{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017518248175182483, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0021897810218978104, 'mean_word_length': 5.5285714285714285, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Approaches to the Management of Presumed Immediate Hymenoptera Venom Allergy and Non-Detectable IgE

Objective: To provide a comprehensive evaluation in patients with a convincing history of immediate insect allergy but negative skin test and/or specific IgE results, adequately addressing the question of how best to manage them. Results: Among 43 identified papers only 9 of them presented relevant original data, while the other papers were reviews. In the majority of the cases, the culprit insect was identified with in vitro tests such as Basophil Activation Test, Cellular Allergen Stimulation Test or Western blot, whereas in vivo (less frequently) with sting challenge or dialyzed venom skin test. Conclusions: The management of patients with a convincing history of immediate insect allergy but negative conventional test results requires an adaption of the guidelines including an incorporation of the novel diagnostic tools. Although cellu- lar tests represent equivalent sensitivity and superior specificity as compared with standard ones, these tests still remain supplementary diagnostic tools. In a minority of cases (especially in the developing countries where cellular tests cannot be performed), venom immunotherapy in adult subjects could be taken into account based solemnly on the history of a clear patient's identification of the culprit insect.