4.4 Article

Prevalence of serum IgE to storage mites in a southwestern Ohio population

期刊

ANNALS OF ALLERGY ASTHMA & IMMUNOLOGY
卷 96, 期 2, 页码 356-362

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)61248-3

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [AI 17252] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Storage mites of the families Chortoglyphidae, Glycyphagidae, Echimyopodidae, and Acaridae are commonly found in agricultural and nonagricultural environments. The prevalence of sensitization to these storage mites in the general population in the United States is unknown. Objective: To determine the prevalence of serum IgE to the storage mites Lepidoglyphus destructor and Acarus siro and to evaluate the degree of co-sensitization to various other astigmatid mites in a population in southwestern Ohio. Methods: Serum samples from 600 people randomly selected from a 1-day submission of approximately 3,000 samples to a clinical diagnostic laboratory were screened for IgE to allergens of L destructor and A siro. Proteins in the extracts of each mite were electrophoretically separated, transferred to membranes, and incubated in the serum samples, and the slot blots were probed for IgE binding using radiolabeled anti-human IgE and autoradiography. Results: Thirty-two (5.3%) of the 600 serum samples screened had IgE to allergens from at least 1 of the 2 mite species; 14 (2.3%) and 20 (3.3%) had serum IgE to proteins of the mites A siro and L destructor, respectively. Additional analysis revealed that most serum samples also had IgE that bound to proteins in extracts prepared from a variety of other astigmatid mite species, but IgE binding profiles suggested little cross-reactivity. Conclusions: Sensitization to the mites L destructor and A siro is significant in this region of southwestern Ohio. Further studies are needed to determine the importance of these and other storage mites in occupationally exposed and urban populations of the United States.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据