Hydrocortisone: an important cutaneous allergen

Allergic Contact Dermatitis From Topical Drugs: An Overview

ABSTRACT

Allergic contact dermatitis from topical drugs is frequent and is seen in 10% to 17% of patients patch tested for suspected contact dermatitis. More than 360 drugs have been implicated as contact allergens, of which-generally-antibiotics, corticosteroids, local anesthetics, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are the most frequent culprits. This article provides an overview of allergic contact dermatitis to topical drugs, discussing their prevalence of sensitization, predisposing factors, clinical manifestations (both typical and atypical), the drugs described as allergens, cross-reactivity and coreactivity, and diagnostic procedures.

Hypersensitivity to topical corticosteroids in otitis externa

Over a12-monthperiod, nine patients were seen in a contact dermatitis clinic with an inflammatory dermatosis localized predominantly to the external auditory canal. Of these patients, four were found to have an allergic contact dermatitis which was exacerbating their dermatitis. All were allergic to one or more corticosteroids and topical antibiotics used in the treatment of their dermatitis. We would suggest that hypersensitivity to topical corticosteroids and other medicaments be considered in patients with otitis externa which fails to respond to treatment.

Cross-reactions to desoximetasone and mometasone furoate in a patient with multiple topical corticosteroid allergies

A 60-year-old man developed a bullous contact dermatitis after topical corticosteroid treatment of dermatitis on his lower leg. Subsequent patch testing showed cross-reactions to numerous group B and group D corticosteroids as well as cross-reactions to group C desoximetasone and group D1 mometasone furoate. His patch-test result was negative for the group A corticosteroids hydrocortisone and tixocortol pivalate. We discuss the uncommon finding of cross-reactions to desoximetasone and mometasone furoate.

Detection of contact hypersensitivity to corticosteroids in allergic contact dermatitis patients who do not respond to topical corticosteroids

The delayed hypersensitivity development against topical corticosteroids which are used in allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) treatment is an important clinical problem. In our study, 41 ACD patients who did not show any response to topical corticosteroid treatment were patch tested with corticosteroid series and the commercial preparations of corticosteroids and their vehicles. In corticosteroid series, there were budesonide, bethametasone-17-valerate, triamcinolone acetonide, tixocortol pivalate, alclomethasone-17-21-dipropionate, clobetasole-17-propionate, dexamethasone-21-phosphate disodium and hydrocortisone-17-butyrate. We detected positive reaction to corticosteroids in 9 of our cases (22%) (5 single and 4 multiple). The sensitivity was mostly produced by tixocortol pivalate (6 patients). This was followed by triamcinolone acetonide (2 patients) budesonide (2 patients), alclomethasone dipropionate (2 patients), dexamethasone 21 phosphate disodium (2 patients) and betamethasone-17-valerate (1 patient). As a result, it should not be forgotten that the corticosteroids used to treat ACD patients may cause ACD themselves. In ACD patients who did not respond to corticosteroid treatment, routinely applying patch test with corticosteroids should be helpful in directing the treatment.

Corticosteroids

Up to 5% of dermatitis patients are allergic to corticosteroids. Because such allergy may be difficult to suspect due to the anti-inflammatory action of the corticosteroid, markers for corticosteroid allergy should be present in any standard series. Budesonide and tixocortol pivalate are two such markers, and they seem to detect a majority of corticosteroid allergy. The patch test concentration for a given corticosteroid may be crucial. A false-negative reaction may follow despite the patient being allergic, if too high a test concentration is used, because of the anti-inflammatory action of the corticosteroid. Patch test readings must be performed not only on Day 3 or Day 4 but also on a late occasion, i.e., Day 7 after test application, also because the anti-inflammatory action may suppress an allergic reaction at an early reading. Once a patient has reacted to a corticosteroid, an extended corticosteroid series should be tested, so that information may be given on which corticosteroids to use and, above all, which corticosteroids to avoid.

Plasminogen activators in inflammation and sepsis

Mortality of severe sepsis remains at 40% to 50%. Intensive efforts over the past two decades have only marginally improved outcome. Improving outcome in sepsis depends on understanding its pathophysiology, which involves triggers, responses of the organism, and dysfunction. Stress, injury, or infection trigger host responses, including local and systemic orchestrated mechanisms. Dysfunction and outcome depend on both trigger and response. Blood coagulation, inflammation, immunity, and fibrinolysis are critical components of the organism's responses. Understanding their role in sepsis pathophysiology is the key to effective treatment. Relevant studies were identified by a systematic literature search, complemented by manual search of individual citations. Using PubMed, 'sepsis' yields more than 62,000 references, 'plasminogen activators' more than 21,000. The selection of citations was guided by preference for reviews that expand important threads of argumentation. Single original studies were included when relevant to critical points. This analytical review describes the essential elements of pathophysiology and the current status of sepsis treatment. Based on this context, an emerging therapeutic option will be discussed: plasminogen activators.

Skin reactions to inhaled corticosteroids

Corticosteroids intended for inhalation into the lungs or into the nose have been used since the 1970s. Only 2 attempts to assess contact allergy attributable to inhaled corticosteroids in patients with asthma and/or rhinitis have been made, and only 1 single case of contact allergy attributable to budesonide and tixocortol pivalate was found. However, several case reports of allergic mucosal and skin symptoms caused by corticosteroids applied locally to the mucosa have been published. Local adverse effects from nasal corticosteroids have ranged from nasal congestion, pruritus, burning, and soreness to perforation of the nasal septum. Inhalation of corticosteroids into the lungs has been reported to cause pruritus, dryness, erythema and oedema of the mouth, a dry cough and odynophagia. Systemic signs reported from the use of nasal corticosteroids and inhalation of corticosteroids into the lungs have been eczematous lesions, particularly on the face, sometimes with spreading to the trunk and flexures. Urticaria has also been noted.

Generalized eczematous reaction to budesonide in a nasal spray with cross-reactivity to triamcinolone

A 78-year-old woman suffered a generalized eczematous hypersensitivity reaction following the use of an intranasal budesonide inhaler. Patch testing demonstrated positive reactions to both budesonide and triamcinolone. Her eczema responded to emollients, betamethasone dipropionate ointment and cessation of her intranasal budesonide inhaler.

Corticosteroid-induced contact dermatitis: a pragmatic approach

It is only in the past 10 years that the allergenic potential of topical corticosteroids has been fully realized. This has an important impact on the management of patients with chronic eczematous eruptions. Nonhalogenated topical steroids are more frequent sensitizers than halogenated molecules. Tixocortol pivalate and budesonide should be added to the standard series of patch test allergens. The topical steroid products that the patient has used should also be tested. If a patient has a positive reaction to tixocortol pivalate and/or budesonide then further patch testing with a commercial corticosteroid series should be undertaken.

Head and neck dermatitis: the role of Malassezia furfur, topical steroid use and environmental factors in its causation

The aetiology of head and neck dermatitis (HND), one subgroup of postpubertal atopic dermatitis (AD), is still unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence on HND of common environmental factors, long-term topical steroid use, and the role of Malassezia furfur infection. Relevant information was obtained from 100 patients with HND attending our dermatology clinic by means of both physical examinations and questionnaires. Corticosteroid-induced vasoconstriction was estimated by visual scoring of laser-Doppler flowmetry. and the following immunological studies were performed: skin prick test, measurement of total IgE, eosinophil cationic protein, and specific IgE antibodies to several fungal antigens including those of M. furfur. The questionnaire revealed that sweating (81%), heat (71%), dryness (70%), psychic stress (67%), and sun exposure (50%) were responsible for aggravation of skin lesions. The vascular response to topical steroid was reduced in HND patients as compared with that of normal healthy controls (P < 0.05). Fifty-four of 80 patients with HND (68%) had anti M. furfur-specific IgE antibodies and 36 of 80 patients (45%) showed positive skin prick tests for M. furfur. The clinical severity and serum total IgE of HND patients were higher in patients with positive response to anti-M. furfur-specific IgE antibodies than in patients with negative response (P < 0.05). These results suggest that HND can be aggravated not only by M. furfur but also by environmental factors such as sweating, heat, dryness, psychic stress and sun exposure. Furthermore, long-term use of topical steroid might be associated with the development of diffuse erythematous lesions with telangiectasia on the head and neck areas.

Side to side comparison of topical treatment in atopic dermatitis

OBJECTIVES

To document and evaluate the outcome of side to side comparisons of different corticosteroids in determining the most effective topical treatment for individuals admitted to hospital for control of atopic dermatitis.

METHODS

Retrospective case note study of 82 admissions (66 children) to a children's hospital for treatment of atopic dermatitis between 1 June 1993 and 31 October 1995. Different topical corticosteroid ointments were applied to the two sides of the body. The outcome measure was a comparison between the two sides, to see whether one treatment was better than the other.

RESULTS

More potent topical corticosteroid preparations appeared more effective than weaker preparations on 25 occasions, there was no difference on 20 occasions, and on seven occasions a weaker preparation appeared more effective. Incorporation of an antimicrobial agent did not appear to increase the efficacy of a preparation.

CONCLUSIONS

The management of atopic dermatitis is bedevilled by considerable spontaneous fluctuations in severity, leading to uncertainty as to whether a new treatment is beneficial; a coincidental flare up of the skin lesions may be wrongly attributed to a particular treatment, which is then discarded. Comparing different topical treatments simultaneously on opposite sides of the body is a feasible and rational way to determine the optimum treatment for an individual with atopic dermatitis.

Contact hypersensitivity to tixocortol pivalate

BACKGROUND

Tixocortol pivalate is an established marker to topical corticosteroid allergy. The prevalence of tixocortol pivalate hypersensitivity is well established in Europe, where exposure to this corticosteroid as a therapeutic agent varies. In the United States, tixocortol pivalate is not commercially available and the prevalence of hypersensitivity to it is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the prevalence of tixocortol pivalate hypersensitivity in our patch-tested population. We further characterized these patients by clinical background, other contact allergens, and the reactivity to other corticosteroids.

METHODS

Tixocortol pivalate has been incorporated in our standard 1-52 patch test series since November 1992. We reviewed the histories and patch test results in all patients tested with the standard 1-52 series from November 1992 to December 1996.

RESULTS

Of 1536 patch-tested patients, 45 had hypersensitivity to tixocortol pivalate. Dermatitis involving the face was the most common (14 patients). Of the 45 patients, 40 had another allergen identified on patch testing. Eighteen patients underwent further patch testing to an extended corticosteroid panel, and 14 had sensitivity to another steroid agent.

CONCLUSION

The 2.9% prevalence of tixocortol pivalate hypersensitivity in our patch test population is within the range reported in Europe. Patients with tixocortol pivalate hypersensitivity tend to have other contact allergens on patch testing. Predisposing factors to tixocortol pivalate hypersensitivity include facial dermatitis and sensitivity to other contact allergens.

Allergic contact dermatitis due to topical application of corticosteroids: review and clinical implications

Allergy due to topically applied corticosteroids is being recognized more frequently. Testing for hypersensitivity to these agents is performed with delayed hypersensitivity patch testing. Cross-reactivity among topically administered corticosteroids is frequent and often can be predicted on the basis of additional patch testing and an established classification scheme. Herein we review allergy due to topically applied corticosteroids with regard to its prevalence, means of testing, cross-reactivity among the subclasses, risk factors, and relationship to steroids.

Patch testing to detect corticosteroid allergy: is it adequate?

Whilst patch testing with corticosteroids in ethanol is more sensitive than either petrolatum or the cream formulation, the frequency of false-negative reactions is not known. We have compared patch testing with corticosteroid at 1% in ethanol with intradermal (i.d.) tests using 1 mg corticosteroid suspended in normal saline. Patch tests with tixocortol pivalate and budesonide detected all patients allergic to hydrocortisone and budesonide, respectively. For other corticosteroids, the use of ethanol as a vehicle resulted in both false-positive and false-negative reactions. In particular, patch tests with hydrocortisone-17-butyrate missed 30% of all positive reactions detected by i.d. testing. There may be a case for advising the avoidance of this steroid in all patients who are positive on patch testing to tixocortol pivalate and budesonide.

What is new in clinical research in contact dermatitis

The field of cutaneous allergy has enjoyed dynamic research advances in epidemiology and clinical contact dermatitis. Studies regarding outcomes analysis, validity, predictive value, and sensitivity have allowed clinicians to better understand the importance of patch test results. In the clinical arena, new and clinically relevant allergens are being discovered, such as corticosteroids, metals, preservatives, surfactants, and glues. Continued epidemiologic surveillance of new allergens will enable manufacturers to develop safer products for patients to use.

Reactivity of tixocortol pivalate-positive patients in intradermal and oral provocation tests

Pivalone/tixocortol pivalate commonly yields positive reactions in the patch test series. The clinical relevance of these positive reactions was investigated in more detail. In the standard patch test series 5.6% (73 of 1306) of the patients were positive to corticosteroids, 5.2% to 0.1% tixocortol pivalate in ethanol (Pivalone nasal spray diluted 1:10) and 2.3% to 1% hydrocortisone butyrate in ethanol. Some of the patients were tested in parallel with Pivalone and 1% tixocortol pivalate in petrolatum. The former test reagent yielded some false-positive reactions, whereas with the latter, some allergic responses were missed. Intradermal tests with the succinate esters of hydrocortisone, methylprednisolone and prednisolone were performed with 52 patients positive to Pivalone. Of these 76.9% (40 of 52) were positive in the intradermal tests; 38 to hydrocortisone, 35 to methylprednisolone and 30 to prednisolone. Twelve patients who had been positive in the intradermal tests were challenged orally with corticosteroids and they all showed positive reactions to hydrocortisone, methylprednisolone or prednisolone. The patients developed localized reactions at the sites of previous eczema or positive skin tests or diffuse erythema or exanthema. The oral doses of hydrocortisone eliciting positive delayed skin reactions ranged from 20 to 200 mg. Reactivity to tixocortol pivalate is closely related to sensitivity to hydrocortisone, methylprednisolone and prednisolone, but high oral doses of these corticosteroids may be required to produce allergic symptoms.

Corticosteroid contact hypersensitivity: what vehicle and concentration?

The correct concentration and vehicle for patch testing with corticosteroids is in many instances not known. The results of this study suggest that 1% in ethanol should be the initial choice, unless it can be shown that petrolatum as a vehicle is as sensitive (tixocortol pivalate and budesonide). We could find no evidence for the anti-inflammatory effects of corticosteroids inhibiting the patch test at higher concentrations. Using ethanol as the vehicle resulted in reactions developing at earlier time points than with petrolatum.

Screening for corticosteroid contact hypersensitivity

To evaluate which corticosteroids are most useful for the detection of corticosteroid contact allergy in our population, 2123 patients were patch tested with a series of 6 corticosteroids, in parallel with a standard series, and other relevant investigations. 127 patients (5.98%) were allergic to one or more corticosteroids; 96 to tixocortol pivalate, 51 to hydrocortisone butyrate, 47 to budesonide, 11 to betamethasone valerate, 11 to clobetasone butyrate and 8 to clobetasol propionate. 511 patients with negative patch tests to the limited corticosteroid series were in addition tested to a further 12 corticosteroids; only 1 of these patients reacted to a corticosteroid. A combination of tixocortol pivalate and budesonide thus detected 91.3% of corticosteroid-allergic subjects. We believe that both these allergens should be included in the standard series and that there may be a case for extending this further.

IgG antibodies and early intradermal reactions to hydrocortisone in patients with cutaneous delayed-type hypersensitivity to hydrocortisone

Seven of 25 patients with cutaneous delayed-type hypersensitivity to hydrocortisone had an immediate reaction following the intradermal injection of hydrocortisone sodium succinate. Using an ELISA method, we found that these patients had significantly increased levels of IgG antibodies to hydrocortisone when compared with normal blood donors (P < 0.005) and nickel-allergic patients (P < 0.05). We suggest that these patients are at risk of developing type III and possibly type I reactions following the systemic administration of hydrocortisone and that, if needed, an alternative systemic corticosteroid should be used, for example betamethasone or dexamethasone.

Hypersensitivity to topical corticosteroids

Contact hypersensitivity from topical corticosteroids is becoming increasingly recognized; it is present in 2-5% of the patients attending contact dermatitis clinics. The use of a corticosteroid series containing tixocortal pivalate 1% (petrolatum), to detect hypersensitivity to hydrocortisone, and other steroids 1% (ethanol), depending on local corticosteroid usage, detects the majority of cases of corticosteroid hypersensitivity. In selected cases, the use of intradermal tests further improves the diagnosis of corticosteroid hypersensitivity. Corticosteroid hypersensitivity occurs most frequently among patients with stasis dermatitis. However, corticosteroid hypersensitivity is also common in other types of dermatitis, occurring as frequently as hypersensitivity to several allergens (e.g. wool alcohols and colophony) in the European standard battery. Although hypersensitivity has mainly been reported with corticosteroids applied to the skin, reactions may also occur on mucosal surfaces, following systemic administration and with sex steroids.

Contact allergy to corticosteroids: the results of a two-centre study

We report a comparative study of the patch-test results obtained with a corticosteroid series, added to the standard series, in two centres, one in Belgium and the other in the Netherlands. The frequencies of positive reactions to the corticosteroids differed considerably between the two centres, and we suggest several reasons for this.

In vitro evidence of delayed-type hypersensitivity to hydrocortisone

Hypersensitivity to topical hydrocortisone is becoming increasingly recognized. We present further evidence that this is mediated via a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction. A hydrocortisone: albumin complex was able to induce a proliferative response in the peripheral blood mononuclear cells of patients allergic to hydrocortisone. Protein binding of hydrocortisone or a degradation product may be important in the development of corticosteroid allergy.

Intradermal testing in the diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis. A reappraisal

Contact hypersensitivity may be diagnosed with patch testing or intradermal testing. Although these methods have been used earlier in parallel, patch testing has gradually become the only method in routine diagnosis of contact allergy. Recent findings in corticosteroid contact hypersensitivity have shown that patch testing is not always an optimal method, especially when poor penetrants are used. Therefore, a reappraisal of intradermal testing is presented, based on the literature. Studies employing both patch and intradermal testing are reviewed and the advantages and disadvantages of intradermal tests as compared to patch tests in contact allergy diagnostics are discussed. We find that it might be worthwhile to evaluate whether contact allergy to compounds other than corticosteroids may be easier to detect with intradermal than patch test.

Contact allergy to corticosteroids

Recent evidence shows that contact allergy to topical corticosteroids is more frequent than earlier believed. This review summarizes the current knowledge of this condition, including methods for clinical diagnosis.

Allergy to systemic and intralesional corticosteroids

In this study, allergic reactions to systemic or intralesional corticosteroids were characterized, and skin tests utilized in the diagnosis of corticosteroid allergy. Five patients who had developed a rash when treated with systemic or intralesional hydrocortisone, methylprednisolone, prednisolone or betamethasone, were challenged with oral or intra-articular corticosteroid preparations, and skin tested. Upon provocation the patients reacted with diffuse erythema principally on the trunk or on the face. The erythema appeared within a period ranging from a few hours to 24 h and faded in 1-3 days. On patch testing, one patient reacted to prednisolone and methylprednisolone, which induced a positive response upon provocation, and two patients were positive to Pivalone. Patients who were sensitive to hydrocortisone or methylprednisolone, as judged by anamnestic data and provocations, reacted to these corticosteroids in the intradermal tests. Allergy to betamethasone could not be verified by intradermal or patch tests. A combination of intradermal and patch tests is recommended when allergy to systemic or intralesional corticosteroids is suspected. If these skin tests remain negative, provocation is the method of choice.

Contact hypersensitivity to hydrocortisone-free-alcohol in patients with allergic patch test reactions to tixocortol pivalate

It has been suggested that contact allergy to hydrocortisone alcohol is a frequent phenomenon. A recent study showed that all patients with allergic patch reactions to tixocortol pivalate reacted to intradermal hydrocortisone sodium phosphate. We studied patients with positive patch test reactions to tixocortol pivalate but negative to hydrocortisone alcohol, with penetration enhancers in hydrocortisone alcohol patch tests and oral challenges with hydrocortisone alcohol. Additionally, prick and intradermal tests with hydrocortisone sodium succinate were used. Using penetration enhancers and oral challenges enabled detection of more contact allergies to hydrocortisone alcohol compared to conventional patch testing alone. 9/12 patients with allergic reactions to tixocortol pivalate reacted to intradermal hydrocortisone sodium succinate. No immediate reactions were seen in prick or intradermal tests, suggesting that hydrocortisone contact hypersensitivity is probably not associated with immediate allergy to hydrocortisone. The present study suggests that allergic patch test reactions to tixocortol pivalate are caused by hypersensitivity to hydrocortisone alcohol itself or to one of its metabolites in the skin.

Hydrocortisone sensitivity: clinical features of fifty-nine cases

BACKGROUND

Hypersensitivity to topical steroids is becoming increasingly recognized.

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to establish factors associated with allergy to topical hydrocortisone.

METHODS

Data from 59 consecutive patients allergic to hydrocortisone were compared with 199 consecutive patients who were not allergic to hydrocortisone.

RESULTS

Patients with stasis dermatitis and leg ulceration were significantly more likely to be allergic to hydrocortisone. In patients with hand eczema, in whom hydrocortisone sensitivity was less common, hydrocortisone was still a common allergen, occurring as frequently as wool alcohols and colophony. In four patients with atopic eczema, hydrocortisone was the only allergen. Duration of dermatitis was not important in determining the presence of hydrocortisone allergy. However, patients allergic to hydrocortisone were more likely to have multiple allergies when compared with control subjects.

CONCLUSION

Allergy to topical hydrocortisone is associated with stasis dermatitis and multiple positive patch test reactions.

Contact hypersensitivity to topical corticosteroids

Topical corticosteroids are increasingly recognized as relatively common contact sensitizers. Between July 1988 and December 1991 2687 patients undergoing routine patch testing were also tested with tixocortol pivalate (TP). Over the same time period 528 patients were selected for testing with a series of 18 steroids. One-hundred and thirty-one cases (4.9%) of corticosteroid hypersensitivity were detected and 119 (90.8%) of these cases were positive to TP. Thirty-seven patients reacted to one or more steroids in the steroid series, the most frequent sensitizers being hydrocortisone, budesonide (3.6%) and hydrocortisone 17-butyrate (2.5%). Of these 37 cases, 20 (54%) reacted to more than one steroid simultaneously, but the patterns of cross-reaction were not consistent with previously suggested groupings. Screening for steroid allergy should be performed as part of standard patch testing. The value of TP as a marker of corticosteroid hypersensitivity is reinforced by this study, but no satisfactory marker was found for the 9.2% of cases not detected by TP. There remains a need for further markers of corticosteroid hypersensitivity. A prevalence of 4.9% of corticosteroid allergy amongst our patients suggests that the frequency of this finding is generally underestimated.

A prospective study into the value of patch and intradermal tests in identifying topical corticosteroid allergy

We have prospectively performed patch and intradermal tests on 105 consecutive patients, attending for patch testing, to determine the optimum method of screening for corticosteroid hypersensitivity. Patch tests with Pivalone and a corticosteroid series (all 1% in ethanol) detected all the patients with steroid sensitivity. However, intradermal tests were essential to exclude false positive reactions and detect all relevant steroid allergies in any individual patient.