Contact allergy to SIDAPA baseline series allergens in patients with eyelid dermatitis: An Italian multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Eyelid dermatitis is a frequent reason of dermatological consultation. Its aetiology is not univocal, being contact dermatitis, both allergic and irritant, the most frequent. The primary sources of allergen exposure include cosmetics, metals, and topical medications, from direct, indirect, or airborne contact.

OBJECTIVES

To define the frequency of positive patch test reactions to SIDAPA baseline series allergens, to document positive allergens, and to precise the final diagnosis in patients with eyelid involvement.

METHODS

A total of 8557 consecutive patients from 12 Italian Dermatology Clinics underwent patch testing with SIDAPA baseline series in 2018 and 2019. Patients were divided into two groups: (i) with eyelid involvement with or without other involved sites (E-Group) and (ii) without eyelid involvement (NE-Group). The final diagnosis and the frequency of positive relevant patch test reactions were evaluated.

RESULTS

E-Group consisted of 688 patients (females 78.6%, mean age 45.3 years), 8.0% of 8557 consecutively patch-tested patients. The final diagnosis in E-Group was ADC in 42.4%, ICD in 34.2%, and AD in 30.5%. The highest reaction rates were elicited by nickel sulphate and methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone in both E-Group and NE-Group, even if these allergens were significantly more frequently positive in NE-Group patients than in E-Group ones. Positive patch test reactions to fragrance Mix II, dimethylaminopropylamine, and sorbitan sesquiolate were significantly more frequent in E-Group patients than in NE-Group ones.

CONCLUSIONS

Eyelid dermatitis is a frequent dermatological complaint. Allergic contact dermatitis is the most frequent diagnosis commonly caused by nickel sulphate, isothiazolinones, and fragrances. The surfactants dimethylaminopropylamine and sorbitan sesquioleate are emerging causes of eyelid allergic contact dermatitis.

New device, 'old' allergens. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by the Dexcom G7 glucose sensor

BACKGROUND

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) has been reported as an adverse effect from the use of several glucose sensors and insulin pumps from different manufacturers. Isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) has been identified as a major culprit sensitizer, but also other acrylates and (modified) colophonium have been reported as causes of ACD.

OBJECTIVES

To report the two first cases diagnosed with ACD caused by the Dexcom G7 (DG7) glucose sensor.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two children with suspected ACD from DG7 were patch tested with our medical device series with an addition of selected test preparations including two variants of modified colophonium - methyl hydrogenated rosinate (MHR) and glyceryl hydrogenated rosinate (GHR). Both patients were also tested with acetone extracts made from different parts of the DG7 sensor. The extracts were analysed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS).

RESULTS

Both patients tested positive to IBOA, hydroabietyl alcohol and GHR. In addition, patient 1 had a positive reaction to MHR and patient 2 had a positive reaction to colophonium. The GC-MS analyses showed the presence of IBOA and colophonium-related substances in the DG7 extracts.

CONCLUSIONS

Both patients were diagnosed with contact allergy to well-known medical device-related sensitizers. The presence of IBOA and (modified) colophonium in a newly introduced (on the Swedish market in 2023) glucose sensor is remarkable and indicates an inadequate toxicological assessment of the materials used in the sensor.

Increasing non-cosmetic exposure and sensitization to isothiazolinones require action for prevention: Review

Frequent use of methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI) and MI in cosmetic products has been the main cause of widespread sensitization and allergic contact dermatitis to these preservatives (biocides). Their use in non-cosmetic products is also an important source of sensitization. Less is known about sensitization rates and use of benzisothiazolinone (BIT), octylisothiazolinone (OIT), and dichlorooctylisothiazolinone (DCOIT), which have never been permitted in cosmetic products in Europe. BIT and OIT have occasionally been routinely patch-tested. These preservatives are often used together in chemical products and articles. In this study, we review the occurrence of contact allergy to MI, BIT, OIT, and DCOIT over time, based on concomitant patch testing in large studies, and case reports. We review EU legislations, and we discuss the role of industry, regulators, and dermatology in prevention of sensitization and protection of health. The frequency of contact allergy to MI, BIT, and OIT has increased. The frequency of contact allergy to DCOIT is not known because it has seldom been patch-tested. Label information on isothiazolinones in chemical products and articles, irrespective of concentration, is required for assessment of relevance, information to patients, and avoidance of exposure and allergic contact dermatitis.

Declining frequency of sensitization to fragrance mixes I and II: IVDK-data of the years 2012-2021

BACKGROUND

EU Commission Regulation 2017/1410 prohibits using atranol and chloroatranol, the main allergens in Evernia prunastri (oakmoss), and hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde (HICC) in cosmetic products. Oakmoss absolute is contained in fragrance mix (FM) I and HICC in FM II which are patch tested as screening mixtures in the baseline series.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the time trends of reaction frequencies to both FMs as well as to their components in FM-positive patients.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of data from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), 2012-2021.

RESULTS

Positive reactions to FM I (FM II) declined from 9.1% (4.7%) in 2012 to 4.6% (3.0%) in 2021. Full breakdown tests were performed in 24% (FM I) and 31% (FM II), respectively, of the mix-positive patients. From this data, frequencies of sensitization to the 14 single fragrances of FM I and FM II were calculated. For the majority, a decline was noted from 2012/2013 to 2020/2021, for oakmoss absolute 1.9%-0.8% and for HICC 1.8%-0.9%.

CONCLUSION

EU Commission Regulation 2017/1410 was an effective measure. However, our data have some limitations, possibly causing underestimation of sensitization frequencies to fragrances.

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.

Triggers, clinical manifestations and assessment of paediatric fixed drug eruptions: A systematic review of the literature

Fixed drug eruption (FDE) is a cutaneous drug reaction characterised by recurrent skin lesions occurring at the same site after each exposure to a causative agent. There is currently limited evidence in the paediatric population. The objective of this systematic review is to investigate the clinical features, causative agents and management of paediatric FDE. A systematic search of the English and French literature on paediatric FDE was conducted using the Medline and Embase databases. After full-text article review, 92 articles were included, representing a total of 233 patients. Antibiotics were the most frequent triggering agents, mainly sulfonamides (65.0% of antibiotics). Systemic symptoms were rare, and most patients only received supportive therapy. One hundred and six patients (106) performed a test to confirm the causative agent. Of these, 72.6% had oral provocation tests (OPTs) and 28.3% had patch tests. The patient's age, presence of bullous lesions and mucosal lesions were similar between tested and untested patients. It did not seem to influence the decision to perform OPTs. Paediatric FDE is a non-severe skin drug reaction. Antibiotics were the most reported triggering agents. Drug testing, including oral provocation test, was safely performed in the paediatric population.

Sensitisation to ethylhexyl salicylate: Another piece of the frontal fibrosing alopecia puzzle

BACKGROUND

There is speculation that some environmental factors may be impacting the increasing incidence of frontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA). In a recent publication, sensitisation to benzyl salicylate was shown to be prevalent among 36 patients with FFA. Ethylhexyl salicylate (EHS), a light stabiliser, ultraviolet (UV) B absorber and UV filter, frequently found in photoprotectors/cosmetics and, rarely reported as a sensitiser, was not patch tested in said research.

METHODS

From January 2021 to February 2022, 33 patients with FFA were patch-tested with the European Photopatch Series, including EHS 10% pet. in two hospitals. In addition, we conducted a literature review and a market survey.

RESULTS

Patch test reactions to EHS were identified in 9 of 33 (27.3%). Four of nine also reacted to their personal sunscreens (containing EHS). All involved women with a mean age of 54 (30-65). Five patients had been diagnosed with FFA before the patch tests; and, four were diagnosed with FFA during the patch test investigations.

CONCLUSION

Sensitisation to EHS was frequently found in a selected population of patients with FFA. We propose to expand the spectrum of contact allergens described in patients with FFA to include EHS and discuss the possible need for optimization of the patch test preparation.

Do hypoallergenic skincare products contain fewer potential contact allergens?

Personal care products (PCPs) commonly cause allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). Skincare companies often market their products as 'hypoallergenic'; however, this term is not regulated by industry standards. To determine whether PCPs marketed as hypoallergenic are truly less likely to precipitate ACD, we conducted a study of ingredients found in 'hypoallergenic PCPs' from two major UK retailers in 2022. Of 208 products meeting the inclusion criteria, 153 (73.6%) contained at least 1 allergen or related chemical from the British Society for Cutaneous Allergy baseline series, 21 (10.1%) had 2 potential allergens and 4 PCPs (1.9%) had 3 allergens. Cetearyl alcohol was the most common -allergen identified in leave-on PCPs and parabens in rinse-off products; fragrance was the most frequent related chemical found in 85 PCPs (40.1%). A high prevalence of common allergens was found in hypoallergenic PCPs, suggesting that dermatologists and consumers should be cautious of product ingredients.

Cosmetovigilance for infrequent allergens in Spain using a national online registry: The example of allergic contact dermatitis caused by phenylethyl resorcinol

BACKGROUND

Monitoring of adverse events induced by cosmetics performed by health authorities, known as cosmetovigilance, has been relied on the collection of case notifications.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to show how a contact dermatitis registry can contribute to the cosmetovigilance of emerging allergens. We used the example of phenylethyl resorcinol, an infrequent allergen with only 6 previous cases reported in Europe and Japan since 2013.

METHODS

A systematic search in the Spanish Registry of Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy (REIDAC) database was performed to identify patients with positive patch test to phenylethyl resorcinol or cosmetics that contains it between June 2018 and January 2023. We collected the main clinical features of these patients and compared them with those of patients recorded in the registry with similar epidemiological features.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients with positive patch test to phenylethyl resorcinol were identified. All the patients were women with a mean age of 42 years (range 32-59) and their lesions were mainly in the face.

CONCLUSION

Assessing the importance of infrequent allergens based solely on a case series is difficult. Multicentre registries facilitate the collection of cases and provide appropriate background information for new allergens.

Allergic contact dermatitis to lip care cosmetic products - a systematic review

Aim: Lip care cosmetics products are any external preparation used by people to prevent drying, chapping, dullness, and beautification of lips. This study aimed to review the literature on allergic reactions induced by different types of lip care cosmetic products. Methods: A literature search was performed in PubMed from inception to June 2022. The study included articles published in English and available in full text. References of illegible articles were searched. Studies describing any patient who developed allergic contact dermatitis after the application of lip care cosmetic products were included. Results: A total of 47 reports consisting of 58 individuals experienced allergic reactions to lip care products. Several lip care cosmetics products, such as lipsticks, lip balms, lip salve, lip gloss, lip liner, and lip plumper, were found to be associated with allergic reactions. The most common ingredients that caused the allergic contact dermatitis were castor oil, benzophenone-3, gallate, wax, and colophony. Conclusions: Lip care cosmetics products contain several components that have been associated with allergic reactions. Awareness needs to be created among the general public and dermatologists regarding the presence of possible allergens in lip care cosmetic products.

Patch Testing With Nickel, Cobalt, and Chromium in Patients With Suspected Allergic Contact Dermatitis

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.

More than just methylisothiazolinone: Retrospective analysis of patients with isothiazolinone allergy in North America, 2017-2020

BACKGROUND

Isothiazolinones are a common cause of allergic contact dermatitis.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prevalence of positive patch test reactions to isothiazolinones from 2017-2020 and characterize isothiazolinone-allergic (Is+) patients compared with isothiazolinone nonallergic (Is-) patients.

METHODS

Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 9028 patients patch tested to methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI)/methylisothiazolinone (MI) 0.02% aqueous, MI 0.2% aqueous, benzisothiazolinone (BIT) 0.1% petrolatum, and/or octylisothiazolinone (OIT) 0.025% petrolatum. Prevalence, reaction strength, concurrent reactions, clinical relevance, and source of allergens were tabulated.

RESULTS

In total, 21.9% (1976/9028) of patients had a positive reaction to 1 or more isothiazolinones. Positivity to MI was 14.4% (1296/9012), MCI/MI was 10.0% (903/9017), BIT was 8.6% (777/9018), and OIT was 05% (49/9028). Compared with Is-, Is+ patients were more likely to have occupational skin disease (16.5% vs 10.3%, P <.001), primary hand dermatitis (30.2% vs 19.7%, P <.001), and be >40 years (73.1% vs 61.9%, P <.001). Positive patch test reactions to >1 isothiazolinone occurred in 44.1% (871/1976) of Is+ patients. Testing solely to MCI/MI would miss 47.3% (611/1292) of MI and 60.1% (466/776) of BIT allergic reactions.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective cross-sectional study design and lack of follow-up data.

CONCLUSION

Sensitization to isothiazolinones is high and concurrent sensitization to multiple isothiazolinone allergens is common.

Role of acrylates in the development of contact dermatitis in diabetic patients-A Polish dermatology tertiary centre experience

BACKGROUND

In recent years, an increasing number of contact dermatitis cases triggered by acrylates contained in diabetes medical devices have been reported. Acrylates seem to play a major role in the development of irritant contact dermatitis and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in diabetic patients.

OBJECTIVES

To study a group of patients with contact dermatitis caused by diabetes medical devices with a focus on acrylates as possible allergens responsible for contact dermatitis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifteen patients with diabetes mellitus type 1 and contact dermatitis from diabetic devices were patch tested to 25 acrylate allergens.

RESULTS

Three patients (20%) reacted to the following allergens: three patients reacted to isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) and one of them additionally to 2-hydroxyethyl acrylate (2-HEA); results were of clinical relevance. All three patients were using insulin pumps and glucose sensors (GS)-in one patient contact dermatitis was towards the insulin pump and the GS, in one patient only towards the insulin pump and in one patient only towards the GS. Twelve patients (80%) did not show any skin reaction towards the allergens tested.

CONCLUSION

A majority of diabetic patients showed no reactions towards any acrylate allergen tested; yet, the presence of untested allergens must be kept in mind. IBOA proved to be a cause of ACD in diabetes patients. 2-HEA might be another culprit allergen, but its presence in the devices must first be confirmed.

Contact allergy to rubber accelerators in consecutively patch tested Danish eczema patients: A retrospective observational study from 1990 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Rubber accelerators are used in the production of rubber gloves and may cause contact allergy.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate long-term trend and prevalence of contact allergy to rubber accelerators for a 30-year period in Denmark, high-risk occupations, and exposures.

METHODS

Data from all patients with contact dermatitis consecutively patch tested at the department of Skin and Allergy Gentofte hospital with the rubber accelerators from the European baseline series (EBS) from 1990 to 2019, were analysed. Further, patients under suspicion of rubber accelerator contact allergy were additionally patch-tested with rubber accelerators from the specialised rubber series from 2005 to 2019 and these were additional extracted.

RESULTS

The overall prevalence of contact allergy to one or more of the rubber accelerators from the EBS series was 2.7% with a significant decline in the first 12-years, followed by a stable frequency in the past 18-years. Associations with occupational contact dermatitis, hand dermatitis, and leg/foot dermatitis were found. Wet-work occupations were most often affected and gloves the most frequent exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Contact allergy to one or more of the rubber accelerators from the EBS is frequent and has been unchanged for several decades, which calls for prevention.

Allergic contact dermatitis to footwear in Thailand: Prevalence, clinical characteristics and common allergens

BACKGROUND

Footwear contact allergy is caused by exposure to allergens in shoes. The prevalence and common allergens vary by region and time due to differences in customs and lifestyle.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical characteristics and common allergens of patients with footwear-related allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) who attended Siriraj Hospital in Bangkok, Thailand, between 2001 and 2020.

METHODS

The medical records of 247 patients with clinically suspected footwear dermatitis who underwent patch testing were reviewed.

RESULTS

The prevalence of ACD to footwear was 1.8%. Females were predominant (71.6%). The three most common allergens were carba mix (7.7%), mercapto mix (6.9%) and potassium dichromate (6.9%). According to the allergens found, rubber (14.2%), adhesives (7.7%) and leathers (6.9%) were the three most common groups. Dorsal-limited skin lesions were significantly associated with footwear ACD.

CONCLUSION

Rubber and leather allergens were still the most common culprit allergens. Dermatologists should keep up-to-date on common allergens in footwear and emerging allergens to include in patch test series.

Presence of 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) and other (meth)acrylates in nail cosmetics, and compliance with EU legislation: An online market survey

BACKGROUND

During the last 15-20 years, allergic contact dermatitis from acrylates-containing nail cosmetics (acrylic nails, gel nails, gel nail polish) has been increasingly reported. 2-Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) is considered to be the major allergenic culprit; few data on its presence in nail cosmetics are available.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate (1) the frequency in which HEMA and di-HEMA trimethylhexyl dicarbamate are present in nail cosmetics; (2) whether nail cosmetics comply with EU regulations; (3) which other (meth)acrylates are present in nail cosmetics and how often.

METHODS

One-line market survey.

RESULTS

HEMA was present in nearly 60% of 394 cosmetic nail products and di-HEMA trimethylhexyl dicarbamate in 34%. Mandatory warnings on the packages of products containing HEMA were absent in 35% ('For professional use only') resp. 55% ('Can cause an allergic reaction'). Forty-five other (meth)acrylates were identified, of which the most frequent were hydroxypropyl methacrylate (25%), isobornyl methacrylate (16%) and trimethylolpropane triacrylate (12%). Some ingredient lists mentioned non-INCI names or non-specific names.

CONCLUSIONS

HEMA was by far the most common ingredient of nail cosmetics, being present in nearly 60% of the products. Violations of EU legislation occurred in >30% (mandatory warnings missing) resp. 10% (mislabelling) of nail cosmetics.

Occupational exposure to epoxy components and risk of dermatitis: A registry-based follow-up study of the wind turbine industry

BACKGROUND

Allergic contact allergy and dermatitis are frequently reported among epoxy-exposed workers.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the risk of dermatitis associated with epoxy exposure.

METHODS

We followed 825 epoxy-exposed and 1091 non-exposed blue-collar workers, and 493 white-collar workers of a Danish wind turbine blade factory during 2017-2022 with linked data from national health registers on diagnoses, patch testing, or fillings of prescriptions for topical corticosteroids. Incidence rate ratios of dermatitis or a first-time topical corticosteroid prescription were estimated with Poisson regression using non-exposed blue-collar workers as reference. We similarly estimated incidence rate ratios for the duration of epoxy exposure and current epoxy exposure.

RESULTS

Epoxy-exposed blue-collar workers showed a dermatitis incidence rate of 2.1 per 100 000 person days, a two-fold increased risk of dermatitis and a 20% increased risk of filling a prescription for topical corticosteroids. Incidence rate ratios were higher during early exposure and declined with further exposure for both outcomes. White-collar workers had generally lower risks.

CONCLUSION

We observed an increased risk of dermatitis following epoxy exposure confirming previous case reports and cross-sectional studies emphasizing the need for intensified focus on preventive efforts for this group of workers.

Sulfites: Allergen of the Year 2024

Sodium disulfite, also known as sodium metabisulfite or sodium pyrosulfite, is an inorganic compound, which may cause allergic contact dermatitis. Sulfites act as antioxidants and preservatives; common sources include food/beverages, pharmaceuticals, and personal care products. Importantly, sulfites are not included in most screening patch test series and thus may be missed as a relevant contact allergen. The American Contact Dermatitis Society chose sulfites as the Allergen of the Year for 2024 to raise awareness about this significant allergen.

Allergic contact dermatitis to topical medicaments: Revisited

BACKGROUND

Allergic reaction to topical drugs varies depending on use and availability of topical drugs and self-medication.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the incidence of contact dermatitis to topical medicaments among patients referred for patch testing.

METHODS

All patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis were patch tested with standard and medicament series. The characterization was performed according to the MOAHLFA index.

RESULTS

59/215 (27.4%) patients had positive reactions to at least 1 medicament but only 13/59 (22.0%) had a relevant history. The 3 most common positive medicaments were framycetin 23/215 (10.7%), miconazole 22/215 (10.2%), and econazole 17/215 (7.9%). Among those positive to medicament, face was the most common location 22/59 (37.3%). 39/215 (18.1%) had more than 2 co-positive standard allergens and showed significant higher rate of topical medicament sensitization. The contributing factors of medicament allergy were the history of suspected allergens in personal care products (OR = 2.09, P = 0.038), topical drugs (OR = 2.93, P = 0.002), topical treatment (OR = 2.47, P = 0.011), and history of drug allergy (OR = 1.78, P = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

The study showed a high rate of medicament sensitization especially antibiotic and antifungal drugs. The incidence of positive medicament patch test result was associated with facial dermatitis. Polysensitization and history of previous exposure, either as treatment or overusing of drugs, significantly associated with medicament positive patients. This study supports the inclusion of medicaments within the standard series of patch test.

Patch Testing to Chlorhexidine Digluconate, 1% Aqueous: North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience, 2015-2020

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.

Prevalence and causative allergens of contact cheilitis in Thailand

BACKGROUND

Cheilitis is an inflammatory condition of the lips. Its causes can be exogenous (irritants, allergens), endogenous (atopic dermatitis, systemic disorders) or unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence of allergic contact cheilitis (ACC), its risk factors, and common allergens in patients with cheilitis at a Thai university-based tertiary care hospital.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients with cheilitis referred for patch testing between January 2007 and December 2021.

RESULTS

Among 5366 patients referred for patch testing, 410 (7.6%) had cheilitis. ACC was diagnosed in 32% of the cheilitis patients. Compared to non-ACC cases, the patients with ACC were more likely to be young and female and have a disease duration of <3 months, no underlying disease and a white-collar job (p-value <0.05). The most common contact allergens were patient's products (73.3%), nickel sulfate (29.8%), potassium dichromate (14.5%), castor oil (14.3%) and benzalkonium chloride (13.0%). Lip cosmetics and toothpastes were major ACC sources.

CONCLUSIONS

ACC should be considered in cheilitis patients, especially in patients with specific risk factors. Castor oil is an emerging allergen. Patch testing using commercial allergen series and patients' own products is crucial for identifying causative agents. The development of a specific cheilitis series is warranted.

Contact Dermatitis to Ophthalmic Solutions: An Update

Eyelid and periorbital dermatitis remains a distressing and recalcitrant disease. Contact dermatitis remains the most common cause of eyelid and periorbital dermatitis. Ophthalmic solutions used in the treatment of ophthalmic conditions can often be the cause. This article is an update of our previous study, summarizing the contact allergens involved and the new test concentrations reported to investigate through patch testing. New insights found during the review are also documented.

Patch Testing to Paraphenylenediamine: The North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience (1994-2018)

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.

Nickel-related hypersensitivity reactions following endovascular interventions: A review of current evidence

INTRODUCTION

Nickel is a principal alloying agent in the production of vascular endoprostheses, despite persisting as the most habitually identified allergen. Variable nickel-related hypersensitivity manifestations following endovascular intervention were reported, challenging established paradigms in treatment and accuracy of prognostic assessments. The objective of this review is to critically evaluate current metrics to maximise patient-related outcomes.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2009 statement. Patients indicative of nickel hypersensitivity reaction following endovascular intervention were discerned. A positive reaction was defined by patch testing, histological analysis, or anamnesis indicative of nickel hypersensitivity. Morphology of implicating prostheses, adverse events and postoperative complications, clinical course, diagnostic and therapeutic strategies alongside patient prognosis were recorded.

RESULTS

Nickel-related hypersensitivity reactions following endovascular repair were identified in 36 patients with a median age of 44.5 years. 20 patients received nitinol-containing intervention. 28 (77.8%) patients are female. Multi-organ adverse reactions occurred in 21 (58.3%) patients with variable latency. 14 (38.9%) patients were presented with neurological adverse reactions manifesting mainly as unilateral hemiparesis. Dermatological reactions implicated 16 (44.4%) patients. Miscellaneous manifestations include suicidal ideation. 13 (36.1%) patients displayed previous metal intolerance and 32 (88.9%) patients had positive patch testing for nickel. Histological analysis of lesions and prostheses indicated lymphocytic infiltration. 5 (13.9%) patients experienced device-specific reactions as in-stent restenosis or auxiliary distal vessel stenosis. 11 (30.1%) patients received solely medical therapy and 5 (13.9%) patients received solely surgical therapy. 19 (52.7%) patients underwent both medical (oral corticosteroid) and surgical therapy (device retrieval). 26 (77.1%) patients achieved symptomatic cessation, 6 (16.7%) patients exhibited symptomatic persistence and 0 patients died.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic pre-assessment for a history of metal allergy and consideration of prostheses alternatives is recommended to minimise reaction risk and severity. Despite nickel's predominant usage, information paucity urges additional studies to emphasise its implications and maximise patient outcomes.

It is not always chlorhexidine: Identification of benzoxonium chloride and lauramine oxide as culprit allergens in a popular antiseptic in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

A popular antiseptic spray in Switzerland (Merfen spray), containing chlorhexidine digluconate, benzoxonium chloride and lauramine oxide, is frequently used to treat skin wounds. However, it is also increasingly reported as a major cause of adverse skin reactions, including allergic contact dermatitis (ACD).

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the contact allergens responsible for ACD from this antiseptic.

PATIENTS/METHODS

Patch tests were performed on seven patients with a clinical history compatible with contact dermatitis from this antiseptic mixture.

RESULTS

All patients presented with acute eczematous reactions following contact with either Merfen spray alone, or with multiple products including this spray. Patients showed positive reactions to this product in both patch tests and repeated open application tests (ROATs). Four patients showed dose-dependent reactions to both benzoxonium chloride and lauramine oxide. One patient showed a dose-dependent reaction to the former and a non-dose-dependent reaction to the latter. Finally, two subjects showed responses only to lauramine oxide. One patient reacted to chlorhexidine digluconate 0.5% aq. in addition to both other allergens.

CONCLUSIONS

Two commercially unavailable allergens, that is, benzoxonium chloride and/or lauramine oxide were identified as major causes of ACD from Merfen antiseptic spray, whereas chlorhexidine digluconate was a contributing culprit in only one patient.

The role of the atopy patch test in the diagnostic work-up of non-IgE gastrointestinal food allergy in children: a systematic review

The "Atopy Patch Test" (APT) has been proposed as a diagnostic tool for food allergies (FA), especially in children with FA-related gastrointestinal symptoms. However, its diagnostic accuracy is debated, and its usefulness is controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the APT diagnostic accuracy compared with the diagnostic gold standard, i.e., the oral food challenge (OFC), in children affected by non-IgE mediated gastrointestinal food allergies, including the evaluation in milk allergic subgroup. Both classical non-IgE mediated clinical pictures and food induced motility disorders (FPIMD) were considered. The search was conducted in PubMed and Scopus from January 2000 to June 2022 by two independent researchers. The patient, intervention, comparators, outcome, and study design approach (PICOS) format was used for developing key questions, to address the APT diagnostic accuracy compared with the oral food challenge (OFC). The quality of the studies was assessed by the QUADAS-2 system. The meta-analysis was performed to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, DOR (diagnostic odds ratio), PLR (positive likelihood ratio), and NLR (negative likelihood ratio) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Out of the 457 citations initially identified via the search (196 on PubMed and 261 on Scopus), 37 advanced to full-text screening, and 16 studies were identified to be included in the systematic review. Reference lists from relevant retrievals were searched, and one additional article was added. Finally, 17 studies were included in the systematic review. The analysis showed that APT has a high specificity of 94% (95%CI: 0.88-0.97) in the group of patients affected by FPIMD. Data showed a high pooled specificity of 96% (95% CI: 0.89-0.98) and the highest accuracy of APT in patients affected by cow's milk allergy (AUC = 0.93).      Conclusion: APT is effective in identifying causative food in children with food-induced motility disorders.  What is Known: • Atopy patch test could be a useful diagnostic test for diagnosing food allergy, especially in children with food allergy-related gastrointestinal symptoms. What is New: • Atopy patch test may be a useful tool in diagnosing non IgE food allergy, especially in children with food-induced gastrointestinal motility disorders and cow's milk allergy.

Allergic disorders of the eyelid

Eyelid dermatitis may present with a variety of clinical findings including erythema, pruritus, and edema, and it has a wide differential. Allergic contact dermatitis due to allergen sources in personal care products, cosmetics, and fragrances is a leading cause of eyelid dermatitis and may be challenging to diagnose by clinical examination alone. Expanded patch testing, in addition to careful inspection of the surrounding skin for additional areas of involvement and clinical clues, remains an important tool in differentiating allergic contact dermatitis from other relevant etiologies of eyelid dermatitis including irritant contact dermatitis, atopic dermatitis, seborrheic dermatitis, and rosacea. We present a practical approach to the management of eyelid dermatitis including the use of a topical anti-inflammatory for long-term control of eyelid findings. Further diagnostic workup may be warranted in patients with refractory eyelid dermatitis.

Allergic contact dermatitis of the eyelids: An interdisciplinary review

PURPOSE

A review of the published literature on the pathogenesis and treatment of eyelid allergic contact dermatitis and ocular surface involvement.

METHODS

Literature search of MEDLINE (Ovid) was conducted using for allergic contact dermatitis and disease of the eyelid or periorbital skin. Dates included in search criteria were from January 1, 2010 to January 12, 2023. 120 articles were reviewed by at least two authors.

RESULTS

Allergic eyelid contact dermatitis(ACD) is a Type IV hypersensitivity reaction to chemical exposure of sensitized eyelid skin. Most patients improve with avoidance strategies. Understanding chemicals that may trigger eyelid ACD, identifying allergens with patch testing, and use of topical steroids can help patients with this challenging disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Recalcitrant allergic eyelid dermatitis can be addressed by an interdisciplinary team and avoidance strategies based on patch testing.

Haptens, Proteins, and Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory disease that is multifactorial in nature. Allergic contact dermatitis and protein contact dermatitis are allergic conditions that may occur in the context of atopic dermatitis and be the cause of exacerbations. Although the prevalence of allergic contact dermatitis is similar in atopic patients and the general population, these 2 conditions are frequently associated because atopic inflammation disrupts the skin barrier. Skin tests are therefore recommended in atopic individuals. Dupilumab could be useful for treating allergic contact dermatitis if it is mediated by type 2 helper T cells but could exacerbate inflammation if mediated by T_H1 cells: further study is needed before conclusions can be drawn. Although the mechanism by which exposure to environmental proteins exacerbates atopic dermatitis remains under discussion, such exacerbations are routinely seen in clinical practice. Prick testing is recommended in symptomatic atopic dermatitis. When prick-test findings are positive, patients should be advised to avoid the culprit substances.

[A CASE OF ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS CAUSED BY DETERGENTS CONTAINING COCAMIDOPROPYL BETAINE IN WHICH AN IMPURITY WAS THE POSSIBLE CAUSATIVE AGENT]

Cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) is an amphoteric surfactant. It has several functions, including producing effervescence and washing effects, and thus, it is used in many cleansing products, such as shampoo and liquid body cleansers. Recently, it has become clear that some impurities that arise during the manufacturing process can have sensitizing effects. Herein, we report a case of allergic contact dermatitis caused by detergents containing CAPB, in which an impurity was determined to be the possible causative agent by patch testing and chemical analysis.A 64-year-old Japanese female developed a skin rash on the hairlines of her forehead and nuchal region one month before her first visit to our clinic. Later, the rashes, which were composed of desquamative erythema, expanded to her face, neck, upper back, and chest. Patch tests produced positive results for a shampoo and liquid body cleanser (1% aq.) that she had used as well as for CAPB (1% aq.); lauramidopropyl betaine (LAPB) (1% aq.); and lauramidopropyl dimethylamine (LAPDMA) (0.05% aq.), which is an impurity of CAPB. The rashes resolved completely after we instructed her to use products without CAPB and LAPB. When issuing such instructions, clinicians should have correct knowledge about surfactants, such as the differences between cosmetic ingredient names and quasi-drug ingredient names.

[ANALYSIS OF PATCH TEST RESULTS FOR INDIVIDUAL INGREDIENTS IN PATIENTS WITH ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS CAUSED BY 10% EFINACONAZOLE NAIL SOLUTION]

BACKGROUND

Ten percent efinaconazole nail solution (EFCZ solution) is a new topical triazole antifungal drug, and we sometimes encounter patients with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) caused by EFCZ solution in our outpatient clinic. However, no previous reports have summarized the patch test (PT) results obtained for individual ingredients in several patients with EFCZ solution-induced ACD.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to 1) confirm the causative agent of EFCZ solution-induced ACD based on PT of individual ingredients and 2) analyze the optimal concentration and vehicle for such PT on the basis of previous studies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We clinically diagnosed eight patients with EFCZ solution-induced ACD from Sep. 2014 to Aug. 2021, and performed 48-hour closed PT using EFCZ solution and its ingredients. Readings were done on days (D) 2, 3, and 7 according to the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group criteria.

RESULTS

Six of the 8 patients underwent PT with EFCZ solution, and all showed + to +++ reactions on D3. The results for the main component, EFCZ, were + to +++ on D3 in all patients. Two patients were patch tested with both 10% EFCZ in ethanol and 10% EFCZ in petrolatum, which produced similar reactions. One patient had an allergic reaction to ethanol.

CONCLUSIONS

The causative agent of EFCZ solution-induced ACD was EFCZ in all patients. For PT, we recommend EFCZ solution as is, its 10-fold dilution and 1% and 0.1% EFCZ in petrolatum.

What Is New in Occupational Allergic Contact Dermatitis in the Year of the COVID Pandemic?

Purpose of Review

This article aims to summarize some recent trends in occupational allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), including dermatitis related to pandemic-level personal protective equipment in healthcare workers, hazards patients may experience when working from home, and occupational perspectives on the recent American Contact Dermatitis Society (ACDS) allergens of the year and ACDS Core Allergen Series updates.

Recent Findings

Recent ACDS Allergens of the Year may be particularly relevant to healthcare workers, including isobornyl acrylate, which is present in glucose sensors and propylene glycol present in hand cleansers and disinfectants. Lavender, limonene, and linalool, all of which are new additions to the ACDS Core Allergen Series, have been reported as causes for occupational ACD in massage therapists and aromatherapists. Isothiazolinone allergy continues to rise in both consumer and occupational settings. Finally, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a wave of occupational ACD in healthcare workers to personal protective equipment, and revealed new potential allergens for individuals working from home.

Summary

Occupational allergic contact dermatitis continues to exert a significant occupational disease burden. Remaining aware of the current trends in allergens may allow for earlier recognition, diagnosis, and treatment, subsequently helping our patients to work in healthier and safer environments.

Long Lasting Allergic Patch Test Reactions: A Literature Review

Long-lasting allergic patch test reactions (LLAPTR) are those in which the clinical features of palpable erythema are still present at the site of a positive allergic patch test reaction 14 or more days after application of the allergen. LLAPTR have been described for a wide range of contact allergens, many of these included in the baseline patch test series. LLAPTR are far from uncommon; they occur in consecutive patients with positive patch tests to baseline allergens with frequency up to 17.9% of the total reactions. Patch test reactions persisting for a very long time (up to several months after the test) have been described, the most frequent ones being those induced by gold salts. The pathomechanisms of LLAPTR have not been clarified, but may hypothetically involve a constant antigen stimulation and/or a defect in cell-mediated immunity down-regulation. Host-related factors significantly associated with LLAPTR are, according to some studies, a strong initial patch test response, older age, and atopy. No significant sex differences have been observed in the frequency of LLAPTR.

Occupational contact dermatitis in manual cloud seeding operations

This is a case report on irritant contact dermatitis secondary to calcium oxide exposure during manual cloud seeding operations. A less hazardous substitute such as sodium chloride should be considered wherever possible. Cloud seeding operations are briefly discussed in this report, and the impact of calcium oxide exposure as an occupational hazard is elaborated.

[Post-traumatic basal cell carcinoma associated with patch testing]

Basal cell carcinoma is the most common epithelial skin cancer in humans and usually effects elderly individuals. Although the pathogenesis is directly related to exposure to ultraviolet sunlight, other factors,particularly trauma, may be involved. We present the case of a woman with contact dermatitis due to sensitization to metals. She developed superficial basal cell carcinoma at the same site as a patch test-performed 30 months earlier-that was strongly positive to 1 % gold chloride. In the histologic study with a scanning electron microscope, we detected electron-dense particles in the dermis which were subsequently identified as gold.

Patch-test-induced "flare-up" reactions to neomycin at prior biopsy sites

"Recall dermatitis" classically refers to the uncommon phenomenon of chemotherapy-induced reactivation of skin damage originally induced by radiotherapy months or years earlier. We compare this condition to ectopic flare-up reactions presenting as dermatitis at existing or previous sites by an inducing agent. Enhanced sensitization of an existent allergen by patch testing is rarely described. We describe a case of a 61-year-old man's developing localized allergic contact dermatitis at previous neomycin-treated sites following the diagnosis of neomycin sensitivity on patch testing, which we attribute to a "flare-up" phenomenon.

Is there a risk of active sensitization to PPD by patch testing the general population?

Para-phenylenediamine (PPD), a constituent of permanent hair dyes, may cause contact allergy in exposed individuals. It has previously been questioned whether a patch testing with PPD in population-based epidemiological studies is entirely safe. The Glostrup allergy studies patch tested the same cohort twice. In 1990, 567 persons were patch-tested and only one person had a (+) positive reaction to PPD. In 1998, 540 persons were re-invited to a new patch test and 365 (participation rate 68%) were re-tested. There were no positive reactions to PPD. These studies indicate that patch testing with PPD in individuals with no previous positive reactions to PPD or with only one previous positive reaction does not cause active sensitization and can be performed with minimal risk.

Is incident sensitization to p-phenylenediamine related to particular exposure patterns? Results of a questionnaire study

Evidence regarding the risk of active sensitization (AS) to p-phenylenediamine (PPD), patch tested 1% in petrolatum, is conflicting. The objective of this study was to evaluate the relative frequency of 'environmental' exposures and skin reactions to products potentially containing PPD in subgroups of patients with versus without newly diagnosed contact allergy (CA) to PPD upon retesting. Patients patch tested twice with PPD between 1996 and 2004 in the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) network were identified and classified into 4 groups, according to the 2 test results with PPD at D3. A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to 171 patients (response 57%). The frequency of exposure to 'henna tattoos', dark hair dyes, or textiles or work as hairdresser did not differ significantly between the groups. A significantly shorter median interval between the 2 patch tests was observed in the group with newly diagnosed PPD CA compared with the other groups (293 versus >700 days). The results of the study add new, if somewhat weak, evidence to the notion that patch testing with PPD may indeed carry some risk of AS, as environmental exposures to PPD were as common in the subgroup of patients with incident CA to PPD as in the remaining patients.

Patch Testing for Evaluating Drug Reactions Due to Systemic Antibiotics

Several studies have evaluated patch testing for the diagnosis of drug eruptions, but widespread acceptance of this procedure is lacking in North America. The objective of this review is to address patch testing for the evaluation of exanthematous drug eruptions due to systemic antibiotics, using a MEDLINE database search for articles in English on patch testing for systemic drug eruptions caused by antibiotics.

Pemphigus foliaceus with epidermal detachment: adverse events from patch testing

Uncommon adverse reactions to patch testing have been reported, but few cases have shown patch testing to be a potential contraindication. We report a patient with known pemphigus foliaceus who had significant epidermal detachment of normal skin during the removal of patch-testing tape.