Safety of specific immunotherapy using an ultra-rush induction regimen in bee and wasp allergy

Background: Specific allergen immunotherapy to Hymenoptera venom (VIT) is a basic treatment for patients allergic to Hymenoptera venom. The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety of an ultra-rush regimen compared with the rush and conventional protocols. Materials and methods: In 31 patients wi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Andrzej Bożek, Krzysztof Kołodziejczyk
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Taylor & Francis Group 2018-02-01
Series:Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2017.1397245
_version_ 1797677571777757184
author Andrzej Bożek
Krzysztof Kołodziejczyk
author_facet Andrzej Bożek
Krzysztof Kołodziejczyk
author_sort Andrzej Bożek
collection DOAJ
description Background: Specific allergen immunotherapy to Hymenoptera venom (VIT) is a basic treatment for patients allergic to Hymenoptera venom. The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety of an ultra-rush regimen compared with the rush and conventional protocols. Materials and methods: In 31 patients with an allergy to bee venom and 82 with an allergy to wasp venom, the allergic adverse reactions during VIT were monitored. Patients were selected based on the criteria established by EAACI (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology) recommendations. Adverse reactions during the ultra-rush immunotherapy were measured, documented and classified according to the criteria of Mueller. Ultra-rush, rush or conventional protocols of the initial phase VIT using the Venomenhal vaccine (Hal Allergy, Leiden, Netherlands) were conducted. Results: Six (13.7%) patients on the ultra-rush regimen, 5 (14.3%) patients on the rush regimen and 9 (26.5%) on conventional VIT experienced an allergic reaction. There were no associations between the adverse allergic reactions and the following factors: gender, total IgE and allergen-specific IgE to wasp or bee venom before the VIT and cardiological drugs that were used. Conclusion: We found that the ultra-rush protocol (similar to the rush protocol) using the Venomenhal vaccine is safer than the conventional protocol.
first_indexed 2024-03-11T22:46:05Z
format Article
id doaj.art-c50211e9c9df4f61babe0c6a3a734a72
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2164-5515
2164-554X
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-11T22:46:05Z
publishDate 2018-02-01
publisher Taylor & Francis Group
record_format Article
series Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics
spelling doaj.art-c50211e9c9df4f61babe0c6a3a734a722023-09-22T08:17:53ZengTaylor & Francis GroupHuman Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics2164-55152164-554X2018-02-0114228829110.1080/21645515.2017.13972451397245Safety of specific immunotherapy using an ultra-rush induction regimen in bee and wasp allergyAndrzej Bożek0Krzysztof Kołodziejczyk1Dermatology and Allergology in Zabrze, Medical University of SilesiaDermatology and Allergology in Zabrze, Medical University of SilesiaBackground: Specific allergen immunotherapy to Hymenoptera venom (VIT) is a basic treatment for patients allergic to Hymenoptera venom. The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety of an ultra-rush regimen compared with the rush and conventional protocols. Materials and methods: In 31 patients with an allergy to bee venom and 82 with an allergy to wasp venom, the allergic adverse reactions during VIT were monitored. Patients were selected based on the criteria established by EAACI (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology) recommendations. Adverse reactions during the ultra-rush immunotherapy were measured, documented and classified according to the criteria of Mueller. Ultra-rush, rush or conventional protocols of the initial phase VIT using the Venomenhal vaccine (Hal Allergy, Leiden, Netherlands) were conducted. Results: Six (13.7%) patients on the ultra-rush regimen, 5 (14.3%) patients on the rush regimen and 9 (26.5%) on conventional VIT experienced an allergic reaction. There were no associations between the adverse allergic reactions and the following factors: gender, total IgE and allergen-specific IgE to wasp or bee venom before the VIT and cardiological drugs that were used. Conclusion: We found that the ultra-rush protocol (similar to the rush protocol) using the Venomenhal vaccine is safer than the conventional protocol.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2017.1397245hymenopterapimmunotherapyallergybeewasp
spellingShingle Andrzej Bożek
Krzysztof Kołodziejczyk
Safety of specific immunotherapy using an ultra-rush induction regimen in bee and wasp allergy
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics
hymenopterap
immunotherapy
allergy
bee
wasp
title Safety of specific immunotherapy using an ultra-rush induction regimen in bee and wasp allergy
title_full Safety of specific immunotherapy using an ultra-rush induction regimen in bee and wasp allergy
title_fullStr Safety of specific immunotherapy using an ultra-rush induction regimen in bee and wasp allergy
title_full_unstemmed Safety of specific immunotherapy using an ultra-rush induction regimen in bee and wasp allergy
title_short Safety of specific immunotherapy using an ultra-rush induction regimen in bee and wasp allergy
title_sort safety of specific immunotherapy using an ultra rush induction regimen in bee and wasp allergy
topic hymenopterap
immunotherapy
allergy
bee
wasp
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2017.1397245
work_keys_str_mv AT andrzejbozek safetyofspecificimmunotherapyusinganultrarushinductionregimeninbeeandwaspallergy
AT krzysztofkołodziejczyk safetyofspecificimmunotherapyusinganultrarushinductionregimeninbeeandwaspallergy