Airway allergy and skin reactivity to aeroallergens in Riyadh

Department of Pathology, Immunology Unit, College of Medicine and King Khalid University Hospital, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Saudi medical journal (Impact Factor: 0.59). 04/2009; 30(3):392-6.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To determine the pattern of skin prick test reactivity to aeroallergens in patients with asthma and rhinitis (airway allergy) residing in Riyadh region.
This is a retrospective cross sectional study based on data analysis of skin prick test results of individuals with clinical diagnosis of airway allergy.Allergy skin prick test result data of 139 Saudi nationals from Riyadh region tested at King Khalid University Hospital between January 2003 and March 2004 was analyzed retrospectively. This group comprised of 53% females and 47% males, with a mean age of 27 +/- 12 years. A set of aeroallergens extracts for both indoor and outdoor allergens including fungal spores was used to test the patients.
Seventy-five percent (105) of patients reacted to one or more allergen extracts. The most frequently reacting indoor allergen was house dust mite (77.8%) followed by the cat (33.6%) and cockroach (19.2%). Among the outdoor allergens Prosopis juliflora was tested positive in 72.1%, Bermuda grass in 53.8%, Chenopodium album in 47.1%, Rye grass in 36.5% and Salsola kali in 36.5%. A significant proportion of patients were also found reacting to Moulds (18.2%) and Aspergillus fumigatus (18.2%) extracts.
Sensitivity to one or more aeroallergens was common in patients, indicating high level of aeroallergen sensitization in patients with airway allergy residing in Riyadh region.

48 Reads
  • Source
    • "Cockroach sensitivity among all the patients in our study was estimated at 18%. Approximately similar results were reported in two of Iran’s Arab neighboring countries: 19.2% in the city of Riyadh (139 patients with airway allergy)30 and 22.7% in Oman (689 patients).31 In contrast, a prevalence rate of 2.8% sensitivity to cockroaches was reported from Turkey;32 this finding is different from the rate reported in our country (2.8% versus 18%). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: The prevalence of allergic diseases has risen in the last decades. The objective of this study was to determine the common allergens in children via the skin prick test. Methods: This cross-sectional study recruited 313 allergic children (4 months to 18 years old) referred to the Asthma and Allergy Clinic of Children’s Medical Center in Tehran. A questionnaire containing demographic data and patient history was completed. The Skin Prick Test (SPT) was selected according to the patients’ history of food and/or aeroallergen sensitivity. Results: Patients (62.4% male, 37.6% female) with symptoms of asthma (n=141, 57.1%), allergic rhinitis (n=50, 20.4%), atopic dermatitis (n=29, 11.7%), and urticaria (n=20, 8.1%) were studied. Positive skin prick test to at least one allergen was 58.1%. The most prevalent allergens were tree mix (26%), Alternaria alternata (26%), weed mix (23.6%), Dermatophagoides farinae (22.9%), Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (22.9%), milk (21.7%), eggs (20%), and wheat flour (18.3%). Also, common allergens in the patients with different symptoms of allergic disorders were as follows: asthma (tree mix, weed mix, and Dermatophagoides farinae); allergic rhinitis (Dermatophagoides farinae, tree mix, and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus); and atopic dermatitis (Alternaria alternata, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, and cockroaches). Conclusion: Identifying allergens in each area is necessary and has an important role in the diagnosis and management of allergic disorders and possibility of performing immunotherapy. In this study, the most common aeroallergens were tree mix, Alternaria alternata, and weed mix and also the most common food allergens were milk, eggs, and wheat. Considering these data, appropriate preventive strategies can decrease the cost and morbidity of therapeutic actions.
    Iranian Journal of Medical Sciences 01/2014; 39(1):29-35.
  • Source
    • "Allergen sensitivity has also been investigated in the area using mostly commercially available batteries of skin tests and, in some cases, locally collected species [6-8]. The study by Almogren revealed that 75% of the patients reacted to 1 or more allergen extracts. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:: Airborne allergens vary from one climatic region to another. Therefore, it is important to analyze the environment of the region to select the most prevalent allergens for the diagnosis and treatment of allergic patients. OBJECTIVE:: To evaluate the prevalence of positive skin tests to pollen and fungal allergens collected from local indigenous plants or isolated molds, as well as other outdoor and indoor allergens in allergic patients in 6 different geographical areas in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), the United Arab Emirates, and Sudan. MATERIAL AND METHODS:: Four hundred ninety-two consecutive patients evaluated at different Allergy Clinics (276 women and 256 men; mean age, 30 years) participated in this study. The selection of indigenous allergens was based on research findings in different areas from Riyadh and adjoining areas. Indigenous raw material for pollen grains was collected from the desert near the capital city of Riyadh, KSA. The following plants were included: Chenopodium murale, Salsola imbricata, Rumex vesicarius, Ricinus communis, Artiplex nummularia, Amaranthus viridis, Artemisia monosperma, Plantago boissieri, and Prosopis juliflora. Indigenous molds were isolated from air sampling in Riyadh and grown to obtain the raw material. These included the following: Ulocladium spp., Penicillium spp., Aspergillus fumigatus, Cladosporium spp., and Alternaria spp. The raw material was processed under Good Manufacturing Practices for skin testing. Other commercially available outdoor (grass and tree pollens) and indoor (mites, cockroach, and cat dander) allergens were also tested. RESULTS:: The highest sensitization to indigenous pollens was detected to C. murale (32%) in Khartoum (Sudan) and S. imbricata (30%) and P. juliflora (24%) in the Riyadh region. The highest sensitization to molds was detected in Khartoum, especially to Cladosporium spp. (42%), Aspergillus (40%), and Alternaria spp. (38%). Sensitization to mites was also very prevalent in Khartoum (72%), as well as in Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates) (46%) and Jeddah (KSA) (30%). CONCLUSIONS:: The allergenicity of several indigenous pollens and molds derived from autochthonous sources was demonstrated. Prevalence studies in different regions of KSA and neighbor countries indicate different sensitization rates to these and other outdoor and indoor allergens.
    World Allergy Organization Journal 06/2012; 5(6):59-65. DOI:10.1097/WOX.0b013e31825a73cd
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The inhalation of Chenopodium album (C. album) pollen has been reported as an important cause of allergic respiratory symptoms. The aim of this study was to produce the recombinant profilin of C. album (rChe a 2) pollen and to investigate its cross-reactivity with other plant-derived profilins based on potential conformational epitopes and IgE reactivity analysis. Che a 2-coding sequence was cloned, expressed, and purified using one step metal affinity chromatography to recover high-purity target protein. We assessed cross-reactivity and predicted IgE potential epitopes among rChe a 2 and other plant-derived profilins. Immunodetection and inhibition assays using sixteen individual sera from C. album allergic patients demonstrated that purified rChe a 2 could be the same as that in the crude extract. The results of inhibition assays among rChe a 2 and other plant-derived profilins were in accordance with those of the homology of predicted conserved conformational regions. In this study, amino acid sequence homology analysis showed that a high degree of IgE cross-reactivity among plant-derived profilins may depend on predicted potential IgE epitopes.
    Molecular Biology Reports 11/2010; 38(4):2579-87. DOI:10.1007/s11033-010-0398-2 · 2.02 Impact Factor
Show more