Allergic contact dermatitis to Compositae: An Australian case series.

BACKGROUND: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to Compositae is caused by sensitisation to sesquiterpene lactones (SQLs) and subsequent exposure can occur from direct handling or from airborne transmission. Plants from the Compositae family are ubiquitous globally and their plant extracts are also used in various products. OBJECTIVES: Investigation of contact allergy (CA) and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to Compositae at a single dermatology centre. METHODS: A retrospective case review was performed on patients undergoing patch testing to Compositae between January 2011 and December 2020 in Melbourne, Australia. RESULTS: Of 3679 patients, 44 (1.2%) patch tested positive to Compositae and 19 (43.2%) reactions were deemed relevant. Thirteen cases (68.4%) were from direct contact with Compositae plants, mostly in gardeners. Six cases (31.6%) were from personal products and all these patients were female. Involvement of the face was significant (p = 0.007). Simultaneous allergic reactions included SQL mix in eight (42.1%), fragrance mix in seven (36.8%), potassium dichromate in three (15.8%) and colophonium in two (10.5%) cases. CONCLUSION: Contact with Compositae from gardening contributed most cases of ACD; however, personal products accounted almost one-third of cases. Treatment options remain limited and avoidance is the most important aspect of management.

Fragrance sensitisers: Is inhalation an allergy risk?

It is well established that some fragrance substances have the potential to cause skin sensitisation associated with the development of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). Fragrances are invariably relatively volatile leading to the consideration that inhalation of fragrances might be a relevant route for either the induction of allergic sensitisation or the elicitation of allergic reactions. Moreover, there has been increasing recognition that allergic sensitisation of the respiratory tract can be induced by topical exposure to certain chemical allergens. Here the central question addressed is whether inhalation exposure to fragrance allergens has the potential to cause skin and/or respiratory sensitisation via the respiratory tract, or elicit allergic symptoms in those already sensitised. In addressing those questions, the underlying immunobiology of skin and respiratory sensitisation to chemicals has been reviewed briefly, and the relevant experimental and clinical evidence considered. The essential mechanistic differences between skin and respiratory allergy appear consistent with other sources of information, including the phenomenon of ACD that can arise from topical exposure to airborne allergens, but in the absence of accompanying respiratory effects. The conclusion is that, in contrast to topical exposure (including topical exposure to airborne material), inhalation of fragrance sensitisers does not represent a health risk with respect to allergy.

Epidemiological data on airborne contact dermatitis - results of the IVDK.

BACKGROUND: Airborne contact dermatitis (AirbCD) is not uncommon, according to a large number of published case reports and review articles. Epidemiological data on AirbCD based on larger clinical samples have not yet been published. OBJECTIVES: To investigate demographic characteristics and patch test reactivity in patients diagnosed with both occupational and non-occupational AirbCD. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), 1994-2013, including 201 344 consecutively patch tested patients, was performed. RESULTS: One thousand two hundred and three patients (0.6%) were diagnosed with AirbCD, 421 (35.0%) of these with an occupational background. Occupational dermatitis and face involvement were more prevalent than in patients without AirbCD (n = 200 141). Sensitization to epoxy resin and sensitization to methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI)/methylisothiazolinone (MI) were significantly associated with AirbCD, and there was a trend for sensitization to Compositae mix and/or sesquiterpene lactone mix to be associated with AirbCD. Adhesives, plastics, construction materials, paints and varnishes in occupational cases, and plants in non-occupational cases, were the most commonly documented culprit product categories. CONCLUSIONS: AirbCD is more common in patients with occupational dermatitis than in patients with non-occupational dermatitis. In our clinical sample, components of epoxy resin systems, MCI/MI and Compositae allergens were the most important contact allergens associated with AirbCD. Patch testing with additional allergens is important.

Parthenium dermatitis: is parthenolide an effective choice for patch testing?

BACKGROUND: Patch test positivity to parthenolide was observed less often than expected in strongly suspected cases of parthenium dermatitis after Chemotechnique Diagnostics (Sweden) replaced parthenium extract with parthenolide (0.5% pet.) by itself while marketing its Indian baseline series for patch testing. OBJECTIVE: The study was performed to find whether parthenolide detects parthenium contact sensitivity more effectively than parthenium extract in patients clinically presenting with classic parthenium dermatitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients with suspected parthenium dermatitis were patch tested prospectively with the Indian baseline series, parthenium extract (1% aq.) and parthenolide (0.5% pet.) between July 2011 and April 2012. RESULTS: Only 37 of 100 patients with suspected parthenium dermatitis (male/female ratio of 20:17) reacted to parthenium extract (32 patients), parthenolide (17 patients), or both (12 patients). Reactions to parthenium extract were generally stronger than reactions to parthenolide. CONCLUSION: Patch testing with parthenolide (0.5% pet.) detects fewer cases of suspected parthenium dermatitis than patch testing with parthenium extract (1% aq.).

Patch testing with expired Indian patch test kits: Results of a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The reliability of patch testing with expired Indian standard patch test kits has been not evaluated before. METHODS: Thirty adults (men:women 25:5) with allergic contact dermatitis were divided into three groups of ten patients each for patch testing by Finn chamber® method using Indian standard patch test kits having expiry in 2016, 2015 and 2014. The results were compared with those from a new kit with 2018 expiry. RESULTS: Ten patients in group-1, eight patients in group-2 and seven patients in group-3 developed positive reactions of identical intensities and mostly from identical allergens from all four kits. The major contact allergens eliciting positive reactions of identical intensities were parthenium in nine, five and three patients, colophony in four, one and zero patients, fragrance mix in three, three and one patients, thiuram mix in three, one and one patients, and paraphenylene diamine in two, one and three patients from group-1,-2, and -3, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Small number of patients in each group remains the major limitation of the study. Whether or not these results can be extrapolated with patch test results from other similar patch test kits available across countries also needs confirmation. CONCLUSION: The patch test allergens can be used beyond labeled expiry dates but needs confirmation by a few large studies and using other available patch test kits. This is important as the relevance of patch test results for individual allergen in this scenario may remain debatable requiring careful interpretation.

Clinical, Occupational and Allergological Profile of 455 Patients with Occupational Contact Dermatitis: A 5-Year Study from a Tertiary Care Center of North India.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate clinical and occupational profile and common allergens in patients with occupational contact dermatitis (OCD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of 455 (M:F 2:1) patients aged 18-85 years with allergic contact dermatitis were analyzed retrospectively. The diagnosis of OCD and patterns of dermatitis were defined by standard criteria. Indian standard series comprising 20 allergens and when suspected patient's own products were patch tested by Finn chamber method as per European Society of Contact Dermatitis guidelines and relevance of positive results was defined clinically. RESULTS: Airborne contact dermatitis (27.7%), acral dermatitis (14.1%), hand dermatitis (12.9%), acrofacial dermatitis (12.7%), and facial dermatitis (10.5%) were the common patterns. Agriculturists (51.2%), homemakers (27.9%), office workers (24.6%), and construction workers (4.6%) comprised the majority. Positive patch test results in 58% cases were from parthenium (31.7%), p-paraphenylenediamine (PPD) (22.9%), nickel (16%), fragrance mix (11%), potassium dichromate (10.7%), cobalt (7.6%), and mercaptobenzothiazole (4.9%). Hair colorants, shoe chips, and shaving cream also produced relevant positive reactions. Parthenium, PPD, fragrance mix, and potassium dichromate in agriculturists; nickel, parthenium, PPD, fragrance mix, and potassium dichromate in women, and potassium dichromate and parthenium in construction workers elicited the most positive reactions. PPD and hair colorants elicited positive reaction mainly in office workers. CONCLUSIONS: The agriculturists, homemakers, and construction workers have OCD most frequently. Parthenium in farmers, potassium dichromate in construction workers, nickel in women, and PPD in office workers were the major contact allergens. The study is limited by its retrospective design, small number of patients, and limited number of patch test allergens.

Airborne contact dermatitis - current perspectives in etiopathogenesis and management.

The increasing recognition of occupational origin of airborne contact dermatitis has brought the focus on the variety of irritants, which can present with this typical morphological picture. At the same time, airborne allergic contact dermatitis secondary to plant antigens, especially to Compositae family, continues to be rampant in many parts of the world, especially in the Indian subcontinent. The recognition of the contactant may be difficult to ascertain and the treatment may be even more difficult. The present review focuses on the epidemiological, clinical and therapeutic issues in airborne contact dermatitis.