Abstract
Abstract Background Advanced component-resolved diagnostics (CRD) in Hymenoptera venom allergy (HVA) has improved the precise description of individual sensitization profiles. However, diagnostic gaps, peptide-based cross-reactivity, early identification of severe reactors and diagnosis of patients with a clear history of sting reactions but negative specific IgE and skin tests, remain challenging. Methods Systematic literature search in PubMed and critical analysis of recently published studies on insect venom allergy diagnostics. Results and discussion CRD has increased the sensitivity of IgE testing and improved the discrimination of primary sensitization from irrelevant cross-reactivity, ultimately providing a better rationale for therapeutic decisions. Despite these major advances, there is still room for improvement in routine HVA diagnostics. Peptide based cross-reactivity among homologous allergens from Vespinae and Polistinae venoms as well as still existing diagnostic gaps are particularly challenging. No marker allergens are currently available to differentiate Vespula and Polistes sensitizations. Several strategies including clinical setting of basophil activation test (BAT) for routine diagnostics, venomic analysis for the identification of novel allergens and characterization of the molecular basis of cross-reactivity could be used to address major limitations and unresolved issues in molecular diagnostics of HVA.
Highlights
Hymenoptera venom allergic individuals experience a wide diversity of clinical manifestations including local symptoms and/or mild to severe systemic reactions
The prevalence of systemic reactions ranges from 0.3–7.5% in European population [4] and from 0.5–3.3% in the United States [5], while in Current challenges in molecular diagnostics of insect venom allergy 79 review
Clinical data suggest that Venom immunotherapy (VIT) prevents subsequent systemic sting reactions in 77–84%, 91–96% and 97–98% of patients treated with honeybee venom (HBV), yellow jacket venom (YJV) and ant venom, respectively [7]
Summary
Hymenoptera venom allergic individuals experience a wide diversity of clinical manifestations including local symptoms and/or mild to severe systemic reactions. Mild systemic reactions such as generalized urticaria, angioedema and pruritus are limited to the skin. Clinical data suggest that VIT prevents subsequent systemic sting reactions in 77–84%, 91–96% and 97–98% of patients treated with honeybee venom (HBV), yellow jacket venom (YJV) and ant venom, respectively [7]. The safety profile and efficacy of VIT critically relies on the unequivocal identification of the culprit insect which in Central and Northern Europe are predominantly honeybee and yellow jacket, while in the Mediterranean region, honeybee, Vespinae (Vespula, Vespa) and Polistinae (Polistes dominula) are the most frequent elicitors. Diagnostic gaps, peptidebased cross-reactivity, early identification of severe reactors and diagnosis of patients with a clear history of sting reactions but negative specific IgE and skin tests, remain challenging
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
