Innovation in prevention of poison oak contact dermatitis.

Poison oak-induced contact dermatitis poses a significant challenge due to its urushiol oil-induced allergic reactions. Conventional preventive measures like avoidance and post-exposure cleansing are often impractical, necessitating innovative strategies. This comprehensive review explores emerging technologies and formulations for preventing poison oak dermatitis. Literature search via PubMed and Covidence identified 13 relevant studies, with six discussing preventive measures. Barrier methods, including occlusive creams and protective clothing, showed promise in reducing dermatitis risk. Immunotherapy, although investigated, requires further development. Complete avoidance, while effective, is often impractical. The complexity of poison oak management underscores the need for ongoing research to develop more effective preventive measures. This review highlights the current landscape, identifies gaps in knowledge, and emphasizes the importance of continued research for improved prevention and management of poison oak-induced dermatitis.

Comorbid Scenarios in Contact Dermatitis: Atopic Dermatitis, Irritant Dermatitis, and Extremes of Age.

Contact dermatitis (allergic and irritant) occurs when the skin encounters haptens that elicit a T cell-mediated hypersensitivity reaction (allergic) or a nonimmunologic, toxic reaction (irritant). Patch testing is the reference standard for diagnosing allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), although positive results are not always relevant. Therefore, the definitive diagnosis of ACD requires an astute clinician able to connect the results of patch testing appropriately with the clinical history and the cutaneous examination findings. Comorbid conditions such as atopic dermatitis can confound the accurate diagnosis of ACD because of the similarities in clinical presentation. Furthermore, both extremes of age can further challenge the diagnostic specificity of ACD owing to the maturing immune system and the space limitations present when the very young are patch tested. The goal of this Continuing Medical Education article is to discuss the challenges of diagnosing ACD in patients with unique comorbidities such as atopic dermatitis, given the morphologic similarities, and when to patch test these patients. Diagnosis of ACD will also be discussed in very young patients with a focus on patch test allergen selection despite the limited geographic space. The most common allergens reported in very young and old patients will also be discussed.

Defining cell type-specific immune responses in a mouse model of allergic contact dermatitis by single-cell transcriptomics.

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), a prevalent inflammatory skin disease, is elicited upon repeated skin contact with protein-reactive chemicals through a complex and poorly characterized cellular network between immune cells and skin resident cells. Here, single-cell transcriptomic analysis of the murine hapten-elicited model of ACD reveals that upon elicitation of ACD, infiltrated CD4+ or CD8+ lymphocytes were primarily the IFNγ-producing type 1 central memory phenotype. In contrast, type 2 cytokines (IL4 and IL13) were dominantly expressed by basophils, IL17A was primarily expressed by δγ T cells, and IL1ß was identified as the primary cytokine expressed by activated neutrophils/monocytes and macrophages. Furthermore, analysis of skin resident cells identified a sub-cluster of dermal fibroblasts with preadipocyte signature as a prominent target for IFNγ+ lymphocytes and dermal source for key T cell chemokines CXCL9/10. IFNγ treatment shifted dermal fibroblasts from collagen-producing to CXCL9/10-producing, which promoted T cell polarization toward the type-1 phenotype through a CXCR3-dependent mechanism. Furthermore, targeted deletion of Ifngr1 in dermal fibroblasts in mice reduced Cxcl9/10 expression, dermal infiltration of CD8+ T cell, and alleviated ACD inflammation in mice. Finally, we showed that IFNγ+ CD8+ T cells and CXCL10-producing dermal fibroblasts co-enriched in the dermis of human ACD skin. Together, our results define the cell type-specific immune responses in ACD, and recognize an indispensable role of dermal fibroblasts in shaping the development of type-1 skin inflammation through the IFNGR-CXCR3 signaling circuit during ACD pathogenesis.

Adverse outcome pathway-based approach to reveal the mechanisms of skin sensitization and long-term aging effects of chlorothalonil.

Chlorothalonil (CHT) is a widely used antifungal agent and is reported to be a sensitizer that can cause allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). ACD initiation is associated with various innate immune cell contributions and is usually accompanied by persistent inflammation, which is a potential contributing factor to skin damage. However, detailed information on the mechanisms by which CHT induces skin sensitization and damage is still insufficient. This study focused on investigating the possible sensitization process and mechanism of CHT and the adverse effects of repeated CHT exposure. CHT activates dendritic cells and promotes the proliferation of lymph cells in the skin sensitization phase, causing severe inflammation. Keratinocytes activate the NLRP3 inflammasome pathway to cause inflammation during CHT treatment, and macrophages also secrete inflammatory cytokines. In addition, CHT-induced inflammation triggered skin wrinkles, decreased epidermal thickness and decreased collagen. Cell experiments also showed that repeated exposure to CHT led to cell proliferation inhibition and senescence, and CHT-induced autophagy dysfunction was not only the reason for inflammation but also for senescence. This study defined the possible process through which CHT is involved in the skin sensitization phase and elucidated the mechanism of CHT-induced inflammation in innate immune responses. We also determined that repeated CHT exposure caused persistent inflammation, ultimately leading to skin aging.

Preservative contact allergy in occupational dermatitis: a machine learning analysis.

Occupational dermatoses impose a significant socioeconomic burden. Allergic contact dermatitis related to occupation is prevalent among healthcare workers, cleaning service personnel, individuals in the beauty industry and industrial workers. Among risk factors, the exposure to preservatives is frequent, since they are extensively added in products for occupational use. The goal of this study is to investigate the contact allergy patterns in order to understand the linkage among hypersensitivity to preservatives, occupational profiles, patients' clinical and demographic characteristics. Patch test results were collected from monosensitized patients to Formaldehyde 2%, KATHON 0.02%, thimerosal 0.1%, and MDBGN 0.5%; information was also collected for an extended MOAHLFA (Male-Occupational-Atopic-Hand-Leg-Face-Age) index. To assess the relationship between allergen group and occupational-related ACD, the chi-square test for independence was utilized. To uncover underlying relationships in the data, multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and categorical principal components analysis (CATPCA), which are machine learning approaches, were applied. Significant relationships were found between allergen group and: occupation class, atopy, hand, leg, facial, trunk, neck, head dermatitis, clinical characteristics, ICDRG 48 h and ICDRG 72 h clinical evaluation. MCA and CATPCA findings revealed a link among allergen group, occupation class, patients' demographic and clinical characteristics, the MOAHLFA index, and the ICDRG scores. Significant relationships were identified between the allergen group and various manifestations of dermatitis. The utilization of machine learning techniques facilitated the discernment of meaningful patterns in the data.

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.

Recognizing and Managing Allergic Contact Dermatitis: Focus on Major Allergens.

Patch testing is the reference standard for the diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis. Identification and avoidance of culprit allergens are essential in the treatment of this disease. Each year, new allergens are identified as emerging or important. The authors discuss allergens that are common, enduring, emergent, incompletely recognized, and controversial for the practicing allergist and dermatologist. This Clinical Management Review will encompass a review of fragrances, preservatives, rubber, acrylates, metals, and medications; their common sources of exposure; controversies in diagnosis and patch testing; management and how to avoid those allergens. This review will also include practical aspects of diagnosis and management and will provide resources that can be used as guidance for physicians and patients on nickel, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, and fragrance, the most common allergens positive on patch testing.

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.

Subclinical immune responses to nickel in sensitized individuals-a dose-response study.

BACKGROUND: Nickel is the leading cause of contact allergy in Europe, with 14.5% of the adult population being sensitized. Despite regulations limiting nickel release from consumer items, the incidence and prevalence of nickel allergy remain high. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical and subclinical immune response to low-dose nickel exposure on nickel pre-exposed skin to assess the adequacy of current regulatory limits. METHOD: Nickel-allergic and healthy controls were patch tested with nickel twice with a 3-4 weeks interval. The first exposure used the diagnostic concentration of 2000 µg/cm2 nickel sulphate, and the same skin areas were then re-exposed to 0.2, 0.5, 12.8 and 370 µg/cm2 nickel sulphate. After 48 h, the patch reactions were examined for clinical signs of eczema, and skin biopsies were collected. The transcriptomic immune profile was analysed with Nanostring nCounter and quantitative polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: Two nickel-allergic participants (15%) had clinical reactions to the regulatory limiting doses for nickel (0.2/0.5 µg/cm2) following re-exposure. There was immune activation in all skin areas following re-exposure to nickel, predominantly mediated by up-regulation of cytokines and chemokines. In all nickel re-exposed skin areas, 81 genes were up-regulated independent from the clinical response. In skin areas exposed to 0.2 µg/cm2, 101 immune-related genes were differentially expressed, even when no clinical response was observed. Healthy controls showed up-regulation of three genes in response to nickel re-exposures without any clinical reactions. CONCLUSION: Immune activation can be induced in skin with local memory to nickel upon challenge with nickel doses within the regulatory limits. Our findings suggest that the regulatory limits in the European nickel regulation may not provide sufficient protection for consumers against low-dose exposures.

Sweat Protects against Contact Hypersensitivity: Transient Sweat Suppression Compromises Skin Barrier Function in Mice.

Although subtle barrier defects may facilitate allergen penetration, thereby enabling allergic sensitization, the relationship between sweating disturbance and skin barrier function is unknown. However, many studies on contact hypersensitivity in mice examined ear skin, which does not sweat, instead of the footpad, where sweating is uniquely present. In this study, we assessed whether sweat suppression in the footpad before hapten application provoked a skin barrier abnormality and reduced inflammatory thresholds to topical haptens. Mice without any genetic skin barrier dysfunction displayed markedly reduced inflammatory thresholds to haptens under transient sweat suppression before hapten application. Epicutaneously applied haptens penetrated the skin more robustly in the presence of sweat suppression compared with that in its absence, although this increase was abolished by exposure to high-humidity conditions. These mice displayed a subtle atopic dermatitis-like inflammation mediated by type 2 response-dominant inflammation and increased IgE responses, mimicking some events occurring in nonlesional atopic dermatitis skin in humans and in murine models. These lesions were dramatically attenuated by exposure to high-humidity conditions. In our model, hapten sensitization does not require mechanical injury, explaining why sensitization occurs through nonlesional atopic dermatitis skin. Awareness of the importance of preserving sweating responses is essential to prevent occupational contact dermatitis and atopic dermatitis.

Lymphatic-Dependent Modulation of the Sensitization and Elicitation Phases of Contact Hypersensitivity.

Allergic contact dermatitis is a common inflammatory skin disease comprising 2 phases. During sensitization, immune cells are activated by exposure to various allergens, whereas repeated antigen exposure induces local inflammation during elicitation. In this study, we utilized mouse models lacking lymphatics in different skin regions to characterize the role of lymphatics separately in the 2 phases, using contact hypersensitivity as a model of human allergic inflammatory skin diseases. Lymphatic-deficient mice exhibited no major difference to single antigen exposure compared to controls. However, mice lacking lymphatics in both phases displayed reduced inflammation after repeated antigen exposure. Similarly, diminished immune response was observed in mice lacking lymphatics only in sensitization, whereas the absence of lymphatics only in the elicitation phase resulted in a more pronounced inflammatory immune response. This exaggerated inflammation is driven by neutrophils impacting regulatory T cell number. Collectively, our results demonstrate that skin lymphatics play an important but distinct role in the 2 phases of contact hypersensitivity. During sensitization, lymphatics contribute to the development of the antigen-specific immunization, whereas in elicitation, they moderate the inflammatory response and leukocyte infiltration in a neutrophil-dependent manner. These findings underscore the need for novel therapeutic strategies targeting the lymphatics in the context of allergic skin diseases.

Contact allergens responsible for eyelid dermatitis in adults.

Allergic contact dermatitis has been established as the most frequent cause of eyelid dermatitis, but it is often misdiagnosed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of patients with eyelid dermatitis who were referred for patch testing. The patients were divided into three subgroups in this retrospective study: patients with only eyelid involvement, patients with involvement of eyelids and other areas, and patients without eyelid involvement. Data was collected on diagnoses, medical history, personal care products and make-up use, occupational dermatitis, and positive allergens. An independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, and chi-squared test were used to analyze the data. A total of 427 patients who referred for patch tests were included in the study. Of these, 139 patients had eyelid dermatitis. Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) was the most common diagnosis in all three groups referred for patch tests. Use of shaving cream and hair conditioner was significantly higher in patients with only eyelid involvement and nickel sulfate was the most common allergen among them. Patch testing is the gold standard tool in the evaluation of eyelid contact dermatitis, and it is a necessity in the treatment of eyelid dermatitis, for the accurate identification of responsible allergens.

CD1a and skin T cells: a pathway for therapeutic intervention.

The CD1 and MR1 protein families present lipid antigens and small molecules to T cells, complementing well-studied major histocompatibility complex-peptide mechanisms. The CD1a subtype is highly and continuously expressed within the skin, most notably on Langerhans cells, and has been demonstrated to present self and foreign lipids to T cells, highlighting its cutaneous sentinel role. Alteration of CD1a-dependent T-cell responses has recently been discovered to contribute to the pathogenesis of several inflammatory skin diseases. In this review, we overview the structure and role of CD1a and outline the current evidence implicating CD1a in the development of psoriasis, atopic dermatitis and allergic contact dermatitis.

Exploring the relationship between allergic contact dermatitis and atopic dermatitis in children: insights from a retrospective patch testing analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent years have seen significant exploration into the potential link between allergic contact dermatitis and atopic dermatitis, yielding contradictory findings. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of children aged 2 to 18 who underwent patch testing at the pediatric dermatology clinic at a tertiary medical center in Israel was conducted. RESULTS: Overall, 367 patients were included in the study, 31.6% of whom were diagnosed with atopic dermatitis. 160 children (43.6%) exhibited a positive reaction to at least one compound in the European baseline series. There was no statistically significant difference in reactivity between children with atopic dermatitis and those without (P = 0.848). Sub-analyses based on ethnicity, gender, and age did not reveal significant differences in overall European baseline series reactivity (P = 0.612, P = 0.446, P = 0.488, respectively). Sensitivity was notably higher when patch readings were conducted 72 h after application compared to 48 h [0.95 (CI: 0.91-0.97) vs. 0.60 (CI: 0.55-0.66)]. CONCLUSIONS: Patch testing is imperative for suspected cases of allergic contact dermatitis in all children, regardless of their atopic background. Further research is warranted to potentially replace the traditional 48-h reading with a single 72-h reading in future guidelines, contributing to enhanced efficiency and cost-effectiveness in clinical practice.

Regulation of immune response genes in the skin of allergic and clinically tolerant individuals exposed to p-phenylenediamine.

BACKGROUND: p-Phenylenediamine (PPD) is a potent contact allergen found in many hair colour products. However, not all individuals develop allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) although they are regularly exposed to PPD. It is unclear whether these asymptomatic individuals are true non-responders to PPD or whether they mount a response to PPD without showing any symptoms. METHODS: Skin biopsies were collected from 11 asymptomatic hairdressers regularly exposed to PPD and from 10 individuals with known ACD on day 4 after patch testing with 1% PPD in petrolatum and petrolatum exclusively as control. RNA sequencing and confocal microscopy were performed. RESULTS: T cell activation, inflammation and apoptosis pathways were up-regulated by PPD in both asymptomatic and allergic individuals. Compared to asymptomatic individuals with a negative patch test, individuals with a strong reaction to PPD strongly up-regulated both pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines genes. Interestingly, PPD treatment induced significant up-regulation of several genes for chemokines, classical type 2 dendritic cell markers and regulatory T cell markers in both asymptomatic and allergic individuals. In addition, apoptosis signalling pathway was activated in both non-responders and allergic individuals. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that there are no true non-responders to PPD but that the immune response elicited by PPD differs between individuals and can lead to either tolerance, subclinical inflammation or allergy.

Contact allergies to dental materials in patients.

BACKGROUND: Concerns regarding contact allergies and intolerance reactions to dental materials are widespread among patients. Development of novel dental materials and less frequent amalgam use may alter sensitization profiles in patients with possible contact allergy. OBJECTIVES: To analyse current sensitization patterns to dental materials in patients with suspected contact allergy. METHODS: This retrospective, multicentre analysis from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) selected participants from 169 834 people tested in 2005-2019 and registered with (i) an affected area of 'mouth' (and 'lips'/'perioral'), (ii) with the dental material in question belonging to one of three groups (dental filling materials, oral implants or dentures or equivalents) and (iii) with patch-testing done in parallel with the German baseline series, (dental) metal series and dental technician series. RESULTS: A total of 2730 of 169 834 tested patients met the inclusion criteria. The patients were predominantly women (81.2%) aged ≥ 40 years (92.8%). The sensitization rates with confirmed allergic contact stomatitis in women (n = 444) were highest for metals (nickel 28.6%, palladium 21.4%, amalgam 10.9%), (meth)acrylates [2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) 4.8%] and the substances propolis (6.8%) and 'balsam of Peru' (11.4%). The most relevant acrylates were HEMA, 2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate, methyl methacrylate, ethylene glycol dimethacrylate and pentaerythritol triacrylate. Few men were diagnosed with allergic contact stomatitis (n = 68); sensitization rates in men were highest for propolis (14.9%) and amalgam (13.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Allergic contact stomatitis to dental materials is rare. Patch testing should not only focus on metals such as nickel, palladium, amalgam and gold, but also (meth)acrylates and the natural substances propolis and 'balsam of Peru'.

Regulation of the immune response to contact sensitizers by Nrf2.

The skin is frequently exposed to chemical stress by organic chemicals or metal ions that can directly or indirectly challenge its immune components and may lead to T-cell-mediated delayed-type hypersensitivity reactions. The disruption of the skin's homeostasis by exposure to contact sensitizers (CSs) can trigger an inflammatory immune response that results in eczema and allergic contact dermatitis. The recognition of these chemicals depends on the expression of pattern recognition receptors on sentinel skin cells, mainly the innate resident immune cells orchestrating the skin's immune response and involving both oxidative and inflammatory pathways. The main driver of these both pathways is the Nrf2/Keap1 pathway, a major ubiquitous regulator of cellular oxidative and electrophilic stress, activated in various innate immune cells of the skin, including keratinocytes and epidermal Langerhans cells in the epidermis and dermal dendritic cells in the dermis. Nrf2 also shows a strong protective capacity by downregulating inflammatory pathways. In this review, the important role of Nrf2 in the regulation of the immune response to CSs will be discussed and highlighted.