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.

Basophil activation in insect venom allergy: comparison of an established test using liquid reagents with a test using 5-color tubes with dried antibody reagents.

BACKGROUND: Flow cytometry-based basophil activation tests (BAT) have been performed with various modifications, differing in the use of distinct identification and activation markers. Established tests use liquid reagents while a new development involves the use of tubes with dried antibody reagents. The aim of this pilot study was to compare these two techniques in patients with insect venom allergy. METHODS: Seventeen patients with an insect venom allergy were included in the study. The established "BAT 1" utilizes conventional antibody solutions of anti-CCR3 for basophil identification and anti-CD63 to assess basophil activation, whereas "BAT 2" uses dried anti-CD45, anti-CD3, anti-CRTH2, anti-203c and anti-CD63 for identification and activation measurement of basophils. Negative and positive controls as well as incubations with honey bee venom and yellow jacket venom at three concentrations were performed. RESULTS: Seven patients had to be excluded due to low basophil counts, high values in negative controls or negative positive controls. For the remaining 10 patients the overall mean (± SD) difference in activated basophils between the two tests was 0.2 (± 12.2) %P. In a Bland-Altman plot, the limit of agreement (LoA) ranged from 24.0 to -23.7. In the qualitative evaluation (value below/above cut-off) Cohen's kappa was 0.77 indicating substantial agreement. BAT 2 took longer to perform than BAT 1 and was more expensive. CONCLUSION: The BAT 2 technique represents an interesting innovation, however, it was found to be less suitable compared to an established BAT for the routine diagnosis of insect venom allergies.

Helios-Negative Regulatory T Cells as a Key Factor of Immune Tolerance in Nonallergic Beekeepers

Background: Although exposure to stings has been identified as the leading risk factor for anaphylaxis due to Hymenoptera venom allergy, professional beekeepers receive hundreds of stings yearly without developing systemic reactions. Objective: This study aims to analyze the mechanisms underlying bee venom tolerance in beekeepers. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted. Participants were recruited and classified into 3 groups: allergic patients (APs), who experienced systemic reactions after bee stings, with a positive intradermal test and specific IgE (sIgE) to Apis mellifera venom (AmV); tolerant beekeepers (TBKs), who received ≥50 stings/year; and healthy nonexposed controls (HCs). We measured serum levels of sIgE and specific IgG4 (sIgG4) to AmV, rApi m 1, rApi m 2, rApi m 3, Api m 4, rApi m 5, and rApi m10, as well as AmV-induced basophil degranulation, percentage of T-cell subsets, regulatory T cells (Treg), and IL-10 production. Results: Compared with TBKs, APs had high levels of sIgE to AmV and all its allergic components (P<.001), together with a high basophil activation rate (P<.001). Conversely, compared with APs, TBKs had higher levels of sIgG4 (P<.001) and IL-10 (P<.0001), as well as an enhanced CTLA-4+ Treg population (P=.001), expanded Helios– Treg (P<.003), and reduced type 1 helper T cells (TH1) (P=.008), TH2 (P=.004), and TH17 (P=.007) subsets. Conclusions: The profile of TBKs, which was strongly marked by Treg activity, differed from that of TBKs. This natural tolerance would be led by the expansion of inducible Helios– Treg cells at the peripheral level. The Helios– Treg population could be a novel candidate biomarker for monitoring tolerance (AU)

Venom Immunotherapy: From Proteins to Product to Patient Protection.

In this review, we outline and reflect on the important differences between allergen-specific immunotherapy for inhalant allergies (i.e., aeroallergens) and venom-specific immunotherapy (VIT), with a special focus on Venomil® Bee and Wasp. Venomil® is provided as a freeze-dried extract and a diluent to prepare a solution for injection for the treatment of patients with IgE-mediated allergies to bee and/or wasp venom and for evaluating the degree of sensitivity in a skin test. While the materials that make up the product have not changed, the suppliers of raw materials have changed over the years. Here, we consolidate relevant historical safety and efficacy studies that used products from shared manufacture supply profiles, i.e., products from Bayer or Hollister-Stier. We also consider the characterization and standardization of venom marker allergens, providing insights into manufacturing controls that have produced stable and consistent quality profiles over many years. Quality differences between products and their impacts on treatment outcomes have been a current topic of discussion and further research. Finally, we review the considerations surrounding the choice of depot adjuvant most suitable to augmenting VIT.

A Review of Honeybee Venom Allergens and Allergenicity.

Honeybee venom is a source of proteins with allergenic properties which can result in in various symptoms, ranging from local reactions through to systematic life-threatening anaphylaxis, or even death. According to the World Allergy Organization (WAO), honeybee venom allergy is one of the most common causes of anaphylaxis. Among the proteins present in honeybee venom, 12 protein fractions were registered by the World Health Organization's Allergen Nomenclature Sub-Committee (WHO/IUIS) as allergenic. Most of them are highly immunogenic glycoproteins that cross-react with IgE and, as a consequence, may give false positive results in allergy diagnosis. Allergenic fractions are different in terms of molecular weight and biological activity. Eight of these allergenic fractions have also been identified in honey. This explains frequent adverse reactions after consuming honey in people allergic to venom and sheds new light on the causes of allergic symptoms in some individuals after honey consumption. At the same time, it also indicates the possibility of using honey as a natural source of allergen in specific immunotherapy.

Bee- and Wasp-Venom Sensitization in Schoolchildren of High- and Low-Socioeconomic Status Living in an Urban Area of Indonesia.

BACKGROUND: There is not much known about venom allergy in tropical regions. Here, we studied the prevalence of specific IgE (sIgE) and skin prick test (SPT) reactivity and reported sting-related symptoms, in high- and low-socioeconomic status (SES) schoolchildren living in urban city of Makassar in Indonesia. METHODS: Children from high- (n = 160) and low- (n = 165) SES schools were recruited. Standardized questionnaires were used to record information on allergic disorders as well as sting-related symptoms. Parasitic infection, SPT reactivity, and sIgE to Apis mellifera (bee-venom) as well as Vespula spp. (wasp-venom) were assessed. RESULTS: SPT reactivity to bee- and wasp-venom was 14.3 and 12.7%, while the prevalence of sIgE was 26.5 and 28.5%, respectively. When SES was considered, prevalence of SPT to bee- and wasp-venom was higher in high-SES than in low-SES schoolchildren (bee: 22.8 vs. 5.7%, p < 0.001; and wasp: 19.6 vs. 5.7%, p < 0.001). Conversely, sIgE to both venoms was lower in high-SES than in low-SES (bee: 19 vs. 34%, p = 0.016; and wasp: 19 vs. 38%, p = 0.003). Furthermore, among SPT positive subjects, considerable proportion had no detectable sIgE to bee- (65.85%) or wasp-venom (66.67%). Altogether the sensitizations were rarely translated into clinical reaction, as only 1 child reported significant local reaction after being stung. No association with parasitic infections was found. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Sensitization against bee- or wasp-venom is quite prevalent among schoolchildren in Indonesia. The discordance between SPT and sIgE might suggest the direct (non-IgE) effect of venoms in skin reactivity. Recorded sensitizations had poor clinical relevance as they rarely translated into clinical symptoms.

In vivo neutralization of bee venom lethality by IgY antibodies.

Bee venom is a complex mixture of molecules, among which melittin and phospholipase A2 (PLA2) are the toxic components involved in envenoming accidents with multiple honeybee stings. Traditionally, the treatment of envenomings has been based on the administration of specific antibodies to neutralize the deleterious effects of toxins. An alternative to mammalian polyclonal antibodies is the use of egg yolk immunoglobulins (IgY) due to their advantages regarding animal welfare and lower costs of production as compared to the conventional production methods. In this work, a novel composition containing specific IgY antibodies was developed. After four immunizations, IgY extracted from the egg yolks was able to recognize several components of the bee venom, including melittin and PLA2. The performance of IgY to neutralize the lethal activity was evaluated in a mouse model by using one median lethal dose (LD50) of the bee venom. The effective dose of the IgY extract was determined as 30.66 µg/mg. These results demonstrate the feasibility to produce IgY-based antivenoms to treat envenomings by multiple bee stings.

Safety and Adherence to Venom Immunotherapy During COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: According to expert consensus, the time interval between Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy (VIT) injections can be extended up to 12 weeks, without significant impact on efficacy and safety. However, the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic caused longer delays, and no recommendations are available to manage this huge extension. OBJECTIVES: To provide advice on how to resume VIT safely after a long delay from the last injection considering the potential risk factors for side effects, without starting again with the induction phase. METHODS: All the patients who delayed VIT because of the pandemic were consecutively enrolled in this single-center study. The time extension was decided according to their risk profile (eg, long prepandemic time interval, severe pre-VIT reaction, older age, multitreatments), and correlation analyses were performed to find potential risk factors of side effects. RESULTS: The mean delay from the pre- (7 weeks) to the postpandemic VIT interval (15.5 weeks) was 8.5 weeks. The total amount of the prepandemic VIT maintenance dose was safely administered in 1 day in 78% of patients, whereas only 3, of 87, experienced side effects, and their potential risk factors were identified in bee venom allergy and recent VIT initiation. CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world setting, long VIT delays may be safe and well tolerated, but more caution should be paid in resuming VIT in patients with long prepandemic maintenance interval, severe pre-VIT reaction, recent VIT initiation, older age, multidrug treatments, and bee venom allergy. This is useful in any case of long, unplanned, and unavoidable VIT delay.

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

No disponible

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.

Sensitization to Hymenoptera venom in pollen allergic patients: Frequency and involvement of cross-reacting carbohydrate determinants (CCD).

Sensitization to Hymenoptera venom in patients without a history of systemic allergic reactions to Hymenoptera stings is frequently found and can be due to the presence of specific IgE to cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants (CCD). This study investigates 105 pollen allergic subjects for the presence of specific IgE to honeybee or wasp venom, pollen, the MUXF3 carbohydrate epitope from bromelain and recombinant Hymenoptera venom components. In addition, in a subgroup of patients (n = 10) a basophil activation test (BAT) using bee and wasp venom was performed. Specific IgE to Hymenoptera venom was detected in 45.7% of the pollen allergic subjects and in 26.7% of the non-atopic controls, both without a history of systemic allergic reactions to Hymenoptera stings. The high sensitization rate in atopic patients could partially be explained by cross-sensitization between pollen and Hymenoptera venom due to specific IgE to CCDs. In our study population, only 20% showed a sensitization to CCDs. Primary sensitization due to sting exposure, high total IgE values or unspecific binding and detection of low affinity antibodies in the test procedure could be reasons. Thus, determination of specific IgE to Hymenoptera venom in patients without a history of systemic allergic reactions as screening test is not recommended.

Comparison of the Safety Profiles of 3 Different Hymenoptera Venom Immunotherapy Protocols: A Retrospective 2-Center Study of 143 Patients.

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.

Studies of royal jelly and associated cross-reactive allergens in atopic dermatitis patients.

Royal jelly (RJ), a creamy substance secreted by honeybees, is the exclusive diet for queen bee differentiation and life maintenance. RJ has been used in cosmetics, beverages, medicines, and supplements worldwide. However, allergy is a concerning issue for RJ, especially in atopic dermatitis (AD) and asthma patients. In some cases, allergic reactions are seen after the first intake of RJ, suggesting the existence of allergens cross-reactive with RJ. Information about the cross-reactive allergens is very important for the safe application of RJ; however, study of this cross-reactivity is quite limited. In this study, we attempted to identify allergens cross-reactive with RJ by using serum samples from 30 AD patients who had never been exposed to RJ. In an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) experiment, RJ-binding IgE antibodies were detected in the serum of 10 out of 30 patients, and their antibody titers ranged from 4- to 2,048-fold dilution ratios. Additionally, 3 AD patients were determined to be positive in a skin-prick test (SPT) with an RJ solution. Significant correlations were observed between the anti-RJ antibody titer and nonspecific IgE and between the anti-RJ antibody titer and the Eczema Area and Severity Index score. We further examined the cross-reactivity between RJ and 14 typical allergens by using an ELISA-inhibition assay and demonstrated that the following 6 allergens showed cross-reactivity with RJ: the European house dust mite (HDM) (Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus), American HDM (Dermatophagoides farinae), snow crab (Chionocetes spp.), edible crab (Cancer pagurus), German cockroach (Blatella germanica), and honeybee venom (Apis mellifera). In conclusion, people with a history of allergic diseases, including AD, asthma, and allergic rhinitis, should be cautioned against consuming RJ products because of the potential for cross-reactive responses to ensure the safe and successful use of RJ supplements.

Venom allergy and knowledge about anaphylaxis among beekeepers and their families.

BACKGROUND: Beekeepers and their families are at an increased risk of life-threatening anaphylaxis due to recurrent bee-sting exposures. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the demographic features, previous history of anaphylaxis among beekeepers and their family members, and their knowledge about the symptoms and management of anaphylaxis. METHODS: A standardized questionnaire was administered to beekeepers during the 6th International Beekeeping and Pine Honey Congress held in 2018, in Mugla, Turkey. Additionally, food-service staff from restaurants were surveyed as an occupational control group about their knowledge about anaphylaxis. RESULTS: Sixty-nine beekeepers (82.6% male, mean age 48.4±12.0 years) and 52 restaurant staff (46.2% male, mean age 40.5±10.0 years) completed the questionnaire. Awareness of the terms 'anaphylaxis' and 'epinephrine auto-injector' among the beekeepers were 55.1% and 30.4% and among the restaurant staff were 23.1% and 3.8%, respectively. Of the beekeepers, 74% were able to identify the potential symptoms of anaphylaxis among the given choices; 2.9% and 5.8% reported anaphylaxis related to bee-stings in themselves and in their family members, respectively. None of the restaurant staff had experienced or encountered anaphylaxis before but 3.8% of their family members had anaphylaxis and those reactions were induced by drugs. CONCLUSION: It is essential that implementation of focused training programs about anaphylaxis symptoms and signs as well as practical instructions of when and how to use an epinephrine auto-injector will decrease preventable morbidities and mortalities due to bee-stings in this selected high-risk population of beekeepers and their family members, as well as other fieldworkers under risk.

Secreted Phospholipase A2 Group X Acts as an Adjuvant for Type 2 Inflammation, Leading to an Allergen-Specific Immune Response in the Lung.

Secreted phospholipase A2 (sPLA2) enzymes release free fatty acids, including arachidonic acid, and generate lysophospholipids from phospholipids, including membrane phospholipids from cells and bacteria and surfactant phospholipids. We have shown that an endogenous enzyme sPLA2 group X (sPLA2-X) is elevated in the airways of asthmatics and that mice lacking the sPLA2-X gene (Pla2g10) display attenuated airway hyperresponsiveness, innate and adaptive immune responses, and type 2 cytokine production in a model of airway sensitization and challenge using a complete allergen that induces endogenous adjuvant activity. This complete allergen also induces the expression of sPLA2-X/Pla2g10 In the periphery, an sPLA2 found in bee venom (bee venom PLA2) administered with the incomplete Ag OVA leads to an Ag-specific immune response. In this study, we demonstrate that both bee venom PLA2 and murine sPLA2-X have adjuvant activity, leading to a type 2 immune response in the lung with features of airway hyperresponsiveness and Ag-specific type 2 airway inflammation following peripheral sensitization and subsequent airway challenge with OVA. Further, the adjuvant effects of sPLA2-X that result in the type 2-biased OVA-specific adaptive immune response in the lung were dependent upon the catalytic activity of the enzyme, as a catalytically inactive mutant form of sPLA2-X does not elicit the adaptive component of the immune response, although other components of the immune response were induced by the inactive enzyme, suggesting receptor-mediated effects. Our results demonstrate that exogenous and endogenous sPLA2s play an important role in peripheral sensitization, resulting in airway responses to inhaled Ags.

Large local reactions and systemic reactions to insect stings: Similarities and differences.

BACKGROUND: Large local reactions (LLR) to Hymenoptera stings were considered as IgE-mediated late-phase inflammatory reactions. However, in older studies, most patients with LLR were skin test positive, but only around 50% had detectable sIgE determined by the RAST system. METHODS: Data of 620 patients were evaluated retrospectively: 310 patients who suffered from LLR and 310 patients with previous systemic sting reactions (SSR). We aimed to clarify if sIgE can generally be detected by the CAP system in patients with LLR; sIgE levels and clinical parameters were compared between patients with LLR and SSR. RESULTS: Positive sIgE levels were detected in 80.7% of patients with LLR, and in 95.2% of patients with SSR (p<0.001). Of the 310 patients with LLR, 80.6% had a LLR with a size of 10-20cm, whereas 19.4% had swellings >20cm, with a mean duration of seven days. In only 2.9% of patients, LLRs occurred after stings on the trunk, while 14.8% of SSR resulted from stings on this site (p<0.001). Similarly, LLR were also less frequent on the capillitium compared to SSR (8.1% versus 26.2%; p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: LLR usually persisted over seven days and about one fifth of patients had swellings greater than 20cm. Contrary to SSR, LLR were less frequently observed on the capillitium and on the trunk. In most patients with LLR, sIgE could be detected. However, total IgE and sIgE levels to bee or vespid venom did not differ between patients with LLR and SSR.