Systemic contact dermatitis to foods: nickel, BOP, and more

The regulatory effects of pomiferin dietary on nickel-induced hepatic injury in Sprague-Dawley rats; action mechanisms and signaling pathways

The new technological applications of nickel (Ni) raise concerns over its harmful effects on the environment and human health. Pomiferin isolated from Osage orange is evaluated in in vitro and in vivo laboratory bioassays. This study focused the effects of pomiferin on Ni-caused hepatic injury and its underlying mechanisms. With this aim, Sprague-Dawley rats received 10 mg/kg nickel chloride (NiCl2) for 7 d by intraperitoneal injections. Pomiferin was given orally once a day at different doses (75, 150, and 300 mg/kg) for 20 d after exposure to NiCl2. Animals were anesthetized and livers were carefully collected to evaluate oxidative stress, inflammation, vascular injury, and hepatic function. Also, immunofluorescence analysis of apoptosis and DNA damage was performed on rat hepatic tissues. NiCl2 increased MDA production while reducing SOD, CAT, and GPx activity. NiCl2 induced the production of inflammatory cytokines and also platelet activation in hepatic tissue. Moreover, there were significant increases in AST, ALT, and LDH levels. NiCl2 also caused significant pathological changes in hepatic. Additionally, it remarkably induced up-regulations of apoptotic marker and 8-OHdG expressions by immunofluorescence labeling in liver cells. Whereas, pomiferin significantly attenuated lipid peroxidation and increased antioxidant defense system in liver. Also, the use of pomiferin prevented deregulated inflammatory process by signaling pathways nuclear factor kappa B (NFκB)/COX-2/TNF-α/IL-1β/IL-6. In addition, pomiferin diminished histopathologic evidence of hepatic toxicity and significantly lower expressions of caspase 3 and 8-OHdG were observed in liver cells. Pomiferin seems to counteract the deleterious effects of NiCl2 on hepatic tissue through different cellular and signaling mechanisms.

Systemic allergic dermatitis (systemic contact dermatitis) from pharmaceutical drugs: A review

The literature on systemic allergic dermatitis (SAD; also known as systemic contact dermatitis) is reviewed. Both topical drugs (from absorption through mucosae or skin) and systemic drugs (oral, parenteral, rectal) may be responsible for the disorder. The topical route appears to be rare with 41 culprit topical drugs found to cause SAD in 95 patients. Most reactions are caused by budesonide (especially from inhalation), bufexamac, and dibucaine. SAD from systemic drugs is infrequent with 95 culprit drugs found to cause SAD in 240 patients. The drugs most frequently implicated are mitomycin C, methylprednisolone (salt, ester), and hydrocortisone (salt). The largest group of culprit drugs consisted of corticosteroids (19%), being responsible for >30% of the reactions, of which nearly 40% were not caused by therapeutic drugs, but by drug provocation tests. The most frequent manifestations of SAD from drugs are eczematous eruptions (scattered, widespread, generalized, worsening, reactivation), maculopapular eruptions, symmetrical drug-related intertriginous and flexural exanthema (SDRIFE [baboon syndrome]) and widespread erythema or erythroderma. Therapeutic systemic drugs hardly ever cause reactivation of previously positive patch tests and infrequently of previous allergic contact dermatitis. The pathophysiology of SAD has received very little attention. Explanations for the rarity of SAD are suggested.

Systemic Contact Dermatitis: The Routes of Allergen Entry

Systemic contact dermatitis (SCD) is a generalized reactivation of type IV hypersensitivity skin diseases in individuals with previous sensitization after a contact allergen is administered systemically. Patients with SCD may consider their dermatitis unpredictable and recalcitrant since the causative allergens are difficult to find. If a patient has a pattern of dermatitis suggestive of SCD but fails to improve with conventional treatment, SCD should be taken into consideration. If doctors are not familiar with the presentations of SCD and the possible routes of allergen sensitization and exposure, the diagnosis of SCD may be delayed. In this work, we summarized all of the routes through which allergens can enter the body and cause SCD, including oral intake, local contact (through skin, inhalation, nasal spray and anal application), implants, and other iatrogenic or invasive routes (intravenous, intramuscular, intraarticular, and intravesicular). This will provide a comprehensive reference for the clinicians to identify the culprit of SCD.

Patch Test Clinic Start-up: From Basics to Pearls

Allergic contact dermatitis is a prevalent burdensome condition affecting millions of Americans. Patch testing, the criterion-standard allergic contact dermatitis diagnostic tool, is underused by US dermatologists. Incorporating patch testing into modern dermatology practices is achievable with utilization of accurate resources and sustainable support. This review focuses on the basics of patch testing and provides practical pearls to assist novice providers in establishing a contact dermatitis specialty practice.

Contact Dermatitis: Classifications and Management

Contact dermatitis (CD) is a common inflammatory skin disease caused by exposure to contact allergens and irritants. It is also the most common reason of occupational dermatitis and contributes greatly to hand dermatitis and facial dermatitis. Besides the two major forms of contact dermatitis: allergic contact dermatitis and irritant contact dermatitis, other subtypes of CD have been recognized including immediate skin reactions, photoinduced contact dermatitis, systemic contact dermatitis, and non-eczematous contact dermatitis. CD is a great imitator which can mimic many kinds of skin diseases, such as atopic dermatitis, lichen planus, and angioedema. For the diagnosis of CD, a complete medical history, including occupational history, is very important. It can give a clue of CD and provide a list of suspected substances. Besides the well-known diagnostic test, patch testing, there are many other diagnostic tests can be used to help diagnosis of CD and identify the causative allergens, including photopatch test, skin tests for detecting of immediate contact reactions, serum allergen-specific IgE test, and qualitative and quantitative testing of allergen in the suspected materials patients exposed to and challenge test. Before the treatment, the suspected irritants or allergens should be avoided completely. This includes both the removal of the patient from the environment that contains those substances and the promotion of the metabolism and expulsion of the allergens that have been absorbed by the body. In addition, it is also important to restore the skin barrier and reduce skin inflammation through multiple treatments, such as emollients, topical corticosteroids, and antihistamines, as well as systemic corticosteroids and immunosuppressants. Early and appropriate treatments are important to prevent further deterioration and persistence of the skin condition.

Pediatric allergic contact dermatitis. Part I: Clinical features and common contact allergens in children

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), a delayed hypersensitivity skin reaction to environmental allergens, has a prevalence that is similar in children and adults. However, diagnostic testing for ACD in pediatric populations accounts for less than one tenth of all patch tests. The relative infrequency of pediatric patch testing may be attributed to the difficulty in testing in this population, which includes a smaller surface area for patch test placement and maintaining cooperation during patch testing, especially in younger children. Diagnosis can be difficult in children because the appearance of ACD can mimic other common pediatric skin conditions, particularly atopic dermatitis and irritant contact dermatitis. Comprehensive history taking, guided by patient presentation, age group, and location of dermatitis, helps build clinical suspicion. Such clinical suspicion is one of the major reasons behind patch testing, with additional indications being recalcitrant dermatitis and dermatitis with atypical distribution. US pediatric data have shown the top allergens to be metals, fragrances, topical antibiotics, preservatives, and emollients. These trends are important to recognize to guide management and accurate diagnosis, because ACD tends to persist if the allergen is not identified and can affect patients' quality of life.

Pediatric contact dermatitis: what's new

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) was once thought to be rare in children but recent studies have demonstrated that the prevalence of ACD is common and appears to be increasing in children. Current trends including toys, hobbies, and personal care products may play a role in potentially new allergen exposure or resurgence of certain allergens, making ACD a moving target in children.

RECENT FINDINGS

ACD and atopic dermatitis can coexist and certain clinical features can help differentiate ACD from endogenous atopic dermatitis in children. It is important to consider ACD in children with recalcitrant atopic dermatitis or dermatitis with atypical distribution. Patch testing has become a more common practice in children. In 2018, the first expert consensus-derived pediatric baseline series consisting of 38 allergens was proposed to aid in the diagnosis of ACD in children. Comparing recent patch testing data in the pediatric population, the top allergens ubiquitously identified were nickel, cobalt, neomycin, Myroxylon pereirae (balsam of Peru), fragrance mix I, fragrance mix II, methylisothiazolinone, methylchloroisothiazolinone/ methylisothiazolinone, formaldehyde, and lanolin.

SUMMARY

ACD is a common problem in children. Detection through patch testing, avoidance of offending allergens, and prevention of common allergens are the main focus of management of ACD in children.

Metals and Metalloids Release from Orthodontic Elastomeric and Stainless Steel Ligatures: In Vitro Risk Assessment of Human Exposure

Elastomeric ligatures are increasingly used as a part of esthetic orthodontic treatment, particularly in children. The aim of the present study was to experimentally test whether these appliances may contribute to exposure to toxic elements. In the present study, elastomeric ligatures (ELs) were incubated in artificial human saliva for 1 month (a typical period of their use) and the release of 21 metals (Ba, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Li, Mn, Mg, Mo, Ni, Pb, Rb, Tl, Ti, Sb, Sr, Sn, Zn, U, V) and 2 metalloids (As and Ge) was studied using inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. For comparison, stainless steel ligatures (SLs) were incubated for 1, 3, and 6 months (since sometimes their use is prolonged) under similar conditions. The determined metal levels were compared to the corresponding safety limits for human exposure. During 1 month, the ELs released Cd, Co, Cr, Mn, Ni, and Sn at total mean ± SD level of 0.31 ± 0.09, 0.98 ± 0.30, 3.96 ± 1.31, 14.7 ± 8.5, 13.8 ± 4.8, and 49.5 ± 27.7 μg, respectively. Other elements were always below the detection limits. In case of SL, the release of Co, Cr, Fe, Ni, Mn, and Sn was observed, and the determined values increased over the studied period. After 6 months, their total mean ± SD levels amounted to 28.6 ± 0.2, 21.7 ± 0.2, 623.5 ± 3.0, 1152.7 ± 1.8, 5.5 ± 0.3, and 22.6 ± 0.2 μg, respectively. The released metal levels from both ligature types were always below safety limits. The release of Ni from SL during 6 months would constitute 5.0 and 11.5% of tolerable intake in adults and children, respectively. The results of this in vitro study highlight that the use of ligatures in orthodontic treatment can be considered safe in terms of metal exposure although elastic ligatures replaced on a monthly basis appear to be advantageous in comparison to the prolonged use of stainless steel appliances.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis in Children: Recommendations for Patch Testing

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) affects 20% of children. However, diagnosis of ACD may be underreported in children due to lack of recognition. Patch testing is the gold standard for evaluation of ACD in children but poses unique challenges in this population.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies highlight the significance of ACD and the utility of patch testing in children. Evaluation of ACD in children is difficult and requires knowledge of a child's exposure history, careful selection of allergens, and knowledge of specialized patch testing considerations to minimize irritation and maximize cooperation. Until recently, there were no agreed upon patch test series for children. In 2018, a comprehensive pediatric baseline series was published enabling thorough evaluation of ACD in children (Yu J, Atwater AR, Brod B, Chen JK, Chisolm SS, Cohen DE, et al. Dermatitis. 2018;29(4):206-12). This review provides an overview of the current literature, an update on pediatric ACD, and patch testing methods in children to effectively evaluate and manage ACD.

The Importance of Education When Patch Testing

Education is the keystone of successful management of allergic contact dermatitis. This article outlines practical tips to manage patients' expectations of the patch test process and understand their results. The considerations are outlined in a stepwise fashion from before, during, and after patch testing. Resources for patient information are highlighted, and an update on provider education is also included.

Effects of diet on skin sensitization by nickel, poison ivy, and sesquiterpene lactones

Skin contact or exposure to sensitizers often occurs as a consequence of occupational exposures (e.g. poison ivy in forestry), wearing jewelry (e.g. nickel), or use of cosmetics (e.g. fragrances). However, many of the known skin sensitizers or their chemical variants are also consumed orally through foods or other sources. Since oral exposure to antigenic substances can lead to tolerance, consumption of sensitizers may impact the development and potency of skin sensitization, especially if the sensitizer is consumed early in life, prior to the first skin contact. To address this issue, we have reviewed human clinical and epidemiological literature relevant to this subject and evaluated whether early oral exposures to relevant sensitizers, or their chemical variants, are associated with reduced prevalence of skin sensitization to three main allergic sensitizers - nickel, urushiols of poison ivy, and sesquiterpene lactones of chrysanthemum and other plants.

Impact of Heavy Metals on Host Cells: Special Focus on Nickel-Mediated Pathologies and Novel Interventional Approaches

BACKGROUND

Heavy metals [arsenic, aluminium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, lead, nickel (Ni), palladium and titanium] are environmental contaminants able to impact with host human cells, thus, leading to severe damage.

OBJECTIVE

In this review, the detrimental effects of several heavy metals on human organs will be discussed and special emphasis will be placed on Ni. In particular, Ni is able to interact with Toll-like receptor-4 on immune and non-immune cells, thus, triggering the cascade of pro-inflammatory cytokines. Then, inflammatory and allergic reactions mediated by Ni will be illustrated within different organs, even including the central nervous system, airways and the gastrointestinal system.

DISCUSSION

Different therapeutic strategies have been adopted to mitigate Ni-induced inflammatoryallergic reactions. In this context, the ability of polyphenols to counteract the inflammatory pathway induced by Ni on peripheral blood leukocytes from Ni-sensitized patients will be outlined. In particular, polyphenols are able to decrease serum levels of interleukin (IL)-17, while increasing levels of IL- 10. These data suggest that the equilibrium between T regulatory cells and T helper 17 cells is recovered with IL-10 acting as an anti-inflammatory cytokine. In the same context, polyphenols reduced elevated serum levels of nitric oxide, thus, expressing their anti-oxidant potential. Finally, the carcinogenic potential of heavy metals, even including Ni, will be highlighted.

CONCLUSION

Heavy metals, particularly Ni, are spread in the environment. Nutritional approaches seem to represent a novel option in the treatment of Ni-induced damage and, among them, polyphenols should be taken into consideration for their anti-oxidant and anti-inflammatory activities.

Atopy and Sensitization to Allergens Known to Cause Systemic Contact Dermatitis

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) associated with respiratory atopy may represent a form of systemic contact dermatitis (SCD), whereby AD flares after ingestion or inhalation of allergens.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to compare the prevalence of positive patch tests to allergens known to cause SCD in AD patients with and without respiratory atopy.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of patients with AD patch tested to 23 allergens known to cause SCD. Positive patch tests were compared between AD patients with and without respiratory atopy, stratified by age and wet or dry work occupation.

CONCLUSIONS

Children and adolescents, but not adults, with AD and respiratory atopy were more likely than age-matched AD patients without respiratory atopy to have positive patch tests to these allergens (odds ratio, 2.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-4.79). Moreover, AD patients with respiratory atopy and engaging in wet work, but not dry work, occupations were more likely than AD patients without respiratory atopy to have positive patch tests to allergens known to cause SCD (odds ratio, 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.06). Thus, respiratory atopy and wet work are associated with sensitization to allergens known to cause SCD in patients with AD, and patch testing may be valuable in identifying systemic triggers of dermatitis in these patients.

Proposed ICDRG Classification of the Clinical Presentation of Contact Allergy

The International Contact Dermatitis Research Group proposes a classification for the clinical presentation of contact allergy. The classification is based primarily on the mode of clinical presentation. The categories are direct exposure/contact dermatitis, mimicking or exacerbation of preexisting eczema, multifactorial dermatitis including allergic contact dermatitis, by proxy, mimicking angioedema, airborne contact dermatitis, photo-induced contact dermatitis, systemic contact dermatitis, noneczematous contact dermatitis, contact urticaria, protein contact dermatitis, respiratory/mucosal symptoms, oral contact dermatitis, erythroderma/exfoliative dermatitis, minor forms of presentation, and extracutaneous manifestations.

Contact Dermatitis Due to Nickel Allergy in Patients Suffering from Non-Celiac Wheat Sensitivity

Background: Non-celiac wheat sensitivity (NCWS) is a new clinical entity in the world of gluten-related diseases. Nickel, the most frequent cause of contact allergy, can be found in wheat and results in systemic nickel allergy syndrome and mimics irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Objective: To evaluate the frequency of contact dermatitis due to nickel allergy in NCWS patients diagnosed by a double-blind placebo-controlled (DBPC) challenge, and to identify the characteristics of NCWS patients with nickel allergy. Methods: We performed a prospective study of 60 patients (54 females, 6 males; mean age 34.1 ± 8.1 years) diagnosed with NCWS from December 2014 to November 2016; 80 age- and sex-matched subjects with functional gastrointestinal symptoms served as controls. Patients reporting contact dermatitis related to nickel-containing objects underwent nickel patch test (Clinicaltrials.gov registration number: NCT02750735). Results: Six out of sixty patients (10%) with NCWS suffered from contact dermatitis and nickel allergy and this frequency was statistically higher (p = 0.04) than observed in the control group (5%). The main clinical characteristic of NCWS patients with nickel allergy was a higher frequency of cutaneous symptoms after wheat ingestion compared to NCWS patients who did not suffer from nickel allergy (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Contact dermatitis and nickel allergy are more frequent in NCWS patients than in subjects with functional gastrointestinal disorders; furthermore, these patients had a very high frequency of cutaneous manifestations after wheat ingestion. Nickel allergy should be evaluated in NCWS patients who have cutaneous manifestations after wheat ingestion.

Nutrition and skin: Kids are not just little people

There has been a surge of new data regarding the pathophysiology of skin diseases. We are appreciating the sophisticated interplay among the skin, the immune system, and the environment. More elegant and highly specific medicines have been designed to target certain immune mediators of the adaptive immune system. In parallel fashion, we are learning more about the elegance of the innate immune system and how nutrition as early as the prenatal period can affect the priming of other immune cells. Concerns about the long-term impact of new immune-modulating medicines-especially in the pediatric population-have patients asking their dermatologists for nutritional alternatives to medical therapies. Nutrients and nutritional therapies appear to play a role at different ages for different dermatoses. Probiotics are showing promise as a therapeutic option for patients older than 1 year for atopic dermatitis. Systemic contact allergens appear to be a bigger burden on the adult population with atopic dermatitis. Obesity is a growing concern for both children and adults with psoriasis. Milk and high glycemic foods have a strong impact on the teenage acne population. Vitamins A and D are addressed as piece of the alopecia areata puzzle. Zinc and homeopathy are presented finally as possible treatments to the everlasting wart.

[Contact allergic gastritis : Rare manifestation of a metal allergy]

Only a few cases of contact allergic gastritis in patients with nickel allergy have been reported in the literature. We report a case of probable contact-allergic gastritis in a 46-year-old woman. Clinical examination revealed lichenoid mucosal lesions of the gums adjacent to a bridge and crowns that had been implanted several weeks previously. Since implantation, the patient suffered from gastrointestinal complaints including stomach pain. Gastroscopy and histological investigation of stomach biopsies showed eosinophilic gastritis. Patch testing done under the diagnosis of contact allergic stomatitis showed positive reactions to gold sodium thiosulphate, manganese (II) chloride, nickel (II) sulphate, palladium chloride, vanadium (III) chloride, zirconium (IV) chloride, and fragrances. The crowns and the bridge contained gold, palladium, and zirconium, hence they were replaced by titan-based dentition. Shortly after replacing the artificial dentition, all gastrointestinal symptoms resolved spontaneously without further treatment. Delayed-type allergy to components in the artificial dentition seem to have caused the gastritis.

Diagnosis of Food Allergy

The prevalence of food allergies has been on the increase over the last 2 decades. Diagnosing food allergies can be complicated, as there are multiple types that have distinct clinical and immunologic features. Food allergies are broadly classified into immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated, non-IgE-mediated, or mixed food allergic reactions. This review focuses on the clinical manifestations of the different categories of food allergies and the different tests available to guide the clinician toward an accurate diagnosis.