Cited by 98Allergic Rhinitis and SensitizationFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchAsthma and respiratory diseases

A new framework for the interpretation of IgE sensitization tests

Open access
Roberts, G., Ollert, M., Aalberse, R., Austin, M., Custovic, A., DunnGalvin, A., Eigenmann, P. A., Fassio, F. +9 more·2016·Allergy

Abstract

IgE sensitization tests, such as skin prick testing and serum-specific IgE, have been used to diagnose IgE-mediated clinical allergy for many years. Their prime drawback is that they detect sensitization which is only loosely related to clinical allergy. Many patients therefore require provocation tests to make a definitive diagnosis; these are often expensive and potentially associated with severe reactions. The likelihood of clinical allergy can be semi-quantified from an IgE sensitization test results. This relationship varies though according to the patients' age, ethnicity, nature of the putative allergic reaction and coexisting clinical diseases such as eczema. The likelihood of clinical allergy can be more precisely estimated from an IgE sensitization test result, by taking into account the patient's presenting features (pretest probability). The presence of each of these patient-specific factors may mean that a patient is more or less likely to have clinical allergy with a given test result (post-test probability). We present two approaches to include pretest probabilities in the interpretation of results. These approaches are currently limited by a lack of data to allow us to derive pretest probabilities for diverse setting, regions and allergens. Also, cofactors, such as exercise, may be necessary for exposure to an allergen to result in an allergic reaction in specific IgE-positive patients. The diagnosis of IgE-mediated allergy is now being aided by the introduction of allergen component testing which may identify clinically relevant sensitization. Other approaches are in development with basophil activation testing being closest to clinical application.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/all.12939

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Both skin prick testing and specific IgE can be positive without symptoms, and neither can confirm the expression of rhinitis symptoms upon allergen exposure.

    “However, both of these tests can be positive in the absence of any symptoms, and neither positive SPT nor IgE can confirm the expression of rhinitis symptoms upon allergen exposure.1009,1010”
  • Allergen sensitization does not necessarily imply clinical responsiveness.

    “Nevertheless, all in vitro test results should be evaluated alongside the clinical history, since allergen sensitization does not necessarily imply clinical responsiveness.”
  • Interpretation of allergy tests has moved from dichotomization based on arbitrary criteria to quantification using specific IgE titer and skin prick test wheal size.

    “This has changed the way we interpret the results of allergy tests, with a move from dichotomization (labeling patients as being sensitized based on a “positive” test using arbitrary criteria), to quantification of blood or skin tests using sIgE titer and SPT wheal size.893,1010-1012”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [9]9. Muraro A*, Agache I*, Clark A*, Sheikh A, Roberts G, Akdis CA, et al. Management patients with food allergy in the community. Allergy 2014; 69: 1046-1057.
  2. [44]44. Du Toit G, Santos A, Roberts G, Smith P, Fox AT, Lack G. The diagnosis of IgEmediated food allergy in childhood. Pediatric Allergy Immunol 2009; 20:309-19.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Roberts, G., Ollert, M., Aalberse, R., Austin, M., Custovic, A., DunnGalvin, A., Eigenmann, P. A., Fassio, F., Grattan, C., Hellings, P., Hourihane, J., Knol, E., Muraro, A., Papadopoulos, N., Santos, A. F., Schnadt, S., & Tzeli, K.
Affiliations
  • University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • University of Southern Denmark (DK)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Anaphylaxis UK (GB)
  • Department of Paediatrics; Imperial College London; London UK
  • University College Cork (IE)
  • University Hospital of Geneva (CH)
  • Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi (IT)
  • Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital (GB)
  • Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven (BE)
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
  • University of Padua (IT)
  • National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • German Allergy and Asthma Association (Deutscher Allergie- und Asthmabund (DAAB)); Mönchengladbach Germany
Corresponding author
Roberts, G.
Venue
Allergy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-08-15
Volume
71
Issue
11
Pages
1540-1551
ISSN
0105-4538 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2401029547
Cited by
98
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4
FWCI
11.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Allergy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (submittedVersion)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • ThermoFisher Scientific
  • Medical Research Council
  • NIAID and the Immune Tolerance Network
  • National Peanut Board
  • Bühlmann Laboratories AG
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Allergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Asthma and respiratory diseases
Keywords
skin prick test, serum specific IgE, pretest probability, post-test probability, Bayesian interpretation, atopic dermatitis, provocation tests
MeSH terms
Allergens, Diagnostic Tests, Routine, Humans, Hypersensitivity, Immunoglobulin E, Immunoglobulin G, Immunization, Prognosis, Risk Factors, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review