







































Volume 04 Issue 04-2024 46 

                 

 
 

   
  
 

American Journal Of Biomedical Science & Pharmaceutical Innovation    
(ISSN – 2771-2753) 
VOLUME 04 ISSUE 04 PAGES: 46-50 

SJIF IMPACT FACTOR (2022: 5. 705) (2023: 6.534) (2024: 7.7) 
OCLC – 1121105677     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Publisher: Oscar Publishing Services 

Servi 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ABSTRACT 

Molecular allergological diagnostics is a modern method of determining sensitization, which allows to diagnose 

specific IgE with higher accuracy than traditional diagnostic methods, especially skin tests. This study was conducted 

in order to determine the types of allergenic molecules to which patients with allergic diseases are sensitive. 

KEYWORDS 

Allergic diseases, molecular allergology, diagnostics. 

INTRODUCTION

Allergic diseases are an urgent global problem that 

negatively affects the health of adults and children 

today. Despite the fact that modern medicine is 

developing year by year, and new technologies are 

coming in, there are still many problems that are 

waiting to be solved in terms of making an accurate 

diagnosis of allergic diseases in patients. In the history 

of diagnosis of allergic diseases, in the second half of 

the 19th century, skin testing with extracts of potential 

allergenic sources began to be used [1]. In 1967, specific 

IgE was detected in the blood serum of a patient with 

myeloma, and tests for in vitro diagnosis of allergic 

diseases began to appear. It is no exaggeration to say 

that a real revolution in allergology took place at the 

  Research Article 

 

RESULTS OF MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS OF ALLERGENS CAUSING 

ALLERGY AMONG THE POPULATION OF UZBEKISTAN 
 

Submission Date: April 20, 2024, Accepted Date:  April 25, 2024,  

Published Date: April 30, 2024  

Crossref doi: https://doi.org/10.37547/ajbspi/Volume04Issue04-08 

 

 

N.N. Alimova  
Tashkent Medical Academy Republican Scientific Specialized Center Of Allergology, Tashkent, Uzbekistan 

 

Vafoyeva N.I.  
Tashkent Medical Academy Republican Scientific Specialized Center Of Allergology, Tashkent, Uzbekistan 

 

Journal Website: 

https://theusajournals.

com/index.php/ajbspi 

Copyright: Original 

content from this work 

may be used under the 

terms of the creative 

commons attributes 

4.0 licence. 

 

https://doi.org/10.37547/ajbspi/Volume03Issue03-01
https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?q=
https://www.mendeley.com/search/?page=1&query=
https://theusajournals.com/
https://doi.org/10.37547/ajbspi/Volume04Issue04-08
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajbspi
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajbspi


Volume 04 Issue 04-2024 47 

                 

 
 

   
  
 

American Journal Of Biomedical Science & Pharmaceutical Innovation    
(ISSN – 2771-2753) 
VOLUME 04 ISSUE 04 PAGES: 46-50 

SJIF IMPACT FACTOR (2022: 5. 705) (2023: 6.534) (2024: 7.7) 
OCLC – 1121105677     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Publisher: Oscar Publishing Services 

Servi 

end of the 20th century, when the first recombinant 

allergen was cloned [2, 3]. In recent years, molecular 

allergology methods based on detection of specific IgE 

have appeared instead of traditional allergen extracts, 

which are a modern method of determining 

sensitization. The molecular components used today 

are purified or recombinant proteins, which provide a 

higher level of standardization than allergen extracts 

and allow the detection of specific IgEs with high 

sensitivity [4]. This study was conducted in order to 

determine which allergenic molecules are sensitive to 

allergenic molecules by the molecular diagnostic 

method. 

Material and methods. A prospective observational 

single-center study was conducted in January-April 

2024 at the Republican Scientific Center of Allergology 

with the participation of 68 patients. The presence of 

specific IgE in relation to the type of allergen in the 

patient was determined immunologically using the 

ISAC (ImmunoCAP) device in the venous blood serum 

sample. It was analyzed how many patients included in 

the study were sensitized to each allergen. 

Results. According to the results of the immunological 

analysis, sensitivity to allergenic molecules of plants 

such as soybean (44%), solyanka (38%), and 

chenopodium (34%) was the highest among patients. 

Sensitivity to some allergen molecules (Cannabis - Can 

s 3, European house mite - Derp 10 and 11, Aspergillus 

fumigatus molecules, etc.) was not detected in any of 

the patients. 

 

Material and methods 

A prospective observational single-center study was 

conducted in January-April 2024 at the Republican 

Scientific Specialized Allergology Center. 68 children 

and adults suffering from various allergic diseases 

were included in the study. Clinical and demographic 

data of patients are given in  

Table 1. 

Table 1. Clinical and demographic data of patients 

Indicator n % 

Total number of patients 68 100 

Sex 
  

a woman 31 46 

male 37 54 

Age 
  

https://doi.org/10.37547/ajbspi/Volume03Issue03-01
https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?q=
https://www.mendeley.com/search/?page=1&query=


Volume 04 Issue 04-2024 48 

                 

 
 

   
  
 

American Journal Of Biomedical Science & Pharmaceutical Innovation    
(ISSN – 2771-2753) 
VOLUME 04 ISSUE 04 PAGES: 46-50 

SJIF IMPACT FACTOR (2022: 5. 705) (2023: 6.534) (2024: 7.7) 
OCLC – 1121105677     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Publisher: Oscar Publishing Services 

Servi 

1-7 18 26 

7-18 12 18 

>18 38 56 

Diagnosis 
  

Allergic rhinitis 29 42.6 

Bronchial asthma 15 22.0 

Atopic dermatitis 5 7.35 

Bubbles 6 8.82 

Drug allergy 2 2.94 

Insect allergy 2 2.94 

Bronchitis 5 7.35 

Others 4 5.88 

A detailed allergy anamnesis was collected for the 

study from patients who applied to the outpatient 

clinic of the center and received inpatient treatment. 

Standard clinical and biochemical blood tests were 

performed. If necessary, examinations such as chest x-

ray, determination of external respiratory function 

were performed. 

For the purpose of molecular diagnostics, venous 

blood was taken from patients, and the presence and 

amount of specific IgE against the type of allergen in 

the patient was determined immunologically using the 

ISAC (ImmunoCAP) device. Using this method, the 

presence or absence of sensitivity to 294 different 

allergens from 165 sources was determined. It was 

analyzed how many patients included in the study 

were sensitized to each allergen. 

Results 

According to the results of immunological analysis, 

sensitivity to allergenic molecules of plants such as 

soybean, solyanka, and chenopodium was the highest 

among patients. Table 2 lists the names of allergenic 

molecules to which sensitivity was determined in more 

than 10% of patients. 

Table 2. Allergens to which sensitization was detected in most patients 

https://doi.org/10.37547/ajbspi/Volume03Issue03-01
https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?q=
https://www.mendeley.com/search/?page=1&query=


Volume 04 Issue 04-2024 49 

                 

 
 

   
  
 

American Journal Of Biomedical Science & Pharmaceutical Innovation    
(ISSN – 2771-2753) 
VOLUME 04 ISSUE 04 PAGES: 46-50 

SJIF IMPACT FACTOR (2022: 5. 705) (2023: 6.534) (2024: 7.7) 
OCLC – 1121105677     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Publisher: Oscar Publishing Services 

Servi 

Allergen source Allergen molecule 

Number of 

encounters in 

patients 

% 

Soya Gly m 5 30 44.1 

Solyanka Sal k 26 38.2 

Chenopodium (Common mar) Ama r 23 33.8 

Solyanka Sal k 1 17 25 

Kiwi Act d 2 16 23.5 

Timofeyevka Phl p 1 15 22.0 

Cat Fel d 1 13 19.1 

Date palm Pho d 2 12 17.6 

Timofeyevka Phl p 2 15 22.0 

Ambrosia Amb a 1 14 20.5 

Bees Api m 1 12 17.6 

Perennial weed Lol p 1 11 16.1 

Paspalum/ Buckwheat Pas n 12 17.6 

An ordinary bee Ves v 11 16.1 

Cynodon dactylon Cyn d 1 10 14.7 

Timofeyevka Phl p12 11 16.1 

Cypress Cup a 1 10 14.7 

Erman Shugoh Art v 11 17.7 

Erman Shugoh Art v 1 11 16.7 

Melon Cuc m 2 11 16.7 

Cynodon dactylon Cyn d 10 14.7 

Ambrosia Amb a 10 14.7 

American house dust mite Der f 2 10 14.7 

Japanese cryptomeria Cry j 1 7 10.2 

Stinging nettle Urt d 8 11.7 

https://doi.org/10.37547/ajbspi/Volume03Issue03-01
https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?q=
https://www.mendeley.com/search/?page=1&query=


Volume 04 Issue 04-2024 50 

                 

 
 

   
  
 

American Journal Of Biomedical Science & Pharmaceutical Innovation    
(ISSN – 2771-2753) 
VOLUME 04 ISSUE 04 PAGES: 46-50 

SJIF IMPACT FACTOR (2022: 5. 705) (2023: 6.534) (2024: 7.7) 
OCLC – 1121105677     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Publisher: Oscar Publishing Services 

Servi 

Sensitivity to other allergens has been identified in a 

relatively small number of patients. Sensitivity to some 

allergen molecules (Cannabis - Can s 3, European house 

mite - Derp 10 and 11, Aspergillus fumigatus molecules, 

etc.) was not detected in any of the patients. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The use of molecular diagnostics provides additional 

information about allergens and specifies which plant 

dusts, food sources of trigger allergens to avoid in 

patients. Among the population of our republic, 

sensitivity to Soya - Gly m 5, Solyanka - Sal k, 

Chenopodium Ama r molecules in patients suffering 

from allergic diseases is more common than to other 

allergenic molecules. 

REFERENCES 

1. Valenta R, Karaulov A, Niederberger V, 

Gattinger P, van Hage M, Flicker S, Linhart B, 

Campana R, Focke-Tejkl M, Curin M, Eckl-Dorna 

J, Lupinek C, Resch-Marat Y, Vrtala S, 

Mittermann I, Garib V, Khaitov M, Valent P, 

Pickl WF. Molecular Aspects of Allergens and 

Allergy. Adv Immunol. 2018;138:195-256. doi: 

10.1016/bs.ai.2018.03.002. Epub 2018 Apr 26. 

PMID: 29731005.  

2. Harwanegg C, Hiller R. Protein microarrays for 

the diagnosis of allergic diseases: state-of-the-

art and future development. Clin Chem Lab 

Med. 2005;43(12):1321-6. doi: 

10.1515/CCLM.2005.226. PMID: 16309367.  

3. Martorano L, Erwin EA. Aeroallergen Exposure 

and Spread in the Modern Era. J Allergy Clin 

Immunol Pract. 2018 Nov-Dec;6(6):1835-1842. 

doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2018.08.014. PMID: 30390901. 

4. Mari A. When does a protein become an 

allergen? Searching for a dynamic definition 

based on most advanced technology tools. Clin 

Exp Allergy. 2008 Jul;38(7):1089-94. doi: 

10.1111/j.1365-2222.2008.03011.x. PMID: 

18477011; PMCID: PMC2607534.  

 

https://doi.org/10.37547/ajbspi/Volume03Issue03-01
https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?q=
https://www.mendeley.com/search/?page=1&query=

