BACKGROUND:Venom immunotherapy can be initiated by different schedules, but randomized comparisons have not been performed. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the safety of 2 initiation schedules. METHODS:Patients of any age with prior immediate generalized reactions to jack jumper ant (Myrmecia pilosula) stings were randomized to venom immunotherapy initiation by a semirush schedule over 10 visits (9 weeks) or an ultrarush schedule over 3 visits (2 weeks). In a concurrent treatment efficacy study, the target maintenance dose was randomized to either 50 μg or 100 μg. The primary outcome was the occurrence of 1 or more objective systemic reactions during venom immunotherapy initiation. Analyses were by intention to treat. We also assessed outcomes in patients who declined randomization. RESULTS: Of 213 eligible patients, 93 were randomized to semirush (44 patients) or ultrarush (49 patients) initiation. Objective systemic reactions were more likely during ultrarush initiation (65% vs 29%; P < .001), as were severe reactions (12% vs 0%; P= .029). Times to maximal increases in venom-specific IgG(4) were no different between treatments, whereas the maximal increase in venom-specific IgE occurred earlier with ultrarush treatment. Similar differences between methods were observed in patients who declined randomization. One hundred seventy-eight patients were randomized to maintenance doses of either 50 μg (90 patients) or 100 μg (88 patients). The target maintenance dose had no effect on the primary outcome, but multiple-failure-per-subject analysis found that the 50 μg dose reduced the likelihood of reactions. CONCLUSION: Ultrarush initiation increases the risk of systemic reactions. A lower maintenance dose reduces the risk of repeated reactions, but the effect on treatment efficacy is unknown.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Venom immunotherapy can be initiated by different schedules, but randomized comparisons have not been performed. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the safety of 2 initiation schedules. METHODS:Patients of any age with prior immediate generalized reactions to jack jumper ant (Myrmecia pilosula) stings were randomized to venom immunotherapy initiation by a semirush schedule over 10 visits (9 weeks) or an ultrarush schedule over 3 visits (2 weeks). In a concurrent treatment efficacy study, the target maintenance dose was randomized to either 50 μg or 100 μg. The primary outcome was the occurrence of 1 or more objective systemic reactions during venom immunotherapy initiation. Analyses were by intention to treat. We also assessed outcomes in patients who declined randomization. RESULTS: Of 213 eligible patients, 93 were randomized to semirush (44 patients) or ultrarush (49 patients) initiation. Objective systemic reactions were more likely during ultrarush initiation (65% vs 29%; P < .001), as were severe reactions (12% vs 0%; P= .029). Times to maximal increases in venom-specific IgG(4) were no different between treatments, whereas the maximal increase in venom-specific IgE occurred earlier with ultrarush treatment. Similar differences between methods were observed in patients who declined randomization. One hundred seventy-eight patients were randomized to maintenance doses of either 50 μg (90 patients) or 100 μg (88 patients). The target maintenance dose had no effect on the primary outcome, but multiple-failure-per-subject analysis found that the 50 μg dose reduced the likelihood of reactions. CONCLUSION: Ultrarush initiation increases the risk of systemic reactions. A lower maintenance dose reduces the risk of repeated reactions, but the effect on treatment efficacy is unknown.
Authors: Marek L Kowalski; Ignacio Ansotegui; Werner Aberer; Mona Al-Ahmad; Mubeccel Akdis; Barbara K Ballmer-Weber; Kirsten Beyer; Miguel Blanca; Simon Brown; Chaweewan Bunnag; Arnaldo Capriles Hulett; Mariana Castells; Hiok Hee Chng; Frederic De Blay; Motohiro Ebisawa; Stanley Fineman; David B K Golden; Tari Haahtela; Michael Kaliner; Connie Katelaris; Bee Wah Lee; Joanna Makowska; Ulrich Muller; Joaquim Mullol; John Oppenheimer; Hae-Sim Park; James Parkerson; Giovanni Passalacqua; Ruby Pawankar; Harald Renz; Franziska Rueff; Mario Sanchez-Borges; Joaquin Sastre; Glenis Scadding; Scott Sicherer; Pongsakorn Tantilipikorn; James Tracy; Vera van Kempen; Barbara Bohle; G Walter Canonica; Luis Caraballo; Maximiliano Gomez; Komei Ito; Erika Jensen-Jarolim; Mark Larche; Giovanni Melioli; Lars K Poulsen; Rudolf Valenta; Torsten Zuberbier Journal: World Allergy Organ J Date: 2016-10-12 Impact factor: 4.084
Authors: F Estelle R Simons; Ledit Rf Ardusso; M Beatrice Bilò; Victoria Cardona; Motohiro Ebisawa; Yehia M El-Gamal; Phil Lieberman; Richard F Lockey; Antonella Muraro; Graham Roberts; Mario Sanchez-Borges; Aziz Sheikh; Lynette P Shek; Dana V Wallace; Margitta Worm Journal: World Allergy Organ J Date: 2014-05-30 Impact factor: 4.084
Authors: Charles Dzviga; Catherine Matevi; Philippe Bonniaud; François Lavaud; Bruno Girodet; Joelle Birnbaum; Claude Lambert Journal: Arch Med Sci Date: 2016-02-02 Impact factor: 3.318
Authors: Maximilian Schiener; Anke Graessel; Markus Ollert; Carsten B Schmidt-Weber; Simon Blank Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2017-06-12 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Peter Korošec; Thilo Jakob; Harfi Harb; Robert Heddle; Sarah Karabus; Ricardo de Lima Zollner; Julij Selb; Bernard Yu-Hor Thong; Fares Zaitoun; David B K Golden; Michael Levin Journal: World Allergy Organ J Date: 2019-10-24 Impact factor: 4.084
Authors: Troy Wanandy; Yoshikazu Honda-Okubo; Noel W Davies; Hayley E Rose; Robert J Heddle; Simon G A Brown; Richard J Woodman; Nikolai Petrovsky; Michael D Wiese Journal: J Pharm Biomed Anal Date: 2019-04-09 Impact factor: 3.935
Authors: Troy Wanandy; Emily Mulcahy; Wun Yee Lau; Simon G A Brown; Michael D Wiese Journal: Clin Rev Allergy Immunol Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 8.667