ライフサイエンスコーパス: prick test

1 ndard diagnostic methods (ImmunoCAP and skin prick test).

2 ISA inhibition, basophil activation and skin prick test.

3 , and to be careful about negative result of prick test.

4 ne challenge tests, questionnaires, and skin prick tests.

5 ophils and elicit positive responses in skin prick tests.

6 tient's allergic triggers or performing skin prick tests.

7 thma Study completed questionnaires and skin prick tests.

8 l had negative results for aeroallergen skin prick tests.

9 Atopy was assessed by using skin prick tests.

10 Atopy was assessed using skin prick tests.

11 lergy was primarily determined by using skin prick tests.

12 erved pasteurized raw egg challenge and skin prick tests.

13 = 0.02), and with similar findings for skin prick tests.

14 6 years by specific IgE assessments and skin prick tests.

15 l examinations including serum IgEs and skin prick tests.

16 eport, clinical examination, and repeat skin prick testing.

17 were examined for eczema and underwent skin prick testing.

18 tients assigned to immediate or delayed skin prick testing.

19 tatus were determined by spirometry and skin prick testing.

20 rat basophil leukaemia cell line and by skin prick testing.

21 or more detailed assessments, including skin prick testing.

22 th IL-31 and NaCl (negative control) by skin prick testing.

23 attend research clinics and consent to skin-prick testing.

24 hinitis but without positive results on skin prick testing.

25 ic IgE was 10.1% (95% CI: 9.4-10.8) and skin prick test 2.7% (95% CI: 2.4-3.0), food challenge positi

26 Of the 1430 children with a valid skin prick test, 228 (16%) were positive (more boys (20%) tha

27 parental face-to-face interviews and/or skin prick testing, 238 (10.4%) were eligible for a DBPCFC.

28 allergens: OR = 1.81, 95% CI 0.80-4.24; skin prick test/4+ allergens: OR = 2.27, 95% CI 1.34-3.95).

29 determined using serum-specific IgE and skin prick testing against a panel of five fungi.

30 rial of his lunch was examined using a prick-prick test, allergen-specific IgE test (ImmunoCAP((R))),

31 A larger wheal on the skin-prick test and a lower ratio of peanut-specific IgG4:IgE

32 rant to food challenge, 159 negative on skin prick test and food challenge).

33 AID in history were tested first with a skin prick test and if negative challenged with the culprit N

34 sources, and latex was tested by using skin prick test and ImmunoCAP.

35 ut systemic IgE-sensitisation tested by skin prick test and serum allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) displa

36 Skin prick test and sIgE display moderate agreement, but have

37 -demographic questionnaire, spirometry, skin prick test and specific IgE were evaluated yearly.

38 fied for eczema status and test method (skin prick test and specific IgE).

39 agnose food allergy, when compared with skin prick test and specific IgE.

40 Atopy was detected by skin prick test and/or serum specific-IgE in patients with LA

41 d for selected cases where the history, skin prick test and/or specific IgE are not definitive for th

42 vention (structured allergy history and skin prick testing and appropriate advice on allergy avoidanc

43 tervention (structured allergy history, skin prick testing and appropriate allergy avoidance advice)

44 Morphine skin prick testing and basophil activation were diminished in

45 ined as one or more positive results on skin prick testing and clinically relevant symptoms of rhinit

46 nt (ST), or food allergic (FA) based on skin prick testing and food challenge at 12 months of age.

47 IgE sensitization tests, such as skin prick testing and serum-specific IgE, have been used to

48 eroallergens was determined by means of skin prick testing and specific IgE measurement.

49 aking a structured allergy history with skin prick testing and tailored advice on allergy avoidance r

50 ensitivity to 65% compared with 20% for skin prick tests and 46% ImmunoCAP using kiwi extract.

51 lergic subjects (group 4) by performing skin prick tests and APTs with rBet v 1 and hypoallergenic rB

52 Skin prick tests and basophil activation test using cetuximab

53 Skin prick tests and basophil activation tests with N, P, or

54 We performed skin-prick tests and basophil degranulation tests using extra

55 aking a structured allergy history with skin prick tests and giving tailored advice on allergy avoida

56 ths, 18 months, 4 years, and 6 years by skin prick tests and IgE measurements.

57 dized interviews, skin prick tests, prick-to-prick tests and ImmunoCAP.

58 Associations with allergic diseases, skin prick tests and lung function assessed at 12 and 18 year

59 th questionnaire, clinical examination, skin prick tests and measurements of specific IgE.

60 Clinic evaluation, which consisted of skin prick tests and OFC where eligible, was undertaken if st

61 years, infants had FS/FA screening with skin prick tests and oral food challenges.

62 At 6.5 years, paediatricians performed skin prick tests and parents reported asthma and AD symptoms

63 nts underwent a standardized interview, skin prick tests and pulmonary function tests.

64 d 5276 infants (74% participation) with skin prick tests and sensitized infants underwent food challe

65 Skin prick tests and sIgE were performed in 529 children.

66 Prick tests and specific IgE determinations were perform

67 ites was diagnosed longitudinally using skin prick tests and specific IgE measurements at (1/2), 1(1/

68 , because of the limited sensitivity of skin prick tests and specific IgE tests to meat extracts.

69 58% (95% CI 49-67) and 49% (40-58%) for skin prick tests and specific-IgE.

70 icity of Ory c 3 was confirmed by using skin prick tests and the basophil activation assay.

71 d consent; evidencing of an allergen by skin prick tests and/or serum-specific IgE dosages; being abl

72 atopy (grass, house dust mite, and cat skin prick test) and atopic vs. non-atopic asthma at the age

73 y outcomes were desensitization, peanut skin prick test, and specific IgE and specific IgG4 measureme

74 In addition to clinical history, skin prick test, and specific IgE determination, BAT can be a

75 -demographic questionnaire, spirometry, skin prick test, and specific IgE to aeroallergens were done

76 Specific IgE values, skin prick test, and T-cell subsets of STAT3-HIES patients we

77 Opishorchis felineus and specific IgE, skin prick testing, and atopic symptoms in Western Siberia, w

78 interviewer-administered questionnaire, skin prick testing, and measurement of lung function from the

79 ar in children positive and negative on skin prick testing, and were not appreciably altered by the e

80 Questionnaires, skin prick tests, and basophil activation assays were perform

81 c immunoglobulin E-antibodies in serum, skin prick tests, and double-blind, placebo-controlled food c

82 c inhalation challenge to argan powder, skin prick tests, and immunoblotting analysis.

83 e of testing (specific IgE measurement, skin prick tests, and oral food challenges), and the timing a

84 allergic sensitization were measured by skin prick tests, and physician-diagnosed inhalant and food a

85 Patients underwent skin prick tests, and received 0.1ml of influenza vaccine, fo

86 ad undergone objective OFCs, concurrent skin prick tests, and specific IgE tests.

87 IgE (aOR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.57, 0.91) and skin prick test (aOR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.50, 0.86).

88 itive ELISA results correlated with the skin prick test areas with the whole body and the setae extra

89 Children completed skin prick testing at age 1 year.

90 (5-17 years old) with asthma underwent skin prick tests at baseline and had clinical data collected

91 In two patients who showed positive skin prick test but negative for challenge test, titer of spe

92 itization (FAS) was identified by using skin prick tests conducted between 1 and 18 years of age to a

93 Identical ISAAC questionnaire and skin prick test data were collected and compared at 10 years

94 The esophageal prick test deserves further exploration because it may g

95 ined in meals before the both episodes and a prick test for apple was positive.

96 ore completed a questionnaire and had a skin prick test for atopy.

97 A skin prick test for poly-gamma-glutamic acid (PGA) which is a

98 Our skin prick test for several kinds of edible jellyfish suggest

99 Participants underwent skin prick testing for house dust mite, cat, grasses and moul

100 Skin prick testing for peanut sensitization was performed at

101 Food-specific serum IgE and skin prick tests for egg, soy, peanut, and cross-reactant foo

102 outperformed allergen-specific IgE and skin prick tests for predicting OFC outcomes.

103 d at age 12 months: food sensitization (skin prick test >/= 2 mm) and allergy (oral food challenge) t

104 specific IgE (sIgE) levels in serum or skin prick test has been shown to be a poor predictor of clin

105 sing the standard methodology (history, skin prick test, IgE assay).

106 Morphine skin prick testing, ImmunoCAP assays for allergen-specific Ig

107 s family history (50.2%) and conducting skin prick testing in non-high-risk children (43.9%).

108 We investigated whether an esophageal prick test, in which the esophageal mucosa is challenged

109 etermine whether C+ assayed by means of skin prick tests influenced AR symptom severity in controlled

110 IgE sensitization was assessed by skin prick test (inhalant allergens) and specific IgE levels

111 unction samples, we performed histamine skin prick tests, investigated the contribution of STAT3 to a

112 The prick test is one of the most common medical methods for

113 Skin prick testing is available in only half of the cases, wh

114 d/or gastrointestinal symptoms only and skin prick test < 8 mm) are considered for home-based milk re

115 Skin prick testing, lung function tests, exhaled nitric oxide

116 -bronchodilator spirometry (n = 1,389), skin prick testing, lung volumes, and diffusing capacity meas

117 Skin prick tests, measurements of specific IgE to peanut and

118 Skin prick test (n = 51) and ImmunoCAP (Thermo Fisher) (n = 6

119 Inclusion criteria included a positive skin prick test of 6 mm or more (wheal diameter, above the ne

120 med challenge test in 41 cases with positive prick test of Glupearl 19S(R), a major allergic HWP foun

121 which was determined with the use of a skin-prick test--one consisting of participants with no measu

122 ding detection of milk-specific IgE (by skin prick test or serum assay), diagnostic elimination diet,

123 levant sensitizations are elucidated by skin prick testing or by the determination of specific IgE in

124 predictors of the original model: sex, skin prick test, peanut sIgE, and total IgE minus sIgE.

125 using 6 predictors: sex, age, history, skin prick test, peanut specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE), and

126 ion, milk-specific IgE levels, and milk skin prick test performed at enrollment, 6 months, 12 months,

127 o hundred eighty-one children had valid skin prick tests performed, and 14% (39/281) were atopic.

128 Primary outcomes were recent wheezing, skin prick test positivity (SPT), and allergen-specific immun

129 ed to measure geographical variation in skin prick test positivity and assess whether it was explaine

130 raphical variation in the prevalence of skin prick test positivity in Europe is unlikely to be explai

131 tted for allergic sensitization (either skin prick test positivity or serum-specific IgE >/= 0.35 kU/

132 Skin prick test positivity to any one of the measured allerge

133 ood allergy by standardized interviews, skin prick tests, prick-to-prick tests and ImmunoCAP.

134 pricking in the apple on prick-to-prick skin prick test (PTP) results.

135 The main outcome was atopy defined as skin prick test reaction >/=3 mm.

136 ociations of NVAS and atopy (defined as skin prick test reaction of >/=3 mm) were analysed using bino

137 Skin prick test reactions to pollen elicited larger weals whe

138 etween a chronic helminth infection and skin prick test reactivity even in a developed country.

139 ctions to peanut were reported in 1.5%, skin prick test reactivity in 2.0%, and IgE sensitization (>/

140 s measured by specific IgE in serum and skin prick test reactivity to aeroallergens.

141 es demonstrated that exercise increases skin prick test reactivity to and bioavailability of the alle

142 tal IgE, grass pollen-specific IgE, and skin prick test reactivity to grass pollen were all reduced c

143 5 +/- 0.24 (P = .001) and a decrease in skin prick test reactivity to house dust mite from 7.0 +/- 1.

144 All pollen-specific IgE and >90% of skin prick tests remained positive 7 days and 3 months after

145 dren with eczema, wheeze, or a positive skin prick test response before ending exclusive breast-feedi

146 (n = 38) was defined as specific IgE or skin prick test response positivity to Aspergillus fumigatus,

147 dependent anaphylaxis to LTPs, positive skin prick test response to LTPs, and serum LTP IgE.

148 Peanut skin prick test responses and peanut- and Ara h 2-specific Ig

149 POIT was associated with reduced peanut skin prick test responses and peanut-specific IgE levels and

150 Skin prick test responses and specific IgE levels against 12

151 hildhood2000 birth cohort by using both skin prick test responses and specific IgE levels.

152 At year 1, skin prick test responses and wheat- and omega-5 gliadin-spec

153 ble by using routinely available peanut skin prick test responses or specific IgE levels, but this si

154 of atopic wheeze, total IgE levels, and skin prick test responses to cockroach.

155 total IgE levels, specific IgE levels, skin prick test responses to common aeroallergens, and IgG4 a

156 ith allergic disease) but with negative skin prick test responses to common allergens at randomizatio

157 history of ragweed allergy and positive skin prick test responses to ragweed were randomized and rece

158 Histamine skin prick test responses were diminished in patients with AD

159 ure and sensitization (as determined by skin prick test responses) was analyzed in more than 1000 ref

160 eanut- and Ara h 2-specific IgE levels, skin prick test responses, basophil activation, and TH2 cytok

161 but have peanut-specific IgE, positive skin prick test responses, or both represents a significant d

162 anut (>/=0.35 kU/L) had negative peanut skin prick test responses.

163 Atopy was defined as a positive skin prick test result (>=3 mm) and/or a positive specific Ig

164 om sample of participants with negative skin prick test results attended a hospital-based food challe

165 Overall, clinical allergy and skin prick test results complied with the specific IgE result

166 tivenoms and cetuximab induced positive skin prick test results in patients with sIgE to alpha-gal.

167 Negative prick test results were observed for regular ayu fish an

168 llergy was positive in only 28% and positive prick test results were present in 55% of the 49 VKC-lik

169 Based on available clinical data and skin prick test results, 922 (73%) patients would have been i

170 Skin prick test, s-IgE and CRD to hazelnut, peanut, PR10 and

171 er IgG4 values (P = .001) and lower egg skin prick test scores (P = .0002) over time and a lower medi

172 In contrast to positive skin prick tests, SE-IgE was more common in smokers (<15 pack

173 g M+ participants tracked the following skin prick test sensitization statuses: M+P+C- > M+P+C+ > M+P

174 of "atopic eczema," "any positive SPT [skin-prick test]," "sensitization to egg," and "sensitization

175 ts were classified by clinical history, skin prick test/serum specific IgE (sIgE), and nasal allergen

176 A skin-prick test showed positive reactions for Inavir inhaler

177 Prick to prick test shows a strongly positive response to nattou.

178 Skin prick test, sIgE measurements, and assessment of allergi

179 Clinical data, skin prick tests, specific IgE to aero- and food allergens, a

180 terview combined with blood collection, skin prick tests, spirometry with bronchodilation, and exhale

181 Using a skin prick by prick test (SPPT) and in vitro techniques, with natural

182 We sought to develop skin prick test (SPT) and allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) thresh

183 Food-specific serum IgE, skin prick test (SPT) and atopy patch test (APT) to foods inc

184 ze in last year, atopy assessed both by skin prick test (SPT) and by the measurement of allergen-spec

185 elease test (HR) (RefLab ApS, Denmark), skin prick test (SPT) and intradermal test (IDT).

186 Skin prick test (SPT) and measurement of serum-specific IgE (

187 basophil activation test (BAT) and the skin prick test (SPT) and measuring the levels of peanut-spec

188 d the highest AUC (0.79), comparable to skin prick test (SPT) and sIgE to soy extract (0.76 and 0.77,

189 Skin prick test (SPT) and specific IgE (sIgE) are often used

190 ht to determine the association between skin prick test (SPT) and specific IgE (sIgE) to egg proteins

191 nonallergic (n = 25) children underwent skin prick test (SPT) and specific IgE (sIgE) to peanut and i

192 rticaria upon CHX exposure and positive skin prick test (SPT) and/or positive CHX ImmunoCAP test (Pha

193 e, were all negative.The results of the skin prick test (SPT) for Citrus unshiu and specific IgE test

194 c sensitization was determined based on skin prick test (SPT) of five mites, three molds, and nine ot

195 of nut specifc IgE shown by a positive skin prick test (SPT) or specific IgE (sIgE) test.

196 ws' milk-specific IgE antibodies (IgE), skin prick test (SPT) reactivity and double-blind, placebo-co

197 Atopy was measured based on skin prick test (SPT) reactivity to 9 allergens at 36 months.

198 Skin prick test (SPT) reactivity to grass, cypress, olive, mu

199 Infants with a skin prick test (SPT) response to egg white (EW) of less than

200 n to egg, milk, or both with a positive skin prick test (SPT) response to the trigger food and/or (2)

201 , milk allergy, or both with a positive skin prick test (SPT) response to the trigger food and/or (2)

202 <=500 mg of peanut protein), a positive skin-prick test (SPT) result (>=5 mm wheal diameter above the

203 years of age and develop thresholds for skin prick test (SPT) results and specific IgE (sIgE) levels

204 peanut allergy, and the implications of skin prick test (SPT) screening before peanut introduction.

205 Skin prick test (SPT) sensitivity to house dust mite allergen

206 ein levels in household dust and peanut skin prick test (SPT) sensitization and likely allergy.

207 ile atopic dermatitis and preceding egg skin prick test (SPT) sensitization, we found a strong and si

208 dog allergens (Can f 1-6) in commercial skin prick test (SPT) solutions and to determine individual a

209 llergic sensitization was determined by skin prick test (SPT) to 17 aeroallergens.

210 276 one-year-old children who underwent skin prick test (SPT) to 4 food allergens and those with dete

211 A total of 433 patients with positive skin prick test (SPT) to birch pollen were analyzed regarding

212 Atopy was assessed by skin prick test (SPT) using inhalant and food allergens.

213 a, egg allergy, or both but 0-mm peanut skin prick test (SPT) wheal responses (n = 542); group III, p

214 dermatitis (AD) and a positive egg/milk skin prick test (SPT), but no known PNA.

215 Q-5D) health questionnaire, spirometry, skin prick test (SPT), exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), smell tes

216 Patients with CMA and/or RA underwent skin prick test (SPT), intracutaneous test (ICT), and, when r

217 aeroallergens with and without positive skin prick test (SPT), respectively.

218 responsiveness of mast cells in vivo by skin prick test (SPT).

219 pid results were compared with those of skin prick test (SPT).

220 y underwent physical examinations and a skin prick test (SPT).

221 Children were skin prick tested (SPT).

222 blot and IgE-ELISA were complemented by Skin Prick Testing (SPT) and mediator release assay to determ

223 ommercial allergen extracts for allergy skin prick testing (SPT) are widely used for diagnosing fish

224 Skin prick testing (SPT) in combination with the clinical his

225 eta lactam testing with 17% undertaking skin prick testing (SPT) only, 77% SPT followed by intra-derm

226 Skin prick testing (SPT) was conducted using standard procedu

227 y fever, eczema, food allergy, positive skin prick testing (SPT), or elevated allergen-specific serum

228 ated in a basophil activation assay and Skin Prick Testing (SPT).

229 llergen-specific IgE (sIgE) and perform skin prick testing (SPT).

230 eeds of oilseed rape and turnip rape in skin prick tests (SPT) and open food challenges.

231 Skin prick tests (SPT) and specific IgE (sIgE) against food a

232 Conjunctival provocation tests (CPT), skin prick tests (SPT), BAT, and sIgE determination including

233 Skin prick tests (SPT), specific-IgE (sIgE), component-resolv

234 its including structured interviews and skin prick tests (SPT).

235 inst common allergens was determined by skin prick tests (SPT); specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) tite

236 ures of allergic sensitisation (such as skin-prick test [SPT] and serum specific IgE [sIgE]) when stu

237 sk factors for atopy (allergen-specific skin prick test [SPT] reactivity and IgE [asIgE] sensitizatio

238 All subjects with skin prick tests (SPTs) for birch pollen conducted during 199

239 hey answered a questionnaire, underwent skin prick tests (SPTs) for common aeroallergens, and provide

240 completed a questionnaire and underwent skin prick tests (SPTs) to egg, peanut, cow's milk, fish, soy

241 invited to a parental questionnaire and skin prick tests (SPTs) to ten airborne allergens, and 2148 (

242 eactions was obtained, and standardized skin prick tests (SPTs) using finely ground tree-nut solution

243 10-fold dilutions of milk protein, and skin prick tests (SPTs) were performed to commercial milk ext

244 Skin prick tests (SPTs) were performed to gain attention for

245 al work-up included a detailed history, skin prick tests (SPTs) with IVIP, and basophil activation te

246 lowing outcomes at age 2 years: eczema, skin prick tests (SPTs), increased allergen-specific IgE leve

247 h mollusc tolerance) were studied using skin prick tests (SPTs), specific IgEs (sIgEs) and SDS-PAGE i

248 o initially had negative results on the skin-prick test, the prevalence of peanut allergy at 60 month

249 P and PEF treated samples were tested by the prick test, the skin response was dependent on the parti

250 peanut-specific basophil activation and skin prick test titration compared with nonresponders.

251 culture for varicella-zoster virus, and skin prick test to common food and animal allergens were nond

252 nts aged 18 to 65 years with a positive skin prick test to Dactylis glomerata pollen were exposed to

253 phylaxis related to NSAID, (3) positive skin prick test to foods and/or specific IgE to food allergen

254 al allergic rhinitis (SAR) and positive skin prick test to grass and olive pollens and evaluate how k

255 action after peanut ingestion, positive skin prick test to peanuts, and positive by double-blind plac

256 of 5276 one-year-old infants underwent skin prick testing to peanut, egg, sesame, and cow's milk or

257 ort study of 5276 infants who underwent skin prick tests to 4 allergens, including egg.

258 were also more likely to have positive skin prick tests to cabbage, lettuce and mustard and sensitiz

259 uestionnaire, clinical examination, and skin prick tests to common allergens.

260 Subjects with positive skin prick tests to GOS (n = 30, 6.2%) underwent basophil act

261 structured questionnaire and underwent skin prick tests to GOS.

262 on between 10 loci and specific IgE and skin prick tests to individual allergens and poly-sensitizati

263 Because of the low sensitivity of skin prick tests to meat, we studied the possibility to perfo

264 ically confirmed fish allergy underwent skin prick tests to salmon and catfish.

265 Twelve-month-old infants were skin prick-tested to common food allergens, and sensitized in

266 or scorings of symptoms and medication, skin prick testing, total IgE, specific IgE, and Der p 1-spec

267 Currently, the precise history and the prick-prick test using both raw and heated shrimps are useful

268 Furthermore, a skin prick test using the same reagent showed a positive resu

269 rding to the clinical symptoms, and positive prick testing using black tiger shrimp.

270 Skin prick tests using wheat extract were performed on 3 pati

271 Provided consent, a skin prick test was performed, and history of allergic sympto

272 The prick-prick test was positive for black tiger shrimp (raw and

273 The skin prick test was positive for raw pork and beef.

274 The result of enokitake skin prick to prick test was positive.

275 A skin prick test was used to ascertain atopy.

276 In addition, skin prick testing was performed to six study foods (cow's mi

277 Atopy was defined as any skin prick test weal to common aeroallergens >/=4 mm.

278 (siitake, simeji, and eringi) skin prick to prick test were all positive.

279 ements of eczema, asthma, rhinitis, and skin prick tests were available for all follow-ups.

280 In both cases, skin prick tests were negative for suspected seafoods.

281 ood-specific serum IgE measurements and skin prick tests were performed before initiating the diet.

282 E inhibition, ImmunoCAP inhibition, and skin prick tests were performed using samples from selected p

283 Skin prick tests were performed with commercial pollen extrac

284 Skin prick tests were performed with pollen extracts.

285 Lung function, airway reversibility and skin prick tests were performed.

286 His skin prick tests were positive, with a result of 2+to frankfu

287 Skin prick tests were used to identify sensitization to invol

288 3 kUA /l (7.2-120.2), and median peanut skin prick test wheal 11.3 mm (6.5-18)]; four experienced no

289 allenges (OFCs) to egg, irrespective of skin prick test wheal sizes.

290 Prick test with erythritol was negative even at 300 mg/m

291 The negative predictive value of skin prick test with peanut extract and peanut butter and of

292 Prick test with the jelly product was negative, but the

293 respiratory or cutaneous symptoms were skin-prick tested with GB extract.

294 s pollen allergic individuals underwent skin prick testing with allergen alone, allergen plus Bet-APE

295 cted to topical cowhage provocation and skin prick testing with histamine and assessed for difference

296 onal healthy controls were subjected to skin prick testing with histamine.

297 , we studied the possibility to perform skin prick tests with cetuximab, which carries the alpha-gal

298 Blinded, quadruplicate skin prick tests with concentrate and three serial half-log d

299 Skin prick tests with purified rAed a 3 and Ae. aegypti bite

300 es with standardized doses of rMal d 1, skin prick tests with recombinant allergens, and measurements