results. Results: Analytic agreement between the two methods was 81% for the tested panel of allergens (ranging from 77 to 89%). The overall agreement in clinical diagnosis decision taken by the expert panel was 94.6% with the nanofluidic IgE assay when compared to the reference method. Conclusion: The nanofluidic IgE assay, as determined through an evaluation based on clinical history, skin prick tests, and IgE measurement, is a valuable tool for allergy experts to identify patients’ sensitization patterns at the point of care, and for routine IgE diagnostic workup.

1.
Berg
TL
,
Johansson
SG
.
Allergy diagnosis with the radioallergosorbent test: A comparison with the results of skin and provocation tests in an unselected group of children with asthma and hay fever
.
J Allergy Clin Immunol
.
1974
Oct
;
54
(
4
):
209
21
.
[PubMed]
0091-6749
2.
Matricardi
PM
,
Kleine-Tebbe
J
,
Hoffmann
HJ
,
Valenta
R
,
Hilger
C
,
Hofmaier
S
, et al.
EAACI molecular allergology user’s guide
.
Pediatr Allergy Immunol
.
2016
May
;
27
Suppl 23
:
1
250
.
[PubMed]
0905-6157
3.
Hamilton
RG
,
Kleine-Tebbe
J
.
Molecular Allergy Diagnostics: Analytical Features That Support Clinical Decisions
.
Curr Allergy Asthma Rep
.
2015
Sep
;
15
(
9
):
57
.
[PubMed]
1529-7322
4.
Durand
NF
,
Saveriades
E
,
Renaud
P
.
Detecting proteins complex formation using steady-state diffusion in a nanochannel
.
Anal Bioanal Chem
.
2009
May
;
394
(
2
):
421
5
.
[PubMed]
1618-2642
5.
World Medical Association
.
World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects
.
JAMA
.
2013
Nov
;
310
(
20
):
2191
4
.
[PubMed]
0098-7484
6.
Bousquet
J
,
Heinzerling
L
,
Bachert
C
,
Papadopoulos
NG
,
Bousquet
PJ
,
Burney
PG
, et al.;
Global Allergy and Asthma European Network
;
Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma
.
Practical guide to skin prick tests in allergy to aeroallergens
.
Allergy
.
2012
Jan
;
67
(
1
):
18
24
.
[PubMed]
0105-4538
7.
Cohen
J
.
A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales
.
Educ Psychol Meas
.
1960
;
20
(
1
):
37
46
. 0013-1644
8.
Märki
I
,
Rebeaud
F
.
Nanotechnologies for In Vitro IgE Testing
.
Curr Allergy Asthma Rep
.
2017
Jul
;
17
(
7
):
50
.
[PubMed]
1529-7322
9.
Hamilton
RG
.
Microarray Technology Applied to Human Allergic Disease
.
Microarrays (Basel)
.
2017
Jan
;
6
(
1
):
3
.
[PubMed]
2076-3905
10.
Kukkonen
AK
,
Pelkonen
AS
,
Mäkinen-Kiljunen
S
,
Voutilainen
H
,
Mäkelä
MJ
.
Ara h 2 and Ara 6 are the best predictors of severe peanut allergy: a double-blind placebo-controlled study
.
Allergy
.
2015
Oct
;
70
(
10
):
1239
45
.
[PubMed]
0105-4538
11.
van Erp
FC
,
Klemans
RJ
,
Meijer
Y
,
van der Ent
CK
,
Knulst
AC
.
Using Component-Resolved Diagnostics in the Management of Peanut-Allergic Patients
.
Curr Treat Options Allergy
.
2016
;
3
(
2
):
169
80
.
[PubMed]
2196-3053
12.
Asero
R
,
Piantanida
M
,
Pinter
E
,
Pravettoni
V
.
The clinical relevance of lipid transfer protein
.
Clin Exp Allergy
.
2018
Jan
;
48
(
1
):
6
12
.
[PubMed]
0954-7894
13.
Kattan
JD
,
Wang
J
.
Allergen component testing for food allergy: ready for prime time?
Curr Allergy Asthma Rep
.
2013
Feb
;
13
(
1
):
58
63
.
[PubMed]
1529-7322
14.
Lee
JH
,
Park
KH
,
Kim
HS
,
Kim
KW
,
Sohn
MH
,
Kim
CH
, et al.
Specific IgE measurement using AdvanSure® system: comparison of detection performance with ImmunoCAP® system in Korean allergy patients
.
Clin Chim Acta
.
2012
May
;
413
(
9-10
):
914
9
.
[PubMed]
0009-8981
15.
Contin-Bordes
C
,
Petersen
A
,
Chahine
I
,
Boralevi
F
,
Chahine
H
,
Taïeb
A
, et al.
Comparison of ADVIA Centaur and Pharmacia UniCAP tests in the diagnosis of food allergy in children with atopic dermatitis
.
Pediatr Allergy Immunol
.
2007
Nov
;
18
(
7
):
614
20
.
[PubMed]
0905-6157
16.
Wang
J
,
Godbold
JH
,
Sampson
HA
.
Correlation of serum allergy (IgE) tests performed by different assay systems
.
J Allergy Clin Immunol
.
2008
May
;
121
(
5
):
1219
24
.
[PubMed]
0091-6749
17.
Wongpiyabovorn
J
,
Suratannon
N
,
Boonmee
S
,
Chatchatee
P
.
Comparison of specific IgE detection by immunoblotting and fluorescence enzyme assay with in vivo skin prick test
.
Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol
.
2018
Sep
;
36
(
3
):
159
65
.
[PubMed]
0125-877X
18.
Kleine-Tebbe
J
,
Poulsen
LK
,
Hamilton
RG
.
Quality management in IgE-based allergy diagnostics
.
Laboratoriumsmedizin (Berl)
.
2016
Jan
;
40
(
2
). 0342-3026
19.
Lee
JH
,
Park
HJ
,
Park
KH
,
Jeong
KY
,
Park
JW
.
Performance of the PROTIA™ Allergy-Q® System in the Detection of Allergen-specific IgE: A Comparison With the ImmunoCAP® System
.
Allergy Asthma Immunol Res
.
2015
Nov
;
7
(
6
):
565
72
.
[PubMed]
2092-7355
20.
Barry Kay
A
. Jean Bousquet, Patrick G. Holt, Allen P. Kaplan. Allergy and Allergic Diseases, 2 Volume Set, 2nd Edition. Second edition. Vol. Volumr 1. Wiley-Blackwell;
2009
. 2184 p.
21.
Heinzerling
L
,
Mari
A
,
Bergmann
KC
,
Bresciani
M
,
Burbach
G
,
Darsow
U
, et al.
The skin prick test - European standards
.
Clin Transl Allergy
.
2013
Feb
;
3
(
1
):
3
.
[PubMed]
2045-7022
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.