Skip to main content

Component Testing (Pt. 1) - The Science

I've been seeing a lot of articles and comments lately about component testing. That's gotten me to thinking about under what circumstances it would be useful.

To explain what's new about component testing, I first have to explain what the current method of testing   enzyme immunoassay  involves. (While I do have some background in the lab sciences field, I definitely welcome any corrections from actual scientists! Leave them as comments, please.)

EIA (sometimes called ELISA), is done using plates that are preloaded with the allergenic substance into a indentation called a well. Your doctor checks off the allergens she wants tested (egg, milk, peanut, etc.) and the technician puts a sample of blood from the test patient into the well that contains the appropriate allergen. The analyzer then sends the panel through a series of chemicals and processes that encourages the antibodies in the patient's blood to bond with the purified antigen/allergenic protein (like egg) that's in the well. The extra, unneeded gunk (technical term!) is washed away and then a chemical is added to make the bonded antibodies/antigens either change colors,  fluoresce (FIA) or become radioactive (RIA) so the analyzer can count them up.

The RAST (radioallergosorbent test) numbers we get back as a result is measures in kilounits per liter (kU/L), where the "unit" part is arbitrary. (One of the problems with early RAST testing is that the different analyzer manufacturers did not standardize on how they reported results, so result sets from two different analyzers could be very different.) This number is just telling us how much antibody from the patient's blood actually stuck to the plate.

The allergen extracts used in the current process are a little clunky. Laboratories extract the allergens used in the test panels from natural substances. This can be a big problem because, for example, using different varieties of apples or even a male vs. a female cat can result in variations in the amount of some proteins. The extracts are continually improved and modified, but different individuals or populations can be sensitive to different proteins, so the test is a one-size-fits-most process.

Additionally, proteins in the body and proteins in the lab don't always behave the same. For example, stomach acid can pull pieces of them apart, changing their three-dimensional shape and therefore how they bond. Other blood components (like plasma) can also alter how much antibody sticks to the plate. All of these things can contribute to false positives and false negatives on tests. That's why RAST test results have to be interpreted in conjunction with patient history and/or skin prick testing.

The "Ep" epitope areas on the protein hook up with
the "Ab" antibodies, triggering the immune response. 
Instead of whirling up a batch of peanut butter and purifying it to create an extract for a plate, component testing focuses very narrowly on just a small strand of protein called an epitope. These protein "hot spots" are the trouble makers on a food that cause the immune system to go nuts. A food protein may have just a few of these hot spots, or it may have dozens. And, to make things fun, a person may react to just one epitope within a protein or to several.

The enzyme immunoassay process used up until now contained ALL the appropriate epitopes because it started with a natural source. However, there was no way to tell which epitope or epitopes were causing the problem. In contrast, a component test uses a recombinant DNA process to make only a specific epitope. If the child is positive, he or she is positive only to that epitope.

Just like with faces, some bodies
are better at telling proteins apart 
There's another concept that can explain many of the false positives we experience with RAST testing: homologous proteins. Often just called homologues for short, these are look-alike proteins.

To give you an example, the birch protein (Bet v 1) looks like a whole lot of other proteins to the body, including those in celery, hazelnut and apple. Sometimes a primary allergy to birch pollen can cause a food allergy test to show a false positive. For many people, this cross-reaction only causes oral allergy syndrome (OAS) and their reaction never proceeds beyond an itchy mouth.

Sometimes homologues are harmless misunderstandings...and sometimes they mean a little bit more.  This study from 2004 shows that up to 40% of patients sensitized to birch pollen experienced more than just an itchy mouth when they ate peanut butter, even though their peanut allergy was the result of their body thinking birch (Bet v 1) was really peanut (Ara h 8). Evil birch can also cross-react with soybean (Gly m 4).

So...the takeaway is that there's a continuum of severity of reactions when it comes to these look-alike proteins. Some are just not likely to be problematic, but with others, whether a full-out allergic reaction occurs may depend on the individual's body chemistry, how much it "looks" like the other protein and how durable the protein itself is. Knowing which protein is involved is only the first step in the process and a food challenge is still the best way to figure out if an allergy exists.

So now the question is...which epitopes cause the problems in people who are allergic? And why would knowing which epitope help us in any way to understand our child's allergy? Can we use this technology to know which allergies are life-threatening? Persistent? Interlinked, so we can predict which foods not to give our kids? Or is it just another $300 we'll never see again?

Part 2 - Why Should We Care.

Follow me on Facebook or Twitter  for updates!       

Popular posts from this blog

Taking The High Road With Food Allergies (Sometimes)

I was getting all ready to write a post about how grateful I am. You of those count-down-to-Thanksgiving posts where I list all the people or things that have helped me along the way.

And I am grateful. Really. Having virtual friends who have traveled this same food-allergy road is a wonderful gift. I can name so many times when my panic and frustration were alleviated by someone I've never even met in real life, but who took the time to give me a tip, or to console me.

But frankly, my lovely gratitude post went out the window when I received this email from a relative:

What can we bring to share? I have some ideas: Sweet Potatoes glazed with Chutney and Ginger, Green beans with Dijon and Caper sauce, Creamed Green beans with Dill sauce, or whatever you request.   I am aware of [FAB's son] dietary restriction.

My son is allergic to beans. We avoid all beans. Even green beans. The doctor was surprised by this, as green beans are the least allergenic of the bean family, b…

Beans, Beans and More (or Less) Allergenic Beans!

We have a little good news this week: my son passed a home bean challenge for both pinto and cannellini (white) beans last night. Hooray!

At our last allergist visit, they ran the numbers on a number of varieties of beans and many were Class 0, with values like 0.68. My son's doctor thought it was reasonable to try these at home.

Going to stop for a moment and interject: DON'T DO THIS WITHOUT YOUR DOCTOR'S DIRECTION. A lot of things go into whether home challenges are a good idea for your child: how serious the allergen typically is, how far the hospital, how experienced the parents are with recognizing reactions. Many doctors are not comfortable with this at all. But, in our case, it makes sense to do some challenges at home because my son tests slightly allergic to dozens of foods.

He has avoided all beans since around age five, when he started developing new allergies. First it was tuna. Then cashews. Then (to our great surprise), he suddenly became allergic to garbonzo be…

Best Food Allergy Tweets/Posts From 2013 ACAAI Meeting

Sorry, guys...I've been very busy the last couple of weeks, but just over a week ago one of the largest allergy and asthma conferences, the annual American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, was tweeting its brains out.

Here were the tweets and (virtual) presentations I thought were most interesting:

ACE inhibitors are often used to treat high blood pressure. I believe Lisinopril was the one specifically mentioned. This goes hand in hand with the idea that older patients, especially men, can see changes in the severity of their allergic reactions as they age.

Here's an answer on the question many of us asked about component testing. Just as with RAST, the number itself doesn't matter; just the positive result.

Gross! But yes, give your kids the bobber after the dog/ brother/ mailman licked it.

Conversely, tree-nut-allergic individuals have a 30% incidence of concurrent peanut allergy. 
So stop blaming yourselves, FA mommies! I've said this consistently - Mother Natur…