Diagnosis and management of hymenoptera venom allergy: British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) guidelines

Anaphylactic Reactions During Bee Venom Immunotherapy in the Paediatric Population

AIM

A retrospective study will review episodes of anaphylaxis during bee venom immunotherapy (BVIT) in children, any modifications made to the dosing schedule, and the subsequent outcomes over a nine-year period in Western Australia.

METHODS

Patient demographics, dose eliciting anaphylaxis during BVIT, modifications made to BVIT regimen following anaphylaxis (i.e., continuation, modification, or cessation), and the subsequent outcomes were collected for children commenced on BVIT from 1st September 2012 to 31st August 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 624 children were commenced on BVIT from 2012 to 2021. 12/624 (1.9%) did not complete the recommended duration of BVIT, the majority of which were due to poor compliance. 33 children (5.2%) developed anaphylaxis. 2/33 children (6.0%) experienced anaphylaxis on multiple occasions, resulting in 36 separate episodes of anaphylaxis. Most of the anaphylactic episodes occurred on Day 1 of BVIT (56%). 23/35 children (65.7%) developed anaphylaxis during the build-up phase and 12/35 children (34.3%) developed anaphylaxis during the maintenance phase. For those who experienced anaphylaxis in the build phase, 6/23 children (26.0%) continued with immunotherapy on the same day, and 5/6 of these children (83.3%) tolerated the same-day continuation of immunotherapy; 17/23 children (73.9%) ceased immunotherapy and restarted on another day, with 11/17 children (64.7%) tolerating cessation and recommencement of the regimen on another day. For those who developed anaphylaxis during the maintenance phase, 6/12 children (50.0%) tolerated ongoing immunotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Children who experience anaphylaxis during the build-up phase of BVIT showed a low risk of further anaphylaxis with proceeding immunotherapy on the same day. Children who experience anaphylaxis during the maintenance phase of BVIT appear less likely to tolerate ongoing immunotherapy due to the recurrence of anaphylaxis.

Hymenoptera venom allergy in children

From a taxonomic point of view, Hymenoptera are subclassified into families: Apidae, including honeybees (Apis mellifera) and bumblebees (Bombus), and Vespidae, which, in turn, are divided into the subfamilies of Vespinae (wasps, including hornets, vespules, dolichovespules) and Polistinae (paper wasp). Hypersensitivity to Hymenoptera venom can be linked to immunological (IgE-mediated or non-IgE-mediated) and non-immunological mechanisms. Reactions are classified into local reactions, large local reactions, systemic reactions, toxic reactions, and unusual reactions. In general, children sensitize less frequently and have less severe reactions than adults, probably due to less exposure to repeated stings and fewer comorbidities. There are risk factors for systemic reactions that should be discussed with patients and their parents as appropriate. A correct diagnosis of Hymenoptera venom allergy relies on a careful clinical history and the appropriate use of skin and in vitro tests. The in vitro tests include serum specific IgE toward venom extracts and toward allergenic molecules. In complex diagnoses, CAP-inhibition and the Basophil Activation Test can also be used. In the presence of a systemic reaction, the basal serum tryptase measurement should be performed to rule out mastocytosis. In case of allergic reactions to Hymenoptera stings, in the acute phase, according to the current guidelines, the treatment of signs and symptoms mainly includes the use of adrenaline as first-line treatment in case of anaphylaxis and antihistamines and corticosteroids as subsequent lines of treatment. Given the impossibility of avoiding a new sting with certainty, the treatment of choice in subjects with hypersensitivity to Hymenoptera venom who have experienced systemic reactions is based on venom immunotherapy (VIT), with the venom of the responsible stinging insect identified after an adequate allergological work-up. VIT is performed in a suitable environment and has proved to be safe and effective with various administration protocols, both accelerated and conventional. The prevention of Hymenoptera venom anaphylaxis in patients who have already developed a previous episode is crucial and must be supported by environmental protection interventions and early therapy. Places where one is more likely to encounter insects and risky behaviors should be avoided.

Monitoring and stopping Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy: Contribution of IgE blocking activity

Background

Hymenoptera venom allergy is a public health issue and has an undeniable impact on quality of life. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has shown long-term efficacy in this severe and potentially lethal allergy. However, no biomarker can predict the effectiveness of this treatment.

Objectives

We evaluated the contribution of IgE blocking activity, a functional biomarker carried out in our center using flow cytometry, to predict the efficacy of AIT.

Methods

This retrospective study from 1985 to 2022 describes in detail the demographic, clinical, and biological characteristics of patients who benefited from AIT with Hymenoptera venom at the University Hospital of Limoges. The outcome measure used was the presence of anaphylactic reaction (grade I to IV according to Ring and Messmer) in case of a new sting after discontinuation of AIT.

Results

Our study, mainly composed of patients allergic to Vespula wasp venom, did not emphasize the interest of IgE blocking activity in the prediction of a relapse after a new sting. However, this inhibition showed a significant correlation with the amount of IgG4 antibodies.

Conclusion

There is no biomarker that can help make the decision of stopping AIT. However, low levels of IgE blocking activity may suggest a likelihood of relapse. Serum IgG4, in correlation with IgE blocking activity, could be useful for monitoring treatment response. Additional studies are necessary to gain a thorough understanding of the composition of inhibitory antibodies.

The Use of Hyaluronidase in Aesthetic Practice: A Comparative Study of Practitioner Usage in Elective and Emergency Situations

BACKGROUND

Hyaluronic acids (HAs) continue to be the fillers of choice worldwide and their popularity is growing. Adverse events (AEs) are able to be resolved through the use of hyaluronidase (HYAL). However, routine HYAL use has been at issue due to perceived safety issues.

OBJECTIVES

There are currently no guidelines on the use of HYAL in aesthetic practice, leading to variability in storage, preparation, skin testing, and beliefs concerning AEs. This manuscript interrogated the use of this agent in daily practice.

METHODS

A 39-question survey concerning HYAL practice was completed by 264 healthcare practitioners: 244 from interrogated databases and 20 from the consensus panel. Answers from those in the database were compared to those of the consensus panel.

RESULTS

Compared to the database group, the consensus group was more confident in the preparation of HYAL, kept reconstituted HYAL for longer, and was less likely to skin test for HYAL sensitivity and more likely to treat with HYAL in an emergency, even in those with a wasp or bee sting anaphylactic history. Ninety-two percent of all respondents had never observed an acute reaction to HYAL. Just over 1% of respondents had ever observed anaphylaxis. Five percent of practitioners reported longer-term adverse effects, including 3 respondents who reported loss of deep tissues. Consent before injecting HA for the possible requirement of HYAL was always obtained by 74% of practitioners.

CONCLUSIONS

Hyaluronidase would appear to be an essential agent for anyone injecting hyaluronic acid filler. However, there is an absence of evidence-based recommendations with respect to the concentration, dosing, and treatment intervals of HYAL, and these should ideally be available.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5

Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy: Safety and efficacy of an accelerated induction regimen with depot aluminum adsorbed extracts

Introduction: Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy (VIT) is the only therapy that protects patients with Hymenoptera venom allergy by preventing systemic reactions after a new sting. Various extracts for VIT are available and used. VIT administration consists of an induction phase and a maintenance phase. Depot preparations of Hymenoptera VIT extracts are typically used for cluster and conventional protocols, and the maintenance phase. Many patients with Hymenoptera allergy need to achieve tolerance quickly because of the high risk of re-sting and possible anaphylaxis. Objective: Our study aimed to show the safety and efficacy of an accelerated regimen with depot preparations on aluminum hydroxide by using relatively high starting doses in a heterogeneous group of patients. Methods: The research focused on a group of patients with a history of severe systemic reactions to Hymenoptera stings, with the necessity of swift immunization due to high occupational risks. Aluminum hydroxide depot extracts either of Vepula species or Apis mellifera extracts were used. Results: The induction protocol was started with the highest concentration of depot venom extract of 100,000 standard quality unit and was well tolerated by 19 of 20 patients. Onne patient presented with a mild systemic reaction during the accelerated induction schedule, which was promptly treated with intravenous steroids and intramuscular H1 antihistamine; when switched to a conventional induction protocol, he had a similar reaction but finally reached maintenance with an H1-antagonist premedication. Conclusion: If validated, the accelerated induction protocol by using depot aluminum adsorbed extracts with the highest concentration of venom from the beginning could offer a streamlined and accessible treatment modality for patients diagnosed with anaphylaxis from bee and wasp venoms in need of rapid desensitization.

The role of molecular diagnosis in anaphylactic patients with dual or triple-sensitization to Hymenoptera venoms

BACKGROUND

The poly-sensitization to Hymenoptera venom makes it difficult to select genuine allergens for immunotherapy and increases patients' costs. The objective of this study was to determine the culprit allergen in dual or triple-sensitized patients to three Hymenoptera venoms through molecular diagnosis and evaluating the results of incorporating the molecular diagnosis with skin tests.

METHODS

Thirty-two patients with anaphylactic reactions and dual or triple-sensitization to Hymenoptera venoms in skin tests entered this study. IgE-sensitization to whole extracts and molecules of Apis mellifera (Api m), Vespula vulgaris (Ves v), and Polistes dominulus (Pol d) was evaluated utilizing ALEX or ImmunoCAP.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients (90.6%) were male. IgE-sensitization to at least one of the allergenic molecules related to Apis mellifera, Vespula vulgaris, and Polistes dominulus was seen in 59.4, 53.1, and 21.9%, respectively. Among 32 patients, 14 (43.8) and 8 (25%), were mono-sensitized to Api m and Ves v components in ALEX, respectively. Double sensitization to Hymenoptera was identified in 18.8% of patients in ALEX. Api m 1+/Api m 2-/Api m 10- and Ves v 1+/Ves v 5+ demonstrated the most prevalent sensitizations patterns in our patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The molecular diagnosis of IgE-sensitization to Hymenoptera venoms can be valuable, especially in patients who show dual or triple-sensitization in skin tests, as the ALEX results revealed mono and double-sensitization to Hymenoptera venoms in 22 and 6 patients, respectively. Regarding the high cost and adverse reactions of venom immunotherapy, especially for two or three venoms, incorporating the molecular diagnosis alongside skin tests for accurate diagnosis of the culprit venom could help decrease costs for patients.

Atopic manifestations of inborn errors of immunity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergy and atopic features are now well recognized manifestations of many inborn errors of immunity (IEI), and indeed may be the hallmark in some, such as DOCK8 deficiency. In this review, we describe the current IEI associated with atopy, using a comprehensive literature search and updates from the IUIS highlighting clinical clues for underlying IEI such as very early onset of atopic disease or treatment resistance to enable early and accurate genetic diagnosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

We focus on recently described genes, their categories of pathogenic mechanisms and the expanding range of potential therapies.

SUMMARY

We highlight in this review that patients with very early onset or treatment resistant atopic disorders should be investigated for an IEI, as targeted and effective therapies exist. Early and accurate genetic diagnosis is crucial in this cohort to reduce the burden of disease and mortality.

Sensitivity of a Hymenoptera serological immunoglobulin (Ig)E assay for the diagnosis of venom hypersensitivity in dogs

BACKGROUND

Hymenoptera envenomation with honey bee (Apis mellifera) and paper wasp (Polistes spp.) may cause life-threatening anaphylaxis in dogs. In human patients, clinical history, intradermal testing (IDT) and measurement of allergen-specific serological immunoglobulin (Ig)E (sIgE) are used to support a diagnosis of Hymenoptera venom hypersensitivity. The utility of venom allergen-specific sIgE has not yet been evaluated for this purpose in dogs.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study was to investigate the sensitivity (sn), specificity (sp) and positive predictive value (PPV) of honey bee and paper wasp serological titres using a commercially available sIgE assay [VARL (Veterinary Allergen Reference Laboratory) Liquid Gold] against clinical history for a diagnosis of Hymenoptera hypersensitivity in dogs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Honeybee and paper wasp IgE serum titres were measured in 15 client-owned dogs with a diagnosis of Hymenoptera venom hypersensitivity based on a history of anaphylaxis, owner observation of Hymenoptera, and positive IDT to bee and/or wasp; and in 10 client-owned dogs with no known history of anaphylaxis or Hymenoptera exposure and a negative IDT to bee and wasp.

RESULTS

Analysis of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves demonstrate that a VARL score cut-off of one of six for honeybee yields Sn, Sp and PPV of 40%, 60% and 60%, respectively, and two of six for wasp yields Sn, Sp and PPV of 25%, 78% and 60%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Owing to the poor sensitivity and PPV of sIgE assays for both bee and wasp hypersensitivity in dogs with known envenomation and anaphylaxis, the use of sIgE cannot be recommended as a tool for venom identification.

Potential Cost Savings by Switching from Subcutaneous to Intralymphatic Insect Venom Immunotherapy

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.

Real-World Safety and Efficacy Clinical Data of an Improved Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy Product for the Treatment of Bee Venom Allergy

The aim of this study is to explore the safety and efficacy of bee venom immunotherapy without HSA, in real-life patients. Methods: This is an observational retrospective study developed in seven hospitals in Spain, where patients treated with this immunotherapy were included. They gathered the protocol used to initiate the immunotherapy, adverse reactions, field re-stings, and the patient clinical data (clinical history, biomarkers, and skin prick test). Results: A total of 108 patients were included. In total, 4 protocols were used (5 weeks reaching 200 μg, and 4, 3, and 2 weeks reaching 100 μg). An incidence of systemic adverse reactions for each 100 injections of 1.5, 1.7, 0, and 0.58, respectively, was found. The demographic data showed not to directly affect the appearance of adverse reactions, except for those having a grade 2 systemic reaction with immunotherapy previously had a grade 4 systemic reaction; the IgE to Apis mellifera was 3 times higher in patients with systemic reactions of grade 1 than in the general group, and other specific IgEs were lower in those with systemic reactions. Most of the patients recognized Api m 1 followed by Api m 10. In the sample, 32% experienced spontaneous re-stings, without presenting systemic reactions, after a year of treatment.

Diagnosis of Apis dorsata venom allergy: use of recombinant allergens of Apis mellifera and a passive basophil activation test

Background

Allergy to Apis dorsata (Giant Asian Honeybee) venom is the commonest insect allergy in Sri Lanka and South East Asia. However, laboratory diagnosis is difficult as the pure venom and diagnostic reagents are not commercially available.

Objective

This study assessed the use of four recombinant allergens of A. mellifera venom and the passive basophil activation test in the diagnosis of A. dorsata venom anaphylaxis.

Methods

Serum IgE levels to four recombinant allergens of A. mellifera, rApi m 1, 2, 5 and 10 were assessed and compared with serum IgE to the crude venom of A. mellifera or V. vulgaris by Phadia ImmunoCAP, in patients who developed anaphylaxis to A. dorsata stings. Basophil activation in response to venom of A. dorsata or V. affinis was assessed using a passive basophil activation test. Association of the severity of the reaction with basophil activation was compared.

Results

rApi m 1 and 10 combinedly had significant correlation (r = 0.722; p < 0.001) with the crude venom of A. mellifera (Western honeybee) and a higher positivity rate of 90% (27/30). Whereas, IgE reactivity to rApi m 2 or 5 had significant correlation (p = 0.02 and p = 0.005 respectively) with V. vulgaris crude venom. All 30 (100%) were positive to A. dorsata venom in passive BAT; 70% (21/30) had over 80% activation, 96.7% (29/30) had over 60% activation and 100% had over 50% activation. Percentage activation of basophils in patients who had mild or moderate reactions (n = 20) was significantly low (p = 0.02) from that of patients who had severe reactions (n = 10).

Conclusions

rApi m 1 and 10 when combined was sensitive for the diagnosis of A. dorsata allergy. This combination had the lowest cross-reactivity rate with Vespula vulgaris. The passive BAT is highly sensitive in A. dorsata allergy. The basophil reactivity was significantly higher in severe anaphylaxis compared to mild/moderate anaphylaxis. This finding should be further explored in further studies.

Review of venom immunotherapy at a regional tertiary paediatric centre

AIM

Bee stings can result in allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis. Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is a definitive cure for bee venom allergy, but controversy surrounds whether accelerated protocols are safe in children. Our primary aim was to assess the safety profile of ultra-rush bee VIT compared with conventional bee VIT at a regional paediatric tertiary centre. We also sought to evaluate the impact of both approaches on time and resource use.

METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively from 14 patients with bee venom allergy who were treated with ultra-rush or conventional bee VIT between 2013 and 2021 at John Hunter Children's Hospital. We compared VIT-associated adverse reactions and use of resources in both these groups.

RESULTS

Overall, six patients received ultra-rush bee VIT and eight patients received conventional VIT. The ultra-rush group had a lower rate of systemic reaction (16%) compared with the conventional group (25%). One patient from the conventional group required adrenaline. Ultra-rush patients require fewer injections over a shorter time and fewer hospital visits to complete the protocol. Travel distance for families was significantly reduced.

CONCLUSION

At our regional paediatric tertiary centre, ultra-rush bee VIT was a safe treatment option for children with bee venom allergy. It has many advantages over a conventional approach, especially for patients living in regional or remote areas.

Development and Validation of the Anaphylaxis Quality of Life Scale for Adults

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis is a severe and potentially life-threatening allergic reaction that can have a detrimental impact on quality of life (QoL). There are no validated scales to measure the impact of anaphylaxis on QoL of adults.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop and assess the reliability and validity of a QoL scale for adults with anaphylaxis (Anaphylaxis Quality of Life Scale for Adults [A-QoL-Adults]).

METHODS

All participants were recruited from a specialist allergy clinic and had a confirmed diagnosis of anaphylaxis (as per the World Allergy Organization diagnostic criteria) to food, drugs, venom, or latex or had spontaneous anaphylaxis. Interviews were conducted with 13 adults; data were analyzed using thematic analysis to extract items for a QoL scale. A prototype QoL scale was then completed by 115 participants alongside validated scales to measure generic QoL (World Health Organization Quality of Life Scale [Brief Version] [WHOQoL BREF]), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]), and stress (Perceived Stress Scale [PSS]).

RESULTS

The A-QoL-Adults scale has 21 items demonstrating excellent internal reliability (Cronbach α = 0.96). Factor analysis produced 3 subscales: Emotional Impact; Social Impact; and Limitations on Life. Each has excellent internal reliability (0.92, 0.92, and 0.91, respectively). Poorer anaphylaxis-related QoL (total A-QoL-Adults score and subscale scores) correlated significantly with poorer general QoL and greater anxiety, depression, and stress (all P < .01 with medium-to-large effect sizes).

CONCLUSIONS

The A-QoL-Adults scale is a reliable measure of QoL in adults with anaphylaxis and shows good construct validity. It will offer health care professionals a means to further understand the impact of anaphylaxis on adult patients and could help direct and monitor allergy management and the need for further psychological intervention.

Bee venom acupuncture therapy ameliorates neuroinflammatory alterations in a pilocarpine-induced epilepticus model

Bee venom (BV) is applied in different traditional medicinal therapies and is used worldwide to prevent and treat many acute and chronic diseases. Epilepsy has various neurological effects, e.g., epileptogenic insults; thus, it is considered a life-threatening condition. Seizures and their effects add to the burden of epilepsy because they can have health effects including residual disability and even premature mortality. The use of antiinflammatory drugs to treat epilepsy is controversial; therefore, the alternative nonchemical apitherapy benefits of BV were evaluated in the present study by assessing neuroinflammatory changes in a pilocarpine-induced epilepticus model. Levels of electrolytes, neurotransmitters, and mRNA expression for some gate channels were determined. Moreover, ELISA assays were conducted to detect pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines, whereas RT-PCR was performed to assess mRNA expression of Foxp3 and CTLA-4. BV ameliorated the interruption in electrolytes and ions through voltage- and ligand-gated ion channels, and it limited neuronal excitability via rapid repolarization of action potentials. In addition, BV inhibited the high expression of proinflammatory cytokines. Acupuncture with BV was effective in preventing some of the deleterious consequences of epileptogenesis associated with high levels of glutamate and DOPA in the hippocampus. BV ameliorates changes in the expression of voltage-gated channels, rebalances blood electrolytes and neurotransmitters, and modulates the levels of pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines. Thus, BV could reduce the progression of epileptogenesis as a cotherapy with other antiepileptic drugs.

Hymenoptera heartaches -cardiac manifestation with hymenoptera stings, a retrospective study from a tertiary care hospital in South India

INTRODUCTION

Hymenoptera stings usually have a multitude of presentations from very subtle to life-threatening conditions. Various cardiac manifestations including Kounis syndrome often get missed due to lack of suspicion. The aim of the study was to describe the clinical profile of the cardiac etiologies associated with hymenoptera stings and review literature with focus on diagnosis and treatment strategies.

METHODOLOGY

A retrospective chart analysis was performed including all adult patients who had a hymenoptera sting during a two-year window (October 2018 - October 2020). Of these, patients with cardiac features were enrolled. A structured case record form was used to capture information like basic demography, clinical profile, and outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirteen cases presented with hymenoptera stings of which six cases had cardiac presentation and were considered. The most common presentations were breathlessness and generalised itching with only one patient complaining of chest pain. All patients(with available data) had ECG changes suggestive of ischemia and associated raised troponin levels with 2D echo changes. The diagnoses considered included Kounis syndrome, hypersensitivity myocarditis, and Takotsubo cardiomyopathy. Patients were managed conservatively with one patient undergoing a coronary angiography. All patients were stable at discharge.

CONCLUSION

Cardiac manifestations with hymenoptera stings although rare may complicate diagnosis and treatment.It should be borne in mind during assessment and standardised guidelines should be developed for ED treatment such as the one recommended in this study.

Hymenoptera Venom Immunotherapy: Immune Mechanisms of Induced Protection and Tolerance

Hymenoptera venom allergy is one of the most severe allergic diseases, with a considerable prevalence of anaphylactic reaction, making it potentially lethal. In this review, we provide an overview of the current knowledge and recent findings in understanding induced immune mechanisms during different phases of venom immunotherapy. We focus on protection mechanisms that occur early, during the build-up phase, and on the immune tolerance, which occurs later, during and after Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy. The short-term protection seems to be established by the early desensitization of mast cells and basophils, which plays a crucial role in preventing anaphylaxis during the build-up phase of treatment. The early generation of blocking IgG antibodies seems to be one of the main reasons for the lower activation of effector cells. Long-term tolerance is reached after at least three years of venom immunotherapy. A decrease in basophil responsiveness correlates with tolerated sting challenge. Furthermore, the persistent decline in IgE levels and, by monitoring the cytokine profiles, a shift from a Th2 to Th1 immune response, can be observed. In addition, the generation of regulatory T and B cells has proven to be essential for inducing allergen tolerance. Most studies on the mechanisms and effectiveness data have been obtained during venom immunotherapy (VIT). Despite the high success rate of VIT, allergen tolerance may not persist for a prolonged time. There is not much known about immune mechanisms that assure long-term tolerance post-therapy.

Evidence update for the treatment of anaphylaxis

The Resuscitation Council UK has updated its Guideline for healthcare providers on the Emergency treatment of anaphylaxis. As part of this process, an evidence review was undertaken by the Guideline Working Group, using an internationally-accepted approach for adoption, adaptation, and de novo guideline development based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence to decision (EtD) framework, referred to as GRADE-ADOLOPMENT. A number of significant changes have been made, which will be reflected in the updated Guideline. These include: emphasis on repeating intramuscular adrenaline doses after 5 min if symptoms of anaphylaxis do not resolve; corticosteroids (e.g. hydrocortisone) no longer being routinely recommended for the emergency treatment of anaphylaxis; interventions for reactions which are refractory to initial treatment with adrenaline; a recommendation against the use of antihistamines for the acute management of anaphylaxis; and guidance relating to the duration of observation following anaphylaxis, and timing of discharge.

Hymenoptera venom allergy among children in Italy: time for pediatricians to take action

Hymenoptera venom allergy (HVA) is one of the most frequent causes of anaphylaxis following a bee, vespid or ant sting. Real-life data regarding the management of HVA in children are lacking. To address this unmet need, we carried out a survey defining the current management of HVA in children among pediatric allergists in Italy. Educational investments on the improvement of the management of pediatric patients with HVA are urgently needed, and our analysis represents a relevant instrument in targeting a roadmap with this aim. The time for pediatric allergists to take action has come, and a task force from the Rare Allergic Diseases Commission of the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology is working on the topic to improve pediatricians' knowledge and optimize the care of these patients.

Cross-Reactive Carbohydrate Determinant in Apis mellifera, Solenopsis invicta and Polybia paulista Venoms: Identification of Allergic Sensitization and Cross-Reactivity

Allergic reactions to Hymenoptera venom, which could lead to systemic and even fatal symptoms, is characterized by hypersensitivity reactions mediated by specific IgE (sIgE) driven to venom allergens. Patients multisensitized to sIgE usually recognize more than one allergen in different Hymenoptera species. However, the presence of sIgE directed against Cross-Reactive Carbohydrate Determinant (CCD), which occurs in some allergens from Hymenoptera venom, hampers the identification of the culprit insects. CCD is also present in plants, pollen, fruits, but not in mammals. Bromelain (Brl) extracted from pineapples is a glycoprotein commonly used for reference to sIgE-CCD detection and analysis. In sera of fifty-one Hymenoptera allergic patients with specific IgE ≥ 1.0 KU/L, we assessed by immunoblotting the reactivity of sIgE to the major allergens of Apis mellifera, Polybia paulista and Solenopsis invicta venoms. We also distinguished, using sera adsorption procedures, the cases of CCD cross-reaction using Brl as a marker and inhibitor of CCD epitopes. The presence of reactivity for bromelain (24–28 kDa) was obtained in 43% of the patients, in which 64% presented reactivity for more than one Hymenoptera venom in radioallergosorbent (RAST) tests, and 90% showed reactivity in immunoblot analysis to the major allergens of Apis mellifera, Polybia paulista and Solenopsis invicta venoms. Sera adsorption procedures with Brl lead to a significant reduction in patients’ sera reactivity to the Hymenoptera allergens. Immunoblotting assay using pre- and post-Brl adsorption sera from wasp-allergic patients blotted with non-glycosylated recombinant antigens (rPoly p1, rPoly p5) from Polybia paulista wasp venom showed no change in reactivity pattern of sIgE that recognize allergen peptide epitopes. Our results, using Brl as a marker and CCD inhibitor to test sIgE reactivity, suggest that it could complement diagnostic methods and help to differentiate specific reactivity to allergens’ peptide epitopes from cross-reactivity caused by CCD, which is extremely useful in clinical practice.

Basophils from Cancer Patients Respond to Immune Stimuli and Predict Clinical Outcome

Basophils are involved in manifestations of hypersensitivity, however, the current understanding of their propensity for activation and their prognostic value in cancer patients remains unclear. As in healthy and atopic individuals, basophil populations were identified in blood from ovarian cancer patients (n = 53) with diverse tumor histologies and treatment histories. Ex vivo basophil activation was measured by CD63 expression using the basophil activation test (BAT). Irrespective of prior treatment, basophils could be activated by stimulation with IgE- (anti-FcεRI and anti-IgE) and non-IgE (fMLP) mediated triggers. Basophil activation was detected by ex vivo exposure to paclitaxel, but not to other anti-cancer therapies, in agreement with a clinical history of systemic hypersensitivity reactions to paclitaxel. Protein and gene expression analyses support the presence of basophils (CCR3, CD123, FcεRI) and activated basophils (CD63, CD203c, tryptase) in ovarian tumors. Greater numbers of circulating basophils, cells with greater capacity for ex vivo stimulation (n = 35), and gene signatures indicating the presence of activated basophils in tumors (n = 439) were each associated with improved survival in ovarian cancer. Circulating basophils in cancer patients respond to IgE- and non-IgE-mediated signals and could help identify hypersensitivity to therapeutic agents. Activated circulating and tumor-infiltrating basophils may be potential biomarkers in oncology.

Risk factors and indicators of severe systemic insect sting reactions

Hymenoptera venom allergy ranks among the top three causes of anaphylaxis worldwide, and approximately one-quarter of sting-induced reactions are classified as severe. Fatal sting reactions are exceedingly rare, but certain factors may entail a considerably higher risk. Delayed administration of epinephrine and upright posture are situational risk factors which may determine an unfavorable outcome of the acute anaphylactic episode and should be addressed during individual patient education. Systemic mastocytosis and senior age are major, unmodifiable long-term risk factors and thus reinforce the indication for venom immunotherapy. Vespid venom allergy and male sex likewise augment the risk of severe or even fatal reactions. Further studies are required to assess the impact of specific cardiovascular comorbidities. Available data regarding potential effects of beta-blockers and/or ACE inhibitors in coexisting venom allergy are inconclusive and do not justify recommendations to discontinue guideline-directed antihypertensive treatment. The absence of urticaria/angioedema during sting-induced anaphylaxis is indicative of a severe reaction, serum tryptase elevation, and mast cell clonality. Determination of basal serum tryptase levels is an established diagnostic tool for risk assessment in Hymenoptera venom-allergic patients. Measurement of platelet-activating factor acetylhydrolase activity represents a complementary approach but is not available for routine diagnostic use.

Contraindications to immunotherapy: a global approach

BACKGROUND

Recommendations on contraindications to allergen immunotherapy (AIT) have been independently developed by National and International Societies/Academies. AIT contraindications are mainly based on case reports, case-series, or experts' opinion, while evidence-based information is limited. The aim of the present review was to describe existing guidelines on contraindications to AIT and to highlight differences between them.

MAIN BODY

An extended review of the literature regarding contraindications to AIT for respiratory allergy and venom hypersensitivity was performed. Furthermore, Societies and Academies registered in the World Allergy Organization and EAACI databases, were asked for additional information. Only AIT guidelines published under official auspicies were included. A large heterogeneity among the various recommendations on contraindications was registered. Common contraindications to most of the guidelines were: lack of adherence, pregnancy before the start of AIT, the use of beta-blockers, certain age groups, uncontrolled asthma, autoimmune diseases and malignancies.

CONCLUSION

As new data arise, revisions might soon be needed allowing AIT in the cases of patients treated with ACE inhibitors and beta-blockers, in elderly patients and in patients with concomitant autoimmune diseases and neoplasias in remission. The decision to prescribe AIT is always tailor-made, balancing risk vs benefit. Creating globally accepted guidelines would help Allergologists in their decision making.

Hymenoptera Venom Allergy: How Does Venom Immunotherapy Prevent Anaphylaxis From Bee and Wasp Stings?

Hymenoptera stings may cause both local and systemic allergic reactions and even life threatening anaphylaxis. Along with pharmaceutical drugs and foods, hymenoptera venom is one of the most common causes of anaphylaxis in humans. To date, no parameter has been identified that may predict which sensitized people will have a future systemic sting reaction (SSR), however some risk factors, such as mastocytosis and age >40 years are known. Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is the most effective method of treatment for people who had SSR, which is shown to be effective even after discontinuation of the therapy. Development of peripheral tolerance is the main mechanism during immunotherapy. It is mediated by the production of blocking IgG/IgG4 antibodies that may inhibit IgE dependent reactions through both high affinity (FcεRI) and low affinity (FcεRII) IgE receptors on mast cells, basophils and B cells. The generation of antigen specific regulatory T cells produces IL-10 and suppresses Th2 immunity and the immune responses shift toward a Th1-type response. B regulatory cells are also involved in the production of IL-10 and the development of long term immune tolerance. During VIT the number of effector cells in target organs also decreases, such as mast cells, basophils, innate type 2 lymphocytes and eosinophils. Several meta-analyses and randomized controlled studies have proved that VIT is effective for preventing SSR to a sting and improves the quality of life. In this review, the risk of SSR in venom allergy and how VIT changed this risk are discussed.

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.

Biomarkers in Human Anaphylaxis: A Critical Appraisal of Current Evidence and Perspectives

Anaphylaxis is a type I hypersensitivity reaction that is potentially fatal if not promptly treated. It is a clinical diagnosis, although measurement of serial serum total mast cell tryptase (MCT) is gold standard and may help differentiate anaphylaxis from its mimics. The performance characteristics of MCT assays in anaphylaxis has been variable in previous studies, due to multiple factors including differences in the definition of anaphylaxis, methods of MCT interpretation, clinical setting of anaphylaxis, causative agents, and timing of blood sample. An international consensus equation for MCT to interpret mast cell activation has been proposed and recently validated in the context of peri-operative anaphylaxis during general anesthesia. There has been an interest in the detection of newer biomarkers in anaphylaxis including platelet activation factor (PAF), chymase, carboxypeptidase A3, dipeptidyl peptidase I (DPPI), basogranulin, and CCL-2. The key determinants of an ideal biomarker in anaphylaxis are half-life, sample handling and processing requirements, and cost. There may be a role for metabolomics and systems biology in the exploration of novel biomarkers in anaphylaxis. Future studies applying these approaches might provide greater insight into factors determining severity, clinical risk stratification, identification of mast cell disorders and improving our understanding of this relatively complex acute immunological condition. Post mortem MCT evaluation is used in Forensic Medicine during autopsy for cases involving sudden death or suspected anaphylaxis. Interpretation of post mortem MCT is challenging since there is limited published evidence and the test is confounded by multiple variables largely linked to putrefaction and site of sampling. Thus, there is no international consensus on a reference range. In this state of the art review, we will focus on the practical challenges in the laboratory diagnosis of anaphylaxis and critically appraise (a) performance characteristics of MCT in anaphylaxis in different clinical scenarios (b) the role for novel biomarkers and (c) post mortem MCT and its role in fatal anaphylaxis.

Rate of Recurrence of Adverse Events Following Immunization: Results of 19 Years of Surveillance In Quebec, Canada

BACKGROUND

While adverse events following immunization (AEFI) are frequent, there are limited data on the safety of reimmunizing patients who had a prior AEFI. Our objective was to estimate the rate and severity of AEFI recurrences.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the AEFI passive surveillance system in Quebec, Canada, that collects information on reimmunization of patients who had a prior AEFI. Patients with an initial AEFI reported to the surveillance system between 1998 and 2016 were included. Rate of AEFI recurrence was calculated as number of patients with recurrence/total number of patients reimmunized.

RESULTS

Overall, 1350 patients were reimmunized, of which 59% were 2 years of age or younger. The AEFI recurred in 16% (215/1350) of patients, of whom 18% (42/215) rated the recurrence as more severe than the initial AEFI. Large local reactions extending beyond the nearest joint and lasting 4 days or more had the highest recurrence rate (67%, 6/9). Patients with hypotonic hyporesponsive episodes had the lowest rate of recurrence (2%, 1/50). Allergic-like events recurred in 12% (76/659) of patients, but none developed anaphylaxis. Of 33 patients with seizures following measles mumps rubella with/without varicella vaccine, none had a recurrence. Compared with patients with nonserious AEFIs, those with serious AEFIs were less often reimmunized (60% versus 80%; rate ratio: 0.8; 95% confidence interval: 0.66-0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients with a history of mild or moderate AEFI can be safely reimmunized. Additional studies are needed in patients with serious AEFIs who are less likely to be reimmunized.

How fast does wasp venom immunotherapy affect a regulatory T cell subpopulation (CD4+ CD25+ Foxp3+) and the synthesis of interleukins 10, 21 and transforming growth factor β1?

Introduction

The literature describes the influence of venom immunotherapy (VIT) on the subpopulation of T regulatory cells (CD4+ CD25+ Foxp3+) and the synthesis of IL-10, TGF-β1 as well as many other cytokines at various times after immunotherapy.

Aim

To assess changes in the percentage of cells of CD4+ and CD25+ in peripheral blood and serum concentrations of IL-10, IL-21 and TGF-β1 in the early stages of VIT.

Material and methods

The study included 18 patients who were allergic to wasp venom and who in the past underwent systemic anaphylactic reaction after stinging, meeting the criteria to qualify for VIT. The immunoenzymatic method (ELISA) was used to assess concentrations of cytokines IL-10, IL-21 and TGF-β1 and the surface antigens CD4 and CD25 on the cells. The concentrations were determined by flow cytometry method at baseline (before VIT) and after 2.5 and 24 h from the VIT starting point.

Results

The mean values of the activity of T lymphocytes CD4+ CD25+ FoxP3+ and concentrations of the cytokines IL-10, IL-21 and TGF-β1 are shown in table.

Conclusions

A 24-hour activation assessment of serum concentrations of cytokines IL-10, IL-21 and TGF-β1 during the first day of the Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy by ultra-rush protocol does not show the significant dynamics of change of the examined parameters.

A longitudinal study of hymenoptera stings in preschool children

BACKGROUND

Insect venom is the second most common cause of anaphylaxis outside of medical encounters. Stings cause over 20% of all anaphylactic deaths and 7% of anaphylaxis in children. To date, there have been no longitudinal studies of insect sting events or allergy in preschool children.

METHODS

A prospective longitudinal nested observational study in the BASELINE Birth Cohort Study (n = 2137). Sting-related questions were asked at 6 and 12 months and 2 and 5 years. Skin prick testing (SPT) was performed at 2 and 5 years. SpIgE testing was performed on selected cases at 2 years.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven children (6.8%) were stung by the age of 2. Of these, 25 (32.5%) reported adverse reactions (four systemic). Eleven (0.9%) had positive SPT at 2 years (eight bee, two wasp, one both). Four stung children had positive SPT. Two (one stung, one never stung) had positive spIgE to a venom component at 2 years. A total of 268 children (21.9%) were stung by 5 years, 144 (52.1%) reporting local reactions and none systemic. Four children (0.4%) had positive SPT at 5 years: one bee and three wasp. Of the 11 SPT-positive children at 2 years, none were still positive at 5 years.

CONCLUSION

This is the first longitudinal study of the natural history of hymenoptera stings and allergy in preschool children. Hymenoptera venom allergy is less common in this cohort than in adults. Systemic reactions were not medically documented in this population, in keeping with previous literature. This study confirms the poor correlation of IgE sensitization to venom with sting allergy and does not support the common parental request to screen children for sting allergy.

Emergency Management of Anaphylaxis Due to an Unknown Trigger: An 8-Year Follow-Up Study in Canada

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis due to unknown trigger (AUT) is anaphylaxis not explained by a proved or presumptive cause or stimulus at the time of the reaction. Research describing the management and follow-up of AUT is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To assess and compare the demographic and clinical characteristics and the management of adult and pediatric AUT cases across Canada.

METHODS

Participants were identified between 2011 and 2018 in emergency departments at 8 centers across Canada as part of the Cross-Canada Anaphylaxis Registry. A standardized form documenting the reaction and management in children and adults was completed. Patients were contacted for follow-up to determine assessment by an allergist.

RESULTS

A total of 295 AUT cases (7.5%) were recruited among 3,922 cases of anaphylaxis. In the prehospital setting, children (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.05-1.37) and those with a known food allergy (aOR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.02-1.28) were more likely to receive treatment with epinephrine. Children were also more likely to be assessed by an allergist after their reaction (aOR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.13-1.81) and were more likely to have an identified trigger for their reaction (aOR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.07-1.70). Among patients contacted for follow-up, food was identified as the cause of reaction in 11 of 76 patients. A new food allergy was diagnosed in 4 patients (2 children and 2 adults).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight important differences between management and follow-up of adult and pediatric AUT cases. It is crucial to follow up all cases of AUT and establish appropriate treatment and management guidelines.

Basophil Activation Test: Old and New Applications in Allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The basophil activation test (BAT) using flow cytometry has supplanted traditional methods of measuring basophil degranulation using histamine and other mediator release, and can be used for clinical applications as well as to explore the immune mechanisms of effector cell response to allergen. This review discusses the advancements made in clinical, diagnostic and laboratory research of allergy utilizing an ever-evolving BAT.

RECENT FINDINGS

Being an in vitro surrogate of the allergic reaction that happens in vivo in the sick patient, the BAT can be used to support the diagnosis of various allergic conditions, such as food, drug, respiratory and insect venom allergies, and the assessment of clinical response to allergen-specific immunotherapy and other immunomodulatory treatments. The BAT can also be used for research purposes to explore the mechanisms of allergy and tolerance at the level of the basophil, for instance by manipulating IgE and IgG and their receptors and by studying intracellular signalling cascade in response to allergen. This review covers the applications of the BAT to the clinical management of allergic patients and the increased understanding of the mechanisms of immune response to allergens as well as technological advancements made in recent years.

The culprit insect but not severity of allergic reactions to bee and wasp venom can be determined by molecular diagnosis

Background

Allergy to bee and wasp venom can lead to life-threatening systemic reactions. The identification of the culprit species is important for allergen-specific immunotherapy.

Objectives

To determine a panel of recombinant bee and wasp allergens which is suitable for the identification of bee or wasp as culprit allergen sources and to search for molecular surrogates of clinical severity of sting reactions.

Methods

Sera from eighty-seven patients with a detailed documentation of their severity of sting reaction (Mueller grade) and who had been subjected to titrated skin testing with bee and wasp venom were analyzed for bee and wasp-specific IgE levels by ImmunoCAP^TM. IgE-reactivity testing was performed using a comprehensive panel of recombinant bee and wasp venom allergens (rApi m 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 10; rVes v 1 and 5) by ISAC chip technology, ImmunoCAP and ELISA. IgG₄ antibodies to rApi m 1 and rVes v 5 were determined by ELISA and IgE/IgG₄ ratios were calculated. Results from skin testing, IgE serology and IgE/IgG₄ ratios were compared with severity of sting reactions.

Results

The panel of rApi m 1, rApi m 10, rVes v 1 and rVes v 5 allowed identification of the culprit venom in all but two of the 87 patients with good agreement to skin testing. Severities of sting reactions were not associated with results obtained by skin testing, venom-specific IgE levels or molecular diagnosis. Severe sting reactions were observed in patients showing < 1 ISU and < 2kU_A/L of IgE to Api m 1 and/or Ves v 5.

Conclusion

We identified a minimal panel of recombinant bee and wasp allergens for molecular diagnosis which may permit identification of bee and/or wasp as culprit insect in venom-sensitized subjects. The severity of sting reactions was not associated with parameters obtained by molecular diagnosis.

Short- and long-term management of cases of venom-induced anaphylaxis is suboptimal

BACKGROUND

Venom-induced anaphylaxis (VIA) accounts for severe reactions. However, little is known about the short- and long-term management of VIA patients.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the short- and long-term management of VIA.

METHODS

Using a national anaphylaxis registry (C-CARE), we identified VIA cases presenting to emergency departments in Montreal and to emergency medical services (EMSs) in western Quebec over a 4-year period. Data were collected on clinical characteristics, triggers, and management. Consenting patients were contacted annually regarding long-term management. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were used to identify factors associated with epinephrine use, allergist assessment, and administration of immunotherapy.

RESULTS

Between June 2013 and May 2017, 115 VIA cases were identified. Epinephrine was administered to 63.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53.9%-72.1%) of all VIA cases by a health care professional. Treatment of reactions without epinephrine was more likely in reactions occurring at home and in nonsevere cases (no hypotension, hypoxia, or loss of consciousness). Among 48 patients who responded to a follow-up questionnaire, 95.8% (95% CI, 84.6%-99.3%) were prescribed epinephrine auto-injector, 68.8% (95% CI, 53.6%-80.9%) saw an allergist who confirmed the allergy in 63.6% of cases, and 81.0% of those with positive testing were administered immunotherapy. Among cases with follow-up, seeing an allergist was less likely in patients with known ischemic heart disease.

CONCLUSION

Almost 30% of patients with suspected VIA did not see an allergist, only two thirds of those seeing an allergist had allergy confirmation, and almost one fifth of those with confirmed allergy did not receive immunotherapy. Educational programs are needed to bridge this knowledge-to-action gap.

EAACI guidelines on allergen immunotherapy: Hymenoptera venom allergy

Hymenoptera venom allergy is a potentially life-threatening allergic reaction following a honeybee, vespid, or ant sting. Systemic-allergic sting reactions have been reported in up to 7.5% of adults and up to 3.4% of children. They can be mild and restricted to the skin or moderate to severe with a risk of life-threatening anaphylaxis. Patients should carry an emergency kit containing an adrenaline autoinjector, H₁ -antihistamines, and corticosteroids depending on the severity of their previous sting reaction(s). The only treatment to prevent further systemic sting reactions is venom immunotherapy. This guideline has been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology's (EAACI) Taskforce on Venom Immunotherapy as part of the EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy initiative. The guideline aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for the use of venom immunotherapy, has been informed by a formal systematic review and meta-analysis and produced using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) approach. The process included representation from a range of stakeholders. Venom immunotherapy is indicated in venom-allergic children and adults to prevent further moderate-to-severe systemic sting reactions. Venom immunotherapy is also recommended in adults with only generalized skin reactions as it results in significant improvements in quality of life compared to carrying an adrenaline autoinjector. This guideline aims to give practical advice on performing venom immunotherapy. Key sections cover general considerations before initiating venom immunotherapy, evidence-based clinical recommendations, risk factors for adverse events and for relapse of systemic sting reaction, and a summary of gaps in the evidence.

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.

IgE cross-reactivity of phospholipase A2 and hyaluronidase of Apis dorsata (Giant Asian Honeybee) and Apis mellifera (Western Honeybee) venom: Possible use of A. mellifera venom for diagnosis of patients allergic to A. dorsata venom

Diagnostic and therapeutic reagents are unavailable for anaphylaxis arising from stings by Apis dorsata. Venom profiles and cross-reactivity of A. dorsata and Apis mellifera were compared, to ascertain whether venom of A. mellifera can be used for diagnosis in A. dorsata allergy. Both venom profiles were similar by High Performance Liquid Chromatography and SDS-PAGE. Sera of 29 of 30 (96.7%) patients with anaphylaxis to A. dorsata stings had IgE to the phospholipase-2 (PLA₂) doublet (15 and 16 kDa) of A. dorsata venom by immunoblot, compared to 26 of 30 (86.7%) with the PLA₂ of A. mellifera and a purified preparation of PLA₂. Twelve patients (40%) with severe anaphylaxis had IgE reactivity to a 39 kDa protein band of venom of both species, a third band, identified in immunoblot as hyaluronidase. The cross-reactivity of PLA₂ and hyaluronidase of A. dorsata and A. mellifera were further confirmed by immunoblot inhibition results. Twenty five of 30 (83.3%) of our patients had positive venom specific IgE (>0.35 KU_A/L) reactivity to Phadia ImmunoCAPs of A. mellifera venom. The observed IgE cross reactivity suggests the possibility of using A. mellifera venom as a diagnostic test for A. dorsata venom allergy.