ArticleClinical and molecular allergy : CMA2004
First successful case of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer with venom immunotherapy for hymenoptera sting allergy.
Article in Clinical and molecular allergy : CMA, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostics and monitoring in Hymenoptera venom allergy: current and future perspectives.Frontiers in allergy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo describe immune and endocrine responses in severe hymenoptera hypersensitivity requiring venom immunotherapy (VIT) during in vitro fertilization (IVF). CASE PRESENTATION: A 39-year old patient was referred for history of multiple miscarriage and a history of insect sting allergy. Four years earlier, she began subcutaneous injection of 100 mcg mixed vespid hymenoptera venom/venom protein every 5-6 weeks. The patient had one livebirth and three first trimester miscarriages. Allergy treatment was maintained for all pregnancies ending in miscarriage, although allergy therapy was discontinued for the pregnancy that resulted in delivery. At our institution ovulation induction incorporated venom immunotherapy (VIT) during IVF, with a reduced VIT dose when pregnancy was first identified. Serum IgE was monitored with estradiol during ovulation induction and early pregnancy. Response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation was favorable while VIT was continued, with retrieval of 12 oocytes. Serum RAST (yellow jacket) IgE levels fluctuated in a nonlinear fashion (range 36-54%) during gonadotropin therapy and declined after hCG administration. A healthy female infant was delivered at 35 weeks gestation. The patient experienced no untoward effects from any medications during therapy.
conclusionOur case confirms the safety of VIT in pregnancy, and demonstrates RAST IgE can remain <60% during IVF. With proper monitoring, VIT during IVF can be safe and appropriate for selected patients and does not appear to adversely affect blastocyst implantation, early embryo development or perinatal outcome. Further studies will be needed to develop VIT guidelines specifically applicable to IVF.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.