Allergy screening with extract‐based skin prick tests demonstrates higher sensitivity over in vitro molecular allergy testing

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundAs extract‐based skin testing as well as in vitro tests for major allergens have their own advantages, both procedures are usually performed in routine settings. In times of shortages in medical staff and supplies, we asked ourselves, how many patients would be underdiagnosed, if only one test could be used.MethodsIn a retrospective analysis, we investigated a cohort of 2646 patients seen by a single physician in a large Austrian outpatient allergy clinic in 2018. Only patients with an allergen source‐specific history and pairs of extract‐based skin prick (SPT) and in vitro molecular allergy tests to major allergens were included.ResultsFor all tested allergen sources, sensitivity was higher for SPT than for sIgE‐based molecular allergy testing. Concerning 1006 birch pollen‐allergic patients, 791 (78.6%) had positive results with both tests, while 153 (15.2%) only with the SPT and 62 (6.2%) only with the sIgE to Bet v1. The other allergen sources showed similar results: For house dust mite 816/1120 (72.9%), grass pollen 1077/1416 (76.1%) and cat 433/622 (69.6%) remained test‐positive with both procedures, whereas in 276 (24.6%), 224 (15.8%) and 173 (27.8%) times only the SPT and 28 (2.5%), 115 (8.1%) and 16 (2.6%) times only the sIgE to Der p1/2/23, Phl p1/5 and Fel d1 showed a positive result. Each comparison was statistically significant (each p < 0.0001, Chi‐squared test).ConclusionsScreening for allergy with major molecular allergens has lower sensitivity when compared with extract‐based skin tests. A combination of both is required for an optimal sensitivity.