Category Archives: Contact Dermatitis

Three cases of non-atopic hyperkeratotic hand eczema treated with dupilumab.
Contact Dermatitis. 2020 Aug 30;:
Authors: Loman L, Diercks GFH, Schuttelaar MLA
PMID: 32864776 [PubMed – as supplied by publisher]

Continue reading →

Related Articles
Cochrane review “Interventions for hand eczema” is published.
Contact Dermatitis. 2019 May 22;:
Authors: Christoffers WA, Coenraads PJ
Abstract
We would like to call your readership’s… Continue reading →

Related Articles
Morphine induced cutaneous adverse drug reaction following occupational diacetylmorphine contact dermatitis, a case report.
Contact Dermatitis. 2019 May 07;:
Authors: van den Hoed E, Coenraads PJ, Sch… Continue reading →

Related Articles
Immediate hypersensitivity to p-phenylenediamine.
Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Nov 13;:
Authors: Wilkinson M, Solman L, Coenraads PJ, Goebel C
PMID: 30426523 [PubMed – as supplied by publisher]

Continue reading →

Related Articles

Contact sensitization to hydroperoxides of limonene and linalool: Results of consecutive patch testing and clinical relevance.

Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Oct 31;:

Authors: Dittmar D, Schuttelaar MLA

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hydroperoxides of limonene and linalool are potent sensitizers.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prevalence of contact allergy to both hydroperoxides of limonene and hydroperoxides of linalool, to report clinical relevance, and to investigate patient demographics.
METHODS: A total of 821 patients (35.6% male, mean age 42.4 years ± 17.8 years) were consecutively patch tested with our departmental baseline series and our fragrance series, including hydroperoxides of limonene 0.3% pet. and hydroperoxides of linalool 1.0% pet. The clinical relevance was assessed for all positive reactions.
RESULTS: Positive patch test reactions to hydroperoxides of limonene and to hydroperoxides of linalool were observed in 77 patients (9.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.4%-11.4%) and in 96 patients (11.7%, 95%CI: 9.5%-13.9%), respectively; 38 of these patients (4.6%, 95%CI: 3.2%-6.0%) reacted to both. Most reactions were considered to be possibly or probably clinically relevant (66.3% and 68.8%, respectively), and a small proportion were deemed to be of certain clinical relevance (18.2% and 19.8%, respectively).
CONCLUSION: As compared with previous studies, high numbers of positive reactions to both hydroperoxides of limonene and hydroperoxides of linalool were observed, the majority of which were clinically relevant, supporting their inclusion in the European baseline series.

PMID: 30378131 [PubMed – as supplied by publisher]

Continue reading →

Related Articles
Allergic contact dermatitis caused by acrylic acid used in transcutaneous electrical nervous stimulation.
Contact Dermatitis. 2017 Dec;77(6):409-412
Authors: Dittmar D, Dahlin J, Persson C, Schuttela… Continue reading →

Related Articles
Cutaneous adverse drug reaction after apomorphine infusion, possibly caused by a systemic type IV hypersensitivity reaction to sodium metabisulfite: Report of 2 cases.
Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Aug 19;:
… Continue reading →

Related Articles
Cutaneous adverse drug reaction after apomorphine infusion, possibly caused by a systemic type IV hypersensitivity reaction to sodium metabisulfite: Report of 2 cases.
Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Aug 19;:
… Continue reading →

Related Articles

Comparing patch test results of methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone tested with both TRUE Test® and 100 ppm using investigator-loaded chambers.

Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Feb;78(2):159-161

Authors: Dittmar D, Schuttelaar ML

PMID: 29341185 [PubMed – in process]

Continue reading →

Related Articles
Two decades of p-phenylenediamine and toluene-2,5-diamine patch testing – focus on co-sensitizations in the European baseline series and cross-reactions with chemically related substances.
Contact Dermatitis…. Continue reading →

Related Articles
Immunology and genetics of tumour necrosis factor in allergic contact dermatitis.
Contact Dermatitis. 2017 Mar 16;:
Authors: Dittmar D, Schuttelaar ML
Abstract
During the sensitization… Continue reading →

Related Articles

p-Phenylenediamine exposure in real life - a case-control study on sensitization rate, mode and elicitation reactions in the northern Netherlands.

Contact Dermatitis. 2015 Jun;72(6):355-61

Authors: Vogel TA, Coenraads PJ, Bijkersma LM, Vermeulen KM, Schuttelaar ML, EDEN Fragrance Study Group

Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of p-phenylenediamine (PPD) sensitization is 4% in the patch tested population and varies between zero and 1.5% in the general population. Hair dye is a recognised sensitization source.
OBJECTIVES: To define the prevalence rates of PPD sensitization in the general and patch tested populations of The Netherlands, and to gain insights into relationships between patch test strength and exposure sources.
METHODS: Patch test database cases were matched with population-based controls. Analyses were performed based on demographic details, patch test reactions, and potential PPD exposure.
RESULTS: PPD sensitization occurred in 3.3% of the patch tested population and in 1.3% of the general population. Hairdressers had a 4.4-fold increased chance of being sensitized to PPD (p = 0.041), and black henna tattoos showed a tendency for a 2.3-fold increased chance of sensitization (p = 0.081). Weak elicitation reactions were present in hairdressers and consumers. However, cases who had had black henna tattoos showed significantly more (extremely) strong patch test reactions upon elicitation (p = 0.015).
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence rates in the patch tested and general population of The Netherlands are comparable with the prevalence rates of other mid-European centres. PPD sensitization is often attributed to hair dye. However, this study shows that subjects sensitized by black henna tattoos present with very severe elicitation reactions, emphasizing the need for more strict policing the prohibition.

PMID: 25824090 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

Continue reading →

Patch test results with fragrance markers of the baseline series - analysis of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA) network 2009-2012.

Contact Dermatitis. 2015 Jun 16;

Authors: Frosch PJ, Duus Johansen J, Schuttelaar ML, Silvestre JF, Sánchez-Pérez J, Weisshaar E, Uter W, (on behalf of the ESSCA network)

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Contact allergy to fragrances is common, and impairs quality of life, particularly in young women.
OBJECTIVE: To provide current results on the prevalences of sensitization to fragrance allergens used as markers in the baseline series of most European countries.
METHODS: Data of patients consecutively patch tested between 2009 and 2012 in 12 European countries with fragrance allergens contained in the baseline series were collected by the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies network and descriptively analysed. Four departments used the TRUE Test® system.
RESULTS: The ‘basic markers’ were tested on 51 477 [fragrance mix II (FM II)] to 57 123 [Myroxylon pereirae, balsam of Peru] patients, and yielded positive reactions as follows: fragrance mix I 6.9%, Myroxylon pereirae 5.4%, FM II 3.8%, colophonium 2.6%, and hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde 1.7%, with some regional differences. Prevalences with TRUE Test® allergens were lower. Additional fragrances were tested on 3643 (trimethylbenzenepropanol) to 14 071 (oil of turpentine) patients, and yielded between 2.6% (Cananga odorata) and 0.7% (trimethylbenzenepropanol) positive reactions.
CONCLUSIONS: Contact allergy to fragrances is common throughout Europe, with regional variation probably being explained by patch test technique, and differences in exposure and referral patterns. The current basic markers of fragrance sensitivity in the baseline series should be supplemented with additional fragrance allergens.

PMID: 26080686 [PubMed – as supplied by publisher]

Continue reading →

Related Articles
Allergic contact dermatitis presenting as severe and persistent blepharoconjunctivitis and centrofacial oedema after dyeing of eyelashes.
Contact Dermatitis. 2014 Nov;71(5):304-6
Authors: Vogel TA, C… Continue reading →

Characteristics of patients patch tested in the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA) network, 2009-2012.

Contact Dermatitis. 2015 May 13;

Authors: Uter W, Gefeller O, Giménez-Arnau A, Frosch P, Duus Johansen J, Schuttelaar ML, Rustemeyer T, Larese Filon F, Dugonik A, Bircher A, Wilkinson M

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patch test results often vary between departments, and also between countries. Such variation may be partly attributable to systematic effects introduced by patient characteristics, differing exposures, patient selection, or methodological differences.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the amount of variation of patient characteristics in terms of the MOAHLFA index and of the proportion of patients with at least one positive reaction to the (European) baseline series (‘P’ measure), and to examine potential reasons for the variation.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of patch test data from 63 530 consultations collected by 53 departments from 12 countries participating in the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA) ( www.essca-dc.org) between 2009 and 2012.
RESULTS: Considerable variation in the prevalence of the MOAHLFA factors between departments was found, caused, for example, by differing specializations (e.g. occupational dermatology) or patient characteristics. Notable variation concerning the ‘P’ measure was observed; however, larger national networks (contributing to the ESSCA) tend to have quite similar ranges of this measure.
CONCLUSIONS: Data from one department per country give valuable insights into the spectrum of contact allergy prevalence rates in that country, but are not as representative as national data pooled from several departments.

PMID: 25969136 [PubMed – as supplied by publisher]

Continue reading →