Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 67
Filter
Add more filters

Country/Region as subject
Publication year range
1.
Br J Dermatol ; 190(6): 895-903, 2024 May 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38123140

ABSTRACT

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'.


Subject(s)
Dental Amalgam , Dental Materials , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Patch Tests , Humans , Female , Male , Retrospective Studies , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/immunology , Adult , Middle Aged , Dental Materials/adverse effects , Dental Amalgam/adverse effects , Aged , Adolescent , Young Adult , Child , Methacrylates/adverse effects , Balsams/adverse effects , Dental Implants/adverse effects , Stomatitis/epidemiology , Stomatitis/chemically induced , Stomatitis/immunology , Stomatitis/diagnosis , Stomatitis/etiology , Propolis/adverse effects , Dentures/adverse effects , Germany/epidemiology , Allergens/adverse effects , Allergens/immunology , Child, Preschool
2.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38709160

ABSTRACT

Tattooing has been part of the human culture for thousands of years, yet only in the past decades has it entered the mainstream of the society. With the rise in popularity, tattoos also gained attention among researchers, with the aim to better understand the health risks posed by their application. 'A medical-toxicological view of tattooing'-a work published in The Lancet almost a decade ago, resulted from the international collaboration of various experts in the field. Since then, much understanding has been achieved regarding adverse effects, treatment of complications, as well as their regulation for improving public health. Yet major knowledge gaps remain. This review article results from the Second International Conference on Tattoo Safety hosted by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) and provides a glimpse from the medical-toxicological perspective, regulatory strategies and advances in the analysis of tattoo inks.

3.
Contact Dermatitis ; 91(2): 112-118, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38840483

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Mainly women work as foot care specialists (FCS). They are at risk to develop occupational dermatitis (OD). OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to describe the contact sensitisation pattern of female FCS with OD. METHODS: In a retrospective study, patch test and clinical data collected by the Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) from 2008 to 2022 were analysed. Data of 116 female FCS with OD were compared with data of 13 930 female patients with OD working in other professions and 78 612 female patients without OD. RESULTS: Hand dermatitis (93.1%) was significantly more common and face dermatitis (0.9%) significantly less common in female FCS with OD compared to other female patients with or without OD. Frequent suspected allergen sources were disinfectants, gloves, leave-on and nail cosmetics. Occlusion and wetness were important co-factors. The most common diagnoses were irritant contact dermatitis (26.7%) and allergic contact dermatitis (21.6%). No sensitisation to any of the baseline series allergens was significantly more frequent in female FCS with OD than in the two control groups. However, sensitisations to allergens which FCS are abundantly exposed to, including fragrances, preservatives, rubber ingredients and disinfectants, were most common. CONCLUSIONS: FCS should be aware of the OD risk and prevention should be promoted.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Dermatitis, Irritant , Dermatitis, Occupational , Hand Dermatoses , Patch Tests , Humans , Female , Dermatitis, Occupational/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Occupational/etiology , Dermatitis, Occupational/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Retrospective Studies , Adult , Middle Aged , Case-Control Studies , Hand Dermatoses/epidemiology , Hand Dermatoses/etiology , Dermatitis, Irritant/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Irritant/etiology , Allergens/adverse effects , Facial Dermatoses/epidemiology , Facial Dermatoses/etiology , Cosmetics/adverse effects , Disinfectants/adverse effects , Gloves, Protective/adverse effects , Foot Dermatoses/epidemiology
4.
Contact Dermatitis ; 90(5): 470-478, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38146081

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: EU Commission Regulation 2017/1410 prohibits using atranol and chloroatranol, the main allergens in Evernia prunastri (oakmoss), and hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde (HICC) in cosmetic products. Oakmoss absolute is contained in fragrance mix (FM) I and HICC in FM II which are patch tested as screening mixtures in the baseline series. OBJECTIVE: To describe the time trends of reaction frequencies to both FMs as well as to their components in FM-positive patients. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of data from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), 2012-2021. RESULTS: Positive reactions to FM I (FM II) declined from 9.1% (4.7%) in 2012 to 4.6% (3.0%) in 2021. Full breakdown tests were performed in 24% (FM I) and 31% (FM II), respectively, of the mix-positive patients. From this data, frequencies of sensitization to the 14 single fragrances of FM I and FM II were calculated. For the majority, a decline was noted from 2012/2013 to 2020/2021, for oakmoss absolute 1.9%-0.8% and for HICC 1.8%-0.9%. CONCLUSION: EU Commission Regulation 2017/1410 was an effective measure. However, our data have some limitations, possibly causing underestimation of sensitization frequencies to fragrances.


Subject(s)
Aldehydes , Cyclohexenes , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Perfume , Resins, Plant , Terpenes , Humans , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Odorants , Retrospective Studies , Patch Tests/adverse effects , Allergens/adverse effects , Perfume/adverse effects
5.
Contact Dermatitis ; 88(5): 331-350, 2023 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36772861

ABSTRACT

We outline constituents of tattoo and permanent make-up ink with regard to inflammatory tattoo reactions and population-based confounders. The comprehensive review of patch-tested tattoo patients between 1997 and 2022 shows that tattoo allergy cannot be reliably diagnosed via patch testing with today's knowledge. Weak penetration and slow haptenization of pigments, unavailability of pigments as test allergens and a lack of knowledge concerning relevant epitopes hamper the diagnosis of tattoo allergy. Patch testing p-phenylenediamine and disperse (textile) dyes is not able to close this gap. Sensitization to metals was associated with all types of tattoo complications, although often not clinically relevant for the tattoo reaction. Binders and industrial biocides are frequently missing on ink declarations and should be patch tested. The pigment carbon black (C.I. 77266) is no skin sensitizer. Patch tests with culprit inks were usually positive with cheap ink products for non-professional use or with professionally used inks in patients with eczematous reactions characterized by papules and infiltration. Tape stripping before patch testing and patch test readings on Day 8 or 10 may improve the diagnostic quality. The meaningfulness of the categorical EU-wide ban of Pigment Green 7 and Pigment Blue 15:3 is not substantiated by the presented data.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Tattooing , Humans , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Tattooing/adverse effects , Allergens , Coloring Agents/adverse effects , Metals , Inflammation/etiology , Ink
6.
Contact Dermatitis ; 88(6): 446-455, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36861774

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Benzisothiazolinone (BIT; CAS no. 2634-33-5) is used as a biocide in various products, including water-based paints, metalworking fluids, and household products. In recent years, increasing sensitization rates have been observed in Europe. OBJECTIVE: To describe a time trend of sensitization to BIT, analyse concomitant reactions, and identify patients with increased risk of BIT sensitization. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of data from 26 739 patients patch tested with BIT, sodium salt, 0.1% petrolatum as part of several special test series within the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), 2002 to 2021. RESULTS: Positive reactions to BIT were noted in 771 patients (2.9%). Sensitization frequency varied over time and increased in recent years, peaking at 6.5% in 2020. Painters and metalworkers handling metalworking fluids, but not cleaners, had a significantly increased risk of BIT sensitization. From our data, there is no evidence of immunological cross-reactivity between BIT and other isothiazolinones. CONCLUSION: The increasing frequency of sensitization justifies adding BIT to the baseline series. More research on the clinical relevance of positive patch test reactions to BIT and the cause for the rising numbers of BIT sensitization is needed.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Humans , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Allergens/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Thiazoles/adverse effects , Patch Tests/adverse effects
7.
Contact Dermatitis ; 89(2): 85-94, 2023 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37177844

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Hydroperoxides of limonene (Lim-OOHs) and linalool (Lin-OOHs) are potent contact sensitizers. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prevalence of positive patch test (PT) reactions to Lim-OOHs and Lin-OOHs in consecutive patients, their demographic factors and concomitant reactions. METHODS: Between 7/2018 and 12/2020, Lim-OOHs 0.3% pet. and Lin-OOHs 1% pet. were patch tested in 5511 consecutive patients. We assessed PT reactivity and analysed data from patients with either positive or negative PTs to Lim-OOHs and Lin-OOHs. RESULTS: Positive PT results to Lim-OOHs (n = 170, 3.1%) and Lin-OOHs (n = 483, 8.8%) were frequent. Most of the positive reactions were weak (LimOOHs n = 134/LinOOHs n = 429), and even more frequently, doubtful (n = 252/n = 578) or irritant reactions (n = 81/n = 178) were documented. PT reactivity to Lim-OOHs and Lin-OOHs was increased in patients with irritant reactions to sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS). The proportion of leg dermatitis and concomitant positive reactions to fragrances and essential oils was increased in patients with reactivity to these hydroperoxides. CONCLUSION: The observed reaction pattern suggests that both test preparations display an irritant potential with an increased risk of false positive reactions. Preparations should be chemically monitored in order to reduce irritancy. Mindful interpretation of PT results and aimed patch testing of lower concentrations is recommended.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Perfume , Humans , Limonene/adverse effects , Monoterpenes/adverse effects , Hydrogen Peroxide/adverse effects , Patch Tests/adverse effects , Irritants , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Perfume/adverse effects , Allergens/adverse effects
8.
Allergy ; 77(5): 1477-1485, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34687560

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patch test (PT) readings are recommended after 48 h and 72 h (D3). An additional day 7 (D7) reading has been suggested by some, although data on efficient patient selection are scarce. We investigated positive D7 reactions regarding (i) allergens in the baseline series and additional PT series of the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group (DKG) and (ii) characteristics of the patients tested. METHODS: Retrospective, multicentre analysis of 190 allergens derived from 17 DKG test series in 4687 patients with an additional D7 reading. Patients were patch tested with the baseline series and additional series, if required. Occurrence of novel D7 reactions as well as increasing skin reactions from D3 to D7 was analysed separately. RESULTS: Depending on the allergen tested, waiving D7 readings would have missed 4.4-26.8% of positive PT results. Patch test series with the highest number of novel D7 reactions were baseline series, metal series, and leather/shoe series. New positive reactions on D7 were associated with age over 50 years and with a negative irritant control containing sodium lauryl sulphate. Of note, application of the PT allergens for 48 h instead of 24 h was positively associated with late PT reactions. CONCLUSION: Within the most frequently tested allergens, without late readings, on average 11.7% of sensitizations would have been missed. Novel late reacting allergens were identified. This study comprehensively dissects patient-, allergen- and test-dependent parameters in support for D7 readings. We propose to always consider late readings individually based on effort-benefit considerations.


Subject(s)
Allergens , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Humans , Middle Aged , Patch Tests/methods , Retrospective Studies
9.
Contact Dermatitis ; 87(1): 71-80, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35417610

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Essential oils (EOs) are widely used in cosmetics, perfumes, massage fluids, aroma therapy and natural medicine. Some EOs contain contact sensitizers. OBJECTIVES: To describe the frequency of sensitization to EOs in dermatitis patients presenting in skin clinics including concomitant reactions, to evaluate the EO patch test preparations and to identify patient groups with an increased risk of EO sensitization. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of data from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), 2010-2019. RESULTS: Twelve EOs were patch tested in an aimed manner in 10 930 patients, of whom 908 (8.3%) reacted to at least 1 EO. Only 6 EOs elicited more than 1% positive patch test reactions: ylang ylang (I + II) oil (3.9%), lemongrass oil (2.6%), jasmine absolute (1.8%), sandalwood oil (1.8%), clove oil (1.6%) and neroli oil (1.1%). Concomitant reactions among EOs or to EOs and fragrances were frequent. Among EO-positive patients, women, leg dermatitis patients, patients aged 40 years or more, masseurs and cosmeticians were over-represented. CONCLUSIONS: Sensitization to EOs occurs, albeit infrequently in most cases. Masseurs and cosmeticians have an increased risk of sensitization to EOs.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Oils, Volatile , Perfume , Allergens/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Female , Humans , Oils, Volatile/adverse effects , Patch Tests/adverse effects , Perfume/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies
10.
Contact Dermatitis ; 86(5): 379-389, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35099073

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: 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. OBJECTIVES: To collect further data on patch test reactivity and clinical relevance of the audit allergens in consecutive patients across Europe. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.


Subject(s)
Allergens , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Allergens/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Humans , Hydrogen Peroxide , Limonene , Patch Tests/methods , Terpenes
11.
Contact Dermatitis ; 87(4): 343-355, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35678309

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Continual analyses of patch test results with the European baseline series (EBS) serve both contact allergy surveillance and auditing the value of included allergens. OBJECTIVES: To present results of current EBS patch testing, obtained in 53 departments in 13 European countries during 2019 and 2020. METHODS: Anonymised or pseudonymised individual data and partly aggregated data on demographic/clinical characteristics and patch test rest results with the EBS were prospectively collected and centrally pooled and analysed. RESULTS: In 2019 and 2020, 22 581 patients were patch tested with the EBS. Sensitization to nickel remained most common (19.8 [19.2-20.4]% positivity [95% confidence interval]). Fragrance mix I and Myroxylon pereirae yielded very similar results with 6.80 (6.43-7.19)% and 6.62 (6.25-7.00)% positivity, respectively. Formaldehyde at 2% aq. yielded almost one percentage point more positive reactions than 1% concentration (2.49 [2.16-2.85]% vs. 1.59 [1.33-1.88]); methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI) and MI alone up to around 5% positives. Among the new additions, propolis was most commonly positive (3.48 [3.16-3.82]%), followed by 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2.32 [2.0-2.68]%). CONCLUSION: Ongoing surveillance on the prevalence of contact sensitization contributes to an up-to-date baseline series containing the most frequent and/or relevant contact sensitizers for routine patch testing in Europe.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Allergens/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Europe/epidemiology , Humans , Nickel , Patch Tests/methods
12.
Contact Dermatitis ; 85(5): 494-502, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34260080

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Painters and varnishers ("painters") are exposed to various contact allergens and skin irritants, and therefore, are at risk for developing occupational dermatitis (OD). OBJECTIVE: To describe the spectrum of occupational sensitizations in painters and revise the corresponding current patch test recommendations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) data from 2000 to 2019 with focus on male painters with OD, ages 20-59 years (n = 557) in comparison to age-matched male painters without OD (n = 422) and male OD patients who have had never worked as painters (n = 13 862). RESULTS: Male painters with OD have a significantly higher rate of allergic contact dermatitis and face dermatitis than male patients with OD who work in other professions. Positive patch tests to epoxy resin, methylisothiazolinone (MI), and methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI)/MI were significantly more frequent in painters with OD than in the other groups. Epoxy resin sensitization was significantly associated with face dermatitis. CONCLUSIONS: Epoxy resin, MI, and MCI/MI represent the most important occupational sensitizers in painters. In addition to baseline, resins and glues, and industrial biocides series, the patients' own workplace materials should be tested in painters with suspected OD.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Occupational/epidemiology , Eczema/epidemiology , Epoxy Resins/adverse effects , Hand Dermatoses/epidemiology , Paint/adverse effects , Adult , Allergens/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Occupational/diagnosis , Eczema/chemically induced , Germany , Hand Dermatoses/chemically induced , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Young Adult
13.
Contact Dermatitis ; 84(6): 407-418, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33533485

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In about half of the patients reacting positive to fragrance mix I (FM I), breakdown testing remains negative. This raises the question of whether the reaction to FM I is false-positive, or the breakdown test is false-negative. OBJECTIVES: To identify characteristics and sensitization patterns of patients positive to FM I, but not to its fragrance constituents. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of data from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) between 2005 and 2019. Three patient groups were defined according to their reaction pattern: Group I, FM I positive and ≥1 single fragrance positive in the breakdown test (n = 1912); Group II, FM I positive and breakdown test negative (n = 1318); Group III, FM I negative (n = 19 790). RESULTS: Regarding the pattern of concomitant reactions to other fragrances, Group II had an intermediate position between Group I and Group III. In other respects (age and sex distribution, frequency of sensitization to non-fragrance baseline series allergens), Group II rather resembled Group I. CONCLUSIONS: Not every positive reaction to FM I in patients with negative breakdown tests is false-positive. There may be false-negative reactions to the single fragrance components when patch tested at 1% pet. Raising patch concentrations of some single fragrances is recommended.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Odorants , Patch Tests/methods , Adult , Dermatitis, Atopic/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Occupational/diagnosis , False Negative Reactions , False Positive Reactions , Hand Dermatoses/diagnosis , Humans , Leg Dermatoses/diagnosis , Male , Retrospective Studies
14.
Contact Dermatitis ; 82(2): 87-93, 2020 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31599977

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Sensitization to methylisothiazolinone (MI) has seen an exceptional epidemic, mainly attributed to its use in cosmetics. OBJECTIVES: To trace the epidemic of MI allergy (2009-2018), and to analyze a possible change of patients' characteristics. METHODS: Informationsverbund Dermatologischer Kliniken-data of patients patch tested between 2009 and 2018 with MI (0.05% aq.) were analyzed concerning anamnestic items and sensitization frequencies. RESULTS: Overall, 4.9% reacted positive to MI. Comparing sensitization to MI in three periods (2009, 2013/14, and 2017/18), there was an increase to 7% in 2013 and a decrease to 3.4% in 2018. The MOAHLFA Index (M=Men, O=Occupational Dermatitis, A=Atopic Dermatitis, L=Leg Dermatitis, F=Face Dermatitis, A= Age > 40) for the period 2013/14 is characterized by a lower proportion of occupational dermatitis and a higher proportion of face dermatitis. The period 2017/18 is characterized by increases of occupational dermatitis and hand dermatitis, and a decrease of face dermatitis. Painters, personal care workers, and hairdressers were particularly affected. Sensitization in hairdressers and personal care workers (mostly cosmeticians) decreased after the peak in 2013/14, whereas sensitization to MI in painters continued to increase. CONCLUSIONS: After an unprecedented epidemic of MI allergy, mainly caused by its use in cosmetics, the continuous use of MI in industrial applications, for example, paints, and subsequent sensitization remain a matter of concern.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Occupational/epidemiology , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Preservatives, Pharmaceutical/adverse effects , Thiazoles/adverse effects , Adult , Cosmetics/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Dermatitis, Occupational/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
15.
Contact Dermatitis ; 83(6): 475-486, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32829502

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Studies on patch testing with workplace materials and evaluation of current occupational relevance of positive patch test reactions are scarce in patients with occupational dermatitis (OD). OBJECTIVES: To identify frequent sensitizations with occupational relevance and to determine the value of patch testing with workplace materials in OD patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Results and clinical data of 654 patients with suspected OD patch tested between 2013 and 2017 were analysed. RESULTS: Occupational allergic contact dermatitis was diagnosed in 113 (17.3%) patients. Mechanics had the widest range of occupational sensitizations. Sensitization to epoxy resin was rated occupationally relevant in almost all handicraft trades. Among positive patch test reactions to workplace products, those to water-based metal working fluids and leave-on cosmetic products were most frequent. Despite frequent testing, protective gloves only rarely elicited positive reactions. Preservatives and rubber compounds were most frequently identified as currently occupationally relevant. CONCLUSIONS: Rubber allergy is occupationally relevant especially in healthcare workers and cleaners. Generally, preservatives including formaldehyde releasers are important allergens in OD patients. Leave-on cosmetic products must not be forgotten as allergen sources. Patch testing both workplace materials and standardized test preparations has a complementary value and is beneficial for the diagnostic work-up of OD patients.


Subject(s)
Allergens/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Occupational/diagnosis , Epoxy Resins/adverse effects , Adult , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Dermatitis, Occupational/etiology , Female , Gloves, Protective/adverse effects , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patch Tests/statistics & numerical data , Workplace
16.
Contact Dermatitis ; 83(6): 487-496, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32776554

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Metalworkers are exposed to a variety of contact allergens by handling tools, metals, metalworking fluids (MWFs), oils and greases, rubber materials, and so on. Most large-scale reports on contact allergy due to MWFs are more than 10-years-old, and there are only few studies on contact allergy in mechanics and other metal workers not exposed to MWFs. OBJECTIVES: To describe a current spectrum of contact sensitization in metalworkers with occupational dermatitis (OD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patch test data collected by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK; 2010-2018), stratifying for 804 cutting metalworkers, 2197 mechanics, and 355 other metalworkers. RESULTS: Cutting metalworkers were most frequently sensitized to monoethanolamine (12.6%), colophonium/abietic acid (11.4%) and formaldehyde releasers (up to 8.5%) from the MWF series, and formaldehyde (4.6%) and iodopropynyl butylcarbamate (4.6%) from the baseline series. Sensitization among mechanics and other metalworkers indicates possible occupational exposure to MWFs, glues, and resins, although this may not be expected from their job titles. CONCLUSIONS: The spectrum of MWF contact allergens remained largely unchanged during the last years. Taking a comprehensive occupational history is indispensable in order to not miss relevant allergen exposures.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Occupational/diagnosis , Hand Dermatoses/diagnosis , Industrial Oils/adverse effects , Metallurgy , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Adult , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Dermatitis, Occupational/etiology , Environmental Monitoring/methods , Female , Germany , Hand Dermatoses/chemically induced , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patch Tests , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
17.
Pediatr Allergy Immunol ; 30(6): 632-637, 2019 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31077617

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Contact sensitization in children is increasing. The offending allergens differ depending on patient age and sex. We aimed to determine the sensitization profiles in children (aged 6-12) and adolescents (aged 13-18), to compare these to a control group of adults (aged 60-66), and to evaluate differences in sensitization patterns between working and non-working adolescents. PATIENTS/MATERIALS/METHODS: We analyzed Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) data from 2009 to 2016 using multiple logistic regression analysis. Of the 99 082 patients documented in the IVDK database, 591 children, 2451 adolescents and 12 122 adults were included in further analysis. RESULTS: Nickel was the most frequent contact allergen among all age-groups. Children and adolescents showed significantly lower reaction rates to fragrance mix, methyldibromo-glutaronitrile, methylisothiazolinone, and propolis than adults. Positive reactions to sorbitan sesquioleate and mercapto mix among children and to cobalt among adolescents were significantly more frequent than in adults. Working adolescents had more often positive reactions to methyl(chloro)isothiazolinone (skin lesions predominantly on hands) and paraben mix (skin lesions predominantly on feet) when compared to non-working peers. Patch-tested children were more often diagnosed with atopic dermatitis than adults (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Contact allergens display age-specific patterns, which should be considered in a standardized series targeting different patient populations (children and adolescents). Employed adolescents should preferably be tested with the baseline series to optimize allergen identification.


Subject(s)
Age Factors , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Skin/immunology , Adolescent , Aged , Allergens/immunology , Case-Control Studies , Child , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/immunology , Female , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Immunization , Male , Middle Aged , Nickel/immunology , Parabens/adverse effects , Thiazoles/immunology , Work
18.
Contact Dermatitis ; 80(5): 273-278, 2019 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30499108

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Professional musicians have prolonged and intense physical contact with their instruments. This can lead to occupational skin diseases, particularly irritant and allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVES: To assess the skin diseases and sensitization patterns common among professional musicians. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the data of the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) was performed, including data from 1997 to 2017. RESULTS: We identified 236 professional musicians. In this group, male sex (58.6%) and younger age (60.6% aged < 40 years) were common. The musicians suffered more frequently from facial dermatitis (23.7% vs 15.7%) and less often from leg dermatitis (5.1% vs 10.7%) than the control group (the non-musicians in the IVDK database). The most frequent diagnoses were allergic contact dermatitis, atopic dermatitis, and irritant contact dermatitis. The sensitization profile of the professional musicians was similar to that of the control group. In 8.9% of cases, an occupational background of skin disease was confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: Severe occupational skin diseases among professional musicians are not as common as in classic "skin-damaging" professions. However, as these skin conditions can mostly be controlled with simple preventive measures, we recommend that this group should be patch tested and treated by a specialist.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Irritant/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Occupational/epidemiology , Facial Dermatoses/epidemiology , Leg Dermatoses/epidemiology , Music , Adult , Austria/epidemiology , Female , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Odds Ratio , Switzerland/epidemiology
19.
Contact Dermatitis ; 80(4): 222-227, 2019 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30378139

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Compositae plant family includes many thousands of species, making it one of the most widespread group of plants worldwide. Sensitization to Compositae allergens may occur in private or in occupational settings. OBJECTIVES: To monitor the current spectrum of sensitization to Compositae allergens, especially in cooks and florists. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed patch test results obtained with two Compositae mixes (CMs) (CM I and CM II; switch in October 2011), their individual components, and sesquiterpene lactone (SL) mix in 1492 cooks, 851 florists, and a control group (118 358 other patients) registered in the IVDK, 2007 to 2016. RESULTS: Florists reacted significantly more frequently to CM I and II (CM I, 8.7%; CM II, 10.6%) than did cooks (CM I, 2.1%; CM II, 0.8%) and controls (CM I, 1.3%; CM II, 1.2%). Additional testing with SL mix detected 14.3% more sensitizations than CM I or CM II alone. CONCLUSIONS: Florists are at considerable risk of sensitization to Compositae allergens. Patch testing with both CM and SL mix is recommended.


Subject(s)
Asteraceae/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Occupational/diagnosis , Patch Tests/methods , Sesquiterpenes/adverse effects , Adult , Allergens/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Dermatitis, Occupational/etiology , Humans , Plant Extracts/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies
20.
PLoS Genet ; 12(8): e1006248, 2016 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27504877

ABSTRACT

The increasing application of gene panels for familial cancer susceptibility disorders will probably lead to an increased proposal of susceptibility gene candidates. Using ERCC2 DNA repair gene as an example, we show that proof of a possible role in cancer susceptibility requires a detailed dissection and characterization of the underlying mutations for genes with diverse cellular functions (in this case mainly DNA repair and basic cellular transcription). In case of ERCC2, panel sequencing of 1345 index cases from 587 German, 405 Lithuanian and 353 Czech families with breast and ovarian cancer (BC/OC) predisposition revealed 25 mutations (3 frameshift, 2 splice-affecting, 20 missense), all absent or very rare in the ExAC database. While 16 mutations were unique, 9 mutations showed up repeatedly with population-specific appearance. Ten out of eleven mutations that were tested exemplarily in cell-based functional assays exert diminished excision repair efficiency and/or decreased transcriptional activation capability. In order to provide evidence for BC/OC predisposition, we performed familial segregation analyses and screened ethnically matching controls. However, unlike the recently published RECQL example, none of our recurrent ERCC2 mutations showed convincing co-segregation with BC/OC or significant overrepresentation in the BC/OC cohort. Interestingly, we detected that some deleterious founder mutations had an unexpectedly high frequency of > 1% in the corresponding populations, suggesting that either homozygous carriers are not clinically recognized or homozygosity for these mutations is embryonically lethal. In conclusion, we provide a useful resource on the mutational landscape of ERCC2 mutations in hereditary BC/OC patients and, as our key finding, we demonstrate the complexity of correct interpretation for the discovery of "bonafide" breast cancer susceptibility genes.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Xeroderma Pigmentosum Group D Protein/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , DNA Repair/genetics , Female , Germ-Line Mutation , Heterozygote , Humans , Mutation, Missense , Ovarian Neoplasms/pathology , Xeroderma Pigmentosum Group D Protein/chemistry
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL