PREVALENCE OF HUMAN SEMINAL PLASMA HYPERSENSITIVITY AMONG SYMPTOMATICWOMEN

Background: Experience with human seminal plasma hypersensitivity in t he last decade has led to increased physician awareness of symptoms co nsistent with human seminal plasma sensitization in women. Incidence a nd prevalence of human seminal plasma hypersensitivity in women are un known. Objective: A questionnaire survey was distributed to determine the prevalence of human seminal plasma hypersensitivity among a popula tion of women suspected of having this disorder. Methods: A questionna ire designed to elicit age, symptoms, duration of symptoms, number of sexual partners, time to onset of symptoms after first human seminal p lasma exposure, onset of symptoms after first intercourse, recent gyne cologic procedures, history of atopy, vaginitis, food or drug allergy and family history of atopy was distributed to 1,073 women who suspect ed they had symptoms consistent with human seminal plasma hypersensiti vity. Women were considered ''possible'' for human seminal plasma hype rsensitivity if they reported two or more symptoms consistent with loc alized or systemic human seminal plasma hypersensitivity. Women were c onsidered ''probable'' for disease if they fulfilled the ''ultimate cr iterion'' defined as complete prevention of symptoms with a condom. Wo men with ''possible'' localized or systemic human seminal plasma hyper sensitivity who had persistent symptoms despite use of a condom served as cohort control groups. Results: Two-hundred sixty-six women report ed symp;toms ''possible'' for human seminal plasma hypersensitivity (8 8 localized and 178 systemic). When the ''ultimate criterion'' was app lied, 130 (46 localized and 84 systemic) of the 266 women were identif ied as having ''probable'' human seminal plasma hypersensitivity. The responses to most of the questions from each group were very similar. A significantly shorter time interval to symptom onset after initial h uman seminal plasma exposure was more common for women with ''probable '' localized human seminal plasma hypersensitivity compared with their cohort control group (49 months versus 108 months; P < .02) whereas a significantly increased number of women with ''probable'' systemic hu man seminal hypersensitivity gave positive food allergy histories comp ared with their cohort control group (31 versus 20; P < .05). Atopy di d not appear to be a risk factor for human seminal plasma hypersensiti vity. Conclusions: Evaluation of women with symptoms suggestive of hum an seminal plasma hypersensitivity using a validated questionnaire ind icates that this disorder is more common than previously recognized.