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

Abstract

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.