Search

Simple Summary: Hymenoptera venom allergy (HVA) is a potentially life-threatening systemic hypersensitivity reaction. In this study, data from 178 dogs with insect sting allergic reactions were analyzed and several risk factors for severe systemic reactions to Hymenoptera stings were identified. Furthermore, a significant number of dogs suffered subsequent systemic reactions to Hymenoptera stings, indicating that venom immunotherapy may be a valuable intervention to prevent future reactions. This study should raise the awareness of dog owners that Hymenoptera stings are associated with HVA and its possible consequences. Hymenoptera, which includes honeybees, wasps, bumblebees, and hornets, is an order of the class Insecta, whose venom can induce anaphylactic reactions in dogs. While several studies have investigated the natural histories and risk factors of Hymenoptera venom allergy (HVA) in humans, only limited information is available on canine patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify risk factors leading to severe systemic reactions (SSRs) and to explore the natural history of these patients. This was achieved with an inquiry into the case histories of 178 dogs that were stung by Hymenoptera and presented to the Vetsuisse Faculty Animal Hospital of the University of Zurich between 2018 and 2022. Dogs under two years old, dogs that weighed under 10 kg, purebred dogs, and dogs that were stung in the oral cavity were at a greater risk of developing SSRs. Almost two thirds of patients with SSRs experienced the same or worse symptoms after subsequent stings and >40% of patients with local reactions developed SSRs when stung again. Next to providing valuable clinical information about HVA in dogs, these findings strongly support the recommendation of venom immunotherapy (VIT) for patients with HVA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nina Hein,1 Conner Callaway,2 Devin Ford,2 John C Carlson1 1Ochsner Health System, Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, New Orleans, LA, USA; 2Tulane University, School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USACorrespondence: John C Carlson, Department of Pediatrics, Ochsner Health System, 1315 Jefferson Hwy, New Orleans, LA, 20121, USA, Tel +1-504-842-3900, Fax +1-504-842-5848, Email john.carlson@ochsner.org

Copyright of Polish Journal of Allergology / Alergologia Polska is the property of Termedia Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a well-established and efficient method of causative treatment for allergic rhinitis, asthma and insect venom allergy. Traditionally, a recent history of malignant neoplasm is regarded as a contraindication to AIT due to concerns that AIT might stimulate tumor growth. However, there are no data confirming that the silencing of the Th2 response affects prognosis in cancer. Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate frequency of malignant tumors in patients undergoing AIT and the association between AIT and cancer-related mortality. Patients and Methods: A group of 2577 patients with insect venom allergy undergoing AIT in 10 Polish allergology centers was screened in the Polish National Cancer Registry. Data on cancer type, diagnosis time and patients' survival were collected and compared with the general population. Results: In the study group, 86 cases of malignancies were found in 85 patients (3.3% of the group). The most common were breast (19 cases), lung (9 cases), skin (8 cases), colon and prostate cancers (5 cases each). There were 21 cases diagnosed before AIT, 38 during and 27 after completing AIT. Laplace's crude incidence rate was 159.5/100,000/year (general population rate: 260/100,000/year). During follow-up, 13 deaths related to cancer were revealed (15% of patients with cancer). Laplace's cancer mortality rate was 37.3/100,000/year (general population rate: 136.8/100,000/year). Conclusions: Malignancy was found in patients undergoing immunotherapy less often than in the general population. Patients with cancer diagnosed during or after AIT did not show a lower survival rate, which suggests that AIT does not affect the prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Changes in the cytokine profile from type 2 to type 1 together with the induction of regulatory cells are expected during hymenoptera venom immunotherapy (VIT). The present study was aimed to investigate the changes in type 1, type 2, and regulatory cytokines induced by a Vespula spp. VIT in patients with anaphylaxis to Vespa velutina.Methods: Twenty consecutive patients with anaphylaxis due to Vespa velutina were treated with Vespula spp. VIT. Serum cytokines (IL-4, IL-5, IL-10, IL-13, and IFN-ɣ) were measured at baseline, 6, and 12 months after starting VIT. Results: A significant increase in serum IFN-y was detected after 6 and 12 months of VIT. An increase in serum IL-10 and a decrease in IL-5 were observed after 12 months. IL-4 was undetectable all along the study, and an unexpected increase of IL-13 was present at 12 months of treatment. Conclusion:Vespula spp. VIT seems to be able to induce a shift to type 1 cytokine production measured through IFN-y levels and IL-10 production after, at least, 6 and 12 months of VIT, respectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Allergen immunotherapy remains a widely recognized and widely used method for the treatment of selected allergic diseases. Currently, according to the European Academy Of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) guidelines, venom immunotherapy (VIT) may be considered for patients over 60. Nevertheless, no separate studies have confirmed the efficacy and safety of this therapy. This study aimed to evaluate the short-term effectiveness of VIT against wasp allergens in an ultra-rush protocol for older patients compared to young patients. Methods: Among the 113 patients included in this study, 51 were older than 60 years (Group A), and 62 formed the control "young group" (age range: 18–35 years). All patients were desensitized to wasp venom using the ultra-rush protocol according to Muller and aqueous solutions of vaccines containing wasp venom. A basophil activation test (Basotest, Orpegen Pharma, Germany) and intracutaneous tests with dilutions of wasp allergen and specific IgE to extract wasp venom were performed at the start and after six months of VIT. The safety of VIT was assessed on the basis of the international Mueller scale. Results: One hundred and eleven patients with confirmed wasp allergies completed six months of VIT: 51 participants over 60 years of age (Group A) and 60 young people (Group B). No systemic adverse reactions were observed during the VIT induction phase. However, large local reactions were noted in 17% of older patients and 20% of young patients at a similar level (p > 0.05). During maintenance VIT, two mild grade I systemic reactions were confirmed in young patients. These symptoms resolved spontaneously. There were no such reactions in older patients. The effectiveness of VIT was tested using BAT. There was a statistically significant reduction in CD63 reactivity in 86% of patients in Group A, and a comparable and substantial decrease in 84% of young patients in Group B. According to the BAT test, the mean reductions in the area under the curve (AUC) after six months of VIT were significant (p < 0.05) and comparable between Groups A and B: −6.52 vs. 7.21. Conclusions: VIT against wasp venom is safe and effective in short-term observation, and is comparable to that used for young patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hymenoptera, which includes honeybees, wasps, bumblebees, and hornets, is an order of the class Insecta, whose venom can induce anaphylactic reactions in dogs. While several studies have investigated the natural histories and risk factors of Hymenoptera venom allergy (HVA) in humans, only limited information is available on canine patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify risk factors leading to severe systemic reactions (SSRs) and to explore the natural history of these patients. This was achieved with an inquiry into the case histories of 178 dogs that were stung by Hymenoptera and presented to the Vetsuisse Faculty Animal Hospital of the University of Zurich between 2018 and 2022. Dogs under two years old, dogs that weighed under 10 kg, purebred dogs, and dogs that were stung in the oral cavity were at a greater risk of developing SSRs. Almost two thirds of patients with SSRs experienced the same or worse symptoms after subsequent stings and >40% of patients with local reactions developed SSRs when stung again. Next to providing valuable clinical information about HVA in dogs, these findings strongly support the recommendation of venom immunotherapy (VIT) for patients with HVA.

Introduction: Venom immunotherapy (VIT) and adrenaline autoinjector (AAI) are important therapies in venom anaphylaxis. Adherence to VIT and AAI in patients with venom allergy has been evaluated in a few studies; however, solid data are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate VIT and AAI retrieval rates in patients with venom allergy with a special focus on adherence to treatment. Adherence was compared to subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) with inhalant allergens. Methods: This was a retrospective study among patients registered for allergen immunotherapy at the Allergy Center, Odense University Hospital, Denmark, from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2014. Data on purchased immunotherapy and AAI were obtained from the Danish National Health Service Prescription Database. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze if allergen, age, sex, mastocytosis, and treatment site affected adherence. Results: The 3-year adherence to VIT was 92.4% (244/264) compared to 87.4% (215/246) in SCIT with inhalant allergens, and the 5-year adherence to VIT was 84.1% (222/264) compared to 74.8% (184/246) in SCIT with inhalant allergens (p = 0.045). Females treated with VIT were more adherent than males (p = 0.45 [3-year], p = 0.008 [5-year]), whereas allergen, age, mastocytosis, or treatment site did not significantly affect adherence. Only 28.6% of patients (12/42) purchased an AAI after premature termination of VIT. Conclusion: In this register-based study, we found that the 3- and 5-year adherences to VIT and SCIT with inhalant allergens are at the upper end of the spectrum hitherto reported. Patients' 5-year adherence to VIT was higher than patients' 5-year adherence to SCIT with inhalant allergens. If VIT was prematurely terminated, less than 1/3 would have purchased an AAI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Hymenoptera venom allergy is second most common cause of anaphylaxis in childhood. Currenty, the only causal therapy that can induce tolerance is venom immunotherapy (VIT). Aim: In our work, we focused on the analysis of selected clinical and laboratory characteristics in a group of pediatric patients with hymenoptera venom allergy treated with VIT. Material and methods: We created a prospective study in which we gradually included 20 pediatric patients (13 boys, 7 girls), which fulfilled indication criteria for VIT. Data were collected from 2015 to 2022. We defined the basic characteristics of the set, we focused on the overall tolerance of treatment in pediatric patients and the occurance of adverse effects during VIT administration, we also performed blood sampling to determine the dynamics of immunological laboratory parameters in precisely determined time intervals. Results: The mean age was 11 ± 4,37 years, with the mean age of firts systemic reactions after the hymenoptera sting 9,15 ± 3,58 years. Of the 20 enrolled patients, 14 were allergic to bee venom and 6 to waps venom. VIT was started at an average age of 10 ± 3,86 years, of which 2 patients started before the fifth year of life. The most frequently represented clinical manifestations of systemic reaction in our group were facial angioedema (70 %), dyspnea (65 %), urticaria (55%) and whole body pruritus (45 %). We observed the occurence of the adverse effects most often during the initial phase of administration in terms of local reactions, whereas no patient developed a systemic reaction. Spontaneus re-exposure during VIT occured in 25% of patients, whereas no patient developed a systemic reaction. During VIT we also noted dynamic changes in individual evaluated laboratory parameters with a gradual decrease of specific IgE against the extract and allergen component of hymenoptera venom and increase of specific IgG4 against the allergen extract. Conclusion: Allergy to hymenoptera venom is classified as a serious to life-threating condition, while the only possible therapy nowadays that can prevent systemic reaction and improve the patient´s quality of life is VIT. A higher effectiveness of VIT and also a lower risk of treatment failure are described in pediatric patients. Our experencie clearly proves the effectiveness and safety of VIT in childhood and at the same time confirms positive changes in laboratory parameters indicating the induction of immune tolerance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hymenoptera venom–triggered anaphylaxis (HVA) affects up to 8.9% of the general population and is the most frequent cause of anaphylaxis in adults, accounting for approximately 20% of all fatal anaphylaxis cases. Quite often, a fatal reaction is a victim's first manifestation of HVA. Mastocytosis represents one of the most important risk factors for severe HVA. We analyzed patients with documented fatal HVA for the presence of underlying clonal mast cell disorder (cMCD). Here, we report three cases of fatal HVA, with undiagnosed underlying cMCD identified by the presence of the peripheral blood and/or bone marrow KIT p.D816V missense variant postmortem. In the first case, anaphylaxis was the initial episode and was fatal. In the other two cases, both patients were treated with specific venom immunotherapy (VIT), nevertheless, one died of HVA after VIT discontinuation, and the other during VIT; both patients had cardiovascular comorbidities and were taking beta-blockers and/or ACE inhibitors. Our results point to the importance of screening all high-risk individuals for underlying cMCD using highly sensitive molecular methods for peripheral blood KIT p.D816V variant detection, including severe HVA and possibly beekeepers, for proper management and the need for lifelong VIT to prevent unnecessary deaths. Patients at the highest risk of fatal HVA, with concomitant cardiovascular and cMCD comorbidities, might not be protected from field stings even during regular VIT. Therefore, two adrenaline autoinjectors and lifelong VIT, and possibly cotreatment with omalizumab, should be considered for high-risk patients to prevent fatal HVA episodes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Allergen immunotherapy remains a widely recognized and widely used method for the treatment of selected allergic diseases. Currently, according to the European Academy Of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) guidelines, venom immunotherapy (VIT) may be considered for patients over 60. Nevertheless, no separate studies have confirmed the efficacy and safety of this therapy. This study aimed to evaluate the short-term effectiveness of VIT against wasp allergens in an ultra-rush protocol for older patients compared to young patients. Methods: Among the 113 patients included in this study, 51 were older than 60 years (Group A), and 62 formed the control “young group” (age range: 18–35 years). All patients were desensitized to wasp venom using the ultra-rush protocol according to Muller and aqueous solutions of vaccines containing wasp venom. A basophil activation test (Basotest, Orpegen Pharma, Germany) and intracutaneous tests with dilutions of wasp allergen and specific IgE to extract wasp venom were performed at the start and after six months of VIT. The safety of VIT was assessed on the basis of the international Mueller scale. Results: One hundred and eleven patients with confirmed wasp allergies completed six months of VIT: 51 participants over 60 years of age (Group A) and 60 young people (Group B). No systemic adverse reactions were observed during the VIT induction phase. However, large local reactions were noted in 17% of older patients and 20% of young patients at a similar level (p > 0.05). During maintenance VIT, two mild grade I systemic reactions were confirmed in young patients. These symptoms resolved spontaneously. There were no such reactions in older patients. The effectiveness of VIT was tested using BAT. There was a statistically significant reduction in CD63 reactivity in 86% of patients in Group A, and a comparable and substantial decrease in 84% of young patients in Group B. According to the BAT test, the mean reductions in the area under the curve (AUC) after six months of VIT were significant (p < 0.05) and comparable between Groups A and B: −6.52 vs. 7.21. Conclusions: VIT against wasp venom is safe and effective in short-term observation, and is comparable to that used for young patients.

Simple Summary: Insect venom allergy is a potentially life-threatening allergic reaction following a bee, wasp, or ant sting. The only treatment to prevent further systemic sting reactions is venom immunotherapy (VIT), with an efficacy of up to 98% in humans. Prospective clinical data on VIT efficacy in dogs are currently lacking. In this investigation, 10 dogs with severe allergic reactions to either bee or wasp stings were treated with VIT. All dogs tolerated the therapy without adverse effects and the dogs which were re-stung tolerated the sting. This means that VIT is not only safe, but also efficacious in these patients. Furthermore, it was also shown that in addition to skin testing, two serum allergen-specific IgE tests were reliable to identify the underlying patients' insect sensitization pattern. Hymenoptera allergens are the main triggers for anaphylaxis in susceptible dogs and humans. Hymenoptera venom specific immunotherapy (VIT), the only disease-modifying treatment, has the potential to prevent future life-threatening reactions in human patients. Prospective clinical data on VIT efficacy in dogs are currently lacking. Therefore, the aim of this study was to show that VIT is not only safe but also efficacious in preventing anaphylaxis in dogs allergic to Hymenoptera. This uncontrolled prospective clinical trial included 10 client-owned dogs with a history of anaphylaxis following repeated Hymenoptera stings. The sensitization to bee and wasp allergens was demonstrated by intradermal testing (IDT) and allergen-specific IgE serology. For VIT induction (induction phase), dogs received a shortened rush immunotherapy protocol with aqueous allergens, which was then followed by monthly injections of 100 µg of alum-precipitated allergen (maintenance phase). VIT efficacy was determined by observing patients' clinical reactions to re-stings. No systemic adverse events were seen during the induction and maintenance phases. From the seven re-stung dogs, only one developed a mild angioedema at the site of the sting; the remaining dogs were asymptomatic. These results show that VIT represents a safe and effective treatment option for Hymenoptera-allergic dogs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: IgE-mediated bee venom allergy can be treated with allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT). Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is time and cost intensive due to the repeated consultations, but the costs are justified by the high risk of potentially life-threatening allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis. However, intralymphatic immunotherapy (ILIT) offers potential to reduce treatment costs due to a significant reduction in injections and a shorter duration of therapy. Therefore, we calculated the cost savings that arise when switching from SCIT to ILIT. Methods: Treatment protocols for ILIT were based on previous ILIT studies. Treatment protocols for SCIT were based on routine treatment at the University Hospital Zurich (USZ). The treatment costs were calculated based on the internal hospital information system (KISIM). Results: The calculations revealed a potential two-fold reduction in treatment costs if ILIT is used instead of SCIT in patients with bee venom allergy. The costs could be reduced from EUR 11,612.59 with SCIT to EUR 5,942.15 with ILIT over 5 years. Conclusions: This study shows that bee venom ILIT has a cost-benefit potential for health insurances and patients, which should encourage further ILIT studies and which should be taken into account when considering future implementation of ILIT in the standard care of venom allergy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Jack Jumper ant venom allergy is a uniquely Australian medical issue. The stinging ant is a leading cause of insect venom allergy in south‐eastern Australia. An effective venom immunotherapy‐based treatment was successfully developed by the Tasmanian Jack Jumper Allergy Research group. This paper provides a synopsis of our 25 years' research journey in developing this evidence‐based treatment modality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neurological complications after a single Hymenoptera insect sting are very rare. The authors of this paper describe two instances of cerebral ischemic stroke that occurred immediately after a wasp sting. Two distinct pathomechanisms involved in the cases are put forward. When diagnosing such cases, it is vital to rule out the possibility of an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-dependent reaction of hypersensitivity. However, if sIgE antibodies against wasp venom extract and/or its allergenic components are detected, after hospitalization the patient should be qualified for venom immunotherapy, which is the only efficient method of protection from severe allergic reactions caused by an insect sting. Although the incidence of ischemic stroke in patients stung by insects is very low, it is important to be aware of this complication. This will allow rapid implementation of appropriate diagnostics and treatment. The optimal stroke treatment (thrombolysis or mechanical thrombectomy) in these rare cases has not yet been established.

Background: The basis for qualification for venom immunotherapy (VIT) is the fulfilment of both the clinical and immunological criteria. Diagnostic tests that confirm the immunological criterion of an IgE-mediated sensitization include skin prick tests (SPT), intradermal tests (IDT), and serum specific IgE (sIgE) for the culprit venom. Objective: This study aimed to assess the usefulness of SPT as the immunological marker in the diagnosis of insect venom sensitization in children with history of systemic reaction (SR) to insect sting evaluated by means of I-IV-grades Mueller's scale. There are no such studies in children. Methods: This cross-sectional study sample consisted of 416 children aged 3–18 years (mean age 10.6 ± 3.8), 76% males, all with the history of a systemic reaction (SR) after a Hymenoptera sting (48% of grade III/IV according to Mueller scale), diagnosed between 1999 and 2019 in the tertiary referral centre. The standard diagnostic tests were used. Specificity, sensitivity, and positive and negative predictive values were computed to assess the diagnostic properties of the clinical tests to distinguish between mild and severe SR. To assess the relative value of an individual test in predicting the qualification to VIT we incorporated the Shapley value (SV). Results: Positive SPT results were found in up to no more than 3% of children; among them less than 1% had only positive SPT and were negative for sIgE and IDT. Approximately 85% of the children had detectable venom sIgE, followed by positive IDT (75%). Almost 70% of children had positive both sIgE and IDT results. In children with grade III/IV reaction, about 80% of children had positive results of both of these tests. sIgE and IDT had sensitivity >0.80, whereas SPT had high specificity (>0.97) in differentiating between mild and severe SR. Relative value of diagnostic tests in predicting qualification to VIT varied between venoms. Bee venom IDT had higher SV (0.052) than sIgE (0.041). In contrast, wasp venom sIgE had higher SV (0.075) than IDT (0.035). Conclusion: SPTs are not an useful immunological marker of venom sensitization in children, and eliminating SPT does not result in a loss of diagnostic accuracy. Limiting diagnostics to venom sIgE and IDT would shorten the procedure and reduce costs. Future studies are needed to determine if venom sIgE as the first line diagnostic test, with IDT added only if the venom sIgE is undetectable, is an optimal diagnostic process.

Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is one of the most effective treatment methods for allergic diseases. Neurological symptoms are infrequent among systemic reactions. In this case report, the clinical and radiological features of a patient who developed acute brainstem ischemia two hours after a VIT up-dosing phase were evaluated. A 48-year-old male patient developed dyspnea, angioedema, and syncope after a honeybee sting and was diagnosed with anaphylaxis. VIT was started with the conventional schedule (depot extract). The patient went to the emergency department due to numbness in his right arm and impaired speech two hours after VIT was started during an up-dosing phase. In the neurological examination, the patient was conscious and fully cooperative. The pupillary light response, eye movements, and visual field were normal. The right nasolabial groove was faint and consistent with central facial paralysis. Brain diffusion-weight magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) detected diffusion restriction consistent with acute lacunar infarct in the pons. The patient was started on clopidogrel (75 mg/day), atorvastatin (10 mg/day), and levetiracetam (1000 mg/day) treatment. When re-evaluated 30 days later, his muscle strength deficit and speech had improved. VIT is a life-saving treatment option applied in cases of anaphylaxis as a result of bee stings. Although systemic reactions are sometimes observed during the applications, it is rare to see neurological symptoms after VIT. In patients undergoing VIT, one should be vigilant regarding ischemia development, especially during an up-dosing phase. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hymenoptera allergens are the main triggers for anaphylaxis in susceptible dogs and humans. Hymenoptera venom specific immunotherapy (VIT), the only disease-modifying treatment, has the potential to prevent future life-threatening reactions in human patients. Prospective clinical data on VIT efficacy in dogs are currently lacking. Therefore, the aim of this study was to show that VIT is not only safe but also efficacious in preventing anaphylaxis in dogs allergic to Hymenoptera. This uncontrolled prospective clinical trial included 10 client-owned dogs with a history of anaphylaxis following repeated Hymenoptera stings. The sensitization to bee and wasp allergens was demonstrated by intradermal testing (IDT) and allergen-specific IgE serology. For VIT induction (induction phase), dogs received a shortened rush immunotherapy protocol with aqueous allergens, which was then followed by monthly injections of 100 µg of alum-precipitated allergen (maintenance phase). VIT efficacy was determined by observing patients’ clinical reactions to re-stings. No systemic adverse events were seen during the induction and maintenance phases. From the seven re-stung dogs, only one developed a mild angioedema at the site of the sting; the remaining dogs were asymptomatic. These results show that VIT represents a safe and effective treatment option for Hymenoptera-allergic dogs.

Background/aim: Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is the most effective treatment method to prevent recurrent systemic reactions to Hymenoptera stings. In this study, the demographic characteristics of VIT patients, the success rates of VIT, the difficulties we encountered during VIT, and solutions for these difficulties in our clinic were presented. Materials and methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with venom allergy who applied venom immunotherapy between 20132020. Data on age, gender, Hymenoptera species with the first reaction, grade of the reaction, beekeeping history, skin prick and specific IgE and component results, double sensitization, blood groups, and reactions with VIT and/or sting during built-up and maintenance periods were recorded. Results: A total of 73 patients were enrolled in the study. The median time from the first sting reaction to the application to the allergy outpatient clinic was 12 (0.5-24) months. The first sting reaction of 38 (52.1%) of the patients was with honey bees, and 24 (32.9%) were with wasps. Double positivity was present in 29 (40%) of the patients in prick results and 26 (36%) serologically. There was no correlation between the severity of first reactions and Apis Mellifera or Vespula prick diameters (p = 0.643; r = -0.056; p = 0.462; r = 0.089, respectively). High-dose VIT was administered to 4 patients. Omalizumab has been used as an alternative agent to achieve the maintenance dose in 2 patients with frequent systemic reactions during VIT. Conclusion: Most patients were able to tolerate VIT. Double positivity is one of the most common difficulties before VIT. In patients who develop systemic reactions in the VIT maintenance phase, a maintenance dose increase should be considered in the maintenance phase. Adding omalizumab does not seem to be a permanent solution in patients who develop a severe systemic reaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neurological complications after a single Hymenoptera insect sting are very rare. The authors of this paper describe two instances of cerebral ischemic stroke that occurred immediately after a wasp sting. Two distinct pathomechanisms involved in the cases are put forward. When diagnosing such cases, it is vital to rule out the possibility of an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-dependent reaction of hypersensitivity. However, if sIgE antibodies against wasp venom extract and/or its allergenic components are detected, after hospitalization the patient should be qualified for venom immunotherapy, which is the only efficient method of protection from severe allergic reactions caused by an insect sting. Although the incidence of ischemic stroke in patients stung by insects is very low, it is important to be aware of this complication. This will allow rapid implementation of appropriate diagnostics and treatment. The optimal stroke treatment (thrombolysis or mechanical thrombectomy) in these rare cases has not yet been established. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hymenoptera venom hypersensitivity reaction affects about 3% of the general population and a higher percentage (14%–43%) in beekeepers. Bee venom immunotherapy (bVIT) is effective in reducing subsequent severe systemic reactions and has a significant beneficial effect on disease-specific quality of life in both children and adults. In patients with a history of recurrent systemic anaphylactic reaction with bee venom, successful bVIT is difficult to achieve and can often lead to withdrawal of treatment. The combination of bVIT and omalizumab is a good option for these patients. Omalizumab is a humanized nonanaphylactogenic monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin (Ig) E antibody against the Cε3 domain of IgE to reduce the allergenicity, if combined with bVIT. We describe a successful treatment with combined omalizumab and bVIT in a case of recurrent anaphylaxis by honey bee sting hypersensitivity. Herein, subcutaneous omalizumab 150 mg was started 15 days before the initiation of bVIT and subsequently once a month for 30 months along with cluster doses of bVIT till the cumulative dose of 100 μg was achieved successfully.

Allergy to Polistes dominula (European paper wasp) venom is of particular relevance in Southern Europe, potentially becoming a threat in other regions in the near future, and can be effectively cured by venom immunotherapy (VIT). As allergen content in extracts may vary and have an impact on diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, the aim was to compare five therapeutic preparations for VIT of P. dominula venom allergy available in Spain. Products from five different suppliers were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and LC-MS/MS and compared with a reference venom sample. Three products with P. dominula venom and one product with a venom mixture of American Polistes species showed a comparable band pattern in SDS-PAGE as the reference sample and the bands of the major allergens phospholipase A1 and antigen 5 were assignable. The other product, which consists of a mixture of American Polistes species, exhibited the typical band pattern in one, but not in another sample from a second batch. All annotated P. dominula allergens were detected at comparable levels in LC-MS/MS analysis of products containing P. dominula venom. Due to a lack of genomic information on the American Polistes species, the remaining products were not analyzed by this method. The major Polistes allergens were present in comparable amounts in the majority, but not in all investigated samples of venom preparations for VIT of P. dominula venom allergy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is the only efficient therapy for the Hymenoptera insect venom allergy. Immunotherapy with bee venom is encumbered with a higher risk of systemic side effects and/or therapeutic failures. The objective of the study was to assess if specific profiles of molecular IgE (Immunoglobulin E) responses are associated with an increased risk of systemic side effects and/or the treatment's inefficacy. The study group numbered 64 bee venom allergic patients (BVA) who received venom immunotherapy modo ultra-rush (VIT-UR), (f/m: 32/32, mean age 43.4 ± 17.2). In total, 54.84% of them manifested allergic reactions of grades I-III (acc. to Mueller's scale), while 48.66% manifested reactions of grade IV. In all the patients, IgE against bee venom extract, rApi m 1 and tryptase (sBT) were assessed. In 46 patients, assessments of IgE against rApi m 2, 3, 5, 10 were also performed. BVA patients manifesting cardiovascular symptoms (SYS IV0) showed higher levels of both sIgE-rApi m 5 (p = 0.03) and tryptase (p = 0.07) than patients with SYS I–III. Systemic adverse events during VIT with bee venom were more frequent in the induction phase than in the maintenance phase: 15.22% vs. 8.7%. In BVA patients who experienced systemic adverse events during VIT, higher concentrations of sIgE-rApi m 5 (p < 0.05), rApi m 1 (p = 0.009), and sBT (p = 0.019) were demonstrated. We conclude that higher levels of sIgE against rApi m 1, rApi m 5, and tryptase many constitute a potential marker of the severity of allergic reactions and therapeutic complications that can occur during VIT with bee venom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is an effective treatment method and is addressed to patients with a history of an anaphylactic reaction to Hymenoptera stings. However, the immunological mechanisms of protection have not been explained yet. The objective of this study was to analyze neutrophils, interleukin 8 (IL-8) and interleukin 17 (IL-17) before and after the initial phase of the immunotherapy. Material and Methods Overall, 40 individuals, including 20 wasp venom sensitized and 20 bee venom sensitized patients, were included in the study. The patients had had a history of severe allergic reactions type III and IV according to Mueller’s classification. An ultra-rush VIT protocol was used in this study. The concentration of serum IL-8 and IL-17A was determined using the ELISA enzymatic method. Results The authors demonstrated a significant rise in the IL-8 level after the immunotherapy, compared to baseline (14.9 vs. 24.7, p < 0.05). The rise in the neutrophils level was also noticeable but proved to be barely out of the range of statistical significance (4.3 vs. 5.0, p = 0.06). The shift in IL-17A was negligent and not statistically significant in the paired samples t-test (1.6 vs. 1.5, p = 0.34) Conclusions Venom immunotherapy induces neutrophils and IL-8 activity after 2 days. After the desensitization, the level of IL-17A did not change. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2020;33(6):811–7

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) and venom immunotherapy (VIT) are meant to work on the causes of allergies, respectively, to respiratory allergens and Hymenoptera venom, inducing tolerance to the allergens and modifying the natural history of allergy. Both types of immunotherapies have evidence of efficacy, but actually they present wide differences in both effectiveness and safety. Indeed, as far as the effectiveness of VIT is concerned, if the protection against fatal reactions to stings is considered as the primary objective, more than 40 years of clinical practice demonstrate complete success. The clinical success of AIT is measurable on the basis of reduction or disappearance of allergic symptoms. The difference between the two treatments is even higher as regards safety: AIT has been concerned in the past by a series of fatal reactions caused, which underwent a progressive decrease when it was understood that they were related to the presence of uncontrolled asthma. However, fatal reactions related to failure to recognize the presence of risk factors or administration errors are still reported. Similarly to what has been observed for efficacy, VIT has never been affected by fatal reactions to the administration of venom, and the most important risk of anaphylaxis, which is the concomitance of mastocytosis, is now identified by measuring its marker serum tryptase. To date, mechanisms of hypersensitivity reactions that differentiate respiratory allergy from Hymenoptera venom allergy have not been successfully demonstrated. We have examined the past and present literature in order to propose reasonable hypotheses about the mechanisms actually involved.

Mastocytosis is a risk factor for Hymenoptera venom anaphylaxis (HVA). Current guidelines recommend measuring tryptase in patients with HVA and that those with mastocytosis pursue lifelong venom immunotherapy (VIT). Available data on HVA and mastocytosis largely derive from European single-center studies, and the prevalence of HVA with and without mastocytosis in the United States is unknown. We sought to determine the prevalence of HVA and mastocytosis in the United States using an insurance claims database and evaluate the impact of mastocytosis on VIT in patients with HVA in a US cohort. The IBM Watson Database, consisting of insurance claims from approximately 27 million US patients in 2018, was queried to identify patients with HVA and/or mastocytosis. Furthermore, a retrospective study of 161 patients undergoing VIT between 2015 and 2018 at the University of Michigan was conducted. In the IBM Watson Database, the prevalence of HVA was 167 per 100,000 (0.167%) and the prevalence of mastocytosis 10 per 100,000 (0.010%) overall and 97 per 100,000 (0.097%) among those with HVA. Mastocytosis showed a 9.7-fold increase among patients with HVA versus the general population. In the U-M cohort, 2.6% of patients with VIT had mastocytosis. Tryptase level did not correlate with venom reaction severity but was higher in patients with systemic VIT reactions. We observed a lower US HVA prevalence than previously reported. Mastocytosis was more common in US patients with HVA, though at lower rates than previously reported. In patients with VIT there was no correlation between tryptase level and reaction severity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hymenoptera stings are generally well-tolerated and usually cause limited local reactions, characterized by self-resolving erythema and edema associated with pain. However, Hymenoptera stings can induce immediate and delayed hypersensitivity reactions. In addition to these manifestations, unusual reactions to Hymenoptera stings have been reported. The latter are defined as unusual because of their atypical characteristics. They may differ from classical hypersensitivity reactions due to the stings' particular localization and the unusual involvement of one or more specific organs. Although unusual reactions to Hymenoptera stings are infrequent, it is essential for clinicians to know the possible related clinical manifestations. Here, we review the available literature and propose a diagnostic and management algorithm. At present, there are no defined guidelines for most of the unusual reactions to Hymenoptera stings, which should be managed in a tailored way according to the specifical clinical manifestations presented by the patients. Further studies are needed to better define these conditions and the underlying pathogenetic mechanisms to improve the diagnostic and therapeutic approach.

Abstract Hymenoptera stings mostly cause acute urticaria but we describe a case of CU after wasp stings which remitted during venom immunotherapy. IgE‐mechanisms have not been fully clarified in CU, except for isolated circumstances. In our case immunotherapy has played a positive role reducing immune cells reactivity and improving urticaria symptoms.

Hymenoptera venom hypersensitivity reaction affects about 3% of the general population and a higher percentage (14%-43%) in beekeepers. Bee venom immunotherapy (bVIT) is effective in reducing subsequent severe systemic reactions and has a significant beneficial effect on disease-specific quality of life in both children and adults. In patients with a history of recurrent systemic anaphylactic reaction with bee venom, successful bVIT is difficult to achieve and can often lead to withdrawal of treatment. The combination of bVIT and omalizumab is a good option for these patients. Omalizumab is a humanized nonanaphylactogenic monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin (Ig) E antibody against the Cε3 domain of IgE to reduce the allergenicity, if combined with bVIT. We describe a successful treatment with combined omalizumab and bVIT in a case of recurrent anaphylaxis by honey bee sting hypersensitivity. Herein, subcutaneous omalizumab 150 mg was started 15 days before the initiation of bVIT and subsequently once a month for 30 months along with cluster doses of bVIT till the cumulative dose of 100 μg was achieved successfully. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is controversy whether taking β‐blockers or ACE inhibitors (ACEI) is a risk factor for more severe systemic insect sting reactions (SSR) and whether it increases the number or severity of adverse events (AE) during venom immunotherapy (VIT). Methods: In this open, prospective, observational, multicenter trial, we recruited patients with a history of a SSR and indication for VIT. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate whether patients taking β‐blockers or ACEI show more systemic AE during VIT compared to patients without such treatment. Results: In total, 1,425 patients were enrolled and VIT was performed in 1,342 patients. Of all patients included, 388 (27.2%) took antihypertensive (AHT) drugs (10.4% took β‐blockers, 11.9% ACEI, 5.0% β‐blockers and ACEI). Only 5.6% of patients under AHT treatment experienced systemic AE during VIT as compared with 7.4% of patients without these drugs (OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.43–1.22, p = 0.25). The severity of the initial sting reaction was not affected by the intake of β‐blockers or ACEI (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.89–1.46, p = 0.29). In total, 210 (17.7%) patients were re‐stung during VIT and 191 (91.0%) tolerated the sting without systemic symptoms. Of the 19 patients with VIT treatment failure, 4 took β‐blockers, none an ACEI. Conclusions: This trial provides robust evidence that taking β‐blockers or ACEI does neither increase the frequency of systemic AE during VIT nor aggravate SSR. Moreover, results suggest that these drugs do not impair effectiveness of VIT. (Funded by Medical University of Graz, Austria; Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT04269629). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hymenoptera stings mostly cause acute urticaria but we describe a case of CU after wasp stings which remitted during venom immunotherapy. IgE‐mechanisms have not been fully clarified in CU, except for isolated circumstances. In our case immunotherapy has played a positive role reducing immune cells reactivity and improving urticaria symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of Review: This review describes improvement in diagnostic accuracy, prediction of outcomes, identifying high-risk factors, and refinements of treatment that continue to evolve over the past 5–10 years. Recent Findings: The risk of anaphylaxis is relatively low (< 5%) in patients with previous large local reactions or strictly cutaneous systemic reactions, but much higher in those with moderate-to-severe anaphylaxis (40%–70%) or mastocytosis (> 90%). Use of recombinant venom allergens and basophil activation tests may improve diagnostic accuracy. Elevated serum tryptase (and possible mastocytosis) occurs in 10% of patients with insect sting allergy, and in 25% of those with hypotensive reactions. Rush VIT is proven safe and rapidly effective. There are known high-risk factors that justify treatment beyond 5 years. Summary: Diagnostic accuracy and prediction of risk have improved in recent years. There are still knowledge gaps related to prediction and management of risk with current diagnostic and therapeutic modalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) is a well-established, efficient, and safe way to treat respiratory and insect-venom allergies. After determining the diagnosis of the clinically relevant culprit allergen, AIT can be prescribed. However, not all patients are eligible for AIT, since some diseases/conditions represent contraindications to AIT use, as described in several guidelines. Allergists are often preoccupied on whether an extensive workup should be ordered in apparently healthy AIT candidates in order to detect contra-indicated diseases and conditions. These preoccupations often arise from clinical, ethical and legal issues. The aim of this article is to suggest an approach to the workup and assessment of the presence of any underlying diseases/conditions in patients with no case history before the start of AIT. Notably, there is a lack of published studies on the appropriate evaluation of AIT candidates, with no globally accepted guidelines. It appears that Allergists are mostly deciding based on their AIT training, as well as their clinical experience. Guidance is based mainly on experts’ opinions; the suggested preliminary workup can be divided into mandatory and optional testing. The evaluation for possible underlying neoplastic, autoimmune, and cardiovascular diseases, primary and acquired immunodeficiencies and pregnancy, might be helpful but only in subjects for whom the history and clinical examination raise suspicion of these conditions. A workup without any reasonable correlation with potential contraindications is useless. In conclusion, the evaluation of each individual candidate for possible medical conditions should be determined on a case-by-case basis.

Wasp allergy with a diagnostic profile of double sensitizations to vespid venom is a frequent clinical problem in areas where different genera of wasps are present. Identification of the insect responsible for serious reactions poses a diagnostic challenge as the only effective treatment to date is immunotherapy based on the specific venom. In southern Europe, the double sensitization to Vespula and Polistes venoms is highly frequent. It has been shown that the major allergenic proteins (Phospholipase A1 and Antigen 5) share sequences across the different genera and species, which would be the cause of cross-reactivity. Additionally, the minor allergens (Dipeptidyl-peptidases, Vitellogenins) have been found to share partial sequence identity. Furthermore, venom contains other homologous proteins whose allergenic nature still remains to be clarified. The traditional diagnostic tools available are insufficient to discriminate between allergy to Vespula and Polistes in a high number of cases. IgE inhibition is the technique that best identifies the cross-reactivity. When a double sensitization has indeed been shown to exist or great uncertainty surrounds the primary sensitization, therapy with two venoms is advisable to guarantee the safety of the patient. In this case, a strategy involving alternate administration that combines effectiveness with efficiency is possible.

Objectives: Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is an effective treatment method and is addressed to patients with a history of an anaphylactic reaction to Hymenoptera stings. However, the immunological mechanisms of protection have not been explained yet. The objective of this study was to analyze neutrophils, interleukin 8 (IL-8) and interleukin 17 (IL-17) before and after the initial phase of the immunotherapy.Material and Methods: Overall, 40 individuals, including 20 wasp venom sensitized and 20 bee venom sensitized patients, were included in the study. The patients had had a history of severe allergic reactions type III and IV according to Mueller's classification. An ultra-rush VIT protocol was used in this study. The concentration of serum IL-8 and IL-17A was determined using the ELISA enzymatic method.Results: The authors demonstrated a significant rise in the IL-8 level after the immunotherapy, compared to baseline (14.9 vs. 24.7, p < 0.05). The rise in the neutrophils level was also noticeable but proved to be barely out of the range of statistical significance (4.3 vs. 5.0, p = 0.06). The shift in IL-17A was negligent and not statistically significant in the paired samples t-test (1.6 vs. 1.5, p = 0.34).Conclusions: Venom immunotherapy induces neutrophils and IL-8 activity after 2 days. After the desensitization, the level of IL-17A did not change. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2020;33(6):811-7. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is highly effective and the treatment of choice for patients with a history of systemic anaphylactic reactions to a Hymenoptera sting. It has been assumed that VIT protocols with a rapid dose increase during the induction phase are associated with a higher frequency of systemic reactions (SR); however, study data addressing this issue are conflicting. Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the safety of 3 different Hymenoptera VIT protocols (half-day ultra-rush, 3-day rush, 3-week cluster). Methods: This retrospective 2-center study included 143 Hymenoptera venom-allergic patients, who underwent 147 VIT procedures during the years 2015–2018. Twenty cluster, 75 rush, and 52 ultra-rush VIT protocols were performed with honeybee (54 protocols) and wasp (93 protocols) venom. All documented side effects were classified into large local and SR (Ring and Messmer classification). Results: SR were observed during 11 (7.5%) VIT procedures and did not exceed severity grade II. SR occurred more frequently in cluster compared to accelerated protocols. This result was observed for both honeybee (cluster: 25%, rush: 8.7%, and ultra-rush: 15.8%) and wasp VIT (cluster: 12.5%, rush: 0%, and ultra-rush: 6.1%), though the differences were statistically significant only in the wasp VIT subgroup. Honeybee venom elicited more SR than wasp venom (14.8 and 3.2%, respectively, p = 0.01). The risk for SR did not depend on age, sex, concomitant antihypertensive medication, hypertryptasemia, or severity of the index sting reaction. Conclusion: Accelerated VIT protocols, namely, rush and ultra-rush protocols are safe therapeutic options for Hymenoptera venom-allergic patients and displayed fewer SR than cluster VIT protocols in our study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of Review: In Hymenoptera venom allergy, the research focus has moved from whole venoms to individual allergenic molecules. Api m 10 (icarapin) has been described as a major allergen of honeybee venom (HBV) with potentially high relevance for diagnostics and therapy of venom allergy. Here, we review recent studies on Api m 10 characteristics as well as its role in component-resolved diagnostics and potential implications for venom-specific immunotherapy (VIT). Recent Findings: Api m 10 is a major allergen of low abundance in HBV. It is an obviously unstable protein of unknown function that exhibits homologs in other insect species. Despite its low abundance in HBV, 35 to 72% of HBV-allergic patients show relevant sensitization to this allergen. Api m 10 is a marker allergen for HBV sensitization, which in many cases can help to identify primary sensitization to HBV and, hence, to discriminate between genuine sensitization and cross-reactivity. Moreover, Api m 10 might support personalized risk stratification in VIT, as dominant sensitization to Api m 10 has been identified as risk factor for treatment failure. This might be of particular importance since Api m 10 is strongly underrepresented in some therapeutic preparations commonly used for VIT. Summary: Although the role of Api m 10 in HBV allergy and tolerance induction during VIT is not fully understood, it certainly is a useful tool to unravel primary sensitization and individual sensitization profiles in component-resolved diagnostics (CRD). Moreover, a potential of Api m 10 to contribute to personalized treatment strategies in HBV allergy is emerging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Venom immunotherapy (VIT) can protect against severe anaphylactic reactions (SR) in 80-100% of subjects allergic to Hymenoptera venom. The mechanisms of induction of immunological tolerance produced by VIT are still little known. It has been shown that VIT modulates Treg activity, Th2 or Th1 cells or both, increases production of IL-10, decreases secretion of IL-13, and causes an IgG4/IgE ratio shift. Aim: To investigate the blood eosinophil count, CCL5/RANTES and IL-17E/IL-25 concentrations before and after the initial phases of the rush protocol of VIT. Material and methods: Forty individuals (14 males, 26 females) of mean age 41.03 ±12.43 years were included in the study. The peripheral eosinophils and the concentration of serum interleukin IL-17E/IL-25 and RANTES were determined before and after the initial phase of VIT. Results: Paired sample t-test revealed that all patients after VIT had significantly higher eosinophil levels compared to the baseline (mean: 0.42 vs. 0.64, p < 0.05). Moreover, in subjects treated with bee venom, RANTES levels proved to rise significantly (51 × 103 vs. 62 × 103, p < 0.05) while IL-17E/IL-25 dropped with near-marginal significance (916 vs. 650, p = 0.069). Conclusions: Our immunological study on the early phase of venom immunotherapy suggested that eosinophils, cytokines such as CCL5/RANTES and IL-17E/IL-25 contribute to the immunological response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Allergen-specific immunotherapy is the only curative treatment of honeybee venom (HBV) allergy, which is able to protect against further anaphylactic sting reactions. Recent analyses on a molecular level have demonstrated that HBV represents a complex allergen source that contains more relevant major allergens than formerly anticipated. Moreover, allergic patients show very diverse sensitization profiles with the different allergens. HBV-specific immunotherapy is conducted with HBV extracts which are derived from pure venom. The allergen content of these therapeutic extracts might differ due to natural variations of the source material or different down-stream processing strategies of the manufacturers. Since variations of the allergen content of therapeutic HBV extracts might be associated with therapeutic failure, we adressed the component-resolved allergen composition of different therapeutic grade HBV extracts which are approved for immunotherapy in numerous countries. The extracts were analyzed for their content of the major allergens Api m 1, Api m 2, Api m 3, Api m 5 and Api m 10. Using allergen-specific antibodies we were able to demonstrate the underrepresentation of relevant major allergens such as Api m 3, Api m 5 and Api m 10 in particular therapeutic extracts. Taken together, standardization of therapeutic extracts by determination of the total allergenic potency might imply the intrinsic pitfall of losing information about particular major allergens. Moreover, the variable allergen composition of different therapeutic HBV extracts might have an impact on therapy outcome and the clinical management of HBV-allergic patients with specific IgE to particular allergens.

Background: Patients with clonal mast cell disorders (cMCD), systemic mastocytosis (SM) and monoclonal mast cell activation syndrome (MMAS), represent an increased risk for Hymenoptera venom anaphylaxis (HVA). Lifelong venom immunotherapy (VIT) is recommended; however, its efficacy and safety are controversial. Hence, we sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of VIT in HVA patients with cMCD. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted among 46 patients with Vespula venom allergy who had experienced severe HVA, 32 cMCD (22 with SM and 10 with MMAS) and 14 controls. There were no differences between cMCD patients and controls in age (58 vs 66) and duration of VIT (47 vs 48 months), respectively. Results: During VIT, 11 (34%) cMCD patients experienced adverse reactions (ARs) (7% in controls), including 1 anaphylaxis. There were 23 re‐stings in 17 (53%) patients during VIT. Of episodes, four (17%) presented with anaphylaxis, 14 (60%) presented with local reaction, and five (23%) were asymptomatic. In 11 episodes (48%), the patient did not take epinephrine, of these 8 (73%) presented with local reaction, and 3 (27%) were asymptomatic. Patient‐based protection from anaphylaxis was 76% (4/17) in cMCD vs. 100% in controls during VIT. The venom‐specific IgG4 concentrations increased during VIT (P <.001) although tryptase and IgE were unaltered. Conclusion: Both safety and efficacy of VIT in cMCD patients were slightly reduced than controls. Severe ARs were rare. The elevated IgG4 levels may be a biomarker for efficacy of VIT in cMCD patients, as it correlates with protection from re‐stings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is considered to be the gold-standard treatment for patients with Hymenoptera venom allergy. Data regarding VIT in bee venom (BV) allergic patients are scarce. Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of VIT in patients with exclusive BV allergy and to try to define risk factors for VIT-induced systemic reactions (VIT-ISR) and VIT failure. Methods: This is a retrospective study including data from all BV allergic patients that were treated by VIT in the Allergy Unit at the Meir Medical Center in the years 1995–2018. Results: Two hundred and forty-seven patients with exclusive BV allergy were included; 206 (83.4%) preferred to undergo rush buildup. Sixty-nine patients (27.9%) had at least 1 reaction during buildup, with the c-kit mutation being the only significant risk factor (100 vs. 28.9%, p = 0.02). Female gender (25.4 vs. 13.3%, p = 0.04), conventional buildup schedule (26.8 vs. 14.1%, p = 0.04), and c-kit mutation (100 vs. 16.8%, p < 0.01) but not tryptase level were found to be significantly more frequent in recurrent reactors. Females (20.3 vs. 9%, p = 0.03), patients with severe systemic reaction to the index sting (24.3 vs. 9.5%, p = 0.004), and c-kit mutation (66 vs. 12%, p = 0.05) but not tryptase level were found to be risk factors for severe systemic reactions. Conclusion: Despite the considerably high rate of VIT-ISR in patients with exclusive BV allergy, VIT can be performed safely and efficiently. C-kit mutation, and not basal serum tryptase level, seems to be a preferable biomarker for VIT-ISR in these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

MicroRNAs are small non-coding molecules playing a significant regulatory role in several allergic diseases. However their role in tolerance induction remains unclear. The aim of this study was to determine the expression of selected microRNAs during the first three months of wasp venom immunotherapy (VIT). 5 adult patients with a history of severe systemic reactions after stinging by wasps and confirmed sensitization were included. Venous blood samples were collected before VIT, 24 hours after completing its initial phase and after 3 months of the maintenance therapy. A control group was comprised of 5 healthy individuals with no history of allergy. In the blood samples expression of 96 microRNAs was determined with the use of microfluidic cards. In a statistical analysis the expression was compared between the study groups as well as between the pre- and post-VIT samples. Significant differences were found between the patients with wasp venom allergy and the healthy controls in the expression of miR-601 and miR-1201 upregulated in allergic patients at every time point (p = 0.04; p = 0.015, respectively). During VIT profile of microRNA was changing with lower expression of 6 microRNAs (including miR-182, miR-342, miR-375) and higher of 11 microRNAs (including let-7d, miR-34b, miR-143). To conclude, VIT has led to some changes in the expression of microRNA associated with Th2-type inflammation and tolerance induction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Current allergen immunotherapy approaches are limited by long treatment duration, cost and adverse reactions. • Immune adjuvants may improve efficacy, durability and cost of allergen immunotherapy. • Delta inulin (Advax™) is a well-tolerated and safe carbohydrate-based immune adjuvant. • Jack Jumper ant venom immunotherapy is compatible with Advax adjuvant. • Delta inulin enhances the immunogenicity of Jack Jumper ant venom immunotherapy. A major challenge in broader clinical application of Jack Jumper ant venom immunotherapy (JJA VIT) is the scarcity of ant venom which needs to be manually harvested from wild ants. Adjuvants are commonly used for antigen sparing in other vaccines, and thereby could potentially have major benefits to extend JJA supplies if they were to similarly enhance JJA VIT immunogenicity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the physicochemical and microbiological stability and murine immunogenicity of low-dose JJA VIT formulated with a novel polysaccharide adjuvant referred to as delta inulin or Advax™. Jack Jumper ant venom (JJAV) protein stability was assessed by UPLC-UV, SDS-PAGE, SDS-PAGE immunoblot, and ELISA inhibition. Diffraction light scattering was used to assess particle size distribution of Advax; pH and benzyl alcohol quantification by UPLC-UV were used to assess the physicochemical stability of JJAV diluent, and endotoxin content and preservative efficacy test was used to investigate the microbiological properties of the adjuvanted VIT formulation. To assess the effect of adjuvant on JJA venom immunogenicity, mice were immunised four times with JJAV alone or formulated with Advax adjuvant. JJA VIT formulated with Advax was found to be physicochemically and microbiologically stable for at least 2 days when stored at 4 and 25 °C with a trend for an increase in allergenic potency observed beyond 2 days of storage. Low-dose JJAV formulated with Advax adjuvant induced significantly higher JJAV-specific IgG than a 5-fold higher dose of JJAV alone, consistent with a powerful allergen-sparing effect. The pharmaceutical data provides important guidance on the formulation, storage and use of JJA VIT formulated with Advax adjuvant, with the murine immunogenicity studies providing a strong rationale for a planned clinical trial to test the ability of Advax adjuvant to achieve 4-fold JJAV dose sparing in JJA-allergic human patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Venom allergy may be life-threatening allergic reaction. Systemic allergic reactions occur with a frequency of 7.5% in adults and 3.4% in children. Since the risk of systemic reactions is a constant risk, it is necessary to prevent the continuing availability of symptomatic medications - adrenaline, antihistamines and corticosteroid injectors, which greatly affects the quality of life of a patient. The only form of treatment that effectively reduces the risk of future systemic responses is venom immunotherapy. This paper presents the latest guidelines in the diagnosis and treatment of venom allergy and discusses the efficacy, safety and efficacy of venom immunotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]