TY - JOUR
T1 - Rush Venom Immunotherapy in Children
AU - Confino-Cohen, Ronit
AU - Rosman, Yossi
AU - Goldberg, Arnon
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology
PY - 2017/5
Y1 - 2017/5
N2 - Background Rush venom immunotherapy (VIT) is highly effective in Hymenoptera venom allergy. Still, specific data regarding its safety and efficiency in children are rather sparse. Objectives The objective of this study was to better evaluate the safety and efficiency of rush VIT in this specific age group. Methods Children younger than 16 years with systemic reaction to insect sting involving, at least, one body system other than skin and children aged 16-18 years with any kind of systemic reaction were offered conventional or rush VIT with a build-up phase that lasted 3 days. Results Eighty-four of 127 children together with their caregivers chose to receive rush VIT. Seventy of them were allergic to bee venom only. There was no difference between the children receiving rush or conventional VIT in the incidence of systemic reactions during the build-up phase (19% and 23.2%, respectively), nor was there any difference in regard to the severity of these reactions. Efficiency was improved with rush VIT, as reflected by a higher number of patients achieving the 100 mcg maintenance dose with the primary protocol (83 of 84 patients, 98.8%, and 39 of 43, 90.7%, for rush and conventional, respectively, P =.04). Conclusions Rush VIT in children is as safe as and more efficient than conventional VIT.
AB - Background Rush venom immunotherapy (VIT) is highly effective in Hymenoptera venom allergy. Still, specific data regarding its safety and efficiency in children are rather sparse. Objectives The objective of this study was to better evaluate the safety and efficiency of rush VIT in this specific age group. Methods Children younger than 16 years with systemic reaction to insect sting involving, at least, one body system other than skin and children aged 16-18 years with any kind of systemic reaction were offered conventional or rush VIT with a build-up phase that lasted 3 days. Results Eighty-four of 127 children together with their caregivers chose to receive rush VIT. Seventy of them were allergic to bee venom only. There was no difference between the children receiving rush or conventional VIT in the incidence of systemic reactions during the build-up phase (19% and 23.2%, respectively), nor was there any difference in regard to the severity of these reactions. Efficiency was improved with rush VIT, as reflected by a higher number of patients achieving the 100 mcg maintenance dose with the primary protocol (83 of 84 patients, 98.8%, and 39 of 43, 90.7%, for rush and conventional, respectively, P =.04). Conclusions Rush VIT in children is as safe as and more efficient than conventional VIT.
KW - Bee venom allergy
KW - Hymenoptera venom allergy
KW - Rush venom immunotherapy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85007304467&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jaip.2016.10.011
DO - 10.1016/j.jaip.2016.10.011
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
C2 - 27914814
AN - SCOPUS:85007304467
SN - 2213-2198
VL - 5
SP - 799
EP - 803
JO - Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
JF - Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
IS - 3
ER -