ライフサイエンスコーパス: skin prick test

1 o standard diagnostic methods (ImmunoCAP and skin prick test).

2 n infants with allergic mothers positive for skin prick test.

3 nd ELISA inhibition, basophil activation and skin prick test.

4 85; P = 0.02), and with similar findings for skin prick tests.

5 he patient's allergic triggers or performing skin prick tests.

6 en Asthma Study completed questionnaires and skin prick tests.

7 Atopy was assessed by using skin prick tests.

8 Atopy was assessed using skin prick tests.

9 n observed pasteurized raw egg challenge and skin prick tests.

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

11 inical examinations including serum IgEs and skin prick tests.

12 saline challenge tests, questionnaires, and skin prick tests.

13 t basophils and elicit positive responses in skin prick tests.

14 ystematic reintroduction analysis but not by skin-prick tests.

15 en patients assigned to immediate or delayed skin prick testing.

16 pic status were determined by spirometry and skin prick testing.

17 ng a rat basophil leukaemia cell line and by skin prick testing.

18 ed with IL-31 and NaCl (negative control) by skin prick testing.

19 s underwent a clinical examination including skin prick testing.

20 of rhinitis but without positive results on skin prick testing.

21 ldren were examined for eczema and underwent skin prick testing.

22 ly to attend research clinics and consent to skin-prick testing.

23 re invited for measurement of spirometry and skin-prick testing.

24 pecific IgE was 10.1% (95% CI: 9.4-10.8) and skin prick test 2.7% (95% CI: 2.4-3.0), food challenge p

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

26 iagnostic testing, 47.3% was assessed with a skin prick test, 39.9% with a serum specific IgE test, a

27 gE/4 allergens: OR = 1.81, 95% CI 0.80-4.24; skin prick test/4+ allergens: OR = 2.27, 95% CI 1.34-3.9

28 Each child underwent skin prick testing (ALK-Abello) and serum IgE assays (Im

29 nates, and allergic disease was evaluated by skin prick test and clinical examination at 12 months of

30 tolerant to food challenge, 159 negative on skin prick test and food challenge).

31 le NSAID in history were tested first with a skin prick test and if negative challenged with the culp

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

33 Skin prick test and sIgE display moderate agreement, but

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

35 tratified for eczema status and test method (skin prick test and specific IgE).

36 to diagnose food allergy, when compared with skin prick test and specific IgE.

37 Atopy was detected by skin prick test and/or serum specific-IgE in patients wi

38 pplied for selected cases where the history, skin prick test and/or specific IgE are not definitive f

39 intervention (structured allergy history and skin prick testing and appropriate advice on allergy avo

40 gy intervention (structured allergy history, skin prick testing and appropriate allergy avoidance adv

41 Morphine skin prick testing and basophil activation were diminish

42 s defined as one or more positive results on skin prick testing and clinically relevant symptoms of r

43 stic correlates included end point titration skin prick testing and measurement of CM-specific IgE an

44 vited for a standardized physician exam with skin prick testing and parental interview at age 2 years

45 IgE sensitization tests, such as skin prick testing and serum-specific IgE, have been use

46 and aeroallergens was determined by means of skin prick testing and specific IgE measurement.

47 re, taking a structured allergy history with skin prick testing and tailored advice on allergy avoida

48 tic sensitivity to 65% compared with 20% for skin prick tests and 46% ImmunoCAP using kiwi extract.

49 nonallergic subjects (group 4) by performing skin prick tests and APTs with rBet v 1 and hypoallergen

50 Skin prick tests and basophil activation test using cetu

51 Skin prick tests and basophil activation tests with N, P

52 re, taking a structured allergy history with skin prick tests and giving tailored advice on allergy a

53 6 months, 18 months, 4 years, and 6 years by skin prick tests and IgE measurements.

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

55 Clinic evaluation, which consisted of skin prick tests and OFC where eligible, was undertaken

56 ge 2 years, infants had FS/FA screening with skin prick tests and oral food challenges.

57 icipants underwent a standardized interview, skin prick tests and pulmonary function tests.

58 reened 5276 infants (74% participation) with skin prick tests and sensitized infants underwent food c

59 Skin prick tests and sIgE were performed in 529 children

60 ust mites was diagnosed longitudinally using skin prick tests and specific IgE measurements at (1/2),

61 icult, because of the limited sensitivity of skin prick tests and specific IgE tests to meat extracts

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

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

64 formed consent; evidencing of an allergen by skin prick tests and/or serum-specific IgE dosages; bein

65 A larger wheal on the skin-prick test and a lower ratio of peanut-specific IgG

66 e markers measured, small wheal diameters on skin-prick testing and increases in egg-specific IgG4 an

67 We performed skin-prick tests and basophil degranulation tests using

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

69 ondary outcomes were desensitization, peanut skin prick test, and specific IgE and specific IgG4 meas

70 In addition to clinical history, skin prick test, and specific IgE determination, BAT can

71 nical-demographic questionnaire, spirometry, skin prick test, and specific IgE to aeroallergens were

72 Specific IgE values, skin prick test, and T-cell subsets of STAT3-HIES patien

73 20 children, respectively; 700 children were skin prick tested, and FEV(1) was measured in 478 and ex

74 minth Opishorchis felineus and specific IgE, skin prick testing, and atopic symptoms in Western Siber

75 ical assessment included full lung function, skin prick testing, and exercise challenge.

76 e an interviewer-administered questionnaire, skin prick testing, and measurement of lung function fro

77 similar in children positive and negative on skin prick testing, and were not appreciably altered by

78 Questionnaires, skin prick tests, and basophil activation assays were pe

79 apnic voluntary hyperpnea challenge, allergy skin prick tests, and bronchoscopy with bronchial biopsi

80 ecific immunoglobulin E-antibodies in serum, skin prick tests, and double-blind, placebo-controlled f

81 ecific inhalation challenge to argan powder, skin prick tests, and immunoblotting analysis.

82 te use of testing (specific IgE measurement, skin prick tests, and oral food challenges), and the tim

83 food-allergic sensitization were measured by skin prick tests, and physician-diagnosed inhalant and f

84 Patients underwent skin prick tests, and received 0.1ml of influenza vaccin

85 who had undergone objective OFCs, concurrent skin prick tests, and specific IgE tests.

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

87 er operating characteristic curves comparing skin prick tests (area under the curve [AUC], 0.87; 95%

88 e positive ELISA results correlated with the skin prick test areas with the whole body and the setae

89 Children completed skin prick testing at age 1 year.

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

91 creased incidence of allergic sensitization (skin prick test) at the age of 4 years in a cohort of 98

92 In two patients who showed positive skin prick test but negative for challenge test, titer o

93 sensitization (FAS) was identified by using skin prick tests conducted between 1 and 18 years of age

94 further analyzed methacholine challenge and skin prick test data for 1,562 of these.

95 Identical ISAAC questionnaire and skin prick test data were collected and compared at 10 y

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

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

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

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

100 Skin prick testing for peanut sensitization was performe

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

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

103 gogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs), biopsies, and skin-prick tests for food and aeroallergens.

104 f the outcomes examined: at least 1 positive skin prick test from the panel of 10 allergens (21.7% vs

105 lected at age 12 months: food sensitization (skin prick test >/= 2 mm) and allergy (oral food challen

106 is, using the standard methodology (history, skin prick test, IgE assay).

107 Morphine skin prick testing, ImmunoCAP assays for allergen-specif

108 extracts was evaluated by IgE immunoblot and skin prick test in patients with clinical allergy to pea

109 hensive set of recommendations on the use of skin prick tests in allergic rhinitis-conjunctivitis and

110 between D5S463 and atopy (P = 0.002) and the skin prick test index (P = 0.04).

111 to determine whether C+ assayed by means of skin prick tests influenced AR symptom severity in contr

112 IgE sensitization was assessed by skin prick test (inhalant allergens) and specific IgE le

113 -of-function samples, we performed histamine skin prick tests, investigated the contribution of STAT3

114 Skin prick testing is available in only half of the case

115 Skin prick testing, lung function tests, exhaled nitric

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

117 Skin prick tests, measurements of specific IgE to peanut

118 For the diagnosis of LAR, neither skin prick testing nor determination of the presence of

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

120 ract, which was determined with the use of a skin-prick test--one consisting of participants with no

121 s not appear to contain factors that enhance skin prick test or atopy patch test responses to house d

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

123 ly relevant sensitizations are elucidated by skin prick testing or by the determination of specific I

124 es to TG and DM allergen based on results of skin prick tests or nasal disk challenges (P < .01 and P

125 nly 4 predictors of the original model: sex, skin prick test, peanut sIgE, and total IgE minus sIgE.

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

127 aluation, milk-specific IgE levels, and milk skin prick test performed at enrollment, 6 months, 12 mo

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

129 The prevalence of any skin prick test positivity (atopy) at age 6 to 7 years w

130 wanted to measure geographical variation in skin prick test positivity and assess whether it was exp

131 t birth order, is a significant predictor of skin prick test positivity at age 4 (IgE below detection

132 Geographical variation in the prevalence of skin prick test positivity in Europe is unlikely to be e

133 re fitted for allergic sensitization (either skin prick test positivity or serum-specific IgE >/= 0.3

134 Skin prick test positivity to any one of the measured al

135 dence and severity of atopic dermatitis, and skin-prick-test positivity at 6 mo of age were not diffe

136 Skin-prick testing predicted only 13% of foods associate

137 for food allergy by standardized interviews, skin prick tests, prick-to-prick tests and ImmunoCAP.

138 n of pricking in the apple on prick-to-prick skin prick test (PTP) results.

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

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

141 Skin prick test reactions to pollen elicited larger weal

142 ion between a chronic helminth infection and skin prick test reactivity even in a developed country.

143 e reactions to peanut were reported in 1.5%, skin prick test reactivity in 2.0%, and IgE sensitizatio

144 py was measured by specific IgE in serum and skin prick test reactivity to aeroallergens.

145 studies demonstrated that exercise increases skin prick test reactivity to and bioavailability of the

146 Total IgE, grass pollen-specific IgE, and skin prick test reactivity to grass pollen were all redu

147 rtive evidence for linkage between a general skin prick test reactivity trait (but not with total ser

148 children with eczema, wheeze, or a positive skin prick test response before ending exclusive breast-

149 SAFS (n = 38) was defined as specific IgE or skin prick test response positivity to Aspergillus fumig

150 with greater airway hyperresponsiveness and skin prick test response positivity.

151 ible mold at age 1 year and child's positive skin prick test response to aeroallergens and molds at a

152 ID-independent anaphylaxis to LTPs, positive skin prick test response to LTPs, and serum LTP IgE.

153 Peanut skin prick test responses and peanut- and Ara h 2-specif

154 PPOIT was associated with reduced peanut skin prick test responses and peanut-specific IgE levels

155 Skin prick test responses and specific IgE levels agains

156 in Childhood2000 birth cohort by using both skin prick test responses and specific IgE levels.

157 tifiable by using routinely available peanut skin prick test responses or specific IgE levels, but th

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

159 serum total IgE levels, specific IgE levels, skin prick test responses to common aeroallergens, and I

160 ves with allergic disease) but with negative skin prick test responses to common allergens at randomi

161 For the incidence of AR, positive skin prick test responses to indoor allergens, parental

162 Positive skin prick test responses to outdoor allergens at baseli

163 th a history of ragweed allergy and positive skin prick test responses to ragweed were randomized and

164 Histamine skin prick test responses were diminished in patients wi

165 exposure and sensitization (as determined by skin prick test responses) was analyzed in more than 100

166 ith peanut- and Ara h 2-specific IgE levels, skin prick test responses, basophil activation, and TH2

167 eanut but have peanut-specific IgE, positive skin prick test responses, or both represents a signific

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

169 By the end of therapy, titrated CM skin prick test results and CD63 and CD203c expression d

170 random sample of participants with negative skin prick test results attended a hospital-based food c

171 asing their judgment on clinical history and skin prick test results before and after obtaining the I

172 Overall, clinical allergy and skin prick test results complied with the specific IgE r

173 th antivenoms and cetuximab induced positive skin prick test results in patients with sIgE to alpha-g

174 Based on available clinical data and skin prick test results, 922 (73%) patients would have b

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

176 higher IgG4 values (P = .001) and lower egg skin prick test scores (P = .0002) over time and a lower

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

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

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

180 A skin-prick test showed positive reactions for Inavir inh

181 Skin prick test, sIgE measurements, and assessment of al

182 Skin prick test, specific IgE determinations, DBPCFC and

183 Clinical data, skin prick tests, specific IgE to aero- and food allerge

184 co-factor enhanced food allergy, assessed by skin-prick tests, specific IgE and oral challenges.

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

186 Food-specific serum IgE, skin prick test (SPT) and atopy patch test (APT) to food

187 wheeze in last year, atopy assessed both by skin prick test (SPT) and by the measurement of allergen

188 ine release test (HR) (RefLab ApS, Denmark), skin prick test (SPT) and intradermal test (IDT).

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

190 in had the highest AUC (0.79), comparable to skin prick test (SPT) and sIgE to soy extract (0.76 and

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

192 sought to determine the association between skin prick test (SPT) and specific IgE (sIgE) to egg pro

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

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

195 1 spiking of the ImmunoCAP, and size of the skin prick test (SPT) for hazelnut were determined, also

196 lergic sensitization was determined based on skin prick test (SPT) of five mites, three molds, and ni

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

198 ng cows' milk-specific IgE antibodies (IgE), skin prick test (SPT) reactivity and double-blind, place

199 HDE) bioactivity were predictive of allergen skin prick test (SPT) reactivity for infants at high ris

200 pecific IgE against aeroallergens (sIgE) and skin prick test (SPT) reactivity for the most common loc

201 Atopy was measured based on skin prick test (SPT) reactivity to 9 allergens at 36 mo

202 Skin prick test (SPT) reactivity to grass, cypress, oliv

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

204 action to egg, milk, or both with a positive skin prick test (SPT) response to the trigger food and/o

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

206 nd 4 years of age and develop thresholds for skin prick test (SPT) results and specific IgE (sIgE) le

207 ping peanut allergy, and the implications of skin prick test (SPT) screening before peanut introducti

208 Skin prick test (SPT) sensitivity to house dust mite all

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

210 nfantile atopic dermatitis and preceding egg skin prick test (SPT) sensitization, we found a strong a

211 Allergic sensitization was determined by skin prick test (SPT) to 17 aeroallergens.

212 of 5276 one-year-old children who underwent skin prick test (SPT) to 4 food allergens and those with

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

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

215 eczema, egg allergy, or both but 0-mm peanut skin prick test (SPT) wheal responses (n = 542); group I

216 ty-two poly-sensitized athletes according to skin prick test (SPT) with different allergic phenotypes

217 fe (EQ-5D) health questionnaire, spirometry, skin prick test (SPT), exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), smel

218 Patients with CMA and/or RA underwent skin prick test (SPT), intracutaneous test (ICT), and, w

219 A clinical questionnaire, skin prick test (SPT), spirometry, and serum total and s

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

221 R) Rapid results were compared with those of skin prick test (SPT).

222 , they underwent physical examinations and a skin prick test (SPT).

223 tern blot and IgE-ELISA were complemented by Skin Prick Testing (SPT) and mediator release assay to d

224 Skin prick testing (SPT) in combination with the clinica

225 Skin prick testing (SPT) is an important step in the dia

226 Skin prick testing (SPT) is fundamental to the practice

227 orm beta lactam testing with 17% undertaking skin prick testing (SPT) only, 77% SPT followed by intra

228 5276 infants (HealthNuts), infants underwent skin prick testing (SPT) to egg white at 12 months of ag

229 ng hay fever, eczema, food allergy, positive skin prick testing (SPT), or elevated allergen-specific

230 evaluated in a basophil activation assay and Skin Prick Testing (SPT).

231 and allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) and perform skin prick testing (SPT).

232 to seeds of oilseed rape and turnip rape in skin prick tests (SPT) and open food challenges.

233 Skin prick tests (SPT) and specific IgE (sIgE) against f

234 Conjunctival provocation tests (CPT), skin prick tests (SPT), BAT, and sIgE determination incl

235 Skin prick tests (SPT), specific-IgE (sIgE), component-r

236 y against common allergens was determined by skin prick tests (SPT); specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE)

237 Skin prick tests (SPTs) and atopy patch tests (APTs) wer

238 Skin prick tests (SPTs) and basophil activation tests (B

239 All subjects with skin prick tests (SPTs) for birch pollen conducted durin

240 ich they answered a questionnaire, underwent skin prick tests (SPTs) for common aeroallergens, and pr

241 were invited to a parental questionnaire and skin prick tests (SPTs) to ten airborne allergens, and 2

242 ous reactions was obtained, and standardized skin prick tests (SPTs) using finely ground tree-nut sol

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

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

245 logical work-up included a detailed history, skin prick tests (SPTs) with IVIP, and basophil activati

246 al physical examinations, children underwent skin prick tests (SPTs), eczema was diagnosed by a clini

247 e following outcomes at age 2 years: eczema, skin prick tests (SPTs), increased allergen-specific IgE

248 7 with mollusc tolerance) were studied using skin prick tests (SPTs), specific IgEs (sIgEs) and SDS-P

249 ations, including a structured interview and skin prick tests (SPTs).

250 on who initially had negative results on the skin-prick test, the prevalence of peanut allergy at 60

251 lacebo-controlled oral food challenge (OFC), skin prick test titration (SPTT), and basophil histamine

252 e in peanut-specific basophil activation and skin prick test titration compared with nonresponders.

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

254 icipants aged 18 to 65 years with a positive skin prick test to Dactylis glomerata pollen were expose

255 easonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and positive skin prick test to grass and olive pollens and evaluate

256 ty reaction after peanut ingestion, positive skin prick test to peanuts, and positive by double-blind

257 ulture and a sputum cell differential count; skin prick testing to both common aeroallergens and an e

258 ample of 5276 one-year-old infants underwent skin prick testing to peanut, egg, sesame, and cow's mil

259 d cohort study of 5276 infants who underwent skin prick tests to 4 allergens, including egg.

260 population-based HealthNuts study underwent skin prick tests to determine peanut sensitization and s

261 Subjects with positive skin prick tests to GOS (n = 30, 6.2%) underwent basophi

262 d via structured questionnaire and underwent skin prick tests to GOS.

263 ciation between 10 loci and specific IgE and skin prick tests to individual allergens and poly-sensit

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

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

266 ths for scorings of symptoms and medication, skin prick testing, total IgE, specific IgE, and Der p 1

267 Moreover, a skin prick test using the crude extract was positive for

268 Skin prick tests using wheat extract were performed on 3

269 Skin prick test was a better predictor for hazelnut alle

270 Provided consent, a skin prick test was performed, and history of allergic s

271 A skin prick test was used to ascertain atopy.

272 rdiac surgery (age, 1 week to 14 years), and skin prick testing was performed from 12 months of age.

273 In addition, skin prick testing was performed to six study foods (cow

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

275 High IgE and positive skin prick test were associated with persistence of RC t

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

277 Skin prick tests were carried out at ages 4, 10, and 18

278 F), forced midexpiratory flow (FEF(50)), and skin prick tests were measured at age 12 years.

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

280 Skin prick tests were performed at the ages of 6, 12, an

281 Food-specific serum IgE measurements and skin prick tests were performed before initiating the di

282 n, IgE inhibition, ImmunoCAP inhibition, and skin prick tests were performed using samples from selec

283 Skin prick tests were performed with commercial pollen e

284 Skin prick tests were performed with pollen extracts.

285 Skin prick tests were used to identify sensitization to

286 E 33.3 kUA /l (7.2-120.2), and median peanut skin prick test wheal 11.3 mm (6.5-18)]; four experience

287 In subjects ingesting baked egg, EW-induced skin prick test wheal diameter and EW-, ovalbumin-, and

288 od challenges (OFCs) to egg, irrespective of skin prick test wheal sizes.

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

290 Skin prick testing with a panel of aeroallergens and a m

291 grass pollen allergic individuals underwent skin prick testing with allergen alone, allergen plus Be

292 subjected to topical cowhage provocation and skin prick testing with histamine and assessed for diffe

293 dditional healthy controls were subjected to skin prick testing with histamine.

294 meat, we studied the possibility to perform skin prick tests with cetuximab, which carries the alpha

295 Blinded, quadruplicate skin prick tests with concentrate and three serial half-

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

297 llenges with standardized doses of rMal d 1, skin prick tests with recombinant allergens, and measure

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

299 Allergen sensitisation was measured by skin-prick testing with a panel of common inhalant and f

300 E, eosinophil count in peripheral blood, and skin-prick tests with three different allergens (cockroa