Search

ispartof: CONTACT DERMATITIS vol:87 issue:5 pages:468-471 ispartof: location:England status: published

The varicella-zoster virus (VZV) infects over 95% of the population and establishes latency afterwards. Reactivation of VZV causes herpes zoster (HZ), commonly known as shingles, which presents as a painful rash in mostly the elderly and people with a weakened immune system. However, HZ might occur in otherwise healthy individuals too. In this study, we have studied the immune signature of HZ to better understand HZ’s pathophysiology. We provide a general overview of the antiviral state and the activation of innate and adaptive immune responses during HZ. Differential gene expression and gene ontology analyses revealed upregulation of several genes and host immune pathways during herpes zoster, especially related to type I IFN response but also related to adaptive immune responses. Intriguingly, no differences in gene expression were noted during convalescence between HZ patients and controls. Furthermore, we conducted the largest HLA association study on HZ to date using the UK Biobank and identified seven protective and four risk HLA alleles associated with the development of herpes zoster. These findings reveal key genes and pathways involved in the host immune response to symptomatic VZV reactivation and provide new molecular insights into the development of HZ.

The European baseline series was last updated in 2019. This article discusses the reasoning behind a further iteration of the series for 2023.

ispartof: CONTACT DERMATITIS vol:88 issue:1 pages:68-70 ispartof: location:England status: published

Background Isocyanates are well-known occupational allergens, but can also be present in medical devices. Objectives To highlight that contact sensitization to isocyanates might contribute to allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from polyurethane (PU)-containing diabetes devices and wound dressings. Patients and Methods Nineteen patients with suspected ACD from diabetes devices and/or wound dressings were patch tested to an isocyanate series. Four wound dressings, six diabetes devices and four monomeric isocyanate patch test preparations were analysed with gas chromatography - mass spectrometry. Results Eight patients reacted to isocyanates and corresponding amines: 3 to isophorone diisocyanate (IPDI), 4 to 4,4 '-diaminodiphenylmethane (MDA), 4 to 2,4-toluene diisocyanate (TDI) and 1 to polymeric methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (PMDI). Three of four wound dressings contained isocyanates (methylene diphenyl diisocyanate [MDI], TDI and/or IPDI), whereas five of six diabetes devices contained 4,4 '-MDI, and one of them also IPDI. None of the medical devices contained 1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate. Contrary to IPDI, and especially MDI, only the concentration of the TDI patch test preparation corresponded approximately (80%) to its label. Conclusion Patch tests with isocyanates may be worth-while in patients with suspected ACD from PU-containing medical devices. Besides MDA, and PMDI, also TDI might potentially be a marker for MDI-sensitization.

BACKGROUND: The reason why patients photosensitized to the drug ketoprofen (KP) may develop severe photoallergic skin reactions to octocrylene (OCT), an organic ultraviolet filter in sunscreens and cosmetics, remains largely unknown. OCT can be synthesized by using unsubstituted benzophenone (BP), a possible human carcinogen. OBJECTIVES: To verify if, and to what extent, BP residues are present in OCT-containing consumer products. METHODS: The raw material of OCT and 39 skincare products, of which 28 contain OCT, were chemically analysed for the presence of BP by means of liquid chromatography. RESULTS: In the OCT raw material and in all 28 OCT-containing products the presence of BP could be demonstrated, mostly in concentrations above 10 ppm (0.001%), whereas a majority of OCT-free products (8/11, 73%) did not contain BP. Moreover, BP concentrations significantly increased, in a time- and temperature-dependent manner, likely due to the additional degradation of OCT. CONCLUSIONS: Photoallergic contact dermatitis from OCT in patients photosensitized to KP might rely on residual BP impurities. Toxicological and ecological studies that evaluate the safety of OCT might also need to consider the concomitant presence of BP. ispartof: CONTACT DERMATITIS vol:85 issue:1 pages:69-77 ispartof: location:England status: published

Background Notwithstanding that concomitant exposure to different isothiazolinone derivatives may result in concomitant sensitization, clinical and animal studies have suggested cross-reactivity between these derivatives, notably between methylisothiazolinone (MI) and octylisothiazolinone (OIT). Objective To investigate if patients sensitized to MI show cross-reactions to OIT and/or to benzisothiazolinone (BIT) by applying the concept of the re-test method. Patients And Methods From March to October 2019 consecutive patients were patch tested with MI 0.2% aqueous in duplicate at the two lower corners of both shoulder blades. Patients sensitized to MI, but not to OIT 0.1% petrolatum (pet.) nor to BIT 0.1% pet., were re-tested, 2 months later, with the latter two derivatives at the skin sites where the MI reactions had fully disappeared. Results Of 116 patients, 15 (13%) were sensitized to MI, eight of these not sensitized to BIT nor to OIT. Of these, seven patients, all (very) strongly sensitized to MI, were re-tested: five patients showed positive patch test reactions to OIT 0.1% pet.; one patient to OIT 0.1% pet. and BIT 0.1% pet.; and one other patient showed no reactions. Conclusion This study suggests that patients primarily and strongly sensitized to MI may show immunologic cross-reactions to OIT, and to a far lesser extent to BIT.

In 2019, a number of allergens (haptens), henceforth, "the audit allergens," were considered as potential additions to the European Baseline Series (EBS), namely, sodium metabisulfite, 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol, diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, Compositae mix II (2.5% or 5% pet), linalool hydroperoxides (lin-OOH), limonene hydroperoxides (lim-OOH), benzisothiazolinone (BIT), octylisothiazolinone (OIT), decyl glucoside, and lauryl glucoside; Evernia furfuracea (tree moss), was additionally tested by some departments as well.To collect further data on patch test reactivity and clinical relevance of the audit allergens in consecutive patients across Europe.Patch test data covering the audit allergens in 2019 and 2020 were collected by those departments of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies testing these, as well as further collaborators from the EBS working group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis (ESCD), and the Spanish Grupo Español de Investigación en Dermatitis de Contacto y Alergia Cutánea. As patch test outcome, reactions between day (D) 3 and D5 were considered.Altogether n = 12 403 patients were tested with any of the audit allergen. Positive reactions were most common to lin-OOH 1% pet. (8.74% [95%CI: 8.14-9.37%]), followed by lin-OOH 0.5% pet., and lim-OOH 0.3% pet (5.41% [95% CI: 4.95-5.89%]). Beyond these terpene hydroperoxides, BIT 0.1% pet. was the second most common allergen with 4.72% (95% CI: 4.2-5.28%), followed by sodium metabisulfite 1% pet. (3.75% [95%CI: 3.32-4.23%]) and Compositae mix 5% pet. (2.31% [95% CI: 1.84-2.87%]). For some allergens, clinical relevance was frequently difficult to ascertain.Despite many positive patch test reactions, it remains controversial whether lin- and lim-OOH should be tested routinely, while at least the two preservatives BIT and sodium metabisulfite appear suitable. The present results are a basis for further discussion and ultimately decision on their implementation into routine testing among the ESCD members.

De huid wordt vaak gezien als de spiegel van gezondheid of ziekte. Deze bewering gaat zeker op voor huidaandoeningen die zich ter hoogte van de handen manifesteren. Handdermatosen kunnen immers een (eerste) uiting zijn van inwendige ziekten. Aan de hand van 4 casus wensen wij deze stelling hier te illustreren.

This review aims to provide a clinically useful update regarding the role of formaldehyde (FA) and its five main releasers (FRs) quaternium-15, diazolidinyl urea, DMDM hydantoin, imidazolidinyl urea, and 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol (bronopol) in contact allergy and allergic contact dermatitis. These ubiquitous preservatives are still often present, and sometimes undeclared, in cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, household detergents, and chemical (industrial) products. In Europe, the use of free FA and quaternium-15 in cosmetics is forbidden and contact allergy rates have been found to be stable to decreasing. However, FA/FRs still readily provoke localized (eg, facial/hand), airborne, and generalized dermatitis, and may also complicate atopic and stasis dermatitis, or result in nummular dermatitis. Seborrheic-, rosacea- and impetigo-like dermatitis have recently been reported. For a correct diagnosis, FA 2% aq. (0.60 mg/cm(2)) should be used, and particularly the FRs bronopol 0.5% pet. and diazolidinyl urea 2% pet. should be patch tested separately in a baseline series. If sensitization to FA occurs, both FA and FRs should preferably be avoided, except perhaps for bronopol in case it tests negatively. If a patient reacts to one or more FRs (such as bronopol or diazolidinyl/imidazolidinyl urea), but not to FA, then the specific FR(s) should be avoided.

Limonene and linalool are among the most common fragrance terpenes used in everyday products. They are pre-haptens, forming hydroperoxides (Lim-OOHs, Lin-OOHs) upon oxidation and inducing frequent positive patch test reactions in patients with dermatitis, and yet they are not routinely tested in Europe. This review evaluates current patch testing with Lim-OOHs and Lin-OOHs by asking whether hydroperoxide patch testing is warranted, examining the difficulties or challenges related to reading and interpreting hydroperoxide patch test results with currently available material, and assessing their relevance. Studies are increasingly pointing to high percentages of positive reactions in patients consecutively patch tested with these oxidized products. An association between a positive clinical history and a strong patch test reaction has been described, but problems with doubtful/irritant reactions have also been reported. Considering the high frequency of relevant positive reactions, the incorporation of Lim-OOHs 0.3% and Lin-OOHs 1% in the baseline series may be justified. Since exposure, sensitization, and elicitation limits of Lim-OOHs and Lin-OOHs in the products still need to be better determined, an assessment of previous exposure, possible sensitizations, and reactions may help to improve the clinical assessment.

BACKGROUND Besides being a potential component of (some species of) colophonium, D-limonene is also used as a tackifier in the production of adhesives. Hydroperoxides of limonene are well-known skin sensitizers. OBJECTIVES To show that D-limonene may be present in colophonium-containing but also colophonium-free ("hypoallergenic") adhesives, and that patients suffering from allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from both types of adhesives might display positive patch test reactions to limonene hydroperoxides in this regard. PATIENTS AND METHODS Five patients with suspected ACD from adhesives were patch tested to the baseline series (containing limonene hydroperoxides 0.3 and 0.2% pet.), additional series, and, if available, to the culprit adhesives. The adhesives labelled as containing colophonium (n= 3) or free from it (n=2) were analysed with gas chromatography - mass spectrometry (GC-MS) for the presence of D-limonene. RESULTS All 5 patients sensitized to adhesives had (strong) positive patch test reactions to limonene hydroperoxides. The presence of D-limonene, and/or related components, could be demonstrated in all 3 colophonium-containing and, surprisingly, also in 2 colophonium-free ("hypoallergenic") tapes. CONCLUSIONS D-limonene may be present in both regular and "hypoallergenic" adhesives, with limonene hydroperoxides potentially contributing to ACD from such medical devices. The use of fragrance chemicals in adhesives deserves further research. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

OBJECTIVE Cutaneous adverse events (CAE) from FreeStyle Libre include allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) caused by the allergen isobornyl acrylate (IBOA). We aim to report CAE from this glucose sensor, ACD to IBOA in particular, and the outcome of using barrier films as a prevention. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A monocentric, retrospective review of medical files from adult and pediatric patients with diabetes using Freestyle Libre, in the period between December 2016 and April 2019, was performed with a focus on CAE. RESULTS Fifty-seven of 1,036 patients with diabetes (5.5%) were referred to our dermatology department because of CAE from FreeStyle Libre. Thirty-nine of 1,036 (3.8%) had ACD due to IBOA. Only two patients, of whom one sensitized to IBOA, had a benefit from using barrier films. CONCLUSIONS CAE occurred in 5.5% of FreeStyle Libre users, and 3.8% suffered from ACD due to IBOA. Barrier films had limited value in the prevention.

Eccrine porocarcinoma is a rare and potentially fatal malignant adnexal tumor that can arise de novo or develop from its benign precursor, poroma. Diagnosis is difficult due to its rarity and resemblance to many other (benign) skin tumors. We present the case of a 71-year-old woman presenting with a long-standing case of eccrine porocarcinoma on the scalp. After multiple incomplete excisions over the last 15 years, no metastases were found. Major reconstructive surgery was necessary after complete excision of the lesion. Complete removal of the eccrine porocarcinoma was achieved in 2 stages. The defect was closed with a large rotation flap of the scalp. No adjuvant radio- or chemotherapy was given. Twenty-one months later, the patient presented with a rapidly growing lymph node recurrence, which was treated by lymph node dissection followed by chemoradiation. This case demonstrates the consequences of suboptimal surgical treatments and follow-up of eccrine porocarcinoma and its benign precursor, poroma. Early recognition, proper pathological diagnosis, and adequate surgical treatment are highly recommended in order to obtain a good prognostic outcome. Level of evidence: Level V, Risk/Prognostic study.

Background Patients suffering from drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome caused by first‐line antituberculosis drugs often need to be retreated rapidly. Patch tests prior to the reintroduction of antituberculosis drugs are rarely performed. Objectives To highlight those drugs most often involved in DRESS caused by antituberculosis drugs, illustrate the potential value of patch tests to identify these culprit(s), and provide insights into how to rapidly retreat these patients. Methods A detailed description of the work‐up of two illustrative patients, together with a literature review of similar cases, is provided. Results All first‐line antituberculosis drugs may cause DRESS syndrome, but rifampicin and isoniazid are most frequently involved. Patch tests can be performed sooner than usually advised in the context of DRESS syndrome, and potentially with lower test concentrations, but false‐negative results are possible. Sequential reintroduction of patch test‐negative drugs is feasible, although the dose and order of drugs to be readministered, as well as the use of concomitant systemic corticosteroids, remain a matter of debate. Conclusion Patch tests in the context of DRESS syndrome caused by antituberculosis drugs, despite their shortcomings, may potentially guide rapid retreatment of these patients.

To date only three cases of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from the relatively new and potent skin-lightening agent phenylethyl resorcinol (PER) have been reported. We describe three additional cases of severe ACD from this substance contained in pigment-lightening cosmetics. [...]

Background Contact dermatitis to homemade slime has been frequently reported, with isothiazolinones as a likely sensitizer. Little is known on the presence of these preservatives in commercial, store-bought slime products. Objectives The aims of the study were to review the literature on "slime dermatitis" and to assess for the presence of isothiazolinones in commercially available slime products and homemade slime components. Methods An experimental, colorimetric spot test was used to verify the presence of isothiazolinones in 38 slime products of the 16 best-selling commercial slime kits, 1 finished homemade slime, and 4 common components of homemade slime. High-performance liquid chromatography with UV detection was performed on 8 commercial slime products. Results According to the spot test, 27 (71%) of the 38 commercial slime products contained isothiazolinones. High-performance liquid chromatography with UV detection analyses indicated, however, that false-positives and false-negatives readily occur: isothiazolinone content was correctly identified in only 4 (50%) of the 8 samples. Conclusions This study is the first to demonstrate the presence of isothiazolinones in commercial slime toys. Although the colorimetric spot test may have some utility as a screening assay, it is far from specific and likely not sensitive enough to reliably identify methylisothiazolinone.

Background The preservatives sorbic acid (SA) and potassium sorbate (PS) are considered rare skin sensitizers. PS-containing products always contain SA to a certain extent, and positivity to PS may reflect sensitization to SA. Their optimal patch-test conditions are unknown. Objectives To report on the outcome of testing with SA and PS in various concentrations and/or vehicles. Patients and methods Seventeen patients with allergic contact dermatitis from PS/SA-containing topical pharmaceuticals and medical devices were patch tested to SA 2% and 5% pet.; SA 1%, 2%, 3%, 5%. eth.; and/or SA 2% aq., whereas PS was patch tested 5% pet. and/or 5% aq. Results Only one patient, not tested to the ethanol preparations, presented with a (doubtful) positive reaction to SA 2% pet., while this remained negative in 13 patients who reacted to SA 2% eth. The preparations containing SA 5% pet.; 1%, 3%, and 5% eth.; and SA 2% aq. had little or no additional value. PS 5% pet. performed better than 5% aq., and always mirrored SA sensitization. Conclusions Sensitization to SA and PS is probably underestimated. SA 2% eth. and PS 5% pet. are preferred for patch testing, and patients sensitized to SA should avoid PS-containing products. Highlights Potassium sorbate (PS) and sorbic acid (SA) are widely used preservatives. PS-containing products always contain some SA. Both are considered rare skin sensitizers, but contact allergy in response to them might be underestimated. SA 2% eth. and PS 5% pet., rather than SA 2% pet. and PS 5% aq., respectively, may be required to diagnose contact allergy from PS/SA-containing topical pharmaceuticals and medical devices. A positive patch test to PS reflects sensitization to SA, and patients sensitized to SA should also avoid PS-containing products.

Background In the 2010s an epidemic of allergic contact dermatitis to methylisothiazolinone (MI) occurred in Europe. European authorities banned the use of methylisothiazolinone in leave-on cosmetics in 2017 and limited its use in rinse-off products in 2018. Objectives To investigate the sensitization rate to MI in Belgium between January 2014 and December 2019, and to assess cosensitizations to octylisothiazolinone (OIT) and benzisothiazolinone (BIT) in MI-sensitized patients. Methods A retrospective study of patch test results with MI, OIT, and BIT observed in patients attending five Belgian hospitals. Results Overall, 560 of 10 029 patients (5.58%) had a positive patch test reaction to MI, and its sensitization rate decreased from 7.9% in 2014 to 3.1% in 2019. Rinse-off cosmetics, paints, and detergents were the most prevalent sensitization sources in recent years. Simultaneous reactions readily occurred to OIT, and, surprisingly, and increasingly, also to BIT. Conclusions Contact allergy to MI in Belgium has reached a pre-epidemic level, reflecting the impact of recent regulatory measures. Leave-on cosmetics, in contrast to rinse-off products, have almost disappeared as sensitization sources in Europe. Paints and detergents also remain problematic. The remarkably high number of patients (co)sensitized to BIT should be a focus of future research.

Among the basic protective measures against COVID-19, the need to wash hands frequently and in a prolonged way using soap, and to regularly use alcohol-based hand sanitizers is well established for the whole population. Healthcare workers in general, and particularly those involved in the direct care of COVID-19 patients, have to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) daily for many hours and also accomplish general preventive measurements outside their work. Cutaneous adverse reactions can develop that need to be prevented, identified and therapeutically managed. According to the data reported by Lin et al 1, based in the experience from healthcare workers in Wuhan, adverse skin reactions were reported in 74% of responders (n=376) to a general survey. The most commonly reported types of eruptions were skin dryness or desquamation (68.6%), papules or erythema (60.4%) and maceration (52,9%). (Less)

Multidisciplinary collaboration between several European dermatology departments has identified isobornyl acrylate (IBOA; CAS 5888-33-5), once deemed a low-risk sensitizer, as a major culprit contact allergen in glucose sensors and insulin pumps, medical devices used by diabetes patients worldwide. Although the patch test modalities of IBOA have been fairly well characterized, intriguing questions remain. For example, its cross-reactive profile to other acrylates remains to be determined, and the striking occurrence of concomitant positive patch test reactions to sesquiterpene lactones needs to be further elucidated. Importantly, the path to its discovery as a contact sensitizer in diabetes devices and the difficulties that were associated with this quest illustrate that apparent difficulties in obtaining sufficient cooperation from the medical device industry may seriously hamper the correct workup of cases of allergic contact dermatitis. The IBOA saga will convince companies to lend more cooperation to dermatologists and policymakers to side with patients and physicians when it comes to updating medical device regulations, including the compulsory labeling of medical devices in general and of diabetes devices in particular. © 2019 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

National baseline series, often based on continental baseline series, usually contain contact allergens to which patients from a particular region are exposed, and that frequently elicit positive and/or relevant patch test reactions. Differences between national baseline series can be explained, among others, by differences in exposure, prescribing habits of physicians, and the (non-)availability of contact allergens. Particularities of baseline series from the following countries are discussed in this chapter: Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, UK, USA, Australia, Brazil, and Mexico. Furthermore, differences in patch testing may also refer to what vehicle and/or concentration are used to patch-test a given contact allergen. Examples, discussed in this chapter, include metals, hair dyes, rubber components, pharmaceuticals, (meth)acrylates, preservatives, vehicle components, fragrances, and textile dyes. All these considerations should be taken into account when comparing patch test data from different countries.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant positive patch test reactions in patients sensitized to isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) have rarely been documented. OBJECTIVES: To report concomitant sensitizations in patients with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from the glucose sensor FreeStyle Libre and sensitized to IBOA. METHODS: In 2019, 26 patients with suspected ACD from FreeStyle Libre were patch tested to a baseline series and to a (meth) acrylate series containing IBOA and 2-phenoxyethyl acrylate (PEA) 0.1% pet. Diabetes devices and patch test preparations were analyzed with gas chromatography - mass spectrometry (GC-MS) for the presence of IBOA and PEA. RESULTS: Of the 26 patients, 18 (69%) were sensitized to IBOA, and eight (44%) and 11 (61%) of these were co-sensitized to sesquiterpene lactones and fragrances, respectively. Ten patients (56%) were co-sensitized to PEA, which, contrary to IBOA, could not be detected in any device. The PEA test material was shown to be contaminated with IBOA. CONCLUSIONS: Contact allergy to IBOA appears to be declining and IBOA-sensitized patients are most often co-sensitized to sesquiterpene lactones and fragrances. Vigilance is required when patch testing (acrylate) materials obtained from industry, as these might be contaminated and, hence, alter the results and their interpretation. ispartof: CONTACT DERMATITIS vol:84 issue:3 pages:166-174 ispartof: location:England status: published

In the past decade, new diabetes technologies, including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, support patients with diabetes in their daily struggle with achieving a good glucose control. However, shortly after the first CGM systems appeared on the market, also the first concerns about adverse skin reactions were raised. Most patients claimed to suffer from (sometimes severe) skin irritation, or even allergy, which they related to the (acrylate-based) adhesive part of the device. For a long time the actual substance that caused these skin reactions with, for example, the Flash Glucose Monitoring system (iscCGM; Freestyle® Libre) could not be identified; however, recently Belgian and Swedish dermatologists reported that the majority of their patients that have developed a contact-allergic while using iscCGM react sensitively to a specific acrylate, that is, isobornyl acrylate (IBOA). Subsequently they showed by means of gas chromatography-mass spectrometry that this substance is present in the case of the glucose sensor attached by an adhesive to the skin. We report three additional cases from Germany, including a 10-year-old boy, suffering from severe allergic contact dermatitis to IBOA.