Results of patch testing propolis in the European baseline series: A 4-year retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Propolis was added to the European baseline series (EBS) in 2019. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the frequency and relevance of positive patch tests to propolis in the EBS and to study co-reactivities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective study in patients patch tested between June 2019 and November 2023 in a university hospital in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. RESULTS: Of 3134 consecutive patients, 299 (9.5%) had a positive reaction to propolis 10% pet. Only nine reactions (3%) were judged to be clinically relevant. There were significant co-reactivities to Myroxylon pereirae resin (balsam of Peru), colophonium, fragrance mixes 1 and 2, and to limonene and linalool hydroperoxides. A steep increase in rates of positive reactions to propolis was observed from 2020 to 2023. This was highly likely the result of the replacement of Chinese propolis with Brazilian propolis by the manufacturer. CONCLUSIONS: Positive patch tests for propolis are very frequent in Amsterdam, but only a few of these reactions are relevant. Most are probably (pseudo-)cross-reactions in patients with fragrance allergies. Propolis in the EBS has very limited value for dermatologists and patients in The Netherlands. Changes in patch test materials should be provided to all users to avoid misinterpretation of patch test results.

Nine years of patch testing with isocyanates in a clinic of occupational dermatology.

BACKGROUND: Isocyanates are used as starting materials of polyurethane (PU) products. They are relatively important occupational skin sensitizers. OBJECTIVES: To analyse results of a large isocyanate patch test series of 19 isocyanate test substances and 4,4'-diaminodiphenylmethane (MDA), a marker of 4,4'-diphenylmethane diisocyanate (MDI) hypersensitivity. METHODS: Test files were screened for positive reactions in the isocyanate series. Patients with positive reactions were analysed for occupation, exposure and diagnosis. RESULTS: In 2010-2019, 53 patients had positive reactions in the series (16% of 338 patients tested). MDA, the well-established screening substance for MDI allergy, was positive in 30 patients, an in-house monomeric MDI test substance in 23 patients and 3 different polymeric MDI test substances in 19-21 patients. We diagnosed 16 cases of occupational allergic contact dermatitis (OACD) from MDI including 3 pipe reliners. Hexamethylene-1,6-diisocyanate (HDI) oligomers in paint hardeners caused 5 cases of OACD, more cases than 2,4-toluene diisocyanate (TDI; n = 3) and isophorone diisocyanate (IPDI; n = 1) put together. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to previous studies, polymeric MDI test substances were not superior to a monomeric MDI. Pipe reliners may get sensitised not only by epoxy products and acrylates but also by MDI in hardeners of PU pipe coatings. HDI oligomers were the second most important causes of OACD after MDI.

Cost-effectiveness of patch testing allergens within the same group: A computational approach to optimize formaldehyde-related allergen selection.

BACKGROUND: Patch testing for multiple cross-reactive allergens for allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) may not be necessary because of copositivity. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the formaldehyde group allergens to determine the optimal, most cost-effective allergens to test. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of Mayo Clinic (1997-2022) examined the well-established copositive formaldehyde group: formaldehyde, quaternium 15, hexahydro-1,3,5-tris(2-hydroxyethyl)triazine, diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, toluenesulphonamide formaldehyde resin, DMDM hydantoin, and ethyleneurea melamine formaldehyde mix. Patch Optimization Platform identified which single formaldehyde-related allergen optimally captures patients with clinically relevant ACD. Next, Patch Optimization Platform determined the optimal additional 1, 2, 3, etc. allergens. Cost per patch test was $5.19 (Medicare 2022). RESULTS: A total of 9832 patients were tested for all listed allergens, with 830 having positive patch test results. Patch Optimization Platform determined that quaternium 15 alone captures 53% of patients with ACD to the formaldehyde group; adding the optimal second allergen (formaldehyde 1%) captures 78%; the optimal 5 top allergens capture >94% of patients. The incremental cost per additional diagnosis increased up to 44-fold as the number of allergens tested increased. LIMITATIONS: Data are from a single institution, and the cost per test was fixed according to Medicare Part B in 2022. CONCLUSIONS: For diagnosing ACD, we recommend considering an optimized allergen selection algorithm.

Diagnosing contact dermatitis using machine learning: A review.

BACKGROUND: Machine learning (ML) offers an opportunity in contact dermatitis (CD) research, where with full clinical picture, may support diagnosis and patch test accuracy. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to summarise the existing literature on how ML can be applied to CD in its entirety. METHODS: Embase, Medline, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library were searched from inception to February 7, 2024, for primary literature reporting on ML models in CD. RESULTS: 7834 articles were identified in the search, with 110 moving to full-text review, and six articles included. Two used ML to identify key biomarkers to help distinguish between allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and irritant contact dermatitis (ICD), three used image data to distinguish between ACD and ICD, and one used clinical and demographical data to predict the risk of positive patch tests. All studies used supervision in their ML model training with a total of 49 704 patients across all data sets. There was sparse reporting of the accuracy of these models. CONCLUSIONS: Although the available research is still limited, there is evidence to suggest that ML has potential to support diagnostic outcomes in a clinical setting. Further research on the use of ML in clinical practice is recommended.

Patch test in Brazilian children with a clinical diagnosis of atopic dermatitis: a cross-sectional study using an extended patch test battery.

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic and relapsing inflammatory skin disease mainly affecting children. Similarly, Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is an inflammatory skin disease, but unlike AD it results from direct exposure to an external agent. Theoretically, the impaired skin barrier facilitates the penetration of potential allergens. Therefore, AD patients are at risk for an associated ACD, exacerbating their skin condition. Because eczema is similar, performing a patch test (PT) for the differential diagnosis is essential. METHODS: In this cross-sectional transversal study, we performed a PT with 30 sensitizers in 26 children with AD, selected according to established criteria for suspected ACD, and treated at an AD center of a pediatric university hospital in Rio de Janeiro. Clinical presentation, patient profile, main sensitizers, and frequency of ACD caused by therapeutic skincare products were evaluated. RESULTS: In all, 23 (88.5%) patients reacted to at least one allergen, 21 (80.7%) had a relevant positive patch test, and 15 (57.7%) were polysensitized. The main positive sensitizers were nickel (38.5%), blue disperse (30.8%), fragrance mix (30.8%), and neomycin (23.1%). Nineteen (73%) patients reacted to substances present in therapeutic or skincare products. CONCLUSION: Our data underscore the importance of performing a PT in AD children whose eczema has atypical distribution. The expressive percentage of positive tests, especially of allergens in skincare products, indicates the constant need to review the proposed treatments. Therefore, we recommend a specific and expanded PT battery for pediatric AD patients, including a negative control, to increase sensitivity for diagnosing ACD.

Severely compromised supply of patch test allergens in Europe hampers adequate diagnosis of occupational and non-occupational contact allergy. A European Society of Contact Dermatitis (ESCD), European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) task forces 'Contact Dermatitis' and 'Occupational Skin Disease' position paper.

Patch testing is the only clinically applicable diagnostic method for Type IV allergy. The availability of Type IV patch test (PT) allergens in Europe, however, is currently scarce. This severely compromises adequate diagnostics of contact allergy, leading to serious consequences for the affected patients. Against this background, the European Society of Contact Dermatitis (ESCD) has created a task force (TF) (i) to explore the current availability of PT substances in different member states, (ii) to highlight some of the unique characteristics of Type IV vs. other allergens and (iii) to suggest ways forward to promote and ensure availability of high-quality patch testing substances for the diagnosis of Type IV allergies throughout Europe. The suggestions of the TF on how to improve the availability of PT allergens are supported by the ESCD, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology and intend to provide potential means to resolve the present medical crisis.

Penicillin Allergy: Mechanisms, Diagnosis, and Management.

Allergy to penicillin can occur via any of the 4 types of Gel-Coombs hypersensitivity reactions, producing distinct clinical histories and physical examination findings. Treatments include penicillin discontinuation, and depending on the type of reaction, epinephrine, antihistamines, and/or glucocorticoids. Most beta-lactams may be safely used in penicillin-allergic patients, with the possible exception of first-generation and second-generation cephalosporins. Penicillin testing includes skin testing, patch testing, and graded challenge. The selection of the type of testing depends on the clinical setting, equipment availability, and type of hypersensitivity reaction. Desensitization may be used in some cases where treatment with penicillins is essential.

In-vivo and ex-vivo tests for culprit drugs identification in severe cutaneous adverse drugs reactions.

Drug causality assessment in severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) remains challenging. We investigated the usefulness of in-vivo drug patch tests (PT), ex-vivo interferon (IFN)-γ enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot) assay, and lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) in 30 SCARs patients within the past 36 months. Drug PT yielded a 20% positivity rate (n = 6), while IFN-γ ELISpot and LTT showed positive rates of 56.67% (n = 17) and 41.38% (n = 12), respectively. Combining the three tests resulted in an overall positive rate of 66.67% (n = 20) of cases. IFN-γ ELISpot offered additional positivity, especially with oxypurinol. Employing a combined diagnostic approach may enhance the chances of obtaining a positive result.

Three-part scoring system (tripartite) for teledermatology versus International Contact Dermatitis Research Group criteria to interpret patch test readings: A comparative, observational study.

Background The International Contact Dermatitis Research Group (ICDRG) grading is the gold standard and is used to interpret patch test results in allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). The ICDRG readings include a combination of visual and palpation findings. Digital photography limits palpation. An alternative scoring system exists to analyse 2D images and interpret patch test readings in teledermatology (TD). Aim To compare tri-partite scoring system (TPSS) (TD) with ICDRG (face-to-face) and to assess the feasibility of TPSS by TD. Methods In this observational study, two investigators each scored the patch test readings for 78 patients at the 48th h, 96th h and on the 7th day. Results The TPSS has a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 93.34%, positive predictive value of 91.67% and negative predictive value of 100%. At a confidence interval of 95%, Cohen's kappa (0.90) indicated excellent agreement between both investigators. The concordance between both scoring systems was at 93.2% for agreement and 6.82% for disagreement. Polysensitisation (6 patients with 16 allergens) was detected equally in both methods. Limitation A single centre study. Conclusion The readings obtained by TPSS were in agreement with ICDRG. TPSS can reduce the number of patient visits by 50% and may be used during COVID-19 times and beyond.

The new Italian SIDAPA Baseline Series for patch testing (2023): an update according to the new regulatory pathway for contact allergens.

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is a common inflammatory skin disease caused by delayed hypersensitivity to chemical and biotic contact allergens. ACD significantly affects the patients' quality of life negatively impacting both occupational and non-occupational settings. Patch testing is the gold standard diagnostic in vivo test to precise the ACD etiology and to correctly perform prevention. According to the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) legislative decree no. 178 of 29th May 1991, allergens are defined as medicines and therefore they are subject to strict regulation. In 2017, AIFA (decree no. 2130/2017) started a procedure to regulate contact allergens on the Italian market and actually the contact allergens temporarily authorized are reported in AIFA decree no. 98/2022, valid until November 2023. The availability on the market of contact allergens to diagnose ACD and continuous updating on the basis of new epidemiological trends are mandatory, jointly with the continuous update of the baseline and integrative series for patch testing. For this reason, the scientific community represented in Italy by the Skin Allergies Study Group of SIDeMaST (Italian Society of Dermatology and Venereology) and SIDAPA (Italian Society of Allergological, Occupational and Environmental Dermatology) are constantly working, in close relationship with the European scientific communities with large expertise in this important sector of the modern Dermatology. Herein, we report the setting up of regulatory legislation by AIFA and the new Italian Adult Baseline Series for patch testing.

Comparison of patch test positivity after 24 and 48 hours of occlusion time in patients of allergic contact dermatitis: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Patch test is the gold standard for diagnosing allergic contact dermatitis. Conventionally, the patches are applied for 48 h, which in tropical weather conditions causes excessive sweating, leading to irritation, and sometimes the patches come off, making the test inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: To compare the patch test positivity after 24 and 48 h of occlusion time in patients of allergic contact dermatitis, using standard allergen concentration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinically suspected patients of allergic contact dermatitis were enrolled and patch tested using the Indian Standard Series, parthenium acetone extracts (1:50, 1:100 and 1:200 dilutions) and patient material. Patches were applied in duplicate on either side of the back, using a random number table. One set of patches was removed after 24-h of occlusion, while the other set after 48-h. Readings were performed at 48- and 96-h by two independent dermatologists, blinded to the duration of occlusion. RESULTS: The study had 97 adult patients (58 males and 39 females; mean age: 48.12 ± 13.07 years). A total of 133 and 142 positive reactions were observed after 48 h occlusion at 48 and 96 h reading, respectively. Of these 117 (87.9%) and 132 (92.9%) patches were positive and concordant and noted at 24 h occlusion time. The Cohen's kappa coefficient were 0.94 for 48 h and 0.97 for 96 h reading, hence showing an almost complete agreement (ⱪ > 0.81) between patches occluded for 24 and 48 h. CONCLUSION: Though there is no significant difference in patch test positivity among ISS allergens after either occlusion time, 48 h occlusion performs significantly better compared with 24 h, when reactions of all allergens (ISS, patient material and parthenium acetone extract) are analysed together.

Results of patch testing with five fragrance materials hitherto not tested: A dose-finding study in the clinical population.

BACKGROUND: Quantitative risk assessment (QRA) for skin sensitization is used to derive safe use levels of sensitising fragrance ingredients in products. Post-marketing surveillance of the prevalence of contact allergy to these ingredients provides relevant data to help evaluate the performance of these measures. OBJECTIVES: To determine a suitable patch test concentration for five fragrance materials that had hitherto not been tested on a regular basis. These concentrations are then to be used in a surveillance study with patch testing consecutive patients over an extended monitoring period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Furaneol, CAS.3658-77-3; trans-2-hexenal, CAS.6728-26-3; 4,8-dimethyl-4,9-decadienal, CAS.71077-31-1; longifolene, CAS.475-20-7; benzaldehyde, CAS.10052-7, were patch tested with other fragrance allergens in four clinics. Patch testing was conducted in three rounds, starting with the lowest concentrations of the five ingredients. The doses were increased in the subsequent rounds if no late-appearing positive reactions and virtually no irritant reactions were reported. RESULTS: Overall, 373 patients were tested. No positive allergic reaction was reported to the five ingredients. Patch test results of other fragrance allergens are reported. CONCLUSIONS: The highest test concentrations are each considered safe for patch testing consecutive patients. Further surveillance based on these preparations will evaluate the hypothesis that QRA-driven consumer product levels of these fragrances can prevent sensitization.

Pediatric Patch Testing at Mayo Clinic Between 2016 and 2020.

Background: Allergic contact Dermatitis (ACD) is a common condition within the pediatric population. Patch testing is an important way to identify relevant allergens. Objective: To provide an update of the common contact allergens seen in children based on patch testing data at our institution from 2016 to 2020. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patch test data from children aged 1-18 years from 2016 to 2020 at Mayo Clinic. Reaction rates were compared to the rates reported by the Pediatric Contact Dermatitis Registry (PCDR). Results: One hundred ninety-two children aged 1-18 were patch tested to various allergens. A total of 15,457 allergens were tested, with 291 positive tests. The top 5 allergens with highest positive reaction rates were hydroperoxides of linalool, hydroperoxides of limonene, methylisothiazolinone, nickel, and cobalt. Seven of the top 38 allergens with the highest reaction rates are not currently included in the Mayo Clinic Pediatric Patch Test Series, and 11 are not currently included in the Pediatric Baseline Series (as developed by the Pediatric Contact Dermatitis Workgroup). Conclusions: Patch testing is a useful tool to diagnose children with ACD. With new products and exposures, there is an opportunity to expand current pediatric patch testing series.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Linalool Hydroperoxides: Pitfalls in the Diagnostic Process-Findings from a Repeated Open Application Test Study.

Background: Increasing trends of oxidized linalool contact allergy have been reported. However, the impact of reactivity and dose in eliciting allergic contact Dermatitis caused by linalool hydroperoxides is insufficiently investigated. Objectives: To perform repeated open application tests (ROATs) using the real-world concentrations of linalool hydroperoxides in patients and control participants. Materials and Methods: Patients who previously had a positive (patients) and a negative (controls) patch test reaction to linalool hydroperoxides 1.0% in petrolatum were patch tested with a dilution series of linalool hydroperoxides preparations and asked to perform ROAT twice daily with 3 concentrations of linalool hydroperoxides creams and a negative control cream for 28 days. The creams contain 44, 140, and 440 PPM of linalool hydroperoxides, representing real-world doses reported in consumer products. Results: Of all 47 participants, 31 were linalool hydroperoxides contact allergy patients, and 16 were controls. One patient had a positive ROAT reaction in the area where cream at the highest concentration of linalool hydroperoxides was applied for 28 days. Conclusions: Repeated exposure to creams containing linalool hydroperoxides at real-life concentrations could rarely elicit an allergic reaction on intact skin after 4 weeks.

Clinical relevance of doubtful reactions in patch testing: A single-centre retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Doubtful reactions in patch testing are infrequently reported in the literature; however, recent reports have suggested they be assessed with the same scrutiny as stronger reactions. OBJECTIVE: Assess the clinical relevance of doubtful reactions in patch testing. METHODS: Retrospective study of 1514 patients comprehensively patch tested via the NACDG standard series and additional allergens based on history. The clinical relevance of each reaction was graded based on the NACDG scale: definite, probable, possible, past, unknown and irritant. Reactions were considered 'unique' if an additional mild-to-strong reaction to the same chemical at a different concentration was not observed. RESULTS: 68.9% (1043) of patients demonstrated at least 1 doubtful reaction. Of 4453 total doubtful reactions, 92.2% (4106) were unique. Only 3.3% (137) and 12.2% (500) of these were determined to be of definite or probable clinical relevance respectively. 'Fragrance' was the most common allergen family present among the unique definite doubtful reactions (37). However, 24 (64.9%) of these also had a stronger reaction to another fragrance. Cocamidopropyl betaine was the second most frequent allergen demonstrating definite doubtful reactions (27) and unique in 85.2% (23) of cases. Methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI) was most prevalent (36) but less frequently unique (58.3%, 21). CONCLUSIONS: Doubtful reactions may not be as impactful to clinical decision making as theorised in the literature. Few demonstrate definite clinical significance, and many have related stronger reactions that capture them for clinical purposes. Identification of doubtful reactions to cocamidopropyl betaine and MCI/MI may be of greatest significance as they most frequently were not supported by stronger reactions.

Examining the benefits of extended patch test series in children: a comprehensive analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The growing presence of allergens in materials and scarce data on allergic contact dermatitis in children has increased our need to refine its diagnosis in this population. We aimed to analyze children's specific responsivity to highly reactive subcomponents of Fragrance mix I, Fragrance mix II, and Textile dye mix from the European baseline series. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patch test records of children aged 2 to 18 who underwent patch testing with the European baseline series between 2014 and 2022 in Israel. RESULTS: A total of 367 children were included in the study. In all, 160 children had positive results; 43 patients reacted to one of the mixes, and 20 performed further testing. Eleven of them completed the extended series at the exact same times as the regular European series, which benefited children. Farnesol was the most reactive compound (30.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Performing the extended European series provides a more accurate and time-efficient allergic contact dermatitis diagnosis. Farnesol reactivity appears prominent in children and may justify tighter product regulations.

Allergic contact dermatitis due to 1,6-hexanediol diacrylate in ostomy patients.

BACKGROUND: Many people live with ostomies after life-saving surgery. Ostomy patients often suffer from peristomal dermatitis. Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) has been reported, mostly due to contact allergy (CA) to topical agents. OBJECTIVES: We present three patients with therapy resistant peristomal dermatitis, suggesting ACD caused by different stoma products. METHODS: Patch testing was performed with baseline series, additional series, and selected allergens. They were also tested with their own ostomy products as is and separate extracts of the products. Extracts were analysed using Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS). RESULTS: In all three patients we diagnosed CA to 1,6-hexanediol diacrylate (HDDA), +++ in case (C) 1 and 3, ++ in C 2. HDDA was detected in C 2's ostomy pouch adhesive and in C 1's and 3's flange extenders used to improve the adhesion of the ostomy pouches. CONCLUSION: Therapy resistant peristomal dermatitis should always be suspected of ACD and patch testing, especially with the patient's own products, should be performed.