Hymenoptera Venom Immunotherapy : Tolerance and Efficacy of an Ultrarush Protocol versus a Rush and a Slow Conventional Protocol

Abstract EN

Background and Objective.

Various venom immunotherapy (VIT) protocols are available for Hymenoptera allergy.

Although adverse reactions (ADRs) to VIT are widely reported, controlled trials are still needed.

We conducted a randomized prospective study to evaluate ADRs and the efficacy of three VIT regimens.

Methods.

76 patients with Hymenoptera allergy, aged 16–76 years, were randomized to receive an ultrarush protocol (group A: 27 patients), a rush protocol (group B: 25), or a slow protocol (group C: 24).

Aqueous venom extract was used in incremental phase and an adsorbed depot in maintenance phase.

ADRs and accidental Hymenoptera stings during VIT were used to evaluate efficacy.

Results.

During incremental treatment, ADRs occurred in 1.99%, 3.7%, and 3.9% of patients in groups A, B, and C, and in 0.99%, 1.46%, and 2.7%, respectively, during maintenance.

ADRs were significantly fewer in group A (incremental + maintenance phase) than in group C (1.29% versus 3.2%; P=0.013).

Reactions to accidental Hymenoptera stings did not differ among groups (1.1%, 1.2%, and 1.1%).

Conclusion.

Ultrarush was as effective as the rush and slow protocols and was associated with a low incidence of reactions to stings.

This study indicates that ultrarush VIT is a valid therapeutic option for Hymenoptera allergy.