Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Allergy. 2017 Mar;72(3):342-365. doi: 10.1111/all.13077. Epub 2017 Jan 25.

Allergen immunotherapy for insect venom allergy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Author information

1
Evidence-Based Health Care Ltd, Edinburgh, UK.
2
School of Pharmacy, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK.
3
Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Respiratory and Allergic Disease Division, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
4
Department of Dermatology and Venerology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
5
Outpatient Allergy Clinic Reumannplatz, Vienna, Austria.
6
Department of Women and Child Health, Food Allergy Referral Centre Veneto Region, Padua General University Hospital, Padua, Italy.
7
Swiss Institute of Allergy and Asthma Research (SIAF), Switzerland Servicio de Enfermedades del Sistema Inmune-Alergia, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
8
Departamento de Medicina y Especialidades Médicas, Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias, Madrid, Spain.
9
Universidad de Alcalá, Madrid, Spain.
10
Allergy Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital of Ancona, Ancona, Italy.
11
Section of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Imperial College London, National Heart and Lung Institute, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK.
12
Department of Pediatrics, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
13
Department of Allergology and Internal Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Hospital Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
14
Groningen Research Center for Asthma and COPD (GRIAC), Groningen, The Netherlands.
15
Department of Internal Medicine, Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.
16
Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Medical Center Gießen and Marburg (UKGM), Justus Liebig University Gießen, Gießen, Germany.
17
Medical Faculty Ljubljana, University Clinic of Respiratory and Allergic Diseases Golnik, Golnik, Slovenia.
18
Department of Pediatric Pneumonology and Allergy, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
19
Department of Allergology and Clinical Immunology, Mother Theresa School of Medicine, Tirana, Albania.
20
Department of Paraclinical Disciplines, Faculty of Technical Medical Sciences, Medicine University of Tirana, Tirana, Albania.
21
Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2nd Pediatric Clinic, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
22
Allergy Clinic, Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, Gentofte, Denmark.
23
Department of Infection and Immunity, Luxembourg Institute of Health (LIH), Strassen, Luxembourg.
24
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
25
Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
26
Center for Rhinology Allergology, Wiesbaden, Germany.
27
Medical School, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus.
28
UOC Clinical Allergy and Immunology, IRCCS Foundation Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.
29
The David Hide Asthma and Allergy Research Centre, St Mary's Hospital, Newport, Isle of Wight, UK.
30
NIHR Respiratory Biomedical Research Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
31
Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
32
Klinik und Poliklinik für Dermatologie und Allergologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.
33
Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Division of Immunology and Allergy, Faculty of Medicine, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
34
Research Fellow Centre for Health Economics, University of York, UK.
35
Institute for Health and Human Development, University of East London, London, UK.
36
Allergy and Respiratory Research Group, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Erratum in

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is in the process of developing the EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for the management of insect venom allergy. To inform this process, we sought to assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of AIT in the management of insect venom allergy.

METHODS:

We undertook a systematic review, which involved searching 15 international biomedical databases for published and unpublished evidence. Studies were independently screened and critically appraised using established instruments. Data were descriptively summarized and, where possible, meta-analysed.

RESULTS:

Our searches identified a total of 16 950 potentially eligible studies; of which, 17 satisfied our inclusion criteria. The available evidence was limited both in volume and in quality, but suggested that venom immunotherapy (VIT) could substantially reduce the risk of subsequent severe systemic sting reactions (OR = 0.08, 95% CI 0.03-0.26); meta-analysis showed that it also improved disease-specific quality of life (risk difference = 1.41, 95% CI 1.04-1.79). Adverse effects were experienced in both the build-up and maintenance phases, but most were mild with no fatalities being reported. The very limited evidence found on modelling cost-effectiveness suggested that VIT was likely to be cost-effective in those at high risk of repeated systemic sting reactions and/or impaired quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS:

The limited available evidence suggested that VIT is effective in reducing severe subsequent systemic sting reactions and in improving disease-specific quality of life. VIT proved to be safe and no fatalities were recorded in the studies included in this review. The cost-effectiveness of VIT needs to be established.

KEYWORDS:

Allergy; anaphylaxis; hymenoptera venom allergy; insect venom allergy; systemic sting reaction

PMID:
28120424
DOI:
10.1111/all.13077
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley Icon for White Rose Research Online
Loading ...
Support Center