Evaluation of demographic data and laboratory of children receiving subcutaneous venom immunotherapy

Aim: Allergic reactions that develop after venom can be serious and fatal. The only treatment that can prevent these serious reactions is venom immunotherapy. Studies on venom immunotherapy in paediatric patients are limited. Aim of this study to evaluate the demographic data and laboratory results of paediatric patients who have received venom immunotherapy. Materials and Methods: The study included 45 patients who have received subcutaneous venom immunotherapy in Department of Paediatric Allergy and Immunology. Results: Thirty-three of the patients (73.3 %) were boys and 12 (26.7 %) were girls, the median age was 14 years (min.: 6, and max. 18). Apis mellifera venom was given to 24 (53.3 %) of 45 patients, and Guapes species venom immunotherapy was given to 21 (46.7 %) patients. While 15 (33.3 %) patients who received immunotherapy were living in Malatya, 30 patients were living in various provinces of the Eastern Anatolia region. While wide local reaction developed in 15 (33.3%) of the patients, systemic reaction developed in 3 (6.7 %) patients during venom immunotherapy. Apis mellifera prick test median diameter was determined as 4 mm and median of Apis specific Ig E value was determined as 6 kU/L. Guapes species prick test median diameter was determined as 4 mm and median of Guapes specific Ig E value was determined as 4 kU/L. Conclusion: Immunotherapy with Apis venom was more than Guapes venom in current study. Large local reaction was observed in 1/3 of the patients during immunotherapy. Therefore, attention should be paid in terms of systemic allergic reactions and large local reactions during immunotherapy. All necessary precautions should be taken during the immunotherapy.

PDF

___

1. Antonicelli L, Bilo MB, Bonifazi F. Epidemiology of Hymenoptera allergy. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2002;2:341-6.
2. Bilo BM, Rueff F, Mosbech H, et al. Diagnosis of Hymenoptera venom allergy. Allergy 2005;60:1339- 49.
3. Bilo MB, Bonifazi F. The natural history and epidemiology of insect venom allergy: clinical implications. Clin Exp Allergy 2009;39:1467-76.
4. Bilo BM, Bonifazi F. Epidemiology of insect-venom anaphylaxis. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2008;8:330-7.
5. Jennings A, Duggan E, Perry IJ, et al. Epidemiology of allergic reactions to hymenoptera stings in Irish school children. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2010;21:1166-70.
6. Golden DB. Insect sting anaphylaxis. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am 2007;27:261-72.
7. Muller U, Helbling A, Berchtold E. Immunotherapy with honey bee venom and yellow jacket venom is different regarding efficacy and safety. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1992;89:529-35.
8. Rueff F, Vos B, Elberink JO et al. Predictors of clinical effectiveness of Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy. Clin Exp Allergy 2014;44:736-46.
9. Roy SR, Sigmon JR, Olivier J et al. Increased frequency of large local reactions among systemic reactors during subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2007;99:82-6.
10. Azkur D, Vezir E, Civelek E, et al. The frequency of large local and systemic reactions after subcutaneous immunotherapy in children. Asthma Allergy Immunol 2013;11:37-42.
11. Gur Cetinkaya P, Esenboga S, Uysal Soyer O, et al. Subcutaneous venom immunotherapy in children: Efficacy and safety. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2018;120:424-8.
12. Bilo B, Rueff F, Mosbech H et all. The EAACI interest group on insect venom hypersensitivity. diagnosis of hymenoptera venom allergy. Allergy 2005;60:1339- 49.
13. Golden DB. Insect sting allergy and venom immunotherapy: a model and a mystery. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2005;115:439-47.
14. Jutel M, Agache I, Bonini S et al. International consensus on allergy immunotherapy. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2015;136:556-68.
15. Mosbech H, Müller U, Group BOTS. Side effects of insect venom immunotherapy: results from an EAACI multicenter study. Allergy 2000;55:1005-10.
16. Dhami S, Zaman H, Varga EM, et al. Allergen immunotherapy for insect venom allergy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Allergy 2017;72:342-65.