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: Comparative studies on tree pollen allergens. XVII. Immunochemical analysis of the international standardization extracts of birch (Betula verrucosa) pollen as compared with a local partially purified extract.
    Author: Vik H, Florvaag E, Elsayed S.
    Journal: Ann Allergy; 1987 Jan; 58(1):71-7. PubMed ID: 3800056.
    Abstract:
    Six different birch pollen extracts were analyzed by 20 laboratories for the standardization of birch (Betula verrucosa) pollen extracts used for diagnosis and specific therapy of patients with birch pollen allergy. The extracts were collected and delivered by the International Union of Immunological Societies, Allergen Standardization Subcommittee. One of the extracts, designated M, was proposed as an international standard (IS)-candidate of birch pollen extracts. The protein content of the IS candidate M was found to be 1.12 mg/mL, more than 2-fold higher than any of the other extracts analyzed. This preparation was among the extracts containing the highest number of protein components, as shown by isoelectric focusing, 28 lines, and by 11 precipitates in crossed immunoelectrophoresis. The allergenic reactivities were tested by crossed radioimmunoelectrophoresis (CRIE) and by radioallergosorbent test (RAST)-inhibition. In CRIE, the proposed IS (M) showed similar affinity for binding patients' IgE as the other extracts, as judged by the autoradiographic illustrations. Except for extract L, the values of RAST-inhibition for the rest were very similar. An IS extract should qualify for the criteria suggested for an optimal allergen preparation, containing minimal amounts of non-allergenic antigens and providing quantitatively and qualitatively all the allergenic proteins. The appropriateness of this selection seems unjustified in view of the above criteria.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]