Nickel release from metal items in contact with skin: a comparison of methods and practical implications for regulation in Europe

Risk management of skin sensitisers: A commentary

Historically, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to chemicals encouraged hazard identification improvements, more sophisticated risk assessment and implementation of regulatory strategies, including banning of specific sensitising substances. The validation process applied to hazard identification methods demonstrates their accuracy; their use to characterise sensitiser potency facilitates quantitative and transparent risk assessment. Diagnostic patch testing at dermatology clinics worldwide delivers feedback showing where risk assessment/management has been insufficient or did not target the exposure of concern, thereby facilitating improvements. When urgent action to protect human health was required, regulations limited/banned, specific skin sensitisers. This can be seen in practice with the fragrance industry, a known source of ACD, thus requiring risk management, usually restrictions to limit allergy induction, and very rarely specific bans on ingredients. Experience and development of more sophisticated tools, e.g. to assess aggregate exposure from multitude of consumer product types, has led to repeated adaptation of risk assessment and promulgation of updated fragrance use limits. Although targeted control may not always lead to rapid change in the overall clinical picture, it is preferable to a blanket undifferentiated regulatory control of all sensitisers, resulting in unwarranted restrictions for many uses of no health concern, with consequent substantial socio-economic impacts.

Metal Allergy: State-of-the-Art Mechanisms, Biomarkers, Hypersensitivity to Implants

Metal allergy is mainly an environmental disorder which can cause allergic contact dermatitis. Environmental metal exposures include jewelry, everyday metal items, mobile phones, leather, metal-rich food and implants, including stents or anchors. While consumer exposure is liable for the majority of metal hypersensitivity cases, the significance of occupational exposure to metals remains relevant. Although the most common metal allergens are nickel, chromium, and cobalt; however, lately, gold, palladium, titanium, and some others have also attracted attention. This review highlights advances in metal allergy mechanisms, biomarkers for potential patients' stratification as well as biological treatments. The most recent evidence of human exposure to metal for risk assessment is discussed, as well as the relationship between the occurrence of metal hypersensitivity and implanted devices, including non-characteristic symptoms. The latest data on the diagnosis of metal hypersensitivity are also reported.