Objective: To evaluate the risk of IgE sensitization and symptoms to shrimp in a population that has received AIT with polymerized mite extract.
Methods: Patients with allergic rhinitis sensitized to dust mites (Dermatophogides spp) with an indication for mite AIT were included. Those patients who had not yet received AIT or had received less than 6 doses were included as controls and those who had received more than 24 doses of AIT were included as cases. Sensitization to shrimp was assessed by skin prick test with complete shrimp extract and/or shrimp-specific IgE.
Results: A total of 68 patients were included; 47 cases and 21 controls. When calculating the odds ratio of sensitization according to time with immunotherapy we observed that there were no differences between the group of cases and controls (OR 0.76 95% CI 0.26 to 2.22 p 0.7 by MacNemar technique). Factors such as consumption or not of shrimp and frequency of consumption do not seem to be related to the outcome.
Conclusion: In contrast to what was reported with aqueous extracts, we observed that AIT with polymerized extracts is not a risk factor for shrimp sensitization. It is necessary to reproduce these results with a larger sample size to explore other factors.
Objetivo: Evaluar el riesgo de sensibilización IgE y síntomas a camarón en una población que ha recibido AIT con extracto polimerizado para ácaros.
Métodos: Se incluyeron pacientes con rinitis alérgica sensibilizados a ácaros del polvo (Dermatophogides spp) con indicación de AIT para ácaros. Aquellos pacientes que no habían aún recibido AIT o llevaban menos de seis dosis, fueron incluidos como controles, y aquellos que llevaban más de 24 dosis de AIT, fueron incluidos como casos. Se evaluó la sensibilización a camarón mediante prueba cutánea con extracto completo de camarón y/o IgE específica a camarón.
Resultados: En total, 68 pacientes fueron incluidos; 47 casos y 21 controles. Al calcular el odds ratio de la sensibilización de acuerdo al tiempo con la inmunoterapia, observamos que no había diferencias entre el grupo de casos y controles (OR 0,76 95% IC 0,26 a 2,22 p 0,7 por técnica de MacNemar). Factores como el consumo o no de camarón y la frecuencia de consumo, no parecen estar relacionados con el desenlace.
Conclusión: A diferencia de lo reportado con extractos acuosos, observamos de AIT con extractos polimerizados para no es un factor de riesgo para la sensibilización a camarón. Es necesario reproducir estos resultados con un mayor tamaño de muestra que permita explorar otros factores.
Keywords: Cross-reactivity; House dust mites; Immunotherapy; Polymerized extract immunotherapy; Shrimp.