TY - JOUR
T1 - Should We Consider Venom Immunotherapy When Levels of Specific IgE to Insect Venom Is Between 0.1 and 0.34?
AU - Al-Shaikhly, Taha
AU - Golden, David B.K.
AU - Craig, Timothy
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - Venom immunotherapy (VIT) improves quality of life and is potentially lifesaving in patients with anaphylactic reactions to stinging insect venom and evidence of immunoglobulin E (IgE)–mediated sensitization. Sensitization is defined as either a positive skin test to insect venom or a serum venom–specific IgE level that is equal to or above 0.35 kU/L. With the advent of advanced diagnostics, levels of sensitization as low as 0.1 kU/L can be appreciated; however, the approach to patients with a low level of sensitization (defined as venom-specific IgE levels between 0.1 and 0.34 kU/L) remains debatable. In addition, when considering VIT for selected patients with large local reactions or cutaneous systemic reactions, encountering low levels of sensitization can complicate the clinical decision. In this pro/con debate, we discuss whether patients who had an anaphylactic reaction, cutaneous systemic reaction, or large local reaction to insect venom should receive VIT when diagnostic evaluation only reveals sensitization between 0.1 and 0.34 kU/L and negative skin testing. The pro position is presented by T. Al-Shaikhly, and the con position is discussed by T. J. Craig. Dr. Golden served as moderator and fact-checker. This review is not intended to address the medical legal aspects, rather to direct research and clinical studies.
AB - Venom immunotherapy (VIT) improves quality of life and is potentially lifesaving in patients with anaphylactic reactions to stinging insect venom and evidence of immunoglobulin E (IgE)–mediated sensitization. Sensitization is defined as either a positive skin test to insect venom or a serum venom–specific IgE level that is equal to or above 0.35 kU/L. With the advent of advanced diagnostics, levels of sensitization as low as 0.1 kU/L can be appreciated; however, the approach to patients with a low level of sensitization (defined as venom-specific IgE levels between 0.1 and 0.34 kU/L) remains debatable. In addition, when considering VIT for selected patients with large local reactions or cutaneous systemic reactions, encountering low levels of sensitization can complicate the clinical decision. In this pro/con debate, we discuss whether patients who had an anaphylactic reaction, cutaneous systemic reaction, or large local reaction to insect venom should receive VIT when diagnostic evaluation only reveals sensitization between 0.1 and 0.34 kU/L and negative skin testing. The pro position is presented by T. Al-Shaikhly, and the con position is discussed by T. J. Craig. Dr. Golden served as moderator and fact-checker. This review is not intended to address the medical legal aspects, rather to direct research and clinical studies.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105018973919
UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=105018973919&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jaip.2025.09.005
DO - 10.1016/j.jaip.2025.09.005
M3 - Article
C2 - 40973003
AN - SCOPUS:105018973919
SN - 2213-2198
JO - Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
JF - Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
ER -