The clinical utility of basophil activation testing in diagnosis and monitoring of allergic disease

The basophil activation test (BAT) has become a pervasive test for allergic response through the development of flow cytometry, discovery of activation markers such as CD63 and unique markers identifying basophil granulocytes. Basophil activation test measures basophil response to allergen cross‐linking IgE on between 150 and 2000 basophil granulocytes in <0.1 ml fresh blood. Dichotomous activation is assessed as the fraction of reacting basophils. In addition to clinical history, skin prick test, and specific IgE determination, BAT can be a part of the diagnostic evaluation of patients with food‐, insect venom‐, and drug allergy and chronic urticaria. It may be helpful in determining the clinically relevant allergen. Basophil sensitivity may be used to monitor patients on allergen immunotherapy, anti‐IgE treatment or in the natural resolution of allergy. Basophil activation test may use fewer resources and be more reproducible than challenge testing. As it is less stressful for the patient and avoids severe allergic reactions, BAT ought to precede challenge testing. An important next step is to standardize BAT and make it available in diagnostic laboratories. The nature of basophil activation as an ex vivo challenge makes it a multifaceted and promising tool for the allergist. In this EAACI task force position paper, we provide an overview of the practical and technical details as well as the clinical utility of BAT in diagnosis and management of allergic diseases.     

Road map for the clinical application of the basophil activation test in food allergy

The diagnosis of IgE‐mediated food allergy based solely on the clinical history and the documentation of specific IgE to whole allergen extract or single allergens is often ambiguous, requiring oral food challenges (OFCs), with the attendant risk and inconvenience to the patient, to confirm the diagnosis of food allergy. This is a considerable proportion of patients assessed in allergy clinics. The basophil activation test (BAT) has emerged as having superior specificity and comparable sensitivity to diagnose food allergy, when compared with skin prick test and specific IgE. BAT, therefore, may reduce the number of OFC required for accurate diagnosis, particularly positive OFC. BAT can also be used to monitor resolution of food allergy and the clinical response to immunomodulatory treatments. Given the practicalities involved in the performance of BAT, we propose that it can be applied for selected cases where the history, skin prick test and/or specific IgE are not definitive for the diagnosis of food allergy. In the cases that the BAT is positive, food allergy is sufficiently confirmed without OFC; in the cases that BAT is negative or the patient has non‐responder basophils, OFC may still be indicated. However, broad clinical application of BAT demands further standardization of the laboratory procedure and of the flow cytometry data analyses, as well as clinical validation of BAT as a diagnostic test for multiple target allergens and confirmation of its feasibility and cost‐effectiveness in multiple settings.     

Mast cell activation tests by flow cytometry: A new diagnostic asset?

Since the late nineties, evidence has accumulated that flow-assisted basophil activation test (BAT) might be an accessible and reliable method to explore the mechanisms governing basophil degranulation and diagnostic allowing correct prediction of the clinical outcome following exposure to the offending allergen(s) and cross-reactive structures for different IgE-dependent allergies and particular forms of autoimmune urticaria. Although the BAT offers many advantages over mediator release tests, it is left with some weaknesses that hinder a wider application. It is preferable to perform the BAT analysis within 4 h of collection, and the technique does not advance diagnosis in patients with non-responsive cells. Besides, the BAT is difficult to standardize mainly because of the difficulty to perform large batch analyses that might span over several days. This article reviews the status of flow cytometric mast cell activation test (MAT) using passively sensitized mast cells (MCs) with patients' sera or plasma (henceforth indicated as passive MAT; pMAT) using both MC lines and cultured MCs in the diagnosis of IgE-dependent allergies. In addition, this paper provides guidance for generating human MCs from peripheral blood CD34⁺ progenitor cells (PBCMCs) and correct interpretation of flow cytometric analyses of activated and/or degranulating cells. With the recent recognition of the mas-related G protein-coupled receptor X2 (MRGPRX2) occupation as a putative mechanism of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHRs), we also speculate how direct activation of MCs (dMAT)—that is direct activation by MRGPRX2 agonists without prior passive sensitization—could advance paradigms for this novel endotype of IDHRs.     

Beef-Induced Anaphylaxis Confirmed by the Basophil Activation Test

Beef allergies are relatively rare, especially in adults. However, clinical manifestations can vary from urticaria, angioedema, anaphylaxis to gastrointestinal symptoms. Currently available tests, such as skin testing or in vitro determination of beef-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE), do not provide an accurate diagnosis of beef allergy. The recent development of the basophil activation test (BAT) presents a new opportunity for the diagnosis of food allergies. Here, we report a 37-year-old woman with a history of recurrent generalised urticaria, nausea, vomiting and hypotension after ingestion of beef, suggesting a beef allergy. Although the skin prick test and serum specific IgE to beef, pork and milk allergens showed negative results using commercial kits, the BAT showed significant upregulation of CD203c in a dose-dependent manner compared to both non-atopic and atopic controls. To our knowledge, this is the first case study of beef allergy consisting of a non-IgE-mediated reaction. The detection of food allergies using direct basophil activation is suggested to complement conventional diagnostic tests.     

Use of a rat basophil leukemia (RBL) cell-based immunological assay for allergen identification,clinical diagnosis of allergy,and identification of anti-allergy agents for use in immunotherapy

Abstract

Food allergy is an important public health problem that affects an estimated 8% of young children and 2% of adults. With an increasing interest in genetically-engineered foods, there is a growing need for development of sensitive and specific tests to evaluate potential allergenicity of foods and novel proteins as well as to determine allergic responses to ensure consumer safety. This review covers progress made in the field of development of cell models, specifically that involving a rat basophil leukemia (RBL) cell-based immunoassay, for use in allergen identification, diagnosis, and immunotherapy. The RBL assay has been extensively employed for determining biologically relevant cross-reactivities of food proteins, assessing the effect of processing on the allergenicity of food proteins, diagnosing allergic responses to whole-food products, and identifying anti-allergy food compounds. From the review of the literature, one might conclude the RBL cell-based assay is a better test system when compared to wild-type mast cell and basophil model systems for use in allergen identification, diagnosis, and analyses of potential immunotherapeutics. However, it is important to emphasize that this assay will only be able to identify those allergens to which the human has already been exposed, but will not identify a truly novel allergen, i.e. one that has never been encountered as in its preferred (humanized) configuration.     

Flow cytometry for basophil activation markers: the measurement of CD203c up-regulation is as reliable as CD63 expression in the diagnosis of cat allergy

The flow cytometric basophil activation test (BAT), based on the detection of allergen-induced CD63 expression, has been proved effective in the diagnosis of various IgE-mediated allergies. However, there is not yet consensus about the suitability of CD203c expression as a specific basophil activation marker and its diagnostic reliability. The goal of the present study was to compare measurement of CD63 and CD203c expression using BAT in a model of cat allergy and to determine optimal experimental conditions for both markers. Heparinized whole blood samples from 20 cat allergic patients and 19 controls were incubated with Fel d1 (relevant allergen) or anti-FcepsilonRI (positive control) either in IL-3 or IL-3-free conditions. An optimal gating of basophils was achieved in triple staining protocols: anti-IgE PE/anti-CD45 PerCP/anti-CD63 FITC or anti-IgE FITC/anti-CD45 PerCP/anti-CD203c PE. We demonstrated that IL-3 significantly enhanced CD63-induced expression by basophils obtained from cat allergic patients in response to Fel d1. Sensitivity was found to be 100%. The CD203c protocol, when performed under IL-3-free conditions, also demonstrated 100% sensitivity. Only one of the control subjects was positive in both tests. In conclusion, using well-defined experimental conditions, the measurement of CD203c up-regulation on basophils in response to specific allergens is as reliable as CD63-BAT for the in vitro diagnosis of patients with IgE-mediated allergy.     

Diagnostic tests based on human basophils: more potentials and perspectives than pitfalls

For the diagnosis of allergy, cellular basophil activation tests (BAT), e.g. histamine or sulfidoleukotriene release tests, have long been introduced, but the expression of basophil activation markers such as CD63 and CD203c detected by flow cytometry has attracted more recent attention. A recent opinion paper in this Journal has stressed not only the potential but also the possible pitfalls of flow-cytometric BAT. We have applied clinical validation of various BAT in various ways for several years, and our experience shows that these new technologies have more potentials and perspectives than pitfalls. A comprehensive review of clinically validated studies on allergy to aeroallergens, insect venoms, latex, food allergens and drugs, e.g. myorelaxants, beta-lactams, pyrazolones and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, as well as chronic urticaria shows clearly that even with different protocols, reproducible and meaningful results can be obtained. Although the available technologies may still be optimized and better standardized, there are no serious reasons to deprive allergic patients of clinically indicated BAT, which can be performed reliably by any laboratory with allergy and flow-cytometric capacity and expertise.     

Evaluation of basophil activation in food allergy: present and future applications

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The diagnosis of immediate hypersensitivity relies on specific IgE and history. Because of low specificity, however, provocation challenges are often necessary. Furthermore, IgE testing does not predict features such as reaction severity; nor can it discriminate cross-reactivity from multiple sensitizations. Direct and passive basophil activation tests may address these needs. In addition, measuring basophil activation ex vivo may be useful for monitoring patients with food allergies. RECENT FINDINGS: Several papers using basophil activation tests demonstrate comparable sensitivity and specificity to current testing for food allergy. Flow-based basophil activation tests have also been used to assess functional characteristics of patient IgE. Finally, several activation phenotypes have been identified as markers of allergic inflammation in vivo; these phenotypes appear to correspond to earlier reports of spontaneous histamine-releasing basophils in patients with active allergic inflammation. SUMMARY: Although in their early stages, direct basophil activation tests may prove to be useful in the clinic. Indirect basophil activation studies are useful when applied to compare functional aspects of IgE. Identification of basophil activation ex vivo is a promising approach for monitoring allergic inflammation.     

Basophil activation tests: time for a reconsideration

Challenges in in vitro allergy diagnostics lie in the development of accessible and reliable assays allowing identification of all offending allergens and cross-reactive structures. Flow-assisted analysis and quantification of in vitro activated basophils serves as a diagnostic instrument with increasing applications developed over the years. From the earliest days it was clear that the test could constitute a diagnostic asset in basophil-mediated hypersensitivity. However, utility of the basophil activation test should be reassessed regarding difficulties with preparation, characterization and validation of allergen extracts; availability and the potential of more accessible diagnostics. Today, the added value mainly lies in diagnosis of immediate drug hypersensitivity. Other potential indications are monitoring venom-immunotherapy and follow-up of natural history of food allergies. However, results in these nondiagnostic applications are preliminary. We review the most relevant clinical applications of the basophil activation test. Some personal comments and views about perspectives and challenges about flow-assisted allergy diagnosis are made.     

The human basophil degranulation test as an invitro method for the diagnosis of allergies

We have designed a human basophil degranulation test based on a one-step method of basophil staining after exposure to a specific allergen. This very simple test is now commercially available as a ready-to-use kit. It explores the allergic sensitivity at the cellular level, probably through IgE-dependent sensilization of the basophil. It positively correlates with histamine release and radioallergosorbent test (RAST). It detects sensitivity to common allergens and to chemical and food products as well. In its present state, the test provides a simple, inexpensive specific means for in vitro diagnosis of allergic diseases, Recently, it has been further developed to be performed on the automatic Hemalog D Technicon machine.     

Detection of allergen-induced basophil activation by expression of CD63 antigen using a tricolour flow cytometric method

In the field of allergy diagnosis, most in vitro functional tests are focused on basophils. Nevertheless, the very small number of circulating basophils limits these experiments and their clinical benefit remains controversial. As flow cytometry is a valuable tool for identifying cell populations, even at low concentrations, we developed a tricolour flow cytometric method for the study of allergen-induced basophil activation. Identification of cells was based both on CD45 expression and on the presence of IgE on the cell surface, since basophils express high-affinity receptors for IgE (Fc epsilon RI). Cell activation upon allergen challenge was assessed by the expression of CD63 antigen on the plasma membrane. Basophil isolation and activation (with the chemotactic peptide formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine) were validated in 32 non-allergic patients. In 12 allergic patients, basophil stimulation by a relevant allergen was in most cases positive (10/12). Furthermore a concentration-dependent hook effect was observed. Of the allergic and non-allergic patients, none showed non-specific activation with an irrelevant allergen (specificity 100%). Overall, our preliminary results, even in a small population, suggest that this is a reliable and valuable method for the diagnosis of allergies complementing specific allergen IgE and skin test results. Obviously, additional clinical studies are needed to validate these first results.     

CD63 expression on basophils as a tool for the diagnosis of pollen-associated food allergy: sensitivity and specificity

BACKGROUND: Basophil activation is associated with the expression of CD63. Because allergens can induce basophil activation by cross-linking specific IgE, increased CD63 expression has been proposed as a novel in vitro test for immediate type allergy. OBJECTIVE: We compared the CD63-based basophil activation test (BAT) in the diagnosis of allergy to carrot, celery and hazelnut with skin prick tests (SPT) and measurement of allergen-specific IgE. METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with a history of an oral allergy syndrome induced by carrot, celery or hazelnut (n = 20 for each allergen) and 20 controls were studied. SPT were performed with standardized and native carrot, celery and hazelnut extracts. Allergen-specific IgE was determined by the CAP FEIA method and basophil activation was determined by flow cytometry upon double staining with anti-IgE/anti-CD63 mAb. RESULTS: SPT with native carrot, celery and hazelnut showed sensitivities of 100%, 100% and 90%, and specificities of 80%, 80% and 90%. SPT with commercial extracts of the same allergens gave sensitivities of 85%, 80% and 85%, and specificities of 80%, 80% and 90%. Sensitivity of allergen-specific IgE and the BAT for carrot, celery and hazelnut was 80% vs. 85%, 70% vs. 85%, and 80% vs. 90%, with corresponding specificities of 80% vs. 85%, 80% vs. 80%, and 95% vs. 90%. The cut-off for a positive BAT was 10% CD63+ basophils. Moreover, there was a positive correlation between IgE reactivity and the number of CD63+ basophils for all food allergens (carrot: r = 0.69, celery: r = 0.67, hazelnut: r = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: Quantification of basophil activation by CD63 expression is a valuable new in vitro method for diagnosis of immediate type food sensitization. Although double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges remain the gold standard, the CD63-based BAT may supplement routine diagnostic tests such as SPT or allergen-specific IgE in the future.     

Food hypersensitivity in primary school children in Taiwan: relationship with asthma

Primary objective. A review of the literature suggested that food allergen intolerance was closely related to inhaled allergen hypersensitivity. Our aim was to determine whether food allergen sensitivity is a marker for increased asthma incidence in children. Methods and procedures. Food allergen sensitivity was evaluated in six- to eight-year-old primary school students (n=1010) using the Phadia ImmunoCAP, Phadiatop Infant and radioallergosorbent tests. Allergy history was obtained by telephone interview. Main outcomes and results. Males were more sensitive than females to food allergens. The most prevalent food allergies were scallop, abalone, lobster, pork, casein, alpha-lactalbumin and garlic. There was gender difference in fruit allergen sensitivity. Of the children who had doctor-diagnosed history of food hypersensitivity, 21.6% had asthma, 65.4% had allergic rhinitis, 16.7% had atopic dermatitis and 1.7% had urticaria.Conclusion. Food allergen hypersensitivity may be an important marker of inhaled allergen-induced respiratory allergy in later childhood.     

A mutant of the major melon allergen, Cuc m 2, with reduced IgE binding capacity is a good candidate for specific immunotherapy

Hypoallergenic mutants with reduced IgE-binding capacity but which show a similar T-cell response to the corresponding natural allergen are ideal tools for immunotherapy, for preventing a possible anaphylactic shock. An IgE conformational epitope has been identified in Cuc m 2, the major allergen and profilin from melon. Since this epitope is highly conserved in most pollen profilins, it may contribute to an explanation of cross-reactivity between pollen and food profilins. Mutants (Mut 1 and Mut 2) were generated by changing specific residues of the Cuc m 2 epitope to alanine, produced in Escherichia coli, and purified by chromatographic methods. Mut 1 showed a slight reduction in IgE binding but an allergenic activity that was similar to recombinant Cuc m 2, as measured by basophil activation test (BAT) and skin prick test (SPT). By contrast, Mut 2 displayed a substantial reduction in IgE-binding capacity (57%) and positive responses, as determined by BAT (33%) and SPT (50%), when compared to those of rCuc m 2. However, the T-cell proliferation and cytokine production induced by Mut 2 and rCuc m 2 were similar. Thus, this mutant represent potential candidate for immunotherapy of profilin allergies.     

Position paper of the EAACI: food allergy due to immunological cross‐reactions with common inhalant allergens

In older children, adolescents, and adults, a substantial part of all IgE‐mediated food allergies is caused by cross‐reacting allergenic structures shared by inhalants and foods. IgE stimulated by a cross‐reactive inhalant allergen can result in diverse patterns of allergic reactions to various foods. Local, mild, or severe systemic reactions may occur already after the first consumption of a food containing a cross‐reactive allergen. In clinical practice, clinically relevant sensitizations are elucidated by skin prick testing or by the determination of specific IgE in vitro. Component‐resolved diagnosis may help to reach a diagnosis and may predict the risk of a systemic reaction. Allergy needs to be confirmed in cases of unclear history by oral challenge tests. The therapeutic potential of allergen immunotherapy with inhalant allergens in pollen‐related food allergy is not clear, and more placebo‐controlled studies are needed. As we are facing an increasing incidence of pollen allergies, a shift in sensitization patterns and changes in nutritional habits, and the occurrence of new, so far unknown allergies due to cross‐reactions are expected.     

The basophil activation test in wasp venom allergy: sensitivity, specificity and monitoring specific immunotherapy

BACKGROUND: As in vitro diagnosis of wasp venom sensitization by specific serum IgE has a sensitivity of only 60-80%, additional in vitro tests are desirable. Basophil activation is associated with the expression of CD63 and its measurement has been proposed as a novel in vitro test for immediate-type allergy. Furthermore, to date, no in vitro test exists to monitor successful specific immunotherapy (SIT) with wasp venom. Therefore, the potentially harmful sting challenge is still recommended. OBJECTIVE: We compared the CD63-based basophil activation test (BAT) in the diagnosis of wasp venom allergy with skin tests and measurement of specific IgE. Furthermore, we investigated whether BAT can predict the outcome of the sting challenge in patients on SIT. METHODS: Fifty patients with a systemic reaction caused by a wasp sting and 20 controls were studied. Intracutaneous tests were performed with wasp and bee venom in the suspected allergics. Specific IgE was determined by the CAP-FEIA method and basophil activation by flow cytometry upon double staining with anti-IgE/anti-CD63 mAb. Twenty-five patients were sting challenged 6 months after starting SIT and the BAT was repeated before challenge. RESULTS: Sensitivity of the intracutaneous tests, specific IgE and BAT was 100, 76, and 92%, respectively. Specificity of specific IgE and the BAT was 85 and 80%, respectively. The cut-off for a positive BAT was 15% CD63+ basophils. There was a positive correlation between IgE reactivity to wasp venom and the number of CD63+ basophils (r = 0.65). Although no patient had a systemic reaction upon sting challenge, in most subjects basophil activation did not decrease when compared with the BAT before SIT. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitation of basophil activation by CD63 expression is a valuable new in vitro method for diagnosis of allergy to hymenopteran venoms. The CD63-based BAT is a helpful tool for the complementation of routine diagnostic tests such as specific IgE as it increases sensitivity of in vitro detection of sensitization. However, this in vitro method does not offer an alternative to the sting challenge in monitoring successful SIT.     

The CD63 basophil activation test in Hymenoptera venom allergy: a prospective study

BACKGROUND: The basophil activation test (BAT), which relies on flow cytometric quantitation of the allergen-induced up-regulation of the granule-associated marker CD63 in peripheral blood basophils, has been suggested to be a useful approach in detecting responsiveness to allergens. The purpose of this study was to establish the usefulness of the BAT with regard to the clinical history and current diagnostic tools in Hymenoptera venom allergy using a prospective study design. METHODS: Fifty-seven consecutive patients allergic to Hymenoptera venom as defined by a systemic reaction after an insect sting, and 30 age- and sex-matched control subjects with a negative history were included. The degree and nature of sensitization was confirmed by skin testing, specific immunoglobulin E (IgE), serum tryptase levels and BAT. In the nonallergic control group only analysis of specific IgE and BAT were performed. Correlation of BAT, skin test and specific IgE, respectively, with the clinical history in the allergic group was termed as sensitivity and in the control group as specificity. RESULTS: Twenty one of 23 (91.3%) bee venom allergic patients and 29 of 34 (85.3%) patients allergic to wasp and hornet venom tested positive in BAT. The overall sensitivity of BAT, specific IgE and skin tests were 87.7, 91.2 and 93.0%, respectively. The overall specificities were 86.7% for BAT and 66.7% for specific IgE. No correlation between the severity of clinical symptoms and the magnitude of basophil activation was observed. CONCLUSION: The BAT seems to be an appropriate method to identify patients allergic to bee or wasp venom with a comparable sensitivity to standard diagnostic regimens. The higher specificity of BAT as compared with specific IgE makes this test a useful tool in the diagnosis of Hymenoptera venom allergy.     

Anaphylaxis from mandarin (Citrus reticulata): identification of potential responsible allergens

We report on a patient with anaphylaxis from mandarin. Temporal relationship between consumption of the fruit, the presence of positive specific IgE, the positive skin test and the basophil activation test for mandarin strongly supported the diagnosis of an IgE-mediated allergy from mandarin. The lipid transfer protein allergen from mandarin fruit was isolated and characterized. Specific IgE levels and IgE immunodetection data indicated the patient's sensitization to orange (Cit s 3) and mandarin (Cit r 3) lipid transfer protein allergens, as well as to germin-like (Cit s 1) allergen. These results were fully confirmed by skin prick test and basophil activation test (BAT) for lipid transfer proteins, and a BAT for Cit s 1. This case report has several particularities. First, in Central and Northern Europe, it is not widely appreciated that citrus fruits, particularly mandarin, can elicit anaphylaxis. Second, this case report re-emphasizes sensitization from lipid transfer proteins to predispose for severe allergic reactions. Finally, it provides an opportunity to summarize the applications of flow cytometry-assisted analysis and quantification of in vitro activated basophils in the diagnostic approach of anaphylaxis from food.     

Local allergic rhinitis: Implications for management

A significant proportion of rhinitis patients without systemic IgE‐sensitisation tested by skin prick test and serum allergen‐specific IgE (sIgE) display nasal reactivity upon nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT). This disease phenotype has been termed local allergic rhinitis (LAR). LAR is an underdiagnosed entity affecting children and adults from different parts of the world, with moderate‐to‐severe symptoms, impairment of quality of life and rapid progression to symptom worsening. LAR is a stable phenotype and not merely an initial state of AR. Allergic rhinitis and LAR share many clinical features including a positive NAPT response, markers of type 2 nasal inflammation including sIgE in nasal secretions and a significant rate of asthma development. LAR should be considered as a differential diagnosis in those subjects of any age with symptoms suggestive of AR but no evidence of systemic atopy. Although LAR pathophysiology is partially unknown, in some patients sIgE can be demonstrated directly in the nasal secretions and/or indirectly via positive responses in basophil activation test (BAT). LAR can coexist with other rhinitis phenotypes, especially AR. The diagnosis currently relies on the positivity of NAPT to a single or multiple allergens. NAPT has high sensitivity, specificity and reproducibility, and it is considered the gold standard. BAT and the measurement of nasal sIgE can also contribute to LAR diagnosis. LAR patients benefit from the same therapeutic strategies than AR individuals, including the avoidance of allergen exposure and the pharmacotherapy. Moreover, several recent studies support the effectiveness and safety of allergen immunotherapy for LAR, which opens a window of treatment opportunity in these patients.     

Adverse reactions to foods.

Allergic reactions to foods represent a prominent, actual and increasing problem in clinical medicine. Symptoms of food allergy comprise skin reactions (urticaria, angioedema, eczema) respiratory (bronchoconstriction, rhinitis), gastrointestinal (cramping, diarrhea) and cardiovascular symptoms with the maximal manifestation of anaphylactic shock. They can be elicited by minute amounts of allergens. The diagnosis of food allergy is done by history, skin test, in vitro allergy diagnosis and--if necessary--oral provocation tests, if possible placebo-controlled. Avoidance of respective allergens for the allergic patient, however, is often complicated or impossible due to deficits in declaration regulations in many countries. Increasing numbers of cases including fatalities, due to inadvertent intake of food allergens are reported. It is therefore necessary to improve declaration laws and develop methods for allergen detection in foods. Allergens can be detected by serological methods (enzyme immunoassays, in vitro basophil histamine release or in vivo skin test procedures in sensitized individuals). The problem of diagnosis of food allergy is further complicated by cross-reactivity between allergens in foods and aeroallergens (pollen, animal epithelia, latex etc.). Elicitors of pseudo-allergic reactions with similar clinical symptomatology comprise low-molecular-mass chemicals (preservatives, colorings, flavor substances etc.). For some of them (e.g. sulfites) detection assays are available. In some patients classic allergic contact eczema can be elicited systemically after oral intake of low-molecular-mass contact allergens such as nickel sulfate or flavorings such as vanillin in foods. The role of xenobiotic components in foods (e.g. pesticides) is not known at the moment. In order to improve the situation of the food allergic patient, research programs to elucidate the pathophysiology and improve allergen detection strategies have to be implemented together with reinforced declaration regulations on a quantitative basis.