title: Laboratory tests for diagnosis of food allergy: advantages, disadvantages and future perspectives.
abstract: Numerous biological tests point to the diagnosis of food sensitization: detection of specific IgEs by Rast techniques, multi-detection assays, immunoblotting, screening of basophil activation (BAT or FAST), assays for leukotriene LTC4 release (CAST), measurement of plasma histamine, serum tryptase, serum ECP, urinary EDN, completed by mannitol-lactulose test evaluating intestinal permeability, assay of fecal IgEs, Rast for specific IgG4. Primary screening for anti-food IgEs by multi-detection assays seeks justification from insufficient clinical data and false positive tests are common in patients sensitized to pollens or latex, on account of in vitro cross reactivities (CR). Multiple CR explain positive Rast to vegetal food allergens in such patients. Biological tests should not be performed as the first line of diagnosis. In vivo sensitisation is assessed by positive prick-tests, demonstrating the bivalence of allergens, as well as the affinity of specific IgEs, two conditions necessary to bridge membrane bound specific IgEs, leading to the release of mediators. Prick-tests are closer to clinical symptoms than biological tests. However, the diagnosis of food allergy is based on standardised oral challenges. Exceptions are high levels of specific IgEs to egg (> 6 kUl/l), peanut (> 15 kUl/l), fish (> 20 kUl/l) and milk (> 32 kUl/l), reaching a 95% predictive positive value. Rast inhibition tests are useful to identify masked allergens in foods. Research developments will have impact on the development of new diagnostic tools: allergen mixes reinforcing a food extract by associated recombinant major allergens, multiple combination of recombinant allergens (chips) or tests with synthetic epitopes aimed a the prediction of recovery. Laboratory tests take place in the decision free for the diagnosis for the food allergy and the follow-up of the levels specific IgEs is a tool to assess outcome and contributes to predict recovery or persistent allergy. Up to now the significance of positive laboratory tests showing the implication of IgEs is at the crossroads of the allergist's and biologist's expertise.
authors.affiliation: Department of Internal Medicine, Clinical Immunology and Allergology, University Hospital, Avenue de Lattre de Tassigny-54035, Nancy.
authors.forename: D A
authors.initials: DA
authors.lastname: Moneret-Vautrin
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Kanny
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Frémont
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000485:Allergens; D000918:Antibody Specificity; D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D003429:Cross Reactions; D005512:Food Hypersensitivity / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000276:immunology; D005544:Forecasting; D006801:Humans; D007073:Immunoglobulin E / Q000097:blood; D007158:Immunologic Techniques; D007223:Infant; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011379:Prognosis; D011852:Radioallergosorbent Test; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D012882:Skin Tests
chemical_list: D000485:Allergens; D007073:Immunoglobulin E