The impact of national guidelines on venom immunotherapy practice in the United Kingdom

Skin prick tests are not useful for the qualification for venom immunotherapy in children

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.

Cosmetic Applications of Bee Venom

Bee venom (BV) is a typical toxin secreted by stingers of honeybee workers. BV and BV therapy have long been attractive to different cultures, with extensive studies during recent decades. Nowadays, BV is applied to combat several skin diseases, such as atopic dermatitis, acne vulgaris, alopecia, vitiligo, and psoriasis. BV is used extensively in topical preparations as cosmetics and used as dressing for wound healing, as well as in facemasks. Nevertheless, the safety of BV as a therapeutic choice has always been a concern due to the immune system reaction in some people due to BV use. The documented unfavorable impact is explained by the fact that the skin reactions to BV might expand to excessive immunological responses, including anaphylaxis, that typically resolve over numerous days. This review aims to address bee venom therapeutic uses in skin cosmetics.

Current practices in diagnosis of Hymenoptera venom allergy in Poland

Introduction

Hymenoptera venom allergy (HVA) is associated with a high risk of anaphylaxis. Effective treatment of HVA patients requires allergologists' familiarity with the latest HVA recommendations.

Aim

Evaluation of current practices in HVA diagnosis in Poland.

Material and methods

A survey questionnaire was conducted in 32 HVA centres in Poland.

Results

The response rate was 97%. There were 1829 patients evaluated due to HVA in 2015. Sixty six percent (n = 21) of the centres used skin prick tests, out which 90% (n = 19) used 100 µg/ml of the venom extract as the highest concentration. All the centres performed intradermal tests (IDT) and serum specific IgE (sIgE), an initial diagnostic tool in 91% (n = 29). The highest venom concentration in IDT was 1 µg/ml in 75% (n = 24), 0.1 µg/ml in 16% (n = 5), 0.01 µg/ml in 3% (n = 1) and 10 µg/ml in 6% (n = 2). Baseline serum tryptase was assessed in 84% of the centres (n = 27), out of which 53% (n = 17) tested all their patients, whereas 31% (n = 10) checked only those with life-threatening reactions. In case of negative IDT/sIgE, 59% of the centres (n = 19) performed components evaluation, while 19% (n = 6) did the basophil activation test. In case of no identification of the culprit insect and sensitization to both venoms, VIT employed venom with higher sIgE.

Conclusions

Most allergology centres in Poland follow HVA guidelines. We identified two inaccuracies in their HVA management including non-adequate venom concentration in IDT and a false belief in correspondence between sIgE concentration and severity of allergic reactions.

Antimicrobial Properties of Apis mellifera's Bee Venom

Bee venom (BV) is a rich source of secondary metabolites from honeybees (Apis mellifera L.). It contains a variety of bioactive ingredients including peptides, proteins, enzymes, and volatile metabolites. The compounds contribute to the venom’s observed biological functions as per its anti-inflammatory and anticancer effects. The antimicrobial action of BV has been shown in vitro and in vivo experiments against bacteria, viruses, and fungi. The synergistic therapeutic interactions of BV with antibiotics has been reported. The synergistic effect contributes to a decrease in the loading and maintenance dosage, a decrease in the side effects of chemotherapy, and a decrease in drug resistance. To our knowledge, there have been no reviews on the impact of BV and its antimicrobial constituents thus far. The purpose of this review is to address the antimicrobial properties of BV and its compounds.

Venom allergy treatment practices in Poland in comparison to guidelines: next edition of the national audit

INTRODUCTION

Venom immunotherapy treatment (VIT) is the only causal treatment of hymenoptera venom anaphylaxis, which aims to provide long-lasting immunoprotection against severe reactions to subsequent stings.

AIM

To reassess the compliance of VIT procedures in the Polish allergy centres with the European guidelines.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A structured questionnaire survey conducted in all 33 VIT-centres. The response rate was 94%.

RESULTS

The ultrarush initial protocol was the most common protocol (71%, n = 22), usually lasting for 3.5 h (50%, n = 7). The most frequent (36%, n = 11) time interval from the initial to the first maintenance dose (MD) was 14 days, ranging from 7 to 35 days. All centres used an MD of 100 μg. The most frequent time interval between subsequent MDs was 4 weeks (58%, n = 18). Five years' of VIT was declared by 71% (n = 22). Before the termination of treatment, more than half of the centres (58%, n = 18) performed sIgE and almost half (42%, n = 13) performed skin tests. To confirm VIT efficacy, few centres (26%, n = 8) conducted the sting challenge. About half of centres provided the patients with an adrenalin auto-injector both at the time of initial diagnostics and at the end of treatment. More than half (55%, n = 17) used antihistamines in all patients. Almost half (45%, n = 14) declared to stop treatment with β-blockers and almost one fourth (23%, n = 7) discontinued angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

In the most important procedures, there is a very high compliance with the guidelines. In the areas where the guidelines are not precise, we observed a large spread of results.

Developments in the field of allergy in 2016 through the eyes of Clinical and Experimental Allergy

In this article, we described the development in the field of allergy as described by Clinical and Experimental Allergy in 2016. Experimental models of allergic disease, basic mechanisms, clinical mechanisms, allergens, asthma and rhinitis, and clinical allergy are all covered.