Allergic contact dermatitis from a perinone-type dye C.I. Solvent Orange 60 in spectacle frames

Deriving a point of departure for assessing the skin sensitization risk of wearable device constituents with in vitro methods

Wearable devices are in contact with the skin for extended periods. As such, the device constituents should be evaluated for their skin sensitization potential, and a Point of Departure (PoD) should be derived to conduct a proper risk assessment. Without historical in vivo data, the PoD must be derived with New Approach Methods (NAMs). To accomplish this, regression models trained on LLNA data that use data inputs from OECD-validated in vitro tests were used to derive a predicted EC3 value, the LLNA value used to classify skin sensitization potency, for three adhesive monomers (Isobornyl acrylate (IBOA), N, N- Dimethylacrylamide (NNDMA), and Acryloylmorpholine (ACMO) and one dye (Solvent Orange 60 (SO60)). These chemicals can be used as constituents of wearable devices and have been associated with causing allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). Using kinetic DPRA and KeratinoSens™ data, the PoDs obtained with the regression model were 180, 215, 1535, and 8325 μg/cm2 for IBOA, SO60, ACMO, and NNDMA, respectively. The PoDs derived with the regression model using NAMs data will enable a proper skin sensitization risk assessment without using animals.

Allergic contact dermatitis from dyes used in the temple of spectacles

BACKGROUND

We observed an increasing number of patients who presented with facial or retro-auricular dermatitis after skin contact with plastic spectacles or plastic covered temples.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the allergens in plastic spectacles that may cause allergic contact dermatitis.

METHODS

All patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis to eyewear were tested with Solvent Orange 60 (SO60), four additionally with Solvent Yellow 14 (SY14), and five with scrapings from their own spectacles. In one case, a chemical analysis of the spectacles was performed to uncover the causative allergen.

RESULTS

Three patients were allergic to SO60, two patients to SY14, and two patients were allergic to both SO60 and SY14.

CONCLUSION

Patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis from spectacles should be tested with SO60 and SY14, and based on findings from previous reports, also with Solvent Red 179.

Solvent Orange 60 is a potent contact sensitizer in occupational and everyday life

BACKGROUND

Solvent Orange (SO) 60 is a perinone-type dye that is often used in plastic materials such as spectacle frames and has been shown to cause contact allergy. The first case of SO 60 allergic contact dermatitis caused by spectacle frames was reported in 1999, and the second in 2011. We have recently seen 10 patients, of whom 6 developed dermatitis in the retroauricular/temporal area after wearing plastic spectacles.

OBJECTIVES

To report the cause of the dermatitis in the 10 patients and to describe our first case with occupational SO 60 contact allergy.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, patch test results of 10 patients, tested with the Swedish baseline series and our specific spectacle and/or plastic series, including SO 60 1.0% pet., in 2011-2017 were analysed.

RESULTS

Ten patients, 2 males and 8 females, aged 43 to 71 years, reacted positively to SO 60 1.0% pet., namely, 4 pensioners, 2 nurses, 1 office worker, 1 teacher, 1 shop assistant, and 1 unemployed person. Four of the patients had an atopic history. Patch test reactions varied from + to +++; some had spread >20 cm outside the test area in terms of erythematous, infiltrated skin with papules. Retesting of patient no. 1 with serial dilutions of SO 60 in acetone showed positive reactions down to 1 ppm. Three patients reacted to the extracts of their earpieces. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry was used to confirm the presence of SO 60 in 2 earpieces.

CONCLUSIONS

SO 60 should be included in any spectacle patch test series that may be used. If there is a strong suspicion of contact allergy to SO 60 before patch testing, lowering the test concentration from 1.0% to 0.01% should be considered.

Materials and allergens within spectacle frames: a review

The materials that have been reported as causing allergic contact dermatitis within spectacle frames are identified, and their most likely location on the frame is highlighted. The lack of any real control over spectacle frame quality and content is indicated to be a problem, as is the difficulty in determining the true source of many frames. Much of the information must be obtained from anonymous sources in the industry, historical 'common knowledge' of indeterminate source or reports of dermatological problems.