Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo de estudio
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Contact Dermatitis ; 91(1): 45-53, 2024 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38602297

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from rubber glove usage is usually caused by rubber additives such as the accelerators. However, in analyses of the suspected gloves, ordinary rubber allergens are not always found. Accelerator-free rubber gloves are available, but some patients with accelerator allergy do not tolerate them and might also be patch test positive to them. OBJECTIVES: To identify and chemically characterize a new allergen, 2-cyanoethyl dimethyldithiocarbamate (CEDMC), in rubber gloves. We describe two patient cases: patient 1 that led us to the identification of CEDMC and patient 2 with occupational ACD caused by CEDMC. METHODS: The patients were examined with patch testing including baseline and rubber series, and their own rubber gloves. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) was used for chemical analysis of rubber gloves. The allergen was synthesized and identified by nuclear magnetic resonance, mass spectrometry and infrared spectrometry, and tested on patient 2. RESULTS: CEDMC was identified by HPLC in a nitrile glove associated with hand eczema in patient 1. Patient 2 whose nitrile gloves contained CEDMC was patch test positive to CEDMC. CONCLUSIONS: CEDMC is a new contact allergen in nitrile gloves and probably forms during vulcanization from residual monomer acrylonitrile and rubber additives.


Asunto(s)
Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto , Dermatitis Profesional , Guantes Protectores , Nitrilos , Pruebas del Parche , Humanos , Alérgenos/efectos adversos , Alérgenos/análisis , Cromatografía Líquida de Alta Presión , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/diagnóstico , Dermatitis Profesional/etiología , Dermatitis Profesional/diagnóstico , Dimetilditiocarbamato/efectos adversos , Ditiocarba/efectos adversos , Ditiocarba/química , Guantes Protectores/efectos adversos , Dermatosis de la Mano/inducido químicamente , Nitrilos/efectos adversos
2.
Contact Dermatitis ; 2024 Aug 25.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39183491

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from protective gloves is often caused by rubber additives, such as accelerators. However, while accelerator-free rubber gloves are available, they still cause ACD in some individuals. OBJECTIVES: A new allergen, 2-cyаnоethyl dimethyldithiocarbamate, (CEDMC), has recently been identified in accelerator-free gloves, and we here provide a first in vitro characterisation of CEDMC in a dendritic cell (DC)-like cell model along with three reference sensitizer rubber chemicals, consisting of tetraethylthiuram disulfide (TETD) and two xanthogenates. METHODS: Cellular responses after the exposure to the rubber chemicals were assessed using a transcriptomic approach, multiplex cytokine secretion profiling, and flow cytometry to determine DC model activation marker expression and apoptosis induction. RESULTS: CEDMC and all other sensitizers were classified as strong skin sensitizers with the transcriptomic approach. They all significantly increased IL-8 secretion and exposure to all except one increased CD86 DC activation marker expression. When tested, CEDMC induced apoptosis, however, delayed compared to TETD. CONCLUSIONS: The in vitro data corroborate CEDMC, TETD, and investigated xanthogenates as skin sensitizers. Transcriptomic analyses further reveal unique cellular responses induced by CEDMC, which together with future study can contribute to better understanding of cellular mechanisms underlying the sensitising capacity of rubber chemicals.

3.
Contact Dermatitis ; 87(1): 40-52, 2022 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35184302

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of contact allergy (CA) to Amerchol L-101 (AL-101), a marker for lanolin allergy, is problematic. Positive patch test reactions are frequently doubtful or weakly positive and difficult to associate with clinical relevance. OBJECTIVE: To gain further insight on the allergic or irritant nature of skin reactions induced by AL-101 patch test. METHODS: We re-tested in a dose-response fashion, 10 subjects with AL-101 CA and performed comprehensive transcriptomic analysis (gene arrays, quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction [qRT-PCR]) of samples of their skin reactions. RESULTS: Eight of the 10 CA subjects reacted positively upon re-test, whereas two did not react. Most of AL-101 positive patch tests expressed an allergy signature with strong activation of gene modules associated with adaptive immunity and downregulation of cornification pathway genes. In addition, the breadth of gene modulation correlated with the magnitude of patch test reactions and the concentration of AL-101 applied. However, we observed that some of the positive patch test reactions to AL-101 expressed no/few allergy biomarkers, suggesting the induction of an irritant skin inflammation in these samples. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that AL-101 is an allergen that can cause both contact allergy and contact irritation. Our results also highlight that molecular profiling might help to strengthen clinical diagnosis.


Asunto(s)
Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto , Alérgenos/efectos adversos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/genética , Humanos , Irritantes/efectos adversos , Lanolina , Pruebas del Parche/métodos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA