BackgroundA longstanding debate in allergy is whether or not specific immunoglobulin-E antibodies (sIgE), recognizing cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants (CCD), are able to elicit clinical symptoms. In pollen and food allergy, ≥20% of patients display in-vitro CCD reactivity based on presence of α1,3-fucose and/or β1,2-xylose residues on N-glycans of plant (xylose/fucose) and insect (fucose) glycoproteins. Because the allergenicity of tomato glycoallergen Lyc e 2 was ascribed to N-glycan chains alone, this study aimed at evaluating clinical relevance of CCD-reduced foodstuff in patients with carbohydrate-specific IgE (CCD-sIgE).Methodology/Principal FindingsTomato and/or potato plants with stable reduction of Lyc e 2 (tomato) or CCD formation in general were obtained via RNA interference, and gene-silencing was confirmed by immunoblot analyses. Two different CCD-positive patient groups were compared: one with tomato and/or potato food allergy and another with hymenoptera-venom allergy (the latter to distinguish between CCD- and peptide-specific reactions in the food-allergic group). Non-allergic and CCD-negative food-allergic patients served as controls for immunoblot, basophil activation, and ImmunoCAP analyses. Basophil activation tests (BAT) revealed that Lyc e 2 is no key player among other tomato (glyco)allergens. CCD-positive patients showed decreased (re)activity with CCD-reduced foodstuff, most obvious in the hymenoptera venom-allergic but less in the food-allergic group, suggesting that in-vivo reactivity is primarily based on peptide- and not CCD-sIgE. Peptide epitopes remained unaffected in CCD-reduced plants, because CCD-negative patient sera showed reactivity similar to wild-type. In-house-made ImmunoCAPs, applied to investigate feasibility in routine diagnosis, confirmed BAT results at the sIgE level.Conclusions/SignificanceCCD-positive hymenoptera venom-allergic patients (control group) showed basophil activation despite no allergic symptoms towards tomato and potato. Therefore, this proof-of-principle study demonstrates feasibility of CCD-reduced foodstuff to minimize ‘false-positive results’ in routine serum tests. Despite confirming low clinical relevance of CCD antibodies, we identified one patient with ambiguous in-vitro results, indicating need for further component-resolved diagnosis.

In vitro BAT clearly demonstrates biological activity of CCD-sIgE. However, because most of the patients showed a mono-positive IC and activation of basophils with the IC-negative venom was significantly lower compared with the IC-positive one, the present data suggest that CCD-sIgE is clinically irrelevant in these patients.

The clinical manifestations in temporal relationship to ingestion of coriander and handling of coriander and/or fenugreek, the positive specific IgE results, skin tests and basophil activation assays support the diagnosis of allergy to both spices. History suggests sensitization by occupational exposure.

Background: In hymenoptera venom allergy, about 75% of detected in vitro double positivity to yellow jacket and honeybee venom is ascribed to specific IgE (sIgE) directed against cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants (CCDs). To date, for the detection of CCD-sIgE, different carbohydrate antigens and methods are used. The most suitable one still has to be identified. Methods: Eighty-seven patients with confirmed hymenoptera venom allergy and venom sIgE values of ≧0.7 kU/l were investigated. Sixty-five patients showed sIgE reactivity to both yellow jacket and honeybee venom, 22 were venom mono positive and served as controls. Occurrence of CCD-sIgE was determined using bromelain, horseradish peroxidase (HRP) and MUXF³ on system A, and ascorbic acid oxidase (AAO), bromelain and HRP on system B. Further, a reference standard for CCD-sIgE evaluation was created: CCD positivity was assumed when at least 4 of the 6 test results were positive. Results: According to the defined reference standard, 45/65 venom double positive patients exhibited CCD-sIgE. Using system A, comparison with the reference standard revealed sensitivity and specificity values of 96 and 97%, respectively, for MUXF³, 100 and 100%, respectively, for bromelain, and 96 and 97%, respectively, for HRP. Using system B, sensitivity and specificity was 98 and 97%, respectively, for AAO, 62 and 95%, respectively, for bromelain, and 96 and 69%, respectively, for HRP. Results of the 3 test allergens obtained with system A showed strong correlations (r = 0.932–0.976), whereas results with system B showed lower correlations (r = 0.714–0.898). Conclusions: All 3 test allergens used with system A are suitable for CCD-sIgE detection in hymenoptera venom allergy. With system B, only AAO seems to be a reliable tool.

No abstract