TITLE:
A Possible Hypoallergenic Cereal in Wheat Food Allergy and Baker’s Asthma
AUTHORS:
Alicia Armentia, Sara Martín, Araceli Diaz-Perales, Arantxa Palacín, Leticia Tordesillas, Manuel Herrero, Blanca Martín-Armentia
KEYWORDS:
Spelt; Wheat Allergy; Food Allergy; Low Allergenic Plant Culture
JOURNAL NAME:
American Journal of Plant Sciences,
Vol.3 No.12A,
December
28,
2012
ABSTRACT:
Background: Wheat is a potent allergen source and is one of
the causes of baker’s asthma and food allergy. The best strategy for managing
food hypersensitivity involves strict avoidance of the trigger. However, wheat
is quite difficult to avoid. Several alternative strategies for the treatment
of food allergy are under study. Spelt is a possible hypoallergenic crop that
may be tried in patients with wheat allergy. Methods: We have evaluated the allergenic IgE hypersensitivity mediated by spelt in wheat allergic patients.
Overall, 66 patients who suffered from baker’s asthma or food allergy (45 males
and 21 females, mean age 28.6 ± 12.9 years) were included. We have also compared its reactivity with standard- ized extracts from wheat and with purified non-specific
lipid transfer proteins from wheat (Tri a 14) and from peach (Pru p 3).
Immunodetection with spelt and common bread wheat extracts (Triticum aestivum,
cultivar Astral) was per- formed. Fresh wheat and spelt grain extracts were used
both for oral and bronchial challenge and skin tests. Specific IgE detection to
different cereals was performed using the Immuno CAP System (Phadia, Uppsala, Sweden). The bronchial challenge was positive with wheat Astral in 44 (67%)
patients, all of them suffered from asthma. Thirteen (29.54%) of these 44
patients had negative the challenge with spelt. The
oral challenge with wheat Astral was positive in 22 (33%) patients
with wheat food allergy, and the same test was positive in only in 6 of them
with spelt (27.3%). The diagnostic
yield (sensitivity, specificity and predictive values) of routine tests in
determining spelt allergy by specific positive challenge responses was
determined. Prick tests for spelt
versus positive challenge tests had a good sensitivity (94%, 86.5 - 99.4; 95%CI) and specificity (86%, 84 - 90; 95% CI) for the diagnosis of spelt allergy. Immunodetection detected minor differences among
different extracts. Conclusion: In summary, the prick test and bronchial and oral challenges
both efficiently detected sensitization to spelt and their levels were related
to more severe clinical profiles, but the wheal area was significantly lower
with spelt (p 0.001) and the percentage of positive challenge tests decreased. Our results suggest that spelt is an old crop that may be tried in
patients with wheat allergy.