Table IV.
Characteristics of patients who reacted to VIT after the extension of the time interval between administrations
| Patient | Age (y) | Sex | VIT duration | Pre-VIT Mueller | REMA score | Reaction during VIT | Venom (extract) | Prepandemic MI | Postpandemic MI | SEs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1∗ | 38 | M | 1 mo | IV | 3 | No† | Bee (depot) | 2 wk | 12 wk | Moderate oral, palmar, and plantar itching |
| 2 | 36 | M | 3 y | III | −2 | No | Bee (depot) | 6 wk | 20 wk | Mild rhinoconjunctivitis and cough |
| 3‡ | 43 | F | 12 y | IV | 2 | No | Bee (depot) | 10 wk | 20 wk | Menses-like pain |
F, Female; M, male.Key common features: bee venom allergy, depot extract, no concomitant diseases/treatments, no previous reactions during VIT.
∗
Hobby beekeeper.
†
This patient tolerated a 3-d “rush” protocol with a purified aqueous extract, whereas 1 y before he was forced to stop VIT in another center because of systemic SEs during a conventional protocol using a nonpurified aqueous extract.
‡
Beekeeper's family member.