Adverse events associated with venomous insect immunotherapy and clinical outcomes in 82 dogs (2002-2020)

BACKGROUND: Limited information is known on adverse events and efficacy associated with venomous insect immunotherapy (VIT) in canine patients. OBJECTIVES: To assess adverse events associated with VIT and perceived efficacy of VIT. ANIMALS: Records from 82 client-owned animals which received VIT were assessed. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective review of records from 2002 to 2020. Clinical history, adverse events during therapy and observations following field stings were collected from all records. Patients were grouped into reactors and nonreactors based on whether or not an adverse event had occurred during therapy. Records were evaluated to determine if a field sting had occurred and the severity of the reaction was compared to pretreatment reaction. RESULTS: Of 82 patients that were identified, 26 experienced a minimum of one adverse event. No deaths or severe anaphylactic reactions were reported. The most common adverse event was gastrointestinal upset. The overall reaction rate per injection was 2.8%. Only variation in sensitisation level (the minimum concentration of venom which elicited a positive intradermal reaction) was significantly different between groups (P = 0.014). Forty-one field challenges in 26 patients were documented. Therapy reduced the severity of reactions in 87.8% of challenges. No deaths were reported. CONCLUSION: Venom immunotherapy appears to be a safe and efficacious treatment for prevention of anaphylaxis due to insect stings in canine patients.

Authors: T. S. Ewing, C. Dong, M. J. Boord and Y. Fang Title: Adverse events associated with venomous insect immunotherapy and clinical outcomes in 82 dogs (2002-2020) Full source: Vet Dermatol, 2021,Vol Document type: Journal Article
Résumé, analyse et commentaires
Aucun.
Photo
Aucune.
Analysis
None.
Abstract	Source
BACKGROUND: Limited information is known on adverse events and efficacy associated with venomous insect immunotherapy (VIT) in canine patients. OBJECTIVES: To assess adverse events associated with VIT and perceived efficacy of VIT. ANIMALS: Records from 82 client-owned animals which received VIT were assessed. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective review of records from 2002 to 2020. Clinical history, adverse events during therapy and observations following field stings were collected from all records. Patients were grouped into reactors and nonreactors based on whether or not an adverse event had occurred during therapy. Records were evaluated to determine if a field sting had occurred and the severity of the reaction was compared to pretreatment reaction. RESULTS: Of 82 patients that were identified, 26 experienced a minimum of one adverse event. No deaths or severe anaphylactic reactions were reported. The most common adverse event was gastrointestinal upset. The overall reaction rate per injection was 2.8%. Only variation in sensitisation level (the minimum concentration of venom which elicited a positive intradermal reaction) was significantly different between groups (P = 0.014). Forty-one field challenges in 26 patients were documented. Therapy reduced the severity of reactions in 87.8% of challenges. No deaths were reported. CONCLUSION: Venom immunotherapy appears to be a safe and efficacious treatment for prevention of anaphylaxis due to insect stings in canine patients.