Patch Testing With Nickel, Cobalt, and Chromium in Patients With Suspected Allergic Contact Dermatitis.

Background: Allergic contact dermatitis is frequently caused by metals, including multiple metals simultaneously. Objectives: To assess characteristics and associations of positive and clinically relevant patch test (PT) reactions with solitary and concurrent metal sensitization. Methods: A retrospective analysis of PT results for nickel, cobalt, and/or chromium from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group between 2001 and 2018 (n = 43,522). Results: 18.0% had a positive/allergic reaction to nickel sulfate hexahydrate, 7.3% to cobalt chloride hexahydrate, and 3.0% to potassium dichromate. 87.9% patients had a currently relevant reaction to 0, 9.4% to 1, and 2.7% to multiple metals tested. Patients with 1 versus no currently relevant reactions to metal were more likely to have a primary dermatitis site of trunk, feet, and ears; patients with currently relevant reactions to multiple metals had more dermatitis affecting the trunk and ears. Metal sources varied by co-reacting metal, especially for patients with cobalt and chromium allergy. Jewelry was the most commonly identified source of nickel and cobalt for both solitary and concurrent metal allergy. Conclusions: Sensitization to multiple metals occurred in 6% of patients. Allergen sources varied between patients with sensitivity to 1 metal versus those who had concurrent sensitivity to cobalt and/or chromium.

Widespread cutaneous eruption after aluminum-containing vaccination: A case report and review of current literature.

Aluminum salts are adjuvants found in many vaccines. Although rare, patients have reported cutaneous reactions to aluminum salts including persistent pruritic subcutaneous nodules at the injection site. We report the case of an 11-year-old male who at the age of 5 years developed a generalized pruritic cutaneous eruption after receiving the aluminum-containing Quadracel® vaccination. Patch testing at that time was positive to aluminum salts and again on repeat patch testing 6 years later. Our case highlights a delayed systemic cutaneous reaction to a vaccine containing aluminum salts. We review cutaneous allergic reactions to vaccines containing aluminum salts and vaccination advice for patients with aluminum contact allergy.

Occupationally Related Nickel Reactions: A Retrospective Analysis of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group Data 1998-2016.

BACKGROUND: The epidemiology of nickel allergy in occupational settings is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to characterize occupationally related nickel allergy (ORNA). METHODS: This is a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 44,378 patients patch tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group from 1998 to 2016. Characteristics of individuals with ORNA were compared with those with non-ORNA (NORNA). RESULTS: A total of 7928 (18.2%) individuals were positive to nickel sulfate 2.5%. Two hundred sixty-eight (3.4%) had ORNA. As compared with NORNA, ORNA was statistically associated with the male sex (41.0% vs 12.9%, P < 0.001), a diagnosis of irritant contact dermatitis (22.4% vs 12.0%, P < 0.001), and no history of eczema (81.7% vs 75.7%, P = 0.0217). The most common sites of ORNA dermatitis were hand (39.9%) and arm (18.1%), which were significantly more common than in NORNA (P < 0.0001). Sixteen industry categories and 22 occupation categories were identified for ORNA; the most common industries were durable goods manufacturing (24.6%) and personal services (15.7%), and the most frequent occupations were hairdressers/cosmetologists/barbers (14.3%), machine operators (9.3%), and health care workers (7.1%). Overall 30% of ORNA occupations were in metalworking. Of 215 ORNA sources identified, instruments/phones/other equipment (16.3%), vehicles/machinery (15.8%), and tools (15.3%) were the most common. CONCLUSIONS: Occupational nickel allergy is distinct from nonoccupational nickel allergy.

Epidemiology of nickel sensitivity: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data 1994-2014.

BACKGROUND: Nickel is a common allergen. OBJECTIVE: To examine the epidemiology of nickel sensitivity in North America. METHODS: Retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of 44,097 patients patch tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group from 1994 to 2014. Nickel sensitivity was defined as a positive patch test for nickel. We evaluated the frequency of nickel sensitivity and patient demographics. For each positive reaction to nickel, we tabulated clinical relevance, occupational relatedness, and exposure sources. RESULTS: The average frequency of nickel sensitivity was 17.5% (1994-2014). Nickel sensitivity significantly increased over time (from 14.3% in 1994-1996 to 20.1% in 2013-2014 [P < .0001]). Nickel-sensitive patients were significantly more likely to be female, young, nonwhite, and atopic (have eczema and asthma) and/or have dermatitis affecting the face, scalp, ears, neck, arm, or trunk (P values ≤ .0474). Overall, 55.5% of reactions were currently clinically relevant; this percentage significantly increased over time (from 44.1% in 1994-1996 to 51.6% in 2013-2014 [P < .0001]). The rate of occupational relatedness was 3.7% overall, with a significant decrease over time (from 7.9% in 1994-1996 to 1.9% in 2013-2014 [P < .0001]). Jewelry was the most common source of nickel contact. LIMITATIONS: Tertiary referral population. CONCLUSIONS: Nickel allergy is of substantial public health importance in North America. The frequency of nickel sensitivity in patients referred for patch testing has significantly increased over a 20-year period.

Epidemiology of pediatric nickel sensitivity: Retrospective review of North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) data 1994-2014.

BACKGROUND: Nickel is a common allergen responsible for allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: To characterize nickel sensitivity in children and compare pediatric cohorts (≤5, 6-12, and 13-18 years). METHODS: Retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of 1894 pediatric patients patch tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group from 1994 to 2014. We evaluated demographics, rates of reaction to nickel, strength of nickel reactions, and nickel allergy sources. RESULTS: The frequency of nickel sensitivity was 23.7%. Children with nickel sensitivity were significantly less likely to be male (P < .0001; relative risk, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.75) or have a history of allergic rhinitis (P = .0017; relative risk, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.90) compared with those who were not nickel sensitive. In the nickel-sensitive cohort, the relative proportion of boys declined with age (44.8% for age ≤5, 36.6% for age 6-12, and 22.6% for age 13-18 years). The most common body site distribution for all age groups sensitive to nickel was scattered/generalized, indicating widespread dermatitis. Jewelry was the most common source associated with nickel sensitivity (36.4%). LIMITATIONS: As a cross-sectional study, no long-term follow-up was available. CONCLUSIONS: Nickel sensitivity in children was common; the frequency was significantly higher in girls than in boys. Overall, sensitivity decreased with age. The most common source of nickel was jewelry.

Cutaneous Delayed-Type Hypersensitivity to Surfactants.

BACKGROUND: Repeated and prolonged use of surfactants can cause irritant as well as allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: This study reports the frequency of positive patch test results to surfactants tested on the North American Contact Dermatitis Group screening series including cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB), amidoamine (AA), dimethylaminopropylamine (DMAPA), oleamidopropyl dimethylamine (OPD), and cocamide diethanolamide (CDEA), and correlations of positive reactions between CAPB and the other surfactants. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 10 877 patients patch tested between 2009 and 2014 to the surfactants CAPB, AA, DMAPA, OPD, and CDEA. Frequencies of positive reactions to these surfactants were calculated, and trends of reactivity between the surfactants analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: The OPD had the highest rate of positive patch reactions (2.3%) followed by DMAPA (1.7%), and CAPB (1.4%). The AA and CDEA had the lowest rate of positive reactions (0.8%). There was a high degree of overlap in positive patch tests between the surfactants. The CDEA was the least likely to coreact with another surfactant.

Unilateral hand allergic contact dermatitis due to occupational exposure.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Hand dermatitis is the most common subtype of occupation-related skin disease. Regardless of its underlying cause, hand dermatitis results in significant impairment and a negative impact on quality of life. Any case of unilateral hand dermatitis should have a high index of suspicion for an allergic contact dermatitis. CONCLUSION: We report two cases of unilateral hand dermatitis. The first case is a 53-year-old female with a unilateral dermatitis of the left hand. The second case is a 53-year-old male with dermatitis of the right hand. Both cases highlight an interesting presentation of unilateral hand allergic contact dermatitis secondary to an occupational exposure.

Cutaneous angiosarcoma as a delayed complication of radiation therapy for carcinoma of the breast.

Three cases of cutaneous angiosarcoma of the breast that arose in irradiated skin tissue in women who had previously undergone treatment for breast carcinoma are reported. A review of the literature identified 55 cases of cutaneous angiosarcoma following radiation therapy as part of the treatment of carcinoma of the breast. For all 58 assembled cases, the mean age at the time of adjuvant radiation therapy for breast carcinoma was 64 years (range 42-83). The mean time to subsequent diagnosis in irradiated skin was 75 months (range 12-192). The estimated 3-year overall survival for all 58 patients was only 20%, similar to that of patients with the general form of angiosarcoma. Postirradiation angiosarcoma of the breast has a variety of presentations; thus diagnosis is often delayed. Early diagnosis relies on a high index of suspicion and appropriate histopathologic studies, as the clinical and histopathologic findings may be confused with other conditions. Treatment should be aggressive and include local surgery with consideration of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy.