ArticleClinical and translational allergy2025
Patients with detectable KIT p.D816V in peripheral blood are at high risk for adverse systemic events during venom immunotherapy and treatment failure.
Article in Clinical and translational allergy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostics and monitoring in Hymenoptera venom allergy: current and future perspectives.Frontiers in allergy · 2026Review
- Patients with detectable KIT p.D816V in peripheral blood are at high risk for adverse systemic events during venom immunotherapy and treatment failure.Clinical and translational allergy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecent studies have highlighted the importance of routine screening for the somatic missense KIT p.D816V variant in peripheral blood leukocytes (PBL), and its association with severe sting anaphylaxis. Our study aimed to evaluate the clinical relevance of KIT p.D816V detected in PBL on systemic adverse events (SAEs) and the efficacy of venom immunotherapy (VIT).
methodsThis retrospective study included 839 patients receiving VIT. The KIT p.D816V variant was assayed with a highly sensitive, allele-specific, quantitative PCR.
resultsKIT p.D816V was detected in the PBL of 125 (15%) of 839 VIT patients. The majority (70%, 88/125) of these individuals had normal BST levels. Notably, half of the KIT-positive patients receiving honeybee venom immunotherapy had SAEs during treatment (48%, 18/37; p = 0.0136), and the KIT p.D816V allele burden was higher than 0.01% in the majority of those patients (61%, 11/18). Furthermore, a significant difference was observed between KIT-positive and KIT-negative patients treated with VIT in the past and who experienced a recurrent reaction to a sting after treatment termination (VIT failure). KIT-positive patients with VIT failure had a higher allele burden than those with successful VIT (80% vs. 40% with a KIT p.D816V higher than 0.01%; p = 0.0019). KIT p.D816V was a predictor of SAEs during honeybee VIT (univariate; OR = 2.43, p = 0.012/multivariate; OR = 2.26, p = 0.033) and a strong predictor of VIT failure in patients treated with wasp venom (univariate; OR = 4.1, p = 0.002/multivariate; OR = 3.54, p = 0.008).
conclusionOur study revealed the high clinical relevance of KIT p.D816V detected in PBL. KIT p.D816V was a significant predictor of SAEs during honeybee VIT and a significant predictor of VIT failure after completing wasp VIT.
Indexed as
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.