A Practical Guide to Using Oral JAK Inhibitors for Atopic Dermatitis from the International Eczema Council.

BACKGROUND: Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKinibs) have the potential to dramatically alter the landscape of atopic dermatitis (AD) management due to their promising efficacy results from phase 3 trials and rapid onset of action. However, JAKinibs are not without risk, and their use is not appropriate for all AD patients, making this a medication class that dermatologists should understand and consider when treating patients with moderate-to-severe AD. OBJECTIVE: This consensus expert opinion statement from the International Eczema Council (IEC) provides a pragmatic approach to prescribing JAKinibs, including choosing appropriate patients, dosing, clinical and lab monitoring, as well as long-term use. METHODS: An international cohort of authors from the IEC with expertise in JAKinibs selected topics of interest and were formed into authorship groups covering 10 subsections. The groups performed topic-specific literature reviews, consulted up-to-date adverse event (AE) data, referred to product labels and provided analysis and expert opinion. The manuscript guidance and recommendations were reviewed by all authors as well as the IEC Research Committee. RESULTS: We recommend JAKinibs be considered for patients with moderate to severe AD seeking the benefits of rapid reduction in disease burden and itch, oral administration, and the potential for flexible dosing. Baseline risk factors should be assessed prior to prescribing JAKinibs, including increasing age, venous thromboembolisms, malignancy, cardiovascular health, kidney/liver function, pregnancy and lactation, and immunocompetence. Patients being considered for JAKinib therapy should be current on vaccinations and we provide a generalized framework for laboratory monitoring, though clinicians should consult individual product labels for recommendations as there are variations among the JAKinib class. Patients who achieve disease control should be maintained on the lowest possible dose, as many of the observed AEs occurred in a dose-dependent manner. Future studies are needed in AD patients to assess the durability and safety of continuous long-term use of JAKinibs, combination medication regimens, and the effects of flexible, episodic treatment over time. CONCLUSIONS: The decision to initiate a JAKinib should be shared among patient and provider, accounting for AD severity and personal risk/benefit assessment, including consideration of baseline health risk factors, monitoring requirements and treatment costs.

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.

Prevalence of allergic contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis: A multicenter retrospective case-control study.

BACKGROUND: As both allergic contact dermatitis and atopic dermatitis (AD) have similar clinical presentations and are characterized by spongiotic dermatitis on skin biopsy, many children with AD are not referred for patch testing and allergic contact dermatitis is underdiagnosed. OBJECTIVE: To provide updated prevalence data of common contact allergens in children with and without AD. METHODS: This is a retrospective case-control study using the Pediatric Allergic Contact Dermatitis Registry from 2018 to 2022. RESULTS: A total of 912 children were included (615 with AD and 297 without AD). Children with AD were more likely to have a longer history of dermatitis (4.1 vs 1.6 years, P < .0001), have seen more providers (2.3 vs 2.1, P = .003), have greater than 1 positive patch test (PPT) result (P = .005), have a greater number of PPT results overall (2.3 vs 1.9, P = .012), and have a more generalized distribution of dermatitis (P = .001). PPT to bacitracin (P = .030), carba mix (P = .025), and cocamidopropyl betaine (P = .0007) were significantly increased in children with AD compared to those without AD. LIMITATIONS: Technical variation between providers and potential for misclassification, selection, and recall biases. CONCLUSION: Children with AD are significantly more likely to have PPT reactions and should be referred for evaluation of allergic contact dermatitis and obtain patch testing.

Proceedings of the 10th Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance (PeDRA) Annual Conference.

The 10th Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance (PeDRA) Annual Conference occurred November 3-5, 2022 in Bethesda, Maryland. This conference was the first in-person PeDRA conference after 2 years of a virtual format due to COVID-19. Fittingly, given the effects of the pandemic, the conference theme was "Reimagining Community." The conference included presentations and panel sessions on finding individual and collective purpose, leveraging community in pursuit of a shared goal, and creating a community of resources in collaboration with NIH. The goal of this meeting was to connect clinicians, basic scientists, patients, patient advocates, and industry partners. The reimagined community of pediatric dermatology research is a synergistic space for all members to better understand, prevent, treat, and cure dermatologic diseases and conditions in children. This two-and-a-half-day conference with over 300 attendees featured educational seminars including a keynote address, didactic lecture and panel sessions, skill-building workshops, 13 topic-specific breakout sessions, and an interactive poster session where 108 active and finished research projects could be discussed.

Pediatric allergic contact dermatitis. Part I: Clinical features and common contact allergens in children.

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), a delayed hypersensitivity skin reaction to environmental allergens, has a prevalence that is similar in children and adults. However, diagnostic testing for ACD in pediatric populations accounts for less than one tenth of all patch tests. The relative infrequency of pediatric patch testing may be attributed to the difficulty in testing in this population, which includes a smaller surface area for patch test placement and maintaining cooperation during patch testing, especially in younger children. Diagnosis can be difficult in children because the appearance of ACD can mimic other common pediatric skin conditions, particularly atopic dermatitis and irritant contact dermatitis. Comprehensive history taking, guided by patient presentation, age group, and location of dermatitis, helps build clinical suspicion. Such clinical suspicion is one of the major reasons behind patch testing, with additional indications being recalcitrant dermatitis and dermatitis with atypical distribution. US pediatric data have shown the top allergens to be metals, fragrances, topical antibiotics, preservatives, and emollients. These trends are important to recognize to guide management and accurate diagnosis, because ACD tends to persist if the allergen is not identified and can affect patients' quality of life.

Pediatric allergic contact dermatitis. Part 2: Patch testing series, procedure, and unique scenarios.

Patch testing is the criterion standard for diagnosing allergic contact dermatitis. Causative allergens differ between children and adults, necessitating the development of pediatric-specific patch test series. The Pediatric Baseline Series was developed in 2018 through expert consensus and includes relevant pediatric allergens that dermatologists can use in practice. Obstacles in patch testing, such as the need for multiple office visits, length of patch application, and avoidance of sweat and water on the testing area, are particularly challenging for the pediatric population, and several strategies are proposed. Aside from formal patch testing, alternatives like the repeat open application test and empiric allergen avoidance can be helpful in children. The key to management of allergic contact dermatitis is allergen avoidance, with emphasis on the need to properly identify causative allergens. Continued data collection through registries allows for a better understanding of the diagnosis and management of pediatric allergic contact dermatitis.

Occupational dermatitis to facial personal protective equipment in health care workers: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged wear of facial protective equipment can lead to occupational dermatoses. OBJECTIVE: To identify important causes of occupational dermatoses from facial protective equipment. METHODS: A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was performed using PubMed and Embase databases. Articles were included if they reported occupational dermatoses caused by surgical/procedure masks or N95 respirators, or both. RESULTS: We identified 344 articles, and 16 were suitable for inclusion in this review. Selected articles focused on facial occupational dermatoses in health care workers. Allergic contact dermatitis to the elastic straps, glue, and formaldehyde released from the mask fabric was reported. Irritant contact dermatitis was common on the cheeks and nasal bridge due to pressure and friction. Irritant dermatitis was associated with personal history of atopic dermatitis and prolonged mask wear (>6 hours). Acneiform eruption was reported due to prolonged wear and occlusion. Contact urticaria was rare. LIMITATIONS: Only publications listed in PubMed or Embase were included. Most publications were case reports and retrospective studies. CONCLUSION: This systematic review from members of the American Contact Dermatitis Society highlights cases of occupational dermatitis to facial protective equipment, including potential offending allergens. This work may help in the diagnosis and treatment of health care workers with facial occupational dermatitis.

Skin tape stripping identifies gene transcript signature associated with allergic contact dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) are common skin conditions with an overlapping clinical and histological appearance, but distinct underlying mechanisms. Patch testing is the gold standard for ACD diagnosis, yet the interpretation of its results may be confounded by weak and varying macroscopic reactions. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether gene transcript profiling of RNA sampled from patch tested patient skin by tape stripping (TS) could differentiate ACD from ICD and the baseline skin state (control) METHODS: Nine patients (seven females, two males; mean age 38.6 years, range 24-72 years) with confirmed ACD through patch testing were recruited. Total RNA was isolated from TS samples and relative transcript abundance was determined by quantitative real-time polymeraise chain reaction using 39 gene-specific primers. RESULTS: TS captured gene transcripts derived from diverse skin cell types, including not only keratinocytes, but also epidermal and dermal antigen-presenting cells. Among the genes analysed in transcript profiling, genes encoding epidermal barrier components and inflammatory mediators exhibited changes in transcript abundance in ACD skin compared to ICD or control skin. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal the potential of skin TS for non-invasive biopsy during patch testing and molecular marker-based ACD diagnosis.

Training in pediatric skin of color: Suggested curricular guidelines of the pediatric dermatology research alliance special interest group in pediatric skin of color.

BACKGROUND: Deficiencies in the skills necessary to diagnose and manage patients with skin of color may contribute to health disparities. The Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance Special Interest Group in Pediatric Skin of Color (PSOCG) convened to generate a curriculum of topics required for basic pediatric skin of color (PSOC) education for medical students and residents in dermatology to improve the quality of education in PSOC. METHODS: A survey was distributed to the PSOCG members to assess expert opinion regarding critical topics for inclusion in a basic PSOC syllabus. Video conference and two rounds of survey were used to rank topics for inclusion and to highlight the underlying need for inclusion. RESULTS: Group members composed of academic pediatric dermatologists with teaching responsibilities including skin of color topics for dermatology residents and medical students. Learning objectives were developed for an educational lecture on basic science, and clinical conditions affecting PSOC were grouped by age-infantile, pediatric, and adolescent skin conditions affecting the PSOC population were identified for inclusion with rank score based on specific parameters including greater frequency in skin of color, nuances in skin of color, and need for medical workup. CONCLUSIONS: Increased focus on PSOC education is needed to improve quality of care for children of color through enhanced knowledge. Inflammatory, genetic, and particularly primary pigmentary disorders should be the focus of a broad curriculum in pediatric skin of color education for medical trainees. Objectives should include improved diagnosis, treatment, and ability to educate patients and their families regarding the nature of their conditions.

Pediatric contact dermatitis: what's new.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) was once thought to be rare in children but recent studies have demonstrated that the prevalence of ACD is common and appears to be increasing in children. Current trends including toys, hobbies, and personal care products may play a role in potentially new allergen exposure or resurgence of certain allergens, making ACD a moving target in children. RECENT FINDINGS: ACD and atopic dermatitis can coexist and certain clinical features can help differentiate ACD from endogenous atopic dermatitis in children. It is important to consider ACD in children with recalcitrant atopic dermatitis or dermatitis with atypical distribution. Patch testing has become a more common practice in children. In 2018, the first expert consensus-derived pediatric baseline series consisting of 38 allergens was proposed to aid in the diagnosis of ACD in children. Comparing recent patch testing data in the pediatric population, the top allergens ubiquitously identified were nickel, cobalt, neomycin, Myroxylon pereirae (balsam of Peru), fragrance mix I, fragrance mix II, methylisothiazolinone, methylchloroisothiazolinone/ methylisothiazolinone, formaldehyde, and lanolin. SUMMARY: ACD is a common problem in children. Detection through patch testing, avoidance of offending allergens, and prevention of common allergens are the main focus of management of ACD in children.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis in Children: Recommendations for Patch Testing.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) affects 20% of children. However, diagnosis of ACD may be underreported in children due to lack of recognition. Patch testing is the gold standard for evaluation of ACD in children but poses unique challenges in this population. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies highlight the significance of ACD and the utility of patch testing in children. Evaluation of ACD in children is difficult and requires knowledge of a child's exposure history, careful selection of allergens, and knowledge of specialized patch testing considerations to minimize irritation and maximize cooperation. Until recently, there were no agreed upon patch test series for children. In 2018, a comprehensive pediatric baseline series was published enabling thorough evaluation of ACD in children (Yu J, Atwater AR, Brod B, Chen JK, Chisolm SS, Cohen DE, et al. Dermatitis. 2018;29(4):206-12). This review provides an overview of the current literature, an update on pediatric ACD, and patch testing methods in children to effectively evaluate and manage ACD.

Hand hygiene during COVID-19: Recommendations from the American Contact Dermatitis Society.

The recent COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in increased hand hygiene and hand cleansing awareness. To prevent virus transmission, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends frequent hand washing with soap and water. Hand hygiene products are available in a variety of forms, and while each of these formulations may be effective against COVID-19, they may also alter skin barrier integrity and function. As health care workers and the general population focus on stringent hand hygiene, the American Contact Dermatitis Society anticipates an increase in both irritant contact and allergic contact hand dermatitis. Alcohol-based hand sanitizers with moisturizers have the least sensitizing and irritancy potential when compared to soaps and synthetic detergents. This article provides an overview of the most frequently used hand hygiene products and their associations with contact dermatitis as well as recommendations from the American Contact Dermatitis Society on how to treat and prevent further dermatitis.

Clinical factors before or after device implantation in predicting metal hypersensitivity reactions: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Metal hypersensitivity reactions (MHR) as a cause of implant-related complications are highly debated and recommendations regarding pre-procedural allergy evaluation vary dramatically. OBJECTIVE: To examine patients referred before or after device implantation and identify factors that could be useful to guide the value of patch testing. METHODS: Patients who underwent patch testing pre- or post-device implantation between July 2006 and September 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: A series of 127 patients underwent patch testing: pre-implantation (n = 40) and post-implantation (n = 87). In the pre-implant group, a history of metal allergy demonstrated high sensitivity (0.94; 95% CI: 0.83-1.00) and negative likelihood ratio (0.17; 95% CI:0.02-1.29) for diagnosing MHR. No predictive value could be ascribed to any of the clinical symptoms (eg dermatitis, pain, swelling, implant failure, and/or other symptoms) for patients referred following orthopaedic and dental post device implantation. Eight patients in the orthopaedic group and six patients in dental group with relevant patch test reactions underwent implant revisions, and seven and five patients improved, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-implant patch testing for selected individuals with a history of metal allergy can help guide implant choice. Post-implant patch testing may be helpful in some patients if other causes have been excluded, as patients with confirmed MHR benefited from revisions.

Delayed patch test reaction to budesonide in an 8-year-old.

Topical corticosteroids are an emerging cause of allergic contact dermatitis in children that may often be missed. It is important to consider patch testing with corticosteroids to detect allergic contact dermatitis in patients with persistent or worsening of dermatitis despite topical corticoseroid treatment. However, delayed reactions (>7 days) to topical corticosteroids may occur, leading to false-negative reactions and misdiagnosis. Herein, we report a case of an 8-year-old girl who developed a positive reaction to budesonide on day 12 of patch testing.

Allergic contact dermatitis caused by wound closure tape in a pediatric patient.

Wound care products are emerging as causes of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). There are increasing reports of ACD to certain medical adhesives; however, there are no published reports of contact sensitization solely due to wound closure tape such as Steri-Strips™. Herein, we present the first confirmed case of ACD in a child caused by wound closure tape.

Erythema Ab Igne in an Adolescent With Chronic Pain: An Alarming Cutaneous Eruption From Heat Exposure.

Erythema ab igne (EAI) is a cutaneous finding caused by prolonged heat exposure and is characterized by a reticular, brownish-pigmented, often telangiectatic dermatosis. The eruption is reminiscent of livedo reticularis, which is typically seen in the setting of a number of rheumatologic conditions, most prominently vasculitis. Identification of key features distinguishing EAI from livedo reticularis can aid in the diagnosis of EAI and correct elucidation of the underlying etiology. Our patient presented with heating pad-induced EAI in the setting of chronic pain. Only 6 other pediatric cases of EAI associated with heat sources for chronic pain are reported (Acta Derm Venereol. 2014;94:365-367, J Pediatr. 2013;163:1789, Int J Eat Disord. 2013;46:381-383, Arch Dis Child. 2008;93:389, Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012;166:185-186, Br J Clin Pract. 1990;44:248-251). Our case highlights the need for awareness of this pathognomonic skin eruption in children with chronic pain conditions to help avoid an extensive workup for vasculitis.