Sunscreens Part 1: Mechanisms and Efficacy.

As our knowledge of the harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation continues to evolve, sunscreen remains an integral part of a comprehensive photoprotection strategy against multiple endpoints of ultraviolet-mediated damage. Part 1 of this review covers sunscreen active and additive ingredient properties, mechanisms of action and gaps in coverage. Following an overview of sunscreen's efficacy in protecting against sunburn, photocarcinogenesis, photoaging, pigmentary disorders, and idiopathic photodermatoses, we highlight considerations for product use and selection in children and individuals with skin of color.

Sunscreens Part 2: Regulation and Safety.

The second part of this CME article discusses sunscreen regulation and safety considerations for humans and the environment. First, we provide an overview of the history of the United States Food and Drug Administration's regulation of sunscreen. Recent Food and Drug Administration studies clearly demonstrate that organic ultraviolet filters are systemically absorbed during routine sunscreen use, but to date there is no evidence of associated negative health effects. We also review the current evidence of sunscreen's association with vitamin D levels and frontal fibrosing alopecia, and recent concerns regarding benzene contamination. Finally, we review the possible environmental effects of ultraviolet filters, particularly coral bleaching. While climate change has been shown to be the primary driver of coral bleaching, laboratory-based studies suggest that organic ultraviolet filters represent an additional contributing factor, which led several localities to ban certain organic filters.

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.

Photopatch testing: Clinical characteristics, test results, and final diagnoses from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 2009-2020.

BACKGROUND: Photoallergic contact dermatitis (PACD) is a delayed hypersensitivity reaction to allergens only in the presence of ultraviolet radiation in sunlight. Photopatch testing (PhotoPT) is necessary to confirm the diagnosis of PACD. There are few published studies of PhotoPT in North America. OBJECTIVE: To summarise the results of patients photopatch tested by members of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG), 2009-2020. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patient characteristics and PhotoPT results to 32 allergens on the NACDG Photopatch Test Series. RESULTS: Most of the 454 tested patients were female (70.3%), 21-60 years old (66.7%) and White (66.7%). There were a total of 119 positive photopatch tests. Sunscreen agents comprised 88.2% of those, with benzophenones responsible for over half of them. Final diagnoses included PACD in 17.2%, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in 44.5%, polymorphous light eruption (PMLE) in 18.9% and chronic actinic dermatitis (CAD) in 9.0% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In 454 patients with suspected photosensitivity referred for photopatch testing in North America, approximately one-fifth had PACD. Sunscreen agents, especially benzophenones, were the most common photoallergens. Other common diagnoses included ACD, PMLE and CAD. Photopatch testing is an important tool for differentiating these conditions.

Drug patch testing in Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The data on patch testing (PT) to identify culprit medications in Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN) are limited to scattered case reports and small case series, without analysis of overall trends to inform clinicians of its utility, methodology, and safety. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of the practice of PT in SJS/TEN, quantify the positivity rate of common drug classes, and assess safety during testing. METHODS: PubMed was searched from inception to 2021. Search terms included "patch testing" AND "SJS" OR "TEN" OR "Stevens-Johnson syndrome" OR "toxic epidermal necrolysis" OR "Lyell's syndrome." RESULTS: There were 58 articles that met the inclusion criteria. In total, 82 patients underwent patch testing for SJS/TEN, resulting in 104 positive reactions to 49 unique medications. Antiepileptic drugs were responsible for 48.1% of the positive reactions; antibiotics, 28.8%; and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, 6.7%. The positivity rates of antiepileptics, antibiotics, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were 33.1%, 13.1%, and 21.9%, respectively. When accounting for suspected causality, these rates increased to 54.3%, 78.4%, and 54.5%, respectively. Three patients (3.7%), 2 of whom had human immunodeficiency virus infection and active tuberculosis, experienced systemic reactions during PT, which required only conservative treatment. CONCLUSION: Published reports suggest that PT in SJS/TEN is useful and safe. Antiepileptic drugs have been tested most frequently and found to have the highest positivity rate. There is a critical need for large-scale studies with standardized methodology to obtain reproducible data on PT in SJS/TEN.

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. 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.

Disseminated cutaneous gout: a rare manifestation of a common disease.

Disseminated cutaneous gout is a rare atypical cutaneous manifestation of gout in which widespread dermal and subcutaneous tophi develop at extra-articular body sites. Given the lack of joint involvement that is typically a feature in tophaceous gout, the diagnosis may not be initially suspected. We present the case of a 50-year-old Hispanic man with poorly controlled gout who was evaluated for several years of firm papulonodules over the trunk and upper and lower extremities, sparing the joints; histopathology confirmed, the diagnosis of disseminated cutaneous gout. Per our literature review, disseminated cutaneous gout presents with polymorphous papules and nodules that can mimic other, more common cutaneous diseases. There is a preponderance of cases in males, Asians, and patients with longstanding gout. The lower extremities are involved in nearly all reports. Uric acid-lowering therapy with allopurinol has been reported to decrease the size and number of lesions in a minority of treated patients.

Epidemiology and treatment of angiolymphoid hyperplasia with eosinophilia (ALHE): A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Current knowledge of angiolymphoid hyperplasia with eosinophilia (ALHE) derives from retrospective reports and case series, leading to a nonevidence-based treatment approach. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically review the literature relating to cutaneous ALHE to estimate its epidemiology and treatment outcomes. METHODS: A literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar was conducted. Articles detailing cases of histologically confirmed cutaneous ALHE were included. RESULTS: In all, 416 studies were included in the review, representing 908 patients. There was no sex predominance among patients with ALHE. Mean age at presentation was 37.6 years. There was a significant association between presence of multiple lesions and pruritus, along with bleeding. Surgical excision was the most commonly reported treatment for ALHE. Treatment failure was lowest for excision and pulsed dye laser. Mean disease-free survival after excision was 4.2 years. There were higher rates of recurrence postexcision with earlier age of onset, longer duration of disease, multiple lesions, bilateral lesions, pruritus, pain, and bleeding. LIMITATIONS: Potential for publication bias is a limitation. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical excision appears to be the most effective treatment for ALHE, albeit suboptimal. Pulsed dye and other lasers may be effective treatment options. More studies are needed to improve the treatment of ALHE.