[Insect venom allergies-What will change in times of global change?] / Insektengiftallergien ­ Was wird sich ändern in Zeiten des globalen Wandels?

BACKGROUND: In Germany, honeybees (Apis mellifera) and various Vespula species (wasps) are primarily relevant for hypersensitivity reactions to stings. Hornets (Vespa crabro), bumblebees, paper wasps (Polistes) and yellowjackets (Dolichovespula) less frequently cause sting reactions. OBJECTIVE: What effects do intensive agricultural utilization and climate change have on the living conditions and occurrence of Hymenoptera and what consequences do they have for the diagnostics and treatment of hypersensitivity reactions to Hymenoptera stings. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature search was carried out. RESULTS: Honeybees and wild bees are endangered due to introduced diseases, invasive species and pesticides. The aim of widespread beekeeping activity is to protect honeybees, which is why no reduction in stings is to be expected despite increased bee mortality. In Germany, there is evidence of the spread of thermophilic Polistes species (paper wasps) from south to north and the immigration of Vespa velutina nigrithorax (Asian hornet). It is unlikely that these species will lead to a significant increase in sting reactions. Nests of the red fire ant (Solenopsis invicta), which was originally common in South America, were first detected in Sicily in 2022. Red fire ants are aggressive insects with a high potential for adverse sting reactions. CONCLUSION: Invasive insects must be considered as a trigger in the anamnesis and diagnostics. Diagnostics are only available for the detection of Polistes sensitization. Therapeutic allergens can be obtained from other European countries for venom immunotherapy of a Polistes allergy. Due to cross-reactivity, diagnostic and therapeutic allergens from Vespula spp. are used for the diagnosis and treatment of suspected allergies to the Asian hornet.

Fatal and Near-Fatal Anaphylaxis: Data From the European Anaphylaxis Registry and National Health Statistics.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a serious systemic reaction-data on fatal and near-fatal reactions are limited. OBJECTIVE: To better understand clinical patterns and risks factors of severe anaphylaxis by a deep analysis of data from fatal and near-fatal anaphylaxis. METHODS: Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry on fatal/near-fatal anaphylactic reactions and national data on anaphylaxis fatalities were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 305 fatal/near-fatal reactions among children and adults including 35 fatalities from the European Anaphylaxis Registry were identified. The most frequent elicitors were drugs, insects, and food. Male patients (66%/60%) were more frequently affected. Male sex, higher age, concomitant mastocytosis, and cardiovascular disease were associated with a more severe outcome. With increasing reaction severity, skin symptoms were less frequently observed (45% of fatal reactions). In parallel, anaphylaxis mortality rates were studied. The data show that anaphylaxis mortality rates increased in Germany from 0.48 (2009) to 0.59 per 1,000,000 population per year (2020). This increase was apparent only in the female population. In this data set, drugs were the most frequent elicitor of anaphylaxis fatalities, and the rate for this increased over time. CONCLUSIONS: We identified not only elicitors but also individual factors to be associated with an increased risk of fatal anaphylaxis. Such patients should be recognized and managed with great caution. The increase in drug-induced fatalities points to the need for a better allergological care of patients suffering from drug hypersensitivity.

Diagnosis and treatment of Hymenoptera venom allergy: S2k Guideline of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) in collaboration with the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Berufs- und Umweltdermatologie e.V. (ABD), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNOKC), the German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), the Society for Pediatric Allergy and Environmental Medicine (GPA), German Respiratory Society (DGP), and the Austrian Society for Allergy and Immunology (ÖGAI).

Hymenoptera venom (HV) is injected into the skin during a sting by Hymenoptera such as bees or wasps. Some components of HV are potential allergens and can cause large local and/or systemic allergic reactions (SAR) in sensitized individuals. During their lifetime, ~ 3% of the general population will develop SAR following a Hymenoptera sting. This guideline presents the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to SAR following Hymenoptera stings. Symptomatic therapy is usually required after a severe local reaction, but specific diagnosis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) with HV (VIT) is not necessary. When taking a patient's medical history after SAR, clinicians should discuss possible risk factors for more frequent stings and more severe anaphylactic reactions. The most important risk factors for more severe SAR are mast cell disease and, especially in children, uncontrolled asthma. Therefore, if the SAR extends beyond the skin (according to the Ring and Messmer classification: grade > I), the baseline serum tryptase concentration shall be measured and the skin shall be examined for possible mastocytosis. The medical history should also include questions specific to asthma symptoms. To demonstrate sensitization to HV, allergists shall determine concentrations of specific IgE antibodies (sIgE) to bee and/or vespid venoms, their constituents and other venoms as appropriate. If the results are negative less than 2 weeks after the sting, the tests shall be repeated (at least 4 - 6 weeks after the sting). If only sIgE to the total venom extracts have been determined, if there is double sensitization, or if the results are implausible, allergists shall determine sIgE to the different venom components. Skin testing may be omitted if in-vitro methods have provided a definitive diagnosis. If neither laboratory diagnosis nor skin testing has led to conclusive results, additional cellular testing can be performed. Therapy for HV allergy includes prophylaxis of reexposure, patient self treatment measures (including use of rescue medication) in the event of re-stings, and VIT. Following a grade I SAR and in the absence of other risk factors for repeated sting exposure or more severe anaphylaxis, it is not necessary to prescribe an adrenaline auto-injector (AAI) or to administer VIT. Under certain conditions, VIT can be administered even in the presence of previous grade I anaphylaxis, e.g., if there are additional risk factors or if quality of life would be reduced without VIT. Physicians should be aware of the contraindications to VIT, although they can be overridden in justified individual cases after weighing benefits and risks. The use of ß-blockers and ACE inhibitors is not a contraindication to VIT. Patients should be informed about possible interactions. For VIT, the venom extract shall be used that, according to the patient's history and the results of the allergy diagnostics, was the trigger of the disease. If, in the case of double sensitization and an unclear history regarding the trigger, it is not possible to determine the culprit venom even with additional diagnostic procedures, VIT shall be performed with both venom extracts. The standard maintenance dose of VIT is 100 µg HV. In adult patients with bee venom allergy and an increased risk of sting exposure or particularly severe anaphylaxis, a maintenance dose of 200 µg can be considered from the start of VIT. Administration of a non-sedating H1-blocking antihistamine can be considered to reduce side effects. The maintenance dose should be given at 4-weekly intervals during the first year and, following the manufacturer's instructions, every 5 - 6 weeks from the second year, depending on the preparation used; if a depot preparation is used, the interval can be extended to 8 weeks from the third year onwards. If significant recurrent systemic reactions occur during VIT, clinicians shall identify and as possible eliminate co-factors that promote these reactions. If this is not possible or if there are no such co-factors, if prophylactic administration of an H1-blocking antihistamine is not effective, and if a higher dose of VIT has not led to tolerability of VIT, physicians should should consider additional treatment with an anti IgE antibody such as omalizumab as off lable use. For practical reasons, only a small number of patients are able to undergo sting challenge tests to check the success of the therapy, which requires in-hospital monitoring and emergency standby. To perform such a provocation test, patients must have tolerated VIT at the planned maintenance dose. In the event of treatment failure while on treatment with an ACE inhibitor, physicians should consider discontinuing the ACE inhibitor. In the absence of tolerance induction, physicians shall increase the maintenance dose (200 µg to a maximum of 400 µg in adults, maximum of 200 µg HV in children). If increasing the maintenance dose does not provide adequate protection and there are risk factors for a severe anaphylactic reaction, physicians should consider a co-medication based on an anti-IgE antibody (omalizumab; off-label use) during the insect flight season. In patients without specific risk factors, VIT can be discontinued after 3 - 5 years if maintenance therapy has been tolerated without recurrent anaphylactic events. Prolonged or permanent VIT can be considered in patients with mastocytosis, a history of cardiovascular or respiratory arrest due to Hymenoptera sting (severity grade IV), or other specific constellations associated with an increased individual risk of recurrent and/or severe SAR (e.g., hereditary α-tryptasemia). In cases of strongly increased, unavoidable insect exposure, adults may receive VIT until the end of intense contact. The prescription of an AAI can be omitted in patients with a history of SAR grade I and II when the maintenance dose of VIT has been reached and tolerated, provided that there are no additional risk factors. The same holds true once the VIT has been terminated after the regular treatment period. Patients with a history of SAR grade ≥ III reaction, or grade II reaction combined with additional factors that increase the risk of non response or repeated severe sting reactions, should carry an emergency kit, including an AAI, during VIT and after regular termination of the VIT.

Guideline for allergological diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity reactions: S2k Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) in cooperation with the German Dermatological Society (DDG), the Association of German Allergologists (ÄDA), the German Society for Pediatric Allergology (GPA), the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group (DKG), the German Society for Pneumology (DGP), the German Society of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, the Austrian Society of Allergology and Immunology (ÖGAI), the Austrian Society of Dermatology and Venereology (ÖGDV), the German Academy of Allergology and Environmental Medicine (DAAU), and the German Documentation Center for Severe Skin Reactions (dZh).

Not available.

Food-Induced Anaphylaxis: Data From the European Anaphylaxis Registry.

BACKGROUND: Food is one of the most common elicitors of anaphylaxis, with an increasing incidence over recent years. OBJECTIVES: To characterize elicitor-specific phenotypes and identify factors enhancing the risk or severity of food-induced anaphylaxis (FIA). METHODS: We analyzed data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry applying an age- and sex-matched analysis of associations (Cramer's V) for single food triggers and calculated odds ratios (ORs) for severe FIA. RESULTS: We identified 3,427 cases of confirmed FIA showing an age-dependent elicitor ranking (for children: peanut, cow's milk, cashew, and hen's egg; and for adults: wheat flour, shellfish, hazelnut, and soy). The age- and sex-matched analysis revealed defined symptom patterns for wheat and cashew. Wheat-induced anaphylaxis was more frequently associated with cardiovascular symptoms (75.7%; Cramer's V = 0.28) and cashew-induced anaphylaxis with gastrointestinal symptoms (73.9%; Cramer's V = 0.20). Furthermore, concomitant atopic dermatitis was slightly associated with anaphylaxis to hen's egg (Cramer's V = 0.19) and exercise was strongly associated with anaphylaxis to wheat (Cramer's V = 0.56). Additional factors influencing the severity were alcohol intake in wheat anaphylaxis (OR = 3.23; CI, 1.31-8.83) and exercise in peanut anaphylaxis (OR = 1.78; CI, 1.09-2.95). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that FIA is age-dependent. In adults, the range of elicitors inducing FIA is broader. For some elicitors, the severity of FIA seems to be related to the elicitor. These data require confirmation in future studies considering a clear differentiation between augmentation and risk factors in FIA.

Secukinumab in moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa (SUNSHINE and SUNRISE): week 16 and week 52 results of two identical, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Few therapeutic options are available for patients with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa. We aimed to assess the efficacy of secukinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa in two randomised trials. METHODS: SUNSHINE and SUNRISE were identical, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 trials done in 219 primary sites in 40 countries. Patients aged 18 years old or older with the capacity to provide written informed consent and with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa (defined as a total of ≥5 inflammatory lesions affecting ≥2 distinct anatomical areas) for at least 1 year were eligible for inclusion. Included patients also agreed to daily use of topical over-the-counter antiseptics on the areas affected by hidradenitis suppurativa lesions while on study treatment. Patients were excluded if they had 20 or more fistulae at baseline, had ongoing active conditions requiring treatment with prohibited medication (eg, systemic biological immunomodulating treatment, live vaccines, or other investigational treatments), or met other exclusion criteria. In both trials, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by means of interactive response technology to receive subcutaneous secukinumab 300 mg every 2 weeks, subcutaneous secukinumab 300 mg every 4 weeks, or subcutaneous placebo all via a 2 mL prefilled syringe in a double-dummy method as per treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a hidradenitis suppurativa clinical response, defined as a decrease in abscess and inflammatory nodule count by 50% or more with no increase in the number of abscesses or in the number of draining fistulae compared with baseline, at week 16, assessed in the overall population. Hidradenitis suppurativa clinical response was calculated based on the number of abscesses, inflammatory nodules, draining fistulae, total fistulae, and other lesions in the hidradenitis suppurativa affected areas. Safety was assessed by evaluating the presence of adverse events and serious adverse events according to common terminology criteria for adverse events, which were coded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities terminology. Both the SUNSHINE, NCT03713619, and SUNRISE, NCT03713632, trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. FINDINGS: Between Jan 31, 2019, and June 7, 2021, 676 patients were screened for inclusion in the SUNSHINE trial, of whom 541 (80%; 304 [56%] women and 237 [44%] men; mean age 36·1 years [SD 11·7]) were included in the analysis (181 [33%] in the secukinumab every 2 weeks group, 180 [33%] in the secukinumab every 4 weeks group, and 180 [33%] in the placebo group). Between the same recruitment dates, 687 patients were screened for inclusion in the SUNRISE trial, of whom 543 (79%; 306 [56%] women and 237 [44%] men; mean age 36·3 [11·4] years) were included in the analysis (180 [33%] in the secukinumab every 2 weeks group, 180 [33%] in the secukinumab every 4 weeks group, and 183 [34%] in the placebo group). In the SUNSHINE trial, significantly more patients in the secukinumab every 2 weeks group had a hidradenitis suppurativa clinical response (rounded average number of patients with response in 100 imputations, 81·5 [45%] of 181 patients) compared with the placebo group (60·7 [34%] of 180 patients; odds ratio 1·8 [95% CI 1·1-2·7]; p=0·0070). However, there was no significant difference between the number of patients in the secukinumab every 4 weeks group (75·2 [42%] of 180 patients) and the placebo group (1·5 [1·0-2·3]; p=0·042). Compared with the placebo group (57·1 [31%] of 183 patients), significantly more patients in the secukinumab every 2 weeks group (76·2 [42%] of 180 patients; 1·6 [1·1-2·6]; p=0·015) and the secukinumab every 4 weeks group (83·1 [46%] of 180 patients; 1·9 [1·2-3·0]; p=0·0022) had a hidradenitis suppurativa clinical response in the SUNRISE trial. Patient responses were sustained up to the end of the trials at week 52. The most common adverse event by preferred term up to week 16 was headache in both the SUNSHINE (17 [9%] patients in the secukinumab every 2 weeks group, 20 [11%] in the secukinumab every 4 weeks group, and 14 [8%] in the placebo group) and SUNRISE (21 [12%] patients in the secukinumab every 2 weeks group, 17 [9%] in the secukinumab every 4 weeks group, and 15 [8%] in the placebo group) trials. No study-related deaths were reported up to week 16. The safety profile of secukinumab in both trials was consistent with that previously reported, with no new or unexpected safety findings detected. INTERPRETATION: When given every 2 weeks, secukinumab was clinically effective at rapidly improving signs and symptoms of hidradenitis suppurativa with a favourable safety profile and with sustained response up to 52 weeks of treatment. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma.

S3 Guideline Urticaria. Part 2: Treatment of urticaria - German-language adaptation of the international S3 guideline.

This publication is the second part of the German-language S3 guideline on urticaria. It covers the management of urticaria and should be used together with Part 1 of the guideline on classification and diagnosis. This publication was prepared according to the criteria of the AWMF on the basis of the international English-language S3 guideline with special consideration of health system conditions in German-speaking countries. Chronic urticaria has a high impact on the quality of life and daily activities of patients. Therefore, if causal factors cannot be eliminated, effective symptomatic treatment is necessary. The recommended first-line treatment is to administer new generation, non-sedating H1 antihistamines. If the standard dose is not sufficiently effective, the dose should be increased up to fourfold. For patients who do not respond to this treatment, the second-line treatment in addition to antihistamines in the treatment algorithm is omalizumab and, if this treatment fails, ciclosporin. Other low-evidence therapeutic agents should only be used if all treatments in the treatment algorithm agreed upon by the guideline group fail. Both the benefit-risk profile and cost should be considered. Corticosteroids are not recommended for long-term treatment due to their inevitable severe side effects.

S3 Guideline Urticaria. Part 1: Classification and diagnosis of urticaria - German-language adaptation of the international S3 Guideline.

The lifetime prevalence of urticaria, a severe allergic disease, is almost 20%. It not only limits the quality of life of those affected, but also their general performance at work and in their daily activities. This publication is the first section of the Urticaria Guideline. It covers the classification and diagnosis of urticaria, taking into account the major advances in research into its causes, triggering factors and pathomechanisms. It also addresses strategies for the efficient diagnosis of the different subtypes of urticaria. This is crucial for individual, patient-oriented treatment, which is covered in the second part of the guideline, published separately. This German-language guideline was developed according to the criteria of the AWMF on the basis of the international English-language S3 guideline with special consideration of health system characteristics in the German-speaking countries. This first part of the guideline describes the classification of urticaria, distinguishing spontaneously occurring wheals (hives) and angioedema from forms of urticaria with inducible symptoms. Urticaria is defined as sudden onset of wheals, angioedema, or both, but is to be distinguished from conditions in which wheals occur as a short-term symptom, such as anaphylaxis. The diagnosis is based on (a limited number of) laboratory tests, but especially on medical history. In addition, validated instruments are available to measure the severity, activity and course of the disease.

Different phenotypes of drug-induced anaphylaxis-Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry.

BACKGROUND: Drugs are a frequent cause of severe anaphylactic reactions. Here, we analyze a large dataset on drug induced anaphylaxis regarding elicitors, risk factors, symptoms, and treatment. METHODS: Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry (2007-2019) with 1815 reported cases of drug-induced anaphylaxis were studied accordingly. RESULTS: Drugs are the third most frequent cause of anaphylaxis reported in the Anaphylaxis Registry. Among the eliciting groups of drugs analgesics and antibiotics were far most often reported. Female and senior patients were more frequently affected, while the number of children with DIA was low. DIA patients had symptoms affecting the skin and mucous membranes (n = 1525, 84.02%), the respiratory (n = 1300, 71.63%), the cardiovascular (n = 1251, 68.93%) and the gastrointestinal system (n = 549, 30.25%). Drugs caused significant more severe reactions, occurred more often in medical facilities and led to increased hospitalization rates in comparison to food and insect venom induced anaphylaxis. Adrenaline was used more often in patients with DIA than in anaphylaxis due to other causes. Patients with skin symptoms received more antihistamines and corticosteroids in the acute treatment, while gastrointestinal symptoms led to less adrenaline use. CONCLUSION: The study contributes to a better understanding of DIA, with a large number of cases from Europe supporting previous data, e.g., analgesics and antibiotics being the most frequent culprits for DIA. Female gender and higher age are relevant risk factors and despite clear recommendations, the emergency treatment of DIA is not administered according to the guidelines.

Increased prevalence of irritant hand eczema in health care workers in a dermatological clinic due to increased hygiene measures during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene measures in the general population and in health care workers have increased considerably since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prevalence and symptoms of hand eczema, as well as hygiene measures and concepts of care, in German health care workers. MATERIALS & METHODS: This was an observational questionnaire study to investigate hygiene and skin care habits, as well as the prevalence and symptoms of hand eczema in 66 nurses and doctors of our dermatology department before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. RESULTS: Hand washing and hand disinfection procedures increased significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Self-diagnosed hand eczema was reported by 33% of the participants, with a median duration of 14 days. The majority of staff currently affected by hand eczema were free of eczema a month previously (82%) and would treat their skin condition with emollients (77%). Erythema, scaling, burning and fissures were reported by 66.1% of the participants and were classified as predominant signs of toxic-irritant hand dermatitis rather than contact allergy. CONCLUSION: Overall, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has led to a significant increase in the incidence of signs of irritant hand eczema despite intensified emollient use as a preventive measure. Awareness of the prevalence of hand eczema in health care workers in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic should be raised, and preventive measures should be intensified.

Patch test results in patients with suspected contact allergy to shoes: Retrospective IVDK data analysis 2009-2018.

BACKGROUND: Allergic contact dermatitis caused by shoes is common and new relevant allergens have been identified. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the pattern of type IV sensitization in patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis of the feet related to shoes as a presumed culprit trigger. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of data of the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), 2009-2018. RESULTS: Six hundred twenty-five patients with presumed shoe dermatitis were identified in a cohort of 119 417 patients. Compared to patients with suspected contact sensitization from other allergen sources (n = 118 792), study group patients were more frequently sensitized to potassium dichromate (10.8% vs 3.5%), colophony (7.2% vs 3.7%), mercaptobenzothiazole (MBT; 4.0% vs 0.6%), mercapto mix (4.6% vs 0.6%), and p-tert-butylphenol formaldehyde resin (1.6% vs 0.5%). Sensitizations to urea formaldehyde resin, melamine formaldehyde resin, glutaraldehyde, tricresyl phosphate, and phenyl glycidylether were rare. Moreover, reactions to compounds in the leather or textile dyes test series were scarce. CONCLUSION: A distinct sensitization pattern was observed in patients with suspected allergy to shoe materials. Although substances with low sensitization rates should be removed from the leather and shoe patch test series, novel potential allergens should be added.

Wheat Anaphylaxis in Adults Differs from Reactions to Other Types of Food.

BACKGROUND: Wheat is one of the most commonly consumed foods and a known elicitor of anaphylaxis in children and adults. Reactions in adults are often cofactor dependent and characterized by a prolonged time between food intake and the onset of symptoms making the diagnosis of wheat anaphylaxis challenging. OBJECTIVE: To characterize a cohort of patients with the history of wheat anaphylaxis to better understand this atypical phenotype of anaphylaxis. METHODS: Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry from 2007 to 2019 (n = 10,636) including 250 patients (213 adults and 37 children) with a history of anaphylaxis caused by wheat were analyzed. RESULTS: Wheat was the most common food elicitor of anaphylaxis in adults in the registry in Central Europe. Reactions to wheat in adults were frequently associated with exercise as a cofactor (82.8%) and partially delayed (57.5%). Only 36.9% of patients had atopic comorbidities, which was uncommonly low for adult patients allergic to other kinds of foods (63.2%). Anaphylaxis to wheat presented frequently with cardiovascular symptoms (86.7%) including severe symptoms such as loss of consciousness (41%) and less often with respiratory symptoms (53.6%). The reactions to wheat were more severe than reactions to other foods (odds ratio [OR] = 4.33), venom (OR = 1.58), or drugs (OR = 2.11). CONCLUSIONS: Wheat is a relevant elicitor of anaphylaxis in adults in Central Europe. Wheat anaphylaxis is highly dependent on the presence of cofactors and less frequently associated with atopic diseases compared with other food allergies. More data on mechanisms of wheat-induced anaphylaxis are required to develop preventive measures for this potentially life-threatening disease.

Anaphylaxis in middle-aged patients.

Age is one of the most important factors influencing the course of anaphylaxis: moreover, the frequency of elicitors of anaphylaxis is age-associated. We analyzed 8,465 anaphylactic episodes in adult patients in three age groups with a focus on patients in the middle-age group (35 - 65 years old). Insect venom was the most frequent trigger in this age group (51.2%) followed by drugs (22.8%) and food (17.3%). Severe reactions were observed in 40.1% of middle-aged patients and occurred more frequently in this age group than in patients below 35 years (27.6%) and less frequently than in patients over 65 years (55.6%). The symptoms and comorbidity profile also changed with age, most significantly regarding the increase in rates of concomitant cardiologic diseases and (severe) cardiovascular symptoms.

Omalizumab ensures compatibility to bee venom immunotherapy (VIT) after VIT-induced anaphylaxis in a patient with systemic mastocytosis.

BACKGROUND: Systemic reactions and anaphylaxis due to Hymenoptera venoms occur in up to 7.5% of the European population. Fatal sting reactions are very rare. Serum tryptase levels should be measured in all patients with a history of severe reactions in order to detect mastocytosis and to determine the risk of severe reactions to venom immunotherapy (VIT). The risk to experience severe or even fatal anaphylaxis due to insect stings is quite high in patients with mastocytosis. Therefore, lifelong VIT is recommended in these highly threatened patients. Multicenter studies involving a large population report that up to 20% of patients undergoing VIT have intolerance and systemic reactions to immunotherapy. Some of these side effects occur repeatedly and cannot be managed by standard treatment. A pre-treatment with the anti-IgE antibody omalizumab was useful in many cases. However, omalizumab is not approved for the indication anaphylaxis. Therefore, there is still no defined protocol for omalizumab pre-treatment, and the optimal duration, dosage as well as long-time benefits are still unclear. CASE REPORT: We present a 60-year-old female patient with mastocytosis who developed a severe anaphylactic reaction during initiation of bee VIT. Serum tryptase was elevated, and a KIT mutation D816V was subsequently confirmed. Component-resolved diagnostic tests revealed specific IgE antibodies to recombinant Api m 1 only. The patient was treated with 150 mg omalizumab, administered subcutaneously 5 weeks, 3 weeks, and 1 week prior to re-start of immunotherapy and for 2 months in parallel to VIT. Updosing was done by a 7-day rush schedule. During this period, no anaphylactic reaction developed, and the bee VIT was well tolerated with up to 200 µg bee venom. The patient is currently in the 3rd year of treatment and tolerates the treatment very well. CONCLUSION: Omalizumab may be used as a premedication in patients with mastocytosis who do not tolerate VIT. Although there is no consensus on the treatment protocol, treatment for 2 - 6 months is considered adequate. The long-term benefits of such treatment require further research.