{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03549899531145345, 'fraction_numerical': 0.026121902210314803, 'mean_word_length': 5.073170731707317, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A new tool in the field of in-vitro diagnosis of allergy: preliminary results in the comparison of ImmunoCAP© 250 with the ImmunoCAP© ISAC

Abstract Background: The ImmunoCAP© ISAC allows for the determination of specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) against 103 recombinant or purified allergen components in a single analytical step. The aim of our study was to perform a comparison of the specific IgE results measured with the microarray method to those obtained using the traditional method of ImmunoCAP©. Methods: We selected 86 clinically relevant patients on the basis of their specific IgE for recombinant allergens (ImmunoCAP© 250, Phadia). Also, we selected two patients with a high total IgE to evaluate the non-specific binding of IgE. All samples were screened with the ImmunoCAP© ISAC. Then, we compared the 555 specific IgE antibodies results provided by ImmunoCAP© ISAC with the specific IgE levels obtained with ImmunoCAP© 250. Results: We observed that 82 of the 384 results found to be positive with ImmunoCAP© were negative with ISAC© (concordance 78.65%). Of 171 negative results obtained with ImmunoCAP©, 11 were positive with ISAC© (concordance 93.57%). No non-specific binding was observed. Conclusions: Our results show that the ImmunoCAP© ISAC has good analytical performance when compared with the ImmunoCAP© 250 method. We did not observe any non-specific binding. However, better sensitivity for some clinically relevant allergen components, such as rPru p 3 is needed.