Essential Site Maintenance: Authorea-powered sites will be updated circa 15:00-17:00 Eastern on Tuesday 5 November.
There should be no interruption to normal services, but please contact us at [email protected] in case you face any issues.

loading page

Birch allergen challenges in allergic conjunctivitis using unitary tests and an exposure chamber
  • +4
  • Alina Gherasim,
  • Jean Luc Fauquert,
  • Nathalie Domis,
  • Xavier SIOMBOING,
  • Nicole Beck,
  • Tristan Bourcier,
  • Frédéric De Blay
Alina Gherasim
Alyatec

Corresponding Author:[email protected]

Author Profile
Jean Luc Fauquert
University Hospital
Author Profile
Nathalie Domis
Alyatec
Author Profile
Xavier SIOMBOING
SOLADIS
Author Profile
Nicole Beck
Alyatec
Author Profile
Tristan Bourcier
University Hospitals Strasbourg
Author Profile
Frédéric De Blay
University Hospital Strasbourg
Author Profile

Abstract

Background: Environmental exposure chambers (EECs) have been used extensively to study allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Few studies have been published using EECs in conjunctivitis only, and none have used conjunctival allergen challenge as a selection criterion. The present study validated ALYATEC EEC in allergic conjunctivitis to birch allergens. Methods: Sixteen patients with a positive conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC) were ex-posed to 60 ng/m3 of Bet v 1 in an EEC on 2 consecutive days for a maximum of 4 hours. Re-producibility was tested among seven of the patients. A positive conjunctival response during the CAC and the EEC exposure was defined as a Total Ocular Symptom Score (TOSS) ≥ 5. Results: Fifty percent of patients had a positive conjunctival response during the first expo-sure and 75% during the second. The mean time to a positive conjunctival response was 81.2±33.9 minutes and 101.6±57 (P>0.05) during the first and second exposure, respectively. No difference in the TOSS occurred between the two exposures. The time necessary to ob-tain a positive response during the CAC was significantly shorter than with the EEC. The es-timated quantity of Bet v 1 inducing a positive response was 0.07±0.03 ng (exposure 1), 0.07±0.07 ng (exposure 2), 980±784 ng (CAC). The frequency of conjunctival responses and quantity of Bet v 1 was reproducible in all six EEC exposures. Conclusions: Birch allergen exposures inducing early conjunctival responses were different than those identified with direct installation during CAC. EEC appears to be closer to natural exposure than CAC.