These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Selection of patients for biological standardization as exemplified by standardization of mugwort, goosefoot and English plantain pollen allergen extracts/preparations.
    Author: Dreborg S, Sjögren I, Eriksson NE, Einarsson R.
    Journal: Allergy; 1987 Oct; 42(7):485-95. PubMed ID: 3688374.
    Abstract:
    The biological activity of a partly purified, biochemically/immunochemically characterized mugwort pollen allergen preparation and crude pollen extracts of mugwort, goosefoot and English plantain was determined by means of skin prick test (SPT). The patient inclusion criteria with mugwort were a well-defined positive clinical history and a positive SPT. Symptoms related to goosefoot/English plantain pollens are difficult to define, as these weeds flower during the grass pollen season. Thus patients tested with these allergens did not fulfill the most important inclusion criterion for so-called biological standardization. To elicit a wheal of the same size as that produced by histamine 1 mg/ml required 100 to 10,000 times more material from these weeds, than from mugwort and other pollen allergen extracts investigated earlier. One thousand Biological Units/ml (BU/ml) corresponded to 8.3 micrograms dry weight (dw/ml) of the crude and 1.8 micrograms dw/ml of the purified mugwort pollen allergen preparation. Only 7/22 goosefoot-and English plantain-tested patients were positive at conjunctival or nasal challenge. All three weeds showed a similar composition with 5-10 allergens by CIE/CRIE analysis and 10-13 by immunoblotting analysis. One dominating allergen (approx. 15,000 d), could be identified for each weed species by protein gel blot after separation by SDS g-PAGE. There was no other explanation for the difference in biological activity than the criteria of selection. If there is no obvious clinical history, which is the main patient inclusion criterion in biological standardization, then additional criteria should be used.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]