Comparison of specific IgE against allergen components measured on the ALEX2® Allergy Xplorer and the ImmunoCAPTM ISAC multiplex assays
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background. Allergic disease, mediated by immunoglobulin E (IgE), is common worldwide and its incidence is on the rise.
Objectives. To compare common food, inhalant and cross-reactive molecular components detected by the ImmunoCAP Immuno Solid- phase Allergen Chip (ISACTM) and the Allergy Xplorer (ALEX2®) multiplex IgE assays.
Methods. The study analysed serum samples from 100 patients with suspected allergies. Allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) molecular component measurements were performed using the ImmunoCAPTM ISAC E112i assay (ISACTM) (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Sweden). Subsequently, sIgE molecular component measurements were performed using the Allergy Xplorer 2® (ALEX2®) (Macro Array Diagnostics, Austria). The ISACTM method tests 112 molecular allergen components. The ALEX2® method offers 295 reportable molecular allergen components and whole allergen extracts.
Results. The overall Kappa analysis showed very good agreement in 58.33% (n=28/48) of components, good agreement in 33.33% (n=16/48) of components, moderate agreement in 8.33% (n=4/48) of components and no fair or poor agreements seen among the analysed components. The four components with a moderate agreement were Gly m 4 (PR-10, soy), Ara h 8 (PR-10, peanut), Gly m 5 (storage protein, soy) and Tri aA/TI (alpha amylase/TI, wheat), with K values of 0.52, 0.51, 0.48 and 0.44, respectively. Tri-AA/TI exhibited the lowest agreement.
Conclusions. The study findings demonstrated a good correlation between the ALEX2® and ISACTM assays for the detection of sIgE against molecular allergen components. ALEX2® offers the benefit of testing 295 molecular allergen components and extracts, as well as cross- reactive carbohydrate determinants (CCD) inhibition.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The SAJCH is published under an Attribution-Non Commercial International Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC 4.0) License. Under this license, authors agree to make articles available to users, without permission or fees, for any lawful, non-commercial purpose. Users may read, copy, or re-use published content as long as the author and original place of publication are properly cited.
Exceptions to this license model is allowed for UKRI and research funded by organisations requiring that research be published open-access without embargo, under a CC-BY licence. As per the journals archiving policy, authors are permitted to self-archive the author-accepted manuscript (AAM) in a repository.
How to Cite
References
1. Edwards-Salmon SE, Padmanabhan SL, Kuruvilla M, Levy JM. Increasing prevalence of allergic disease and its impact on current practice. Curr Otorhinolaryngol Rep 2022;10(3):278-284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40136- 022-00406-5
2. Čelakovská J, Bukač J, Cermákova E, et al. Analysis of results of specific IgE in 100 atopic dermatitis patients with the use of multiplex examination ALEX2®— Allergy explorer. Int J Molecular Sci 2021;22(10):5286. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijms22105286
3. Rao LV. Allergy testing. In: Rifai N, Chiu RWK, Young I, Burnham CD, Wittwer CT, editors. Tietz Textbook of Laboratory Medicine. 7th ed. St Louis: Elsevier, 2023. pp.1357.e1-1357e42.
4. Ansotegui IJ, Melioli G, Canonica GW, et al. A WAO—ARIA—GA2LEN consensus document on molecular-based allergy diagnosis (PAMD@): Update 2020. World Allergy Organ J 2020;13(2):100091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. waojou.2019.100091
5. Heffler E, Puggioni F, Peveri S, Montagni M, Canonica GW, Melioli G. Extended IgE profile based on an allergen macroarray: A novel tool for precision medicine in allergy diagnosis. World Allergy Organ J 2018;11(1):1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40413-018-0186-3
6. Van Hage M, Hamsten C, Valenta R. ImmunoCAP assays: Pros and cons in allergology. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2017;140(4):974-977. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jaci.2017.05.008
7. Huss-Marp J, Gutermuth J, Schäffner I, et al. Comparison of molecular and extract-based allergy diagnostics with multiplex and singleplex analysis. Allergo J Int 2015;24:46-53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40629-015-0046-4
8. Platteel AC, van der Pol P, Murk JL, et al. A comprehensive comparison between ISAC and ALEX2 multiplex test systems. Clin Chemistry Lab Med (CCLM) 2022;60(7):1046-1052. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2022-0191
9. Bojcukova J, Vlas T, Forstenlechner P, Panzner P. Comparison of two multiplex arrays in the diagnostics of allergy. Clin Transl Allergy 2019;9(31):1-6. https:// doi.org/10.1186/s13601-019-0270-y
10. Diem L, Neuherz B, Rohrhofer J, et al. Real-life evaluation of molecular multiplex IgE test methods in the diagnosis of pollen-associated food allergy. Allergy 2022;77(10):3028-3040. https://doi.org/10.1111/all.15329
11. Buzzulini F, Da Re M, Scala E, et al. Evaluation of a new multiplex assay for allergy diagnosis. Clinica Chimica Acta 2019;493:73-78. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cca.2019.02.025
12. Scala E, Caprini E, Abeni D, et al. A qualitative and quantitative comparison of IgE antibody profiles with two multiplex platforms for component-resolved diagnostics in allergic patients. Clin Experim Allergy 2021;51(12):1603-1612. https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.14016
13. Nösslinger H, Mair E, Oostingh GJ, Ahlgrimm-Siess V, Ringauf A, Lang R. Multiplex assays in allergy diagnosis: Allergy Explorer 2 versus ImmunoCAP ISAC E112i. Diagnostics 2024;14(10):976. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14100976