ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To analyse the clinical characteristics and sensitivity of an essential oil patch test series (EOS) in patients sensitized to their own essential oils (EOs). METHOD: We analysed the clinical data and patch test results obtained with the European baseline series (BSE) and an EOS, as well as the mode of use of EOs, through a questionnaire included in the patient file. RESULTS: The study included 42 patients (79% women, average age 50 years) with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), 8 patients required hospitalization. All patients were sensitized to the EO they used, primarily lavender (Lavandula augustifolia, 8000-28-0), tea tree (Melaleuca alternifolia leaf oil, 68647-73-4), ravintsara (Cinnamomum camphora oil, 92201-50-8), and 2 cases were attributed to helichrysum (helichrysum italicum flower absolute, 90045-56-0). 71% had positive patch tests to fragrance mix I or II, 9 only to the EOS and 4 only with their personal EO. Interestingly, 40% of patients did not spontaneously mention the use of EOs, and only 33% received advice on their use at the time of purchase. CONCLUSION: Patch tests with the BSE, limonene and linalool HP, and oxidized tea tree oil is sufficient to detect most EO-sensitized patients. The most important is to test the patient's own used EOs.
Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Dermatology , Lavandula , Oils, Volatile , Tea Tree Oil , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Male , Oils, Volatile/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Patch Tests , Tea Tree Oil/adverse effectsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Dupilumab is the first biologic available to treat atopic dermatitis (AD). Its effectiveness and safety were demonstrated in clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the effectiveness and safety of dupilumab in adults with AD in a real-life French multicenter retrospective cohort. METHODS: We included patients treated during March 2017-April 2018. Efficacy outcomes, including Scoring Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) and Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) scores, were collected at baseline and 3 months when available. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded at follow-up. RESULTS: We included 241 patients. The median ± interquartile range (IQR) follow-up time was 3.8 ± 3.7 months. A ≥75% improvement in SCORAD was achieved in 27 of 163 (16.6%) patients, and a ≥75% improvement in EASI was achieved in 40 of 82 (48.8%) patients. The median SCORAD and EASI scores at 3 months were significantly lower than those at baseline (SCORAD ± IQR, 25 ± 21 vs 56 ± 27.4, P < 10-9 and EASI ± IQR, 4.1 ± 6.8 vs 17.9 ± 15.4, P < 10-9, respectively). Conjunctivitis was reported in 84 of 241 (38.2%) patients. The proportion with eosinophilia (>500 cells/mm3) during follow-up (57%) was higher than that at baseline (33.7%) (n = 172, P < 10-6). Dupilumab was stopped in 42 cases; 27 patients stopped because of AEs. LIMITATIONS: No control group, missing data. CONCLUSION: This real-life study demonstrated a similar dupilumab effectiveness as that seen in clinical trials, but it also revealed a higher frequency of conjunctivitis and eosinophilia.