Cost-effectiveness of patch testing allergens within the same group: A computational approach to optimize formaldehyde-related allergen selection.

BACKGROUND: Patch testing for multiple cross-reactive allergens for allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) may not be necessary because of copositivity. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the formaldehyde group allergens to determine the optimal, most cost-effective allergens to test. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of Mayo Clinic (1997-2022) examined the well-established copositive formaldehyde group: formaldehyde, quaternium 15, hexahydro-1,3,5-tris(2-hydroxyethyl)triazine, diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, toluenesulphonamide formaldehyde resin, DMDM hydantoin, and ethyleneurea melamine formaldehyde mix. Patch Optimization Platform identified which single formaldehyde-related allergen optimally captures patients with clinically relevant ACD. Next, Patch Optimization Platform determined the optimal additional 1, 2, 3, etc. allergens. Cost per patch test was $5.19 (Medicare 2022). RESULTS: A total of 9832 patients were tested for all listed allergens, with 830 having positive patch test results. Patch Optimization Platform determined that quaternium 15 alone captures 53% of patients with ACD to the formaldehyde group; adding the optimal second allergen (formaldehyde 1%) captures 78%; the optimal 5 top allergens capture >94% of patients. The incremental cost per additional diagnosis increased up to 44-fold as the number of allergens tested increased. LIMITATIONS: Data are from a single institution, and the cost per test was fixed according to Medicare Part B in 2022. CONCLUSIONS: For diagnosing ACD, we recommend considering an optimized allergen selection algorithm.

Deep learning for dermatologists: Part II. Current applications.

Because of a convergence of the availability of large data sets, graphics-specific computer hardware, and important theoretical advancements, artificial intelligence has recently contributed to dramatic progress in medicine. One type of artificial intelligence known as deep learning has been particularly impactful for medical image analysis. Deep learning applications have shown promising results in dermatology and other specialties, including radiology, cardiology, and ophthalmology. The modern clinician will benefit from an understanding of the basic features of deep learning to effectively use new applications and to better gauge their utility and limitations. In this second article of a 2-part series, we review the existing and emerging clinical applications of deep learning in dermatology and discuss future opportunities and limitations. Part 1 of this series offered an introduction to the basic concepts of deep learning to facilitate effective communication between clinicians and technical experts.

Deep learning for dermatologists: Part I. Fundamental concepts.

Artificial intelligence is generating substantial interest in the field of medicine. One form of artificial intelligence, deep learning, has led to rapid advances in automated image analysis. In 2017, an algorithm demonstrated the ability to diagnose certain skin cancers from clinical photographs with the accuracy of an expert dermatologist. Subsequently, deep learning has been applied to a range of dermatology applications. Although experts will never be replaced by artificial intelligence, it will certainly affect the specialty of dermatology. In this first article of a 2-part series, the basic concepts of deep learning will be reviewed with the goal of laying the groundwork for effective communication between clinicians and technical colleagues. In part 2 of the series, the clinical applications of deep learning in dermatology will be reviewed and limitations and opportunities will be considered.

Coccidioidomycosis in patients with various inflammatory disorders treated with tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors.

Coccidioides fungi are found primarily in the southwestern United States and are the cause of coccidioidomycosis. Tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors (TNFIs) are therapies for autoimmune and inflammatory conditions; their association with coccidioidomycosis is not well characterized. We aimed to determine the prevalence and characteristics of coccidioidomycosis among TNFI recipients with different inflammatory disorders at a tertiary care center. We retrospectively reviewed the electronic health records of patients at our institution from April 4, 2010 to December 17, 2017, who received TNFIs (infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, or golimumab) and had positive culture, pathologic, and/or serologic results for coccidioidomycosis. Among 1770 patients identified who received TNFIs, 49 (2.8%) had proven or probable coccidioidomycosis. Of these 49, 28 (57%) were men, 47 (96%) were White, and 42 (86%) had pulmonary coccidioidomycosis. The most common TNFIs used were adalimumab, infliximab, and etanercept. Coccidioidomycosis was identified in 25 of 794 patients with rheumatologic disorders (3.1%), 18 of 783 patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (2.3%), and six of 193 patients with dermatologic disorders (3.1%) (P = .34). There was no difference in coccidioidal infections among recipients of any particular TNFI agents. A minority of patients (7/49, 14%) had an extrapulmonary infection, and the majority of these (6/7) had IBD. Our study shows a low prevalence of coccidioidomycosis in TNFI recipients, even within the Coccidioides-endemic area. Persons with IBD were disproportionately represented among those with extrapulmonary coccidioidomycosis. Treatment with azoles was effective. LAY SUMMARY: Among 1770 patients who received tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors, 49 (2.8%) had newly acquired coccidioidomycosis over a 7-year period. Dissemination occurred in 14.3%, but disproportionately among those with underlying inflammatory bowel disease. All patients recovered with medical management.

The Utility of Screening for Coccidioidomycosis in Recipients of Inhibitors of Tumor Necrosis Factor α.

BACKGROUND: Tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors (TNFi) are commonly used to treat immune-mediated disorders, but they are associated with an increased risk of mycobacterial and fungal infections. We compared the outcomes of TNFi recipients screened for asymptomatic coccidioidomycosis with those of unscreened patients to compare the development of symptomatic coccidioidomycosis and to describe its outcomes for patients with abnormal coccidioidal screenings. METHODS: We searched electronic health records from 4 September 2010 through 26 September 2016 for all patients receiving a TNFi for dermatologic, rheumatologic, or gastroenterologic diagnoses, then categorized patients by whether or not they had undergone coccidioidal serologic testing for screening or diagnostic purposes. RESULTS: A total of 2793 patients had a TNFi prescribed. Of those, 1951 met the inclusion criteria: 1025/1951 (52.5%) never had coccidioidal screening; 925/1951 (47.4%) had serologic screening either before beginning TNFi therapy or annually, or both after beginning a TNFi. Symptomatic coccidioidomycosis developed in 35/1025 (3.4%) unscreened patients. Of those screened, 861/925 (93.1%) had negative serologic tests, of which 11/861 (1.3%) subsequently developed symptomatic coccidioidomycosis; 36/925 (3.9%) had coccidioidomycosis at screening (7, probable infection; 11, possible infection; 18, asymptomatic seropositive result); and 17 had only positive findings for immunoglobulin M antibodies and did not meet the definition for coccidioidomycosis. The unscreened cohort was more likely to have symptomatic coccidioidomycosis than the screened cohort (35/1025 vs 11/861, P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Screening for asymptomatic coccidioidomycosis within a Coccidioides-endemic area allowed for identifying and managing asymptomatic coccidioidomycosis before patients began TNFi therapy. Less symptomatic infection developed in the screened than the unscreened cohort.

Crusted (Norwegian) Scabies: Nine-Month Course With Iatrogenic Immunosuppression.

Crusted scabies (CS) is a highly infectious hyperinfestation variant of scabies with up to millions of Sarcoptes scabiei mites present on the skin surface. Diagnostic clues include intense itching and thick crusting especially on the face, groin, and buttocks, although variable presentations may mimic other dermatoses. CS has been associated with immunosuppression including the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and lymphoreticular malignancies.1-3 A long latency period from symptom onset to diagnosis and appropriate treatment is often reported. Clinical suspicion is required to obtain a mineral oil preparation or biopsy. We report a patient treated for eczema with 9 months of progressive immunosuppression who was found to have crusted scabies. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(10):1131-1133.

Prevalence of allergen sensitization detected by patch tests.

BACKGROUND: Existing literature on the prevalence of positive reactions to allergens is largely derived from dermatologists who practice at large academic centers. Data from other providers, including allergists who practice in various other settings, is important to assess a more representative and accurate prevalence of contact allergy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of contact allergy among individuals with at least one positive patch test result by comparing data for positive patch test reaction rates of common contact allergens from 3 groups based in different practice settings, 2 of which are academic. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patch test results of an academic center (January 1, 2011, to December 4, 2015) and a national contact allergen database (March 1, 2015, to September 1, 2016). Data from a third, academic-based group was obtained separately from the published literature. Logistic regression analysis was used to compare positive reaction rates of the widely available, patch test allergens among the 3 groups. RESULTS: The positive reaction rates for 10 of 36 compared allergens (28%) were significantly higher (p < 0.05) for the national contact allergen database compared with both the academic groups. CONCLUSION: Positive reaction rates to common allergens used in patch testing may be underreported in the literature. Limitations of our study included the retrospective nature of the study, different date ranges among the three groups, and the absence of all allergens tested by the national contact allergen database.

Trends in patch-test results and allergen changes in the standard series: a Mayo Clinic 5-year retrospective review (January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2010).

BACKGROUND: Patch testing is essential for identification of culprits causing allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify trends and allergen changes in our standard series during 2006 to 2010, compared with our previous report (2001-2005). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patch-test results. RESULTS: A total of 3115 patients were tested with a mean of 73.0 allergens. Since our prior report, 8 allergens were added to the standard series; 14 were deleted. Significantly higher rates of allergic positive reaction were documented for carba mix, 3%, and Disperse Orange 3, 1%. Rates were lower for 10 allergens: neomycin sulfate, 20%; gold sodium thiosulfate, 0.5%; hexahydro-1,3,5-tris(2-hydroxyethyl)triazine, 1%; disperse blue 124, 1%; disperse blue 106, 1%; diazolidinyl urea, 1%; hexylresorcinol, 0.25%; diazolidinyl urea, 1% aqueous; 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol, 0.25%; and lidocaine, 5%. Many final patch-test readings for many allergens were categorized as mild reactions (erythema only). Overall allergenicity and irritancy rates declined significantly since our prior report. Results were generally comparable with those in a North American Contact Dermatitis Group report from 2005 to 2006. LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective study; there is a lack of long-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Since our previous report, our standard series composition has changed, and overall rates of allergenicity and irritancy have decreased. Notably, many final patch-test readings showed mild reactions.

Results of Patch Testing to Botanicals: Review of the Mayo Clinic Experience Over 2 Decades (1997-2017).

Background: Botanicals are increasingly incorporated into skincare products. Although allergic contact dermatitis due to botanicals is recognized, data describing the prevalence of positive patch tests to botanicals are sparse. Objective: To report the Mayo Clinic experience of patch testing to selected botanical products in the standard, extended standard, fragrance, and plant series. Methods: IRB-approved retrospective study of the Mayo Clinic experience with patch testing to botanicals from 1997 to 2017. Results: In total, 12,169 people were patch tested to botanicals in the standard, extended standard, fragrance, and plant series; 4032 were men and 8137 were women. The mean age of the population tested was 54 (standard deviation 17.7) years. Almost 11% (1320/12,169) of the patch-tested population exhibited positive reactions to at least 1 botanical agent. Myroxylon pereirae resin 25% was the most common positive allergen in the series. Patients who had positive reactions to at least 1 botanical agent were more (19.8%) likely to have a positive reaction to at least 1 additional botanical than those patients who did not have any positive tests. Most patients presented with generalized involvement (334) or involvement of the hands (284) or face (232). Conclusion: Physicians should be aware of the high prevalence of allergic contact dermatitis and patch test positivity associated with botanical products.

Pediatric Patch Testing at Mayo Clinic Between 2016 and 2020.

Background: Allergic contact Dermatitis (ACD) is a common condition within the pediatric population. Patch testing is an important way to identify relevant allergens. Objective: To provide an update of the common contact allergens seen in children based on patch testing data at our institution from 2016 to 2020. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patch test data from children aged 1-18 years from 2016 to 2020 at Mayo Clinic. Reaction rates were compared to the rates reported by the Pediatric Contact Dermatitis Registry (PCDR). Results: One hundred ninety-two children aged 1-18 were patch tested to various allergens. A total of 15,457 allergens were tested, with 291 positive tests. The top 5 allergens with highest positive reaction rates were hydroperoxides of linalool, hydroperoxides of limonene, methylisothiazolinone, nickel, and cobalt. Seven of the top 38 allergens with the highest reaction rates are not currently included in the Mayo Clinic Pediatric Patch Test Series, and 11 are not currently included in the Pediatric Baseline Series (as developed by the Pediatric Contact Dermatitis Workgroup). Conclusions: Patch testing is a useful tool to diagnose children with ACD. With new products and exposures, there is an opportunity to expand current pediatric patch testing series.

Trends in Patch Testing With the Mayo Clinic Standard Series, 2017-2021.

Background: Patch testing to a standard series is used to identify culprit allergens in patients with contact dermatitis. The reaction rates evolve over time based on trends in cutaneous exposures by the general population. Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the patch test results of the Mayo Clinic standard series in patients tested from 2017 to 2021. Methods: The patch test reactions of standard series allergens tested from 2017 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed and compared with the results of our prior report from 2011 to 2015 as well as the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) report from 2017 to 2018. Results: Of 2667 patients tested, 1683 (63.1%) had at least 1 positive reaction. The 15 allergens with the highest reaction rates were hydroperoxides of linalool 1%, nickel (II) sulfate hexahydrate, methylisothiazolinone, Myroxylon pereirae resin, hydroperoxides of linalool 0.5%, methyldibromo glutaronitrile, neomycin sulfate, cobalt (II) chloride hexahydrate, fragrance mix I, benzalkonium chloride, bacitracin, hydroperoxides of limonene, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, p-phenylenediamine, and textile dye mix. Twelve (80%) of these allergens were also in the top 15 of the most recent NACDG report. Conclusions: Hydroperoxides of linalool and hydroperoxides of limonene are new allergens that have been added to our standard series. These are associated with high reaction rates.

Systematic Identification of Copositivity Groups in Standard Series Patch Testing Through Hierarchical Clustering.

Importance: Patients are frequently copositive for multiple allergens simultaneously, either due to chemical similarity or simultaneous sensitization. A better understanding of copositivity groups would help guide contact avoidance. Objective: To use patient data to systematically determine copositivity groups in the Mayo Clinic Standard Series. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective cross-sectional analysis, the Mayo Clinic patch test database was queried for pairwise copositivity rates in the 80 allergen Mayo Clinic Standard Series between 2012 and 2021. Data were collected from 3 tertiary care sites of the Mayo Clinic Contact Dermatitis Group and a total of 5943 patients were included, comprising all patients undergoing patch testing to the Mayo Clinic Standard Series allergens. Main Outcomes and Measures: Copositivity rates between every 2 allergens in the 80-allergen Mayo Clinic Standard Series were estimated. After background correction, copositivity rates were analyzed using unsupervised hierarchical clustering to systematically identify copositivity groups in an unbiased manner. Results: Overall, 394 921 total patches were applied to 5943 patients (4164 [70.1%] women, 1776 [29.9%] men, with a mean [SD] age of 52.3 [18.8] years ), comprising 9545 positive reactions. After background correction based on overall positivity rates, hierarchical clustering revealed distinct copositivity groups. Many were supported by prior literature, including formaldehyde releasers, cobalt-nickel-potassium dichromate, acrylates, 3-dimethylaminopropylamine-amidoamine-oleamidopropyl dimethylamine, alkyl glucosides, budesonide-hydrocortisone-17-butyrate, certain fragrances, compositae-sesquiterpene lactone mix, mercapto mix-mercaptobenzothiazole, carba mix-thiuram mix, and disperse orange-p-phenylenediamine. However, novel associations were also found, including glutaraldehyde-sorbitan sesquioleate, benzalkonium chloride-neomycin-bacitracin, bronopol-methylchloroisothiazolinone-methylisothiazolinone, and benzoic acid-iodopropynyl butylcarbamate. Conclusions and Relevance: This retrospective cross-sectional analysis found that copositivity rates varied between allergens; allergens with extremely high positivity rates demonstrated nonspecific copositivity to multiple other allergens. Background correction based on positivity rates followed by hierarchical clustering confirmed prior known copositivity groups, contaminants and/or excipients leading to copositivity, and novel associations to guide contact avoidance.

Trends in Patch Testing of Black Patients: The Mayo Clinic Decade Experience (January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2020).

Background: Trends in patch testing for allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) have not been well characterized in Black patients. Despite similar incidence of ACD in Black and White patients, there are differences in allergen profiles. Understanding patch testing trends in Black patients furthers knowledge that has considerable impact on the management of ACD in the Black population. Objective: The purpose of this study was to review the results of patch testing in Black patients at Mayo Clinic over a decade. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the results of patch testing to the standard, extended standard, or hairdresser series in 149 Black patients seen at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN; Scottsdale, AZ; and Jacksonville, FL) from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2020. Results: During the 10-year period, 149 Black patients (mean age, 49.2 years [SD, 17.1 years]; female 67.1%) were patch tested at Mayo Clinic to the standard, extended standard, or hairdresser series. Most common sites of dermatitis were generalized (30.9%), hands (18.8%), leg (16.8%), trunk (16.1%), and arm (14.8%). Overall, 109 patients (73.2%) had at least 1 positive reaction and 74 patients (50%) had 2 or more positive reactions. Overall, the 10 allergens with the highest reaction rates (from highest to lowest) identified in our study population were 4-amino-2-hyroxytoluene (33.3%), thimerosal (20.4%), nickel sulfate (18.9%), methylisothiazolinone (16.5%), methyldibromo glutaronitrile (13.4%), methyldibromo glutaronitrile/phenoxyethanol (12.5%), captan (12.5%), carmine (12.5%), methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (11.5%), and hydroperoxide of linalool 1% (11.3%). Conclusions: We describe patch test results in Black patients over a decade at Mayo Clinic. The top 10 allergens were preservatives, hair dyes, and fragrances. Differing patterns of allergens may occur in Black patients due to different patterns of exposures related to cultural practices.

Results of patch testing in 10 patients with peristomal dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Peristomal dermatitis is a common problem in patients with ostomies that is a source of considerable morbidity. Irritant contact dermatitis is most common, but allergic contact dermatitis can also occur. Because of the lack of published reports on patch testing for this indication, we undertook a retrospective study of patch testing results in patients with suspected peristomal allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe our patch testing experience with patients referred with peristomal dermatitis. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of medical records of patients with ostomies and peristomal dermatitis who underwent patch testing in the Mayo Clinic Departments of Dermatology in Jacksonville, FL; Rochester, MN; and Scottsdale, AZ, during a 10-year period (2000-2010). RESULTS: Ten patients with peristomal dermatitis were referred for patch testing (6 in Minnesota, 2 in Florida, and 2 in Arizona). Patients were patch tested to the materials used in their stoma devices, to the standard series, and in some cases to supplemental series. All 10 had at least one allergic patch test reaction, most commonly to stoma paste (3 of 10 patients). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective nature of study via chart review is a limitation. CONCLUSION: Patch testing is a useful tool for identification of allergens in patients with peristomal dermatitis.

Intraoral metal contact allergy as a possible risk factor for oral squamous cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: Intraoral exposure to dental restorations can cause contact allergy that may induce carcinogenesis. We investigated the relationship of intraoral metal contact allergy to epithelial carcinogenesis. METHODS: The prevalence of positive patch test reactions to dental restoration metals in 65 prospectively enrolled patients with newly or previously diagnosed oral squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) was compared to that in 48 control patients. The relative risk of oral SCC was estimated by calculating odds ratios for exposure to dental metals resulting in allergy. RESULTS: Of the 65 patients with oral SCC, 34% were allergic to at least 1 adjacent metal. They were 1.57 times as likely as control patients to have metal contact allergy (odds ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.65 to 3.80) and more than 3 times as likely to react to mercury (odds ratio, 3.20; 95% confidence interval, 0.42 to 33.20). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with oral SCC who have metal dental restorations should undergo patch testing and possible removal of the restorations if their reactions are positive.

A Retrospective Review of Late Delayed Positive Patch Testing Greater Than Day 8 at Mayo Clinic From 2001 to 2020.

BACKGROUND: Patch tests are read between days 5 and 7, because most hypersensitivity reactions occur within 7 days. Later reactions can occur after day 8, which may be missed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to review all late delayed positive (LDP) reactions that have occurred after day 8 at Mayo Clinic from 2001 to 2020. METHODS: Mayo Clinic records were reviewed for patients who had patch test readings performed at greater than day 8. Late delayed positive reactions were defined as any patch tests that were initially negative from days 4 to 7 yet became positive after day 8. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-four patients developed 439 LDPs to 89 allergens. Fourteen allergens had LDPs in at least 2% of patients: gold (gold sodium thiosulfate-3 concentrations, gold chloride, potassium dicyanoaurate), cobalt (cobalt sulfate, cobalt chloride hexahydrate), beryllium, palladium, acrylates (2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate, 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate, 2-hydroxyethyl acrylate), dodecyl gallate, and gentamycin. Late delayed positive reactions to gold allergens were the most frequent reactions. Up to 90% of relevant gold allergen LDPs were positive by day 15. CONCLUSIONS: Positive patch test readings after day 8 are uncommon, but allergens most likely to be positive are metals (gold, cobalt, palladium, beryllium), acrylates, dodecyl gallate, and gentamycin. Gold allergens showed the highest LDP rates and relevance, with most reactions occurring by day 15.

Reevaluating Corticosteroid Classification Models in Patient Patch Testing.

Importance: Individuals with allergic contact dermatitis to one topical corticosteroid may also react to other corticosteroids. Corticosteroid classification models have been proposed to predict such copositivity, recommend representative screening corticosteroids, and guide allergen avoidance. Objective: To use patient data to determine copositivity patterns between corticosteroids and evaluate against previous corticosteroid classification models. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study included a retrospective analysis of the Mayo Clinic Contact Dermatitis Group corticosteroid patch test data from 2010 to 2019. Among patients undergoing patch testing with the Mayo Clinic's standard or steroid series who consented to research participation, 5637 patients were included in the analysis. Copositivity rates were determined between corticosteroids and analyzed by hierarchical clustering for comparison to previous classification models. Main Outcomes and Measures: The frequency of patch test positivity to each of the analyzed corticosteroids was noted and compared with previously published patch test positivity rates. Copositivity rates between each pair of corticosteroids were determined, and overall copositivity patterns were analyzed and evaluated against known steroid classes. Results: A total of 49 472 individual patches were applied to 5637 patients, testing 18 corticosteroids. Patch test positivity rates ranged between 0.3% and 4.7%. The fluocinonide positivity rate corresponded to the highest copositivity rate with other corticosteroids (mean [SD], 50.7% [26.1%]). Tixocortol-21-pivalate, 0.1%, and tixocortol-21-pivalate, 1%, positivity rates corresponded to the lowest copositivity rates (mean [SD], 4.1% [1.7%] and 3.6% [1.4%], respectively). Hierarchical clustering elucidated patterns that did not support previous corticosteroid classification models. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, copositivity rates were variable between corticosteroids, and overall patch test positivity for allergy to topical corticosteroids was rare. Previously published corticosteroid classifications are not supported by real patient-derived data and may not be accurate in predicting corticosteroid copositivity.

Seven Common Allergen Groups Causing Eyelid Dermatitis: Education and Avoidance Strategies.

OBJECTIVE: Eyelid dermatitis is most commonly attributed to allergic response. This retrospective clinical study identifies common allergens with eyelid involvement and addresses a literary gap by providing a clear approach for effective management of periorbital allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) recurrence. METHODS: Charts of 215 patients diagnosed with periorbital dermatitis who were patch tested with Mayo Clinic Standard Series, Extended Standard Series, and personal products from 2013 to 2017 were examined. Positive reaction rates for patients with eyelid involvement were compared to those without. Findings were also compared to North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) 2013-2014 and Mayo Clinic Contact Dermatitis Group (MCCDG) 2011-2015 general patch test populations. RESULTS: The 215 patients showed more common allergy to shellac, benzalkonium chloride, acrylates, and surfactants than the NACDG and MCCDG study populations. Periorbital ACD allergen groups eliciting the highest positive reaction rates were, in descending order: metals, shellac, preservatives, topical antibiotics, fragrances, acrylates, and surfactants. Of the corticosteroids, only tixocortol pivalate (the screening agent for prednisolone and fluorometholone) and budesonide elicited positive reactions. CONCLUSION: The top seven eyelid ACD allergen groups were identified. Avoidance of these allergens can be straightforward, with initial empiric counseling and free, online allergen avoidance programs. Patients who are unresponsive to avoidance should undergo patch testing.