John M Kelso1. 1. Allergy Division, Naval Medical Center, San Diego, California, USA. jmkelso@nmcsd.med.navy.mil
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Even though no studies have shown that local reactions to immunotherapy injections predict subsequent systemic reactions, many protocols continue to call for dose adjustments after local reactions. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the rate of systemic reactions to immunotherapy injections is affected by dose adjustment after local reactions. METHODS: In our clinic before March 1999, if a patient had a local reaction to an immunotherapy injection, an adjustment was made to repeat or reduce the next dose. From March 1999 on, no such adjustments were made. At our outlying clinics, the adjustment protocol continued. A retrospective review was conducted for shots given from March 1997 to February 2001, recording whether an immunotherapy visit resulted in a systemic reaction. RESULTS: In our clinic, there were 3,250 shot visits from March 1997 to February 1999 (adjustment protocol) and 4,692 visits from March 1999 to February 2001 (no adjustment protocol). The systemic reaction rate during the 2 periods was not different (1.11% vs 0.85%, P = .29). In the outlying clinics, there were 1,138 shot visits from March 1999 to February 2001 (adjustment protocol), and the systemic reaction rate was not different than in our clinic (no adjustment protocol) (0.88% vs 0.85%, P = .86). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of systemic reactions to immunotherapy injections is the same whether or not the dose is adjusted after a local reaction. These dose adjustments are thus unnecessary, and eliminating them lessens chances for errors and decreases the number of shots required to reach a therapeutic dose.
BACKGROUND: Even though no studies have shown that local reactions to immunotherapy injections predict subsequent systemic reactions, many protocols continue to call for dose adjustments after local reactions. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the rate of systemic reactions to immunotherapy injections is affected by dose adjustment after local reactions. METHODS: In our clinic before March 1999, if a patient had a local reaction to an immunotherapy injection, an adjustment was made to repeat or reduce the next dose. From March 1999 on, no such adjustments were made. At our outlying clinics, the adjustment protocol continued. A retrospective review was conducted for shots given from March 1997 to February 2001, recording whether an immunotherapy visit resulted in a systemic reaction. RESULTS: In our clinic, there were 3,250 shot visits from March 1997 to February 1999 (adjustment protocol) and 4,692 visits from March 1999 to February 2001 (no adjustment protocol). The systemic reaction rate during the 2 periods was not different (1.11% vs 0.85%, P = .29). In the outlying clinics, there were 1,138 shot visits from March 1999 to February 2001 (adjustment protocol), and the systemic reaction rate was not different than in our clinic (no adjustment protocol) (0.88% vs 0.85%, P = .86). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of systemic reactions to immunotherapy injections is the same whether or not the dose is adjusted after a local reaction. These dose adjustments are thus unnecessary, and eliminating them lessens chances for errors and decreases the number of shots required to reach a therapeutic dose.
Authors: Sarah K Wise; Sandra Y Lin; Elina Toskala; Richard R Orlandi; Cezmi A Akdis; Jeremiah A Alt; Antoine Azar; Fuad M Baroody; Claus Bachert; G Walter Canonica; Thomas Chacko; Cemal Cingi; Giorgio Ciprandi; Jacquelynne Corey; Linda S Cox; Peter Socrates Creticos; Adnan Custovic; Cecelia Damask; Adam DeConde; John M DelGaudio; Charles S Ebert; Jean Anderson Eloy; Carrie E Flanagan; Wytske J Fokkens; Christine Franzese; Jan Gosepath; Ashleigh Halderman; Robert G Hamilton; Hans Jürgen Hoffman; Jens M Hohlfeld; Steven M Houser; Peter H Hwang; Cristoforo Incorvaia; Deborah Jarvis; Ayesha N Khalid; Maritta Kilpeläinen; Todd T Kingdom; Helene Krouse; Desiree Larenas-Linnemann; Adrienne M Laury; Stella E Lee; Joshua M Levy; Amber U Luong; Bradley F Marple; Edward D McCoul; K Christopher McMains; Erik Melén; James W Mims; Gianna Moscato; Joaquim Mullol; Harold S Nelson; Monica Patadia; Ruby Pawankar; Oliver Pfaar; Michael P Platt; William Reisacher; Carmen Rondón; Luke Rudmik; Matthew Ryan; Joaquin Sastre; Rodney J Schlosser; Russell A Settipane; Hemant P Sharma; Aziz Sheikh; Timothy L Smith; Pongsakorn Tantilipikorn; Jody R Tversky; Maria C Veling; De Yun Wang; Marit Westman; Magnus Wickman; Mark Zacharek Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Oliver Pfaar; Tobias Ankermann; Matthias Augustin; Petra Bubel; Sebastian Böing; Randolf Brehler; Peter A Eng; Peter J Fischer; Michael Gerstlauer; Eckard Hamelmann; Thilo Jakob; Jörg Kleine-Tebbe; Matthias Volkmar Kopp; Susanne Lau; Norbert Mülleneisen; Christoph Müller; Katja Nemat; Wolfgang Pfützner; Joachim Saloga; Klaus Strömer; Peter Schmid-Grendelmeier; Antje Schuster; Gunter Johannes Sturm; Christian Taube; Zsolt Szépfalusi; Christian Vogelberg; Martin Wagenmann; Wolfgang Wehrmann; Thomas Werfel; Stefan Wöhrl; Margitta Worm; Bettina Wedi; Susanne Kaul; Vera Mahler; Anja Schwalfenberg Journal: Allergol Select Date: 2022-09-06
Authors: Oliver Pfaar; Claus Bachert; Albrecht Bufe; Roland Buhl; Christof Ebner; Peter Eng; Frank Friedrichs; Thomas Fuchs; Eckard Hamelmann; Doris Hartwig-Bade; Thomas Hering; Isidor Huttegger; Kirsten Jung; Ludger Klimek; Matthias Volkmar Kopp; Hans Merk; Uta Rabe; Joachim Saloga; Peter Schmid-Grendelmeier; Antje Schuster; Nicolaus Schwerk; Helmut Sitter; Ulrich Umpfenbach; Bettina Wedi; Stefan Wöhrl; Margitta Worm; Jörg Kleine-Tebbe; Susanne Kaul; Anja Schwalfenberg Journal: Allergo J Int Date: 2014