Search

Background: Anaphylaxis to insect venom (Hymenoptera) is most severe in patients with mastocytosis and may even lead to death. However, not all patients with mastocytosis suffer from anaphylaxis. The aim of the study was to analyze differences in gene expression between patients with indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM) and a history of insect venom anaphylaxis (IVA) compared to those patients without a history of anaphylaxis, and to determine the predictive use of gene expression profiling., Methods: Whole-genome gene expression analysis was performed in peripheral blood cells., Results: Twenty-two adults with ISM were included: 12 with a history of IVA and 10 without a history of anaphylaxis of any kind. Significant differences in single gene expression corrected for multiple testing were found for 104 transcripts (P < 0.05). Gene ontology analysis revealed that the differentially expressed genes were involved in pathways responsible for the development of cancer and focal and cell adhesion suggesting that the expression of genes related to the differentiation state of cells is higher in patients with a history of anaphylaxis. Based on the gene expression profiles, a naïve Bayes prediction model was built identifying patients with IVA., Conclusions: In ISM, gene expression profiles are different between patients with a history of IVA and those without. These findings might reflect a more pronounced mast cells dysfunction in patients without a history of anaphylaxis. Gene expression profiling might be a useful tool to predict the risk of anaphylaxis on insect venom in patients with ISM. Prospective studies are needed to substantiate any conclusions., (© 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

The most important causative factor for anaphylaxis in mastocytosis are insect stings. The purpose of this review is to analyse the available data concerning prevalence, diagnosis, safety and effectiveness of venom immunotherapy (VIT) in mastocytosis patients. If data were unclear, authors were contacted personally for further information. Quality of evidence (A: high, B: moderate, C: low and D: very low) and strength of recommendation (strong 1 and weak 2) concerning VIT in mastocytosis patients are assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation and are marked in square brackets. Results of VIT were described in 117 patients to date. The mean rate of side-effects during treatment in studies published so far is 23.9% (7.6% requiring adrenaline) with an overall protection rate of 72%. Based on the review we conclude that (1) mastocytosis patients have a high risk of severe sting reactions in particular to yellow jacket, (2) VIT could be suggested [2] in mastocytosis, (3) probably should be done life long [2], (4) VIT in mastocytosis is accompanied by a higher frequency of side-effects, so (5) special precautions should be taken into account notably during the built up phase of the therapy [2], (6) VIT is able to reduce systemic reactions, but to a lesser extent compared to the general insect venom allergic population [2], so (7) patients should be warned that the efficacy of VIT might be less than optimal and they should continue carrying two adrenaline auto injectors [2].

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., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Conjunctival allergen provocation test ( CAPT) reproduces the events occurring by instilling an allergen on the ocular surface. This paper is the compilation of a task force focussed on practical aspects of this technique based on the analysis of 131 papers. Main mechanisms involved are reviewed. Indications are diagnosing the allergen(s)-triggering symptoms in IgE-mediated ocular allergy in seasonal, acute or perennial forms of allergic conjunctivitis, especially when the relevance of the allergen is not obvious or in polysensitized patients. Contraindications are limited to ongoing systemic severe pathology, asthma and eye diseases. CAPT should be delayed if receiving systemic steroids or antihistamines. Local treatment should be interrupted according to the half-life of each drug. Prerequisites are as follows: obtaining informed consent; evidencing of an allergen by skin prick tests and/or serum-specific IgE dosages; being able to deal with an unlikely event such as acute asthma exacerbation, urticaria or anaphylaxis, or an exacerbation of allergic conjunctivitis. Allergen extracts should be diluted locally prior to administration. Positive criteria are based on itching or quoted according to a composite score. An alternative scoring is based on itching. CAPT remains underused in daily practice, although it is a safe and simple procedure which can provide valuable clinical information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An anaphylactic reaction due to a Hymenoptera sting is a clinical emergency, and patients, their caregivers as well as all healthcare professionals should be familiar with its recognition and acute management. This consensus report has been prepared by a European expert panel of the EAACI Interest Group of Insect Venom Hypersensitivity. It is targeted at allergists, clinical immunologists, internal medicine specialists, pediatricians, general practitioners, emergency department doctors, and any other healthcare professional involved. The aim was to report the scientific evidence on self-medication of anaphylactic reactions due to Hymenoptera stings, to inform healthcare staff about appropriate patient self-management of sting reactions, to propose indications for the prescription of an adrenaline auto-injector ( AAI), and to discuss other forms of medication. First-line treatment for Hymenoptera sting anaphylaxis is intramuscular adrenaline. Prescription of AAIs is mandatory in the case of venom-allergic patients who suffer from mast cell diseases or with an elevated baseline serum tryptase level and in untreated patients with a history of a systemic reaction involving at least two different organ systems. AAI prescription should also be considered in other specific situations before, during, and after stopping venom immunotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hymenoptera venom allergy occasionally causes fatal reactions. The prevalence of systemic reactions (SRs) is 0.3-8.9%, with anaphylaxis in 0.3-42.8% of cases. Factors contributing to reaction severity include older age, insect type, a previous less severe SR, preexisting diseases, concomitant treatments, mast cell diseases and elevated baseline tryptase serum concentration. Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is highly effective, as shown by sting challenge and spontaneous field stings. Indications for VIT are based on history of an SR, positive diagnostic tests, natural history and established risk factors for a severe outcome. Current strategies for reducing adverse reactions include anti-IgE monoclonal antibody pretreatment, and purified aqueous and purified aluminium hydroxide adsorbed preparations. New strategies for VIT, mostly using recombinant allergen, are in development. Further improvements will increase the safety and efficacy of VIT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]