부산대학교 도서관

Background Flow cytometry-based basophil activation tests (BAT) have been performed with various modifications, differing in the use of distinct identification and activation markers. Established tests use liquid reagents while a new development involves the use of tubes with dried antibody reagents. The aim of this pilot study was to compare these two techniques in patients with insect venom allergy. Methods Seventeen patients with an insect venom allergy were included in the study. The established "BAT 1" utilizes conventional antibody solutions of anti-CCR3 for basophil identification and anti-CD63 to assess basophil activation, whereas "BAT 2" uses dried anti-CD45, anti-CD3, anti-CRTH2, anti-203c and anti-CD63 for identification and activation measurement of basophils. Negative and positive controls as well as incubations with honey bee venom and yellow jacket venom at three concentrations were performed. Results Seven patients had to be excluded due to low basophil counts, high values in negative controls or negative positive controls. For the remaining 10 patients the overall mean ([+ or -] SD) difference in activated basophils between the two tests was 0.2 ([+ or -] 12.2) %P. In a Bland-Altman plot, the limit of agreement (LoA) ranged from 24.0 to -23.7. In the qualitative evaluation (value below/above cut-off) Cohen's kappa was 0.77 indicating substantial agreement. BAT 2 took longer to perform than BAT 1 and was more expensive. Conclusion The BAT 2 technique represents an interesting innovation, however, it was found to be less suitable compared to an established BAT for the routine diagnosis of insect venom allergies. Keywords: Basophil activation test, Liquid reagents, Dried antibody reagents, Insect venom allergy
Author(s): Sebastian Waldherr[sup.1] , Miriam Hils[sup.1] , Martin Köberle[sup.1] , Knut Brockow[sup.1] , Ulf Darsow[sup.1] , Simon Blank[sup.2] , Tilo Biedermann[sup.1] and Bernadette Eberlein[sup.1] Introduction The basophil activation test (BAT) [...]