High burden of clonal mast cell disorders and hereditary α-tryptasemia in patients who need Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: In patients who require venom immunotherapy (VIT), there is a need to identify underlying mast cell (MC) disorders since these may affect the risk and severity of future sting reactions and the long-term effectiveness of VIT. METHODS: 1319 individuals with Hymenoptera venom allergy (HVA) who needed VIT from referral centers in Slovenia, Austria, Croatia, and Poland underwent examination for KIT p.D816V in peripheral blood leukocytes (PBL) using a highly sensitive PCR test and tryptase genotyping by digital droplet PCR. We also included 183 control individuals with large local reactions (LLRs) to Hymenoptera stings and with asymptomatic sensitization to Hymenoptera venoms. RESULTS: 285 of 1319 individuals recommended for VIT (21.6%) were positive for KIT p.D816V in PBL, preferably those who present with severe reaction (33.9% [n = 207 of 610] with Ring-Messmer grade 3-4 vs. 11% [n = 78 of 709] with Grade 1-2; p < .0001), whereas only 1.3% (n = 2 of 152) of controls with LLR and none with asymptomatic sensitization (n = 31) had KIT p.D816V. KIT p.D816V allelic burden was higher in those with severe reaction (median 0.018% [n = 207] in Grade 3-4 vs. 0.001% [n = 78] in Grade 1-2; p < .0001), and the majority had normal baseline serum tryptase levels (69% [n = 196 of 285]). All KIT p.D816V-positive individuals (n = 41) who underwent bone marrow (BM) biopsy were found to have underlying clonal diseases, principally BM mastocytosis. HαT was also associated with severe HVA and symptoms (p < .01), and remarkably, 31.0% (n = 31 of 100) were found to have concomitant KIT p.D816V. Concomitant HαT and KIT p.D816V showed an additive effect, and having both was associated with the highest risk for severe HVA, even higher than having either HαT or KIT p.D816V alone (OR = 3.8; p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: By employing prospective universal tryptase genotyping and examination for KIT p.D816V in PBL in large HVA populations, we have demonstrated a high burden of clonal MC disorders and HαT in patients who require VIT.

Fatal Hymenoptera Venom-Triggered Anaphylaxis in Patients with Unrecognized Clonal Mast Cell Disorder-Is Mastocytosis to Blame?

Hymenoptera venom-triggered anaphylaxis (HVA) affects up to 8.9% of the general population and is the most frequent cause of anaphylaxis in adults, accounting for approximately 20% of all fatal anaphylaxis cases. Quite often, a fatal reaction is a victim's first manifestation of HVA. Mastocytosis represents one of the most important risk factors for severe HVA. We analyzed patients with documented fatal HVA for the presence of underlying clonal mast cell disorder (cMCD). Here, we report three cases of fatal HVA, with undiagnosed underlying cMCD identified by the presence of the peripheral blood and/or bone marrow KIT p.D816V missense variant postmortem. In the first case, anaphylaxis was the initial episode and was fatal. In the other two cases, both patients were treated with specific venom immunotherapy (VIT), nevertheless, one died of HVA after VIT discontinuation, and the other during VIT; both patients had cardiovascular comorbidities and were taking beta-blockers and/or ACE inhibitors. Our results point to the importance of screening all high-risk individuals for underlying cMCD using highly sensitive molecular methods for peripheral blood KIT p.D816V variant detection, including severe HVA and possibly beekeepers, for proper management and the need for lifelong VIT to prevent unnecessary deaths. Patients at the highest risk of fatal HVA, with concomitant cardiovascular and cMCD comorbidities, might not be protected from field stings even during regular VIT. Therefore, two adrenaline autoinjectors and lifelong VIT, and possibly cotreatment with omalizumab, should be considered for high-risk patients to prevent fatal HVA episodes.

Immunophenotypes of anti-SARS-CoV-2 responses associated with fatal COVID-19.

Background: The relationship between anti-SARS-CoV-2 humoral immune response, pathogenic inflammation, lymphocytes and fatal COVID-19 is poorly understood. Methods: A longitudinal prospective cohort of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 (n=254) was followed up to 35 days after admission (median, 8 days). We measured early anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 antibody IgG levels and dynamic (698 samples) of quantitative circulating T-, B- and natural killer lymphocyte subsets and serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) response. We used machine learning to identify patterns of the immune response and related these patterns to the primary outcome of 28-day mortality in analyses adjusted for clinical severity factors. Results: Overall, 45 (18%) patients died within 28 days after hospitalisation. We identified six clusters representing discrete anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunophenotypes. Clusters differed considerably in COVID-19 survival. Two clusters, the anti-S1-IgGlowestTlowestBlowestNKmodIL-6mod, and the anti-S1-IgGhighTlowBmodNKmodIL-6highest had a high risk of fatal COVID-19 (HR 3.36-21.69; 95% CI 1.51-163.61 and HR 8.39-10.79; 95% CI 1.20-82.67; p≤0.03, respectively). The anti-S1-IgGhighestTlowestBmodNKmodIL-6mod and anti-S1-IgGlowThighestBhighestNKhighestIL-6low cluster were associated with moderate risk of mortality. In contrast, two clusters the anti-S1-IgGhighThighBmodNKmodIL-6low and anti-S1-IgGhighestThighestBhighNKhighIL-6lowest clusters were characterised by a very low risk of mortality. Conclusions: By employing unsupervised machine learning we identified multiple anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune response clusters and observed major differences in COVID-19 mortality between these clusters. Two discrete immune pathways may lead to fatal COVID-19. One is driven by impaired or delayed antiviral humoral immunity, independently of hyper-inflammation, and the other may arise through excessive IL-6-mediated host inflammation response, independently of the protective humoral response. Those observations could be explored further for application in clinical practice.

ß-blockers and ACE inhibitors are not a risk factor for severe systemic sting reactions and adverse events during venom immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: There is controversy whether taking ß-blockers or ACE inhibitors (ACEI) is a risk factor for more severe systemic insect sting reactions (SSR) and whether it increases the number or severity of adverse events (AE) during venom immunotherapy (VIT). METHODS: In this open, prospective, observational, multicenter trial, we recruited patients with a history of a SSR and indication for VIT. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate whether patients taking ß-blockers or ACEI show more systemic AE during VIT compared to patients without such treatment. RESULTS: In total, 1,425 patients were enrolled and VIT was performed in 1,342 patients. Of all patients included, 388 (27.2%) took antihypertensive (AHT) drugs (10.4% took ß-blockers, 11.9% ACEI, 5.0% ß-blockers and ACEI). Only 5.6% of patients under AHT treatment experienced systemic AE during VIT as compared with 7.4% of patients without these drugs (OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.43-1.22, p = 0.25). The severity of the initial sting reaction was not affected by the intake of ß-blockers or ACEI (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.89-1.46, p = 0.29). In total, 210 (17.7%) patients were re-stung during VIT and 191 (91.0%) tolerated the sting without systemic symptoms. Of the 19 patients with VIT treatment failure, 4 took ß-blockers, none an ACEI. CONCLUSIONS: This trial provides robust evidence that taking ß-blockers or ACEI does neither increase the frequency of systemic AE during VIT nor aggravate SSR. Moreover, results suggest that these drugs do not impair effectiveness of VIT. (Funded by Medical University of Graz, Austria; Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT04269629).