Allergic contact dermatitis to rubber accelerators in protective gloves: Problems, challenges, and solutions for occupational skin protection

Allergic contact dermatitis of the scalp: a review of an underdiagnosed entity

Background

It is hypothesized that scalp allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in women is commonly mistaken for other disorders due to overlapping symptoms and unique clinical presentations.

Objective

This study reviews the potential underdiagnosis and misdiagnosis of scalp ACD and explores ways to improve diagnostic accuracy.

Methods

This study conducted an extensive literature review to identify diagnostic challenges, common misdiagnoses, and diagnostic approaches for scalp ACD, focusing on standard versus targeted patch testing techniques.

Results

Scalp ACD, often misdiagnosed as seborrheic dermatitis due to similar symptoms, has atypical presentations such as hair thinning, hair loss, and erythematous lesions affecting neighboring regions. Trichoscopy can help distinguish scalp ACD, identifying its patchy distribution of thin white scales, in contrast to the yellow scaling of seborrheic dermatitis. Standardized patch testing further contributes to diagnostic errors, with a study reporting 83% of patients who tested negative with standardized patch tests were positive when using their personal products. Individualized patch testing is more effective in identifying causative allergens and accurately diagnosing scalp ACD.

Limitations

It is a retrospective review.

Conclusion

Several factors contribute to scalp ACD's misdiagnosis for conditions such as seborrheic dermatitis. The significant discrepancy in ACD detection rates between personalized and standardized patch tests in women emphasizes the importance of using patient-specific products in diagnostic testing. Incorporating scalp ACD more readily into one's differential, employing individualized patch testing with trichoscopy, and accounting for neighboring symptomatic areas are all crucial elements in improving diagnostic accuracy for scalp ACD in women.

Occupational Contact Dermatitis in Construction Workers: A Retrospective Analysis of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group Data, 2001-2020

Background: Construction workers (CWs) are at risk for occupational contact dermatitis (CD) owing to workplace exposures. Objective: Determine the prevalence of occupational allergic CD and characterize common occupational allergens in CWs referred for patch testing in the United States and Canada. Methods: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of patients patch tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group from 2001 to 2020. Results: Of 47,843 patch-tested patients, 681 (1.4%) were CWs. Compared with non-CWs, CWs were more likely to be male (91.0% vs 30.9%) have occupational skin disease (36.9% vs 11.4%) and have hand involvement (37.2% vs 22.5%) (all P < 0.0001). Of 681 CWs, 60.1% (411) had clinically relevant positive patch test reactions, and nearly 1/3 of CWs (128) had occupationally relevant reactions. Most common occupationally relevant allergens were potassium dichromate 0.25% pet. (30.5%, 39/128), bisphenol A epoxy resin 1% pet. (28.1%, 36/128), carba mix 3% pet. (14.8%, 19/128), cobalt (ii) chloride hexahydrate 1% pet. (14.1%, 18/128), and thiuram mix 1% pet. (14.1%, 18/128). Top sources of occupationally relevant allergens were cement/concrete/mortar (20.4%, 46/225), gloves (15.1%, 34/225), and coatings (paint/lacquer/shellac/varnish/stains) (9.8%, 22/225). Conclusions: Occupational CD in North American CWs is common. In this group, frequently identified etiological sources of occupational allergic CD included metals, epoxy resin, and rubber.

Review on Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Research Advancements on the Use of Medical Gloves Concerning Hand Dermatitis Among Health Care Workers

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a significant surge in glove usage, as recommended by the World Health Organization. Despite efforts to ensure the quality and safety of gloves, glove-associated skin diseases such as hand dermatitis have become ubiquitous, particularly among health care workers. This review discusses the prevalence, causes, and risk factors of hand dermatitis, as well as research efforts in medical gloves in the past decade to overcome glove-related hand dermatitis. Research papers from 2013 to 2022 were reviewed, selecting only 49 relevant papers from the Ovid, PubMed, and Scopus databases. The average prevalence of hand dermatitis among health care workers increased from 21.08% to 37.24% upon the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The cases are likely due to allergies to latex proteins, rubber additives, and accelerators commonly found in gloves. Using alternatives to latex gloves, such as accelerator-free and latex-free glove options, can help reduce allergy-induced hand dermatitis. Strict hand hygiene practices, such as frequent hand washing and the use of sanitizers, are also contributing factors in contracting hand dermatitis. Over the past decade, glove research advancements have focused mainly on reducing or immobilizing latex proteins. These include the use of biodegradable dialdehyde, sodium alginate, arctigenin, bromelain, papain, UV-LED, prototype photoreactors, and structure-modified nanosilica with silane A174. Two effective hand dermatitis preventive measures, i.e. an additional layer of glove liners and the use of gentle alcohol-based hand sanitizer, were recommended. These advancements represent promising steps towards mitigating hand dermatitis risks associated with glove usage.

New causes of occupational allergic contact dermatitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Occupational allergic contact dermatitis (OACD) is an important work-related skin disease. Information about the causative agents comes from many sources, including patch test databases, registries, case series and case reports. This review summarizes new information about common causative allergens and diagnosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Common causes of OACD include rubber components, epoxies and preservatives. New exposure sources for these allergens continue to be described. Often these exposure sources are related to the changing world around us, such as allergens related to smartphones and technology, and personal protective equipment-related exposures during the COVID-19 pandemic. New allergens are also being described, some of which are related to known allergens (e.g. a new epoxy or acrylate component).Accurate diagnosis is critical to effective management of OACD, which may include removing the worker from exposure to the causative allergen. Safety data sheets may not contain complete information and patch testing with specialized series of allergens and workplace materials may be necessary.

SUMMARY

This review provides current evidence about causes of OACD and important aspects of diagnosis. This is important for clinical practice to ensure cases of OACD are not missed.

Screening Allergenic Potencies of Skin-Contact Products Using the Human-Derived THP-1 Cell Activation Test

With the prevalence of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from the usage of skin-contact products, like wearable, skin care, and hair care products, screening their skin sensitizing potential is necessary, for the sake of alleviating the consequent public health impact. In the present study, a total of 77 skin-contact products classified by four categories, watch bands (WBs), skin care products (SCPs), hair care products (HCPs), and rubber gloves (RGs), were investigated, using an optimized in vitro assay of human cell line activation test (h-CLAT). Extracting the products using neutral artificial sweat simulated well the practical usage scenarios, and testing the extracts showed that 26 of them were allergy test positive, including nine WBs, six SCPs, two HCPs, and nine RGs. The allergenic response was mainly characterized by the induction of CD54 expression, and diverse paradigms of CD54 and CD86 levels were observed by analyzing dose-response curves, which could also be influenced by the compromised viability of the THP-1 cells. The data implicated the intricate regulation by different contributors to suspicious ingredients in the test samples. Altogether, a promising methodology for testing skin allergy potential was well established for commonly used commodities by neutral artificial sweat extraction coupled with h-CLAT screening. The findings would be of great help in tracing the potential allergens in practical products and improving their qualities.

Hand eczema in glove-wearing patients

BACKGROUND

Allergic contact dermatitis to gloves is mostly induced by rubber accelerators. The European baseline series (EBS) appears insufficient to detect glove allergy. Since 2017, it is recommended to use the European rubber series (ERS) and to test the patients' own gloves.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the clinical profile of glove-wearing patients with hand eczema (HE) and to evaluate their sensitisation profile to glove allergens and the value of testing the patients' own gloves.

METHODS

We conducted a French multicentre study of patients evaluated for HE between 2018 and 2020 and tested with the EBS, the ERS and their own gloves in patch tests and semi-open (SO) tests.

RESULTS

A total of 279 patients were included; 32.6% of patients had positive tests to their own gloves or to glove allergens. Almost 45% of the sensitisations to glove allergens were detected only by the ERS. Among the patients tested both in patch tests and SO tests with their own gloves with positive results, 28% had positive SO tests only. Polyvinylchloride (PVC) gloves were positive in four patients.

CONCLUSION

Our series confirms the need to test the ERS. All the patients' gloves must also be tested including PVC gloves. SO tests with gloves are useful as a complement to patch tests.

[When protective gloves do not protect-unexpected findings in a dental assistant]

We report on a 38-year-old dental assistant who developed erythema and dryness of the skin of the hands 12 years after she had started the job. After healing for 3 months she developed eczema lesions on the body, especially on the back of the hands, arms, neck, and legs. Contact dermatitis was suspected. We diagnosed atopic dermatitis and allergic contact dermatitis to different thiurames and to three of the seven protective gloves she had worn professionally. Carbamates were identified in those protection gloves. Thus, we assume two skin diseases: atopic hand eczema and atopic dermatitis of the body as well as intermittent contact dermatitis to occupationally relevant contact allergens. By using thiuram- and carbamate-free protective gloves and implementing skin protection and skin care measures, the skin disease has been completely cured to this day.

Occupational contact allergy: The European perspective-Analysis of patch test data from ESSCA between 2011 and 2020

BACKGROUND

Occupational skin diseases have led the occupational disease statistics in Europe for many years. Especially occupational allergic contact dermatitis is associated with a poor prognosis and low healing rates leading to an enormous burden for the affected individual and for society.

OBJECTIVES

To present the sensitization frequencies to the most relevant allergens of the European baseline series in patients with occupational contact dermatitis (OCD) and to compare sensitization profiles of different occupations.

METHODS

The data of 16 022 patients considered having OCD after patch testing within the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA) network between January 2011 and December 2020 were evaluated. Patients (n = 46 652) in whom an occupational causation was refuted served as comparison group.

RESULTS

The highest percentages of OCD were found among patients working in agriculture, fishery and related workers, metal industry, chemical industry, followed by building and construction industry, health care, food and service industry. Sensitizations to rubber chemicals (thiurams, carbamates, benzothiazoles) and epoxy resins were associated with at least a doubled risk of OCD. After a decline from 2014 onwards, the risks to acquire an occupation-related sensitization to methyl(chloro)isothiazolinone (MCI/MI) and especially to methylisothiazolinone (MI) seem to increase again. Sensitization rates to formaldehyde were stable, and to methyldibromo glutaronitrile (MDBGN) slightly decreasing over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Among allergens in the European Baseline Series, occupational relevance is most frequently attributed to rubber accelerators, epoxy resins and preservatives.

Synthesis of Oleanolic Acid-Dithiocarbamate Conjugates and Evaluation of Their Broad-Spectrum Antitumor Activities

Efficient and mild synthetic routes for bioactive natural product derivatives are of current interest for drug discovery. Herein, on the basis of the pharmacophore hybrid strategy, we report a two-step protocol to obtain a series of structurally novel oleanolic acid (OA)-dithiocarbamate conjugates in mild conditions with high yields. Moreover, biological evaluations indicated that representative compound 3e exhibited the most potent and broad-spectrum antiproliferative effects against Panc1, A549, Hep3B, Huh-7, HT-29, and Hela cells with low cytotoxicity on normal cells. In terms of the IC₅₀ values, these OA-dithiocarbamate conjugates were up to 30-fold more potent than the natural product OA. These compounds may be promising hit compounds for the development of novel anti-cancer drugs.

Contact allergens for the allergist

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this article is to provide an overview and describe typically encountered skin contact allergens implicated in allergic contact dermatitis (ACD).

DATA SOURCES

Published literature obtained through textbooks, online PubMed, and Google Scholar database searches, author photography, and adapted figures were used.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Studies on the evaluation of ACD and specific skin contact allergens were selected, with a focus on original research articles and clinical reviews.

RESULTS

Major classifications of common contact allergens include the following: (1) fragrances, (2) preservatives, (3) excipients, (4) rubber chemicals, (5) textile dyes, (6) topical medications, and (6) metals and other biomedical device components. The dermatitis distribution can aid in identifying the suspected contact allergen culprit. Certain contact allergens have features that are important to consider in the patch testing (PT) interpretation; these include possible irritant reactions, false-negative reactions or missed detection, and delayed reactions. Fragrances, preservatives, and excipients are culprits in personal products and facial or neck dermatitis. Patch testing with fragrances, preservatives, and patient-supplied products requires careful interpretation. Hand or foot dermatitis may be attributed to rubber chemicals or textile dyes. The management of topical corticosteroid contact allergy is guided on the basis of structural group classifications. Metal sensitization has been associated with dermatitis or biomedical device complications.

CONCLUSION

Each skin contact allergen has unique characteristics with regard to the dermatitis clinical presentation and potential PT nuances. These features are critical to recognize in the evaluation of ACD and PT interpretation and clinical relevance, leading to an accurate diagnosis.