Search

Background: The safety profile of venom immunotherapy (VIT) is a relevant issue, and considerable differences have been reported in the safety and efficacy of this treatment modality. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and ß-blockers during VIT. In a second analysis, we evaluated data on premedication and venom preparations and their association with systemic adverse events (AEs) during the up-dosing phase and the first year of the maintenance phase, as well as the outcome of field stings and sting challenges., Methods: Ours was an open, prospective, observational, multicenter study that recruited 1425 patients, of whom 1342 underwent VIT., Results: Premedication with oral antihistamines was taken by 52.1% of patients during up-dosing and 19.7% of patients during the maintenance phase. Antihistamines had no effect on the frequency of systemic AEs (P=.11), although large local reactions (LLRs) were less frequent (OR, 0.74; 95%CI, 0.58-0.96; P=.02). Aqueous preparations were preferred for up-dosing (73.0%), and depot preparations were used for the maintenance phase (64.5%). The type of venom preparation had no influence on the frequency of systemic AEs or on the effectiveness of VIT (P=.26 and P=.80, respectively), while LLRs were less frequent with depot preparations (P<.001)., Conclusions: Pretreatment with oral antihistamines during VIT significantly reduces the frequency of LLRs but not systemic AEs. All venom preparations were equally effective and did not differ in terms of the frequency of systemic AEs.

Background and Objectives: Although exposure to stings has been identified as the leading risk factor for anaphylaxis due to Hymenoptera venom allergy, professional beekeepers receive hundreds of stings yearly without developing systemic reactions. This study aims to analyze the mechanisms underlying bee venom tolerance in beekeepers., Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted. Participants were recruited and classified into 3 groups: allergic patients (APs), who experienced systemic reactions after bee stings, with a positive intradermal test and specific IgE (sIgE) to Apis mellifera venom (AmV); tolerant beekeepers (TBKs), who received ≥50 stings/year; and healthy nonexposed controls (HCs). We measured serum levels of sIgE and specific IgG4 (sIgG4) to AmV, rApi m 1, rApi m 2, rApi m 3, Api m 4, rApi m 5, and rApi m10, as well as AmV-induced basophil degranulation, percentage of T-cell subsets, regulatory T cells (Treg), and IL-10 production., Results: Compared with TBKs, APs had high levels of sIgE to AmV and all its allergic components (P<.001), together with a high basophil activation rate (P<.001). Conversely, compared with APs, TBKs had higher levels of sIgG4 (P<.001) and IL-10 (P<.0001), as well as an enhanced CTLA-4+ Treg population (P=.001), expanded Helios- Treg (P<.003), and reduced type 1 helper T cells (TH1) (P=.008), TH2 (P=.004), and TH17 (P=.007) subsets., Conclusions: The profile of TBKs, which was strongly marked by Treg activity, differed from that of TBKs. This natural tolerance would be led by the expansion of inducible Helios- Treg cells at the peripheral level. The Helios- Treg population could be a novel candidate biomarker for monitoring tolerance.

In this review, the Hymenoptera Allergy Committee of the SEAIC analyzes the most recent scientific literature addressing problems related to the diagnosis of hymenoptera allergy and to management of venom immunotherapy. Molecular diagnosis and molecular risk profiles are the key areas addressed. The appearance of new species of hymenoptera that are potentially allergenic in Spain and the associated diagnostic and therapeutic problems are also described. Finally, we analyze the issue of mast cell activation syndrome closely related to hymenoptera allergy, which has become a new diagnostic challenge for allergists given its high prevalence in patients with venom anaphylaxis.