TY - JOUR
T1 - Prospective observations on stopping prolonged venom immunotherapy
AU - Golden, David B.K.
AU - Addison, Bonnie I.
AU - Gadde, Jyothi
AU - Kagey-Sobotka, Anne
AU - Valentine, Martin D.
AU - Lichtenstein, Lawrence M.
N1 - Funding Information:
From the Department of Medicine, Division of Clinical Immunol-ogy, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine at The Good Samaritan Hospital, Baltimore, Md. Supported by National Institutes of Health Grant A108270. Received for publication May 31, 1988. Revised Dec. 15, 1988. Accepted for publication Jan. 11, 1989. Reprint requests: David B. K. Golden, MD, Clinical Immunology Division, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine at The Good Samaritan Professional Building, 5601 Loch Raven Boulevard, Suite 402, Baltimore, MD 21239. Publication No. 725 from the O’Neill Laboratories of The Good Samaritan Hospital, Baltimore, Md. 111/12887
PY - 1989/8
Y1 - 1989/8
N2 - After a decade spent establishing the safety, efficacy, and optimal techniques for venom immunotherapy, we have begun a series of studies to determine how long venom immunotherapy must be continued. In retrospective surveys, patients who had stopped venom immunotherapy after 1 to 2 years had a substantial risk (25%) of systemic sting reactions, but this was <50% of the risk in untreated patients. In this first prospective study, 30 patients elected to stop venom immunotherapy after at least 5 years of therapy. Skin test sensitivity had decreased significantly during therapy in 18 30 patients but remained clearly positive in 23 30 (seven patients became equivocal or negative). Serum venom-specific IgE antibodies were at the lower limit of detection (1 ng/ml) in 11 30 patients. After stopping treatment, the mean serum venom-specific IgG antibody level declined from 5.5 ± 0.6 μg/ml to 2.4 ± 0.3 μg/ml by 9 months, which is the same as the mean venom IgG in untreated patients. After 12 months without therapy, live sting challenge caused no systemic reaction in 29 patients. The mean venom IgG level 1 month after the sting had risen significantly to 4.1 ± 0.5 μg/ml, but there was no significant increase of venom IgE. These results suggest that prolonged venom immunotherapy leads to isotype-specific suppression of the venom IgE antibody response and may provide persistent clinical protection by mechanisms other than IgG blocking antibodies. The observations are to be interpreted very cautiously. Further investigations are needed to extend these observations in additional patients and for longer periods of time, and to examine possible mechanisms for this apparent loss of clinical reactivity.
AB - After a decade spent establishing the safety, efficacy, and optimal techniques for venom immunotherapy, we have begun a series of studies to determine how long venom immunotherapy must be continued. In retrospective surveys, patients who had stopped venom immunotherapy after 1 to 2 years had a substantial risk (25%) of systemic sting reactions, but this was <50% of the risk in untreated patients. In this first prospective study, 30 patients elected to stop venom immunotherapy after at least 5 years of therapy. Skin test sensitivity had decreased significantly during therapy in 18 30 patients but remained clearly positive in 23 30 (seven patients became equivocal or negative). Serum venom-specific IgE antibodies were at the lower limit of detection (1 ng/ml) in 11 30 patients. After stopping treatment, the mean serum venom-specific IgG antibody level declined from 5.5 ± 0.6 μg/ml to 2.4 ± 0.3 μg/ml by 9 months, which is the same as the mean venom IgG in untreated patients. After 12 months without therapy, live sting challenge caused no systemic reaction in 29 patients. The mean venom IgG level 1 month after the sting had risen significantly to 4.1 ± 0.5 μg/ml, but there was no significant increase of venom IgE. These results suggest that prolonged venom immunotherapy leads to isotype-specific suppression of the venom IgE antibody response and may provide persistent clinical protection by mechanisms other than IgG blocking antibodies. The observations are to be interpreted very cautiously. Further investigations are needed to extend these observations in additional patients and for longer periods of time, and to examine possible mechanisms for this apparent loss of clinical reactivity.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0024438753&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0024438753&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/0091-6749(89)90320-5
DO - 10.1016/0091-6749(89)90320-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 2760358
AN - SCOPUS:0024438753
SN - 0091-6749
VL - 84
SP - 162
EP - 167
JO - The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology
JF - The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology
IS - 2
ER -