1
|
Silverberg JI, Patel N, Warshaw EM, DeKoven JG, Belsito DV, Atwater AR, Taylor JS, Sasseville D, Reeder MJ, Houle MC, DeLeo VA, Maibach HI, Fowler JF, Zug KA, Pratt MD, Yu J, Mowad CM, Botto NC, Adler BL. Patch Testing With Nickel, Cobalt, and Chromium in Patients With Suspected Allergic Contact Dermatitis. Dermatitis 2024; 35:152-159. [PMID: 38052041 DOI: 10.1089/derm.2023.0139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/07/2023]
Abstract
Background: Allergic contact dermatitis is frequently caused by metals, including multiple metals simultaneously. Objectives: To assess characteristics and associations of positive and clinically relevant patch test (PT) reactions with solitary and concurrent metal sensitization. Methods: A retrospective analysis of PT results for nickel, cobalt, and/or chromium from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group between 2001 and 2018 (n = 43,522). Results: 18.0% had a positive/allergic reaction to nickel sulfate hexahydrate, 7.3% to cobalt chloride hexahydrate, and 3.0% to potassium dichromate. 87.9% patients had a currently relevant reaction to 0, 9.4% to 1, and 2.7% to multiple metals tested. Patients with 1 versus no currently relevant reactions to metal were more likely to have a primary dermatitis site of trunk, feet, and ears; patients with currently relevant reactions to multiple metals had more dermatitis affecting the trunk and ears. Metal sources varied by co-reacting metal, especially for patients with cobalt and chromium allergy. Jewelry was the most commonly identified source of nickel and cobalt for both solitary and concurrent metal allergy. Conclusions: Sensitization to multiple metals occurred in 6% of patients. Allergen sources varied between patients with sensitivity to 1 metal versus those who had concurrent sensitivity to cobalt and/or chromium.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan I Silverberg
- From the Department of Dermatology, George Washington University School of Medicine, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
- Department of Dermatology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Nisha Patel
- From the Department of Dermatology, George Washington University School of Medicine, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| | - Erin M Warshaw
- Department of Dermatology, Park Nicollet Health Services, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
- Department of Dermatology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
- Department of Dermatology, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Joel G DeKoven
- Division of Dermatology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Donald V Belsito
- Department of Dermatology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Amber R Atwater
- Department of Dermatology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - James S Taylor
- Department of Dermatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Denis Sasseville
- Division of Dermatology, Montreal General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Margo J Reeder
- Department of Dermatology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Marie-Claude Houle
- Division of Dermatology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Québec, Laval University, Quebec, Canada
| | - Vincent A DeLeo
- Department of Dermatology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Howard I Maibach
- Department of Dermatology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Joseph F Fowler
- Division of Dermatology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA
| | - Kathryn A Zug
- Department of Dermatology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA
| | - Melanie D Pratt
- Division of Dermatology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - JiaDe Yu
- Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Christen M Mowad
- Division of Dermatology, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania, USA; and
| | - Nina C Botto
- Department of Dermatology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Brandon L Adler
- Department of Dermatology, University of Southern California, Lost Angeles, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Warshaw EM, Han J, Kullberg SA, DeKoven JG, Adler BL, Silverberg JI, Houle MC, Pratt MD, Belsito DV, Yu J, Botto NC, Reeder MJ, Taylor JS, Atwater AR, Dunnick CA, DeLeo VA, Mowad CM. Patch Testing to Chlorhexidine Digluconate, 1% Aqueous: North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience, 2015-2020. Dermatitis 2023; 34:501-508. [PMID: 37279017 DOI: 10.1089/derm.2023.0077] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
Background: Chlorhexidine is an antiseptic that may cause allergic contact dermatitis. Objectives: To describe the epidemiology of chlorhexidine allergy and characterize positive patch test reactions. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients patch tested to chlorhexidine digluconate 1% aqueous by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 2015-2020. Results: Of 14,731 patients tested to chlorhexidine digluconate, 107 (0.7%) had an allergic reaction; of these, 56 (52.3%) reactions were currently clinically relevant. Most (59%) reactions were mild (+), followed by strong (++, 18.7%) and very strong (+++, 6.5%). Common primary dermatitis anatomic sites in chlorhexidine-positive patients were hands (26.4%), face (24.5%), and scattered/generalized distribution (17.9%). Compared with negative patients, chlorhexidine-positive patients were significantly more likely to have dermatitis involving the trunk (11.3% vs 5.1%; P = 0.0036). The most commonly identified source category was skin/health care products (n = 41, 38.3%). Only 11 (10.3%) chlorhexidine reactions were occupationally related; of these, 81.8% were in health care workers. Conclusions: Chlorhexidine digluconate allergy is uncommon, but often clinically relevant. Involvement of the hands, face, and scattered generalized patterns was frequent. Occupationally related reactions were found predominantly in health care workers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erin M Warshaw
- From the Department of Dermatology, Park Nicollet Health Services, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
- Department of Dermatology, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
- Department of Dermatology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Joohee Han
- From the Department of Dermatology, Park Nicollet Health Services, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Sara A Kullberg
- From the Department of Dermatology, Park Nicollet Health Services, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
- Department of Dermatology, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
- University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Joel G DeKoven
- Division of Dermatology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Brandon L Adler
- Department of Dermatology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Jonathan I Silverberg
- Department of Dermatology, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| | - Marie-Claude Houle
- Division of Dermatology, CHU de Quebec, Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
| | - Melanie D Pratt
- Division of Dermatology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Donald V Belsito
- Department of Dermatology, Columbia University Irving Medical School, New York, New York, USA
| | - Jiade Yu
- Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Nina C Botto
- Department of Dermatology, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Margo J Reeder
- Department of Dermatology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - James S Taylor
- Department of Dermatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Amber R Atwater
- Department of Dermatology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Cory A Dunnick
- Department of Dermatology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
- Rocky Mountain Regional Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Aurora, Colorado, USA
| | - Vincent A DeLeo
- Department of Dermatology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Chris M Mowad
- Department of Dermatology, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Warshaw EM, Peterson MY, Atwater AR, DeKoven JG, Pratt MD, Taylor JS, Belsito DV, Silverberg JI, Reeder MJ, DeLeo VA, Houle MC, Dunnick CA, Yu J, Adler B, Mowad C, Botto NC. Patch Testing to Paraphenylenediamine: The North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience (1994-2018). Dermatitis 2023; 34:536-546. [PMID: 37523239 DOI: 10.1089/derm.2023.0140] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/02/2023]
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Paraphenylenediamine (PPD) is an aromatic amine dye that may cause allergic contact dermatitis. This study examines the epidemiology of allergic patch test reactions to PPD. Methods: This retrospective analysis characterizes individuals tested to PPD (1% petrolatum) by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (1994-2018). Demographics and dermatitis site(s) were compared between PPD-allergic and PPD-negative patients. PPD reactions were analyzed by reaction strength, clinical relevance, occupational relatedness, and source as well as coreactivity with structurally related compounds. Results: Of 54,917 patients tested to PPD, 3095 (5.6%) had an allergic patch test reaction. Compared with PPD-negative patients, PPD-allergic patients had significantly greater odds of age >40 years (odds ratio [OR] 1.55 [95% confidence interval; CI 1.43-1.69]) and female gender (OR 1.52 [95% CI 1.41-1.66]), but lower odds of being White (OR 0.66 [95% CI 0.60-0.71]). The most common primary anatomic sites of dermatitis were face (25.5%), hands (21.9%), and scattered/generalized pattern (15.5%). Over half (55.3%) of PPD reactions were ++ or +++ at the final reading and 60.9% were currently relevant. Common exposure sources included hair dye (73.5%) and clothing/shoes/apparel (3.9%). Occupationally related reactions occurred in 8.3%, most commonly in hairdressers/cosmetologists (72.8%). The most common coreactions were benzocaine (11.3%), N-isopropyl-N'-phenyl-p-phenylenediamine (6.7%), disperse dye mix (6.5%), and black rubber mix (5.1%). Conclusions: The 24-year percentage of allergic reactions to PPD was 5.6%. PPD allergy was associated with female gender and age >40 years. PPD allergic patients were less likely to be White. Allergic reactions were usually clinically relevant and hair dye was the most frequently identified source.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erin M Warshaw
- From the Department of Dermatology, Park Nicollet/Health Partners Health Services, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
- Department of Dermatology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
- Department of Dermatology, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Malina Yamashita Peterson
- From the Department of Dermatology, Park Nicollet/Health Partners Health Services, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
- University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Amber R Atwater
- Department of Dermatology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Joel G DeKoven
- Division of Dermatology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Melanie D Pratt
- Division of Dermatology, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - James S Taylor
- Department of Dermatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Donald V Belsito
- Department of Dermatology, Columbia University Irving Medical School, New York, New York, USA
| | - Jonathan I Silverberg
- Department of Dermatology, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| | - Margo J Reeder
- Department of Dermatology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Vincent A DeLeo
- Department of Dermatology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Marie-Claude Houle
- Division of Dermatology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec, Laval University, Québec, Canada
| | - Cory A Dunnick
- Department of Dermatology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
| | - Jiade Yu
- Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Brandon Adler
- Department of Dermatology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Christen Mowad
- Department of Dermatology, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Nina C Botto
- Department of Dermatology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Abstract
Contact dermatitis (CD) is among the most common inflammatory dermatological conditions and includes allergic CD, photoallergic CD, irritant CD, photoirritant CD (also called phototoxic CD) and protein CD. Occupational CD can be of any type and is the most prevalent occupational skin disease. Each CD type is characterized by different immunological mechanisms and/or requisite exposures. Clinical manifestations of CD vary widely and multiple subtypes may occur simultaneously. The diagnosis relies on clinical presentation, thorough exposure assessment and evaluation with techniques such as patch testing and skin-prick testing. Management is based on patient education, avoidance strategies of specific substances, and topical treatments; in severe or recalcitrant cases, which can negatively affect the quality of life of patients, systemic medications may be needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pamela L Scheinman
- Department of Dermatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Marc Vocanson
- CIRI - Centre International de Recherche en Infectiologie, INSERM, U1111; Univ Lyon; Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1; Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon; CNRS, UMR, 5308, Lyon, France
| | - Jacob P Thyssen
- National Allergy Research Centre, Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Jeanne Duus Johansen
- National Allergy Research Centre, Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Rosemary L Nixon
- Skin Health Institute - Occupational Dermatology Research and Education Centre, Carlton, VIC, Australia
| | - Kate Dear
- Skin Health Institute - Occupational Dermatology Research and Education Centre, Carlton, VIC, Australia
| | - Nina C Botto
- Department of Dermatology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Johanna Morot
- CIRI - Centre International de Recherche en Infectiologie, INSERM, U1111; Univ Lyon; Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1; Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon; CNRS, UMR, 5308, Lyon, France
| | - Ari M Goldminz
- Department of Dermatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Botto NC, Penn EH, Grant BM, Kogelman L, Gottlieb AB, Scheinman PL. Diffuse crusting of the skin. Cutis 2015; 96:E1-E3. [PMID: 26367755] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Erin H Penn
- Department of Medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital, 45 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Botto NC, Shpall RL, Kim J, Bruckner AL. A young girl with weather-beaten, waxy knuckles. J Pediatr 2010; 156:671-4. [PMID: 20303443 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2010.01.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2009] [Revised: 12/16/2009] [Accepted: 01/15/2010] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Nina C Botto
- Department of Dermatology, Tufts University, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Warshaw EM, Botto NC, Maibach HI, Fowler JF, Rietschel RL, Zug KA, Belsito DV, Taylor JS, DeLeo VA, Pratt MD, Sasseville D, Storrs FJ, Marks JG, Mathias TC. Positive Patch-Test Reactions to Propylene Glycol: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Analysis from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 1996 to 2006. Dermatitis 2009. [DOI: 10.2310/6620.2008.08039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
8
|
Warshaw EM, Botto NC, Maibach HI, Fowler JF, Rietschel RL, Zug KA, Belsito DV, Taylor JS, DeLeo VA, Pratt MD, Sasseville D, Storrs FJ, Marks JG, Mathias CGT. Positive patch-test reactions to propylene glycol: a retrospective cross-sectional analysis from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 1996 to 2006. Dermatitis 2009; 20:14-20. [PMID: 19321115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Propylene glycol (PG) may cause allergic or irritant contact dermatitis. It primarily functions as a vehicle, solvent, or emulsifier in cosmetics and topical medications. OBJECTIVES To characterize the prevalence of positive patch-test reactions to PG and the epidemiology of affected patients. METHODS Retrospective analysis of cross-sectional data compiled by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) from 1996 to 2006. RESULTS Of 23,359 patients, 810 (3.5%) had allergic patch-test reactions to 30% PG; 12.8% of the reactions were of definite clinical relevance (positive reaction to a personal product containing PG), 88.3% were considered to be currently relevant (definite, probable, or possible relevance), and 4.2% of reactions were occupation related, most commonly to mechanical and motor vehicle occupations. Common sources of PG were personal care products (creams, lotions, and cosmetics, 53.8%), topical corticosteroids (18.3%), and other topical medicaments (10.1%). In patients positive only to PG (n = 135), the face was most commonly affected (25.9%), followed by a scattered or generalized pattern (23.7%). The most common concomitant reactions included reactions to Myroxilon pereirae, fragrance mix, formaldehyde, bacitracin, methyldibromoglutaronitrile/phenoxyethanol, carba mix, and tixocortol pivalate. CONCLUSIONS In this select population of patients referred for patch testing, allergic reactions to PG were often currently clinically relevant but were rarely related to occupation. The most common sources were personal care products and topical corticosteroids.
Collapse
|
9
|
Botto NC, Warshaw EM. Solar urticaria. J Am Acad Dermatol 2008; 59:909-20; quiz 921-2. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2008.08.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 94] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2008] [Revised: 06/18/2008] [Accepted: 08/13/2008] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
|
10
|
Warshaw EM, Botto NC, Zug KA, Belsito DV, Maibach HI, Sasseville D, Fowler JF, Storrs FJ, Taylor JS, DeLeo VA, Marks JG, Mathias CGT, Pratt MD, Rietschel RL. Contact dermatitis associated with food: retrospective cross-sectional analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data, 2001-2004. Dermatitis 2008; 19:252-260. [PMID: 18845115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/26/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Allergic and irritant contact dermatitis to food is likely underreported. OBJECTIVES To characterize relevant allergens and irritants associated with food in patients referred to the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) for patch testing. METHODS Retrospective analysis of cross-sectional data from the NACDG from 2001 to 2004. RESULTS Of 10,061 patch-tested patients, 109 (1.1%) had a total of 122 reactions associated with food. Approximately two-thirds of patients (66%) were female, and one-third (36%) were atopic. The hands were the most common sites of dermatitis (36.7%). There were 78 currently relevant (definite, probable, or possible) allergic reactions to NACDG standard series allergens with a food source; the most common allergen was nickel (48.7%), followed by Myroxilon pereirae (balsam of Peru) (20.6%) and propylene glycol (6.4%). Twenty allergic reactions to non-NACDG standard allergens and 24 relevant food irritants were also identified. Overall, 21% (25 of 122) of all reactions (irritant and allergic) were occupation related; the majority of these (17 of 25) were relevant irritant reactions. Cooks were the most commonly affected occupational group (40%). CONCLUSIONS In this limited data set, nickel, Myroxilon pereirae, and propylene glycol were the most common allergens identified with a food source. Of food-related occupational disease, irritation was more common than allergy.
Collapse
|
11
|
Warshaw EM, Botto NC, Zug KA, Belsito DV, Maibach HI, Sasseville D, Fowler JF, Storrs FJ, Taylor JS, DeLeo VA, Marks JG, Mathias TC, Pratt MD, Rietschel RL. Contact Dermatitis Associated with Food: Retrospective Cross-Sectional Analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group Data, 2001-2004. Dermatitis 2008. [DOI: 10.2310/6620.2008.08012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|