This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
BACKGROUND: To date, only limited information on structure, expression levels and IgE binding of Bet v 1 variants, which are simultaneously expressed in birch pollen, is available. OBJECTIVE: To analyse and compare structure and serum IgE/IgG binding of rBet v 1 variants to Bet v 1.0101. METHODS: Recombinant Bet v 1 variants were studied with sera of 20 subjects allergic to birch pollen. Folding, aggregation and solubility of the rBet v 1 variants were analysed to attribute diverging IgE binding to either allergen structure or methodological features. IgE/IgG binding was studied with rBet v 1 in solution or adsorbed to solid phases. Allergen-mediated cross-linking of FcεRI receptors was determined by mediator release of sensitized humanized rat basophil leukaemia cells. RESULTS: All variants, except for rBet v 1.0113, were monomeric and had Bet v 1-type conformation. Serum IgE binding to variants adsorbed to solid phase was reduced to 6.6%-36.5% compared with Bet v 1.0101. In contrast, inhibition of IgE binding to Bet v 1.0101 by rBet v 1 variants ranged from 62% to 83%. Similarly, mediator release ranged from 30.7% to 55.2% for all variants and was only clearly reduced for rBet v 1.0301 (10.4%). The IgE-binding potency of rBet v 1 variants representing their native quantities in birch pollen was only slightly lower compared to extract. IgG binding to variants was between 50.9% and 134.5% compared with rBet v 1.0101 (100%). CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Bet v 1 variants previously classified as hypoallergenic can exhibit similar functional IgE binding as Bet v 1.0101. Eight rBet v 1 variants largely reproduce total Bet v 1-specific IgE binding of birch pollen extracts. Assay format-dependent variation in IgE-binding properties needs to be considered in the development of diagnostic or therapeutic products.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Loetzen et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: