1989
DOI: 10.1177/019459988910100312
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Efficacy of Alternative Tests for Delayed‐Cyclic Food Hypersensitivity

Abstract: With the oral challenge food test (OCFT) used as the standard for delayed-cyclic food hypersensitivity diagnosis, blinded comparison studies were accomplished with 175 in vitro food specific IgE and 180 IgG radioallergosorbent tests, 180 food enzyme-linked immune complex assays, and 155 in vivo Multi-Test prick tests. The study was multi-centered, eight physicians and 37 patients participating. All of the compared tests were shown to be approximately 50% efficient when compared with the OCFT results, and, thus… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

1993
1993
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…After histamine and glycerin controls were applied, 51,52 IDT for the same 12 inhalants and 12 foods 53 was performed on all patients (Table II). All skin reactions were evaluated at 10 minutes, and a mean wheal diameter 2 mm greater than the glycerol control was considered a positive reaction.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After histamine and glycerin controls were applied, 51,52 IDT for the same 12 inhalants and 12 foods 53 was performed on all patients (Table II). All skin reactions were evaluated at 10 minutes, and a mean wheal diameter 2 mm greater than the glycerol control was considered a positive reaction.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meta-analysis of the efficacy of antimicrobials for OME, as evaluated in eleven large studies, indicates increased cure rates of only 22.0% (95% C1, 15.2% to 28.9% V It is obvious that there is no simple answer.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The poor correlation of SPT and in vitro tests with clinical symptoms likely reflects the number of people with non‐IgE‐mediated reactions to foods. In the absence of other sensitive, specific laboratory tests for food allergy, IDT has been used to test for non‐IgE‐mediated food reactions, and avoids the inconvenience and risk of multiple oral challenges. Yet current guidelines state, based primarily on opinion, and not on data, that there is significant risk to food IDT …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%