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

BACKGROUND: Patch testing to multiple cross reactive allergens for allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) may not be necessary due to copositivity. OBJECTIVE: 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 (POP) identified which single formaldehyde-related allergen optimally captures patients with clinically relevant ACD. Next, POP determined the optimal additional 1, 2, 3, etc. allergens. Cost per patch test was $5.19 (Medicare 2022). RESULTS: 9832 patients were tested to all listed allergens, with 830 having positive patch tests. POP 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 five top allergens capture over 94% of patients. The incremental cost-per-additional-diagnosis increased up to 44-fold as the number of allergens tested increased. LIMITATIONS: Data is from a single institution, and the cost-per-test was fixed to Medicare Part B in 2022. CONCLUSIONS: For diagnosing ACD, we recommend considering an optimized allergen selection algorithm.

Diagnosing contact dermatitis using machine learning: A review.

BACKGROUND: Machine learning (ML) offers an opportunity in contact dermatitis (CD) research, where with full clinical picture, may support diagnosis and patch test accuracy. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to summarise the existing literature on how ML can be applied to CD in its entirety. METHODS: Embase, Medline, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library were searched from inception to February 7, 2024, for primary literature reporting on ML models in CD. RESULTS: 7834 articles were identified in the search, with 110 moving to full-text review, and six articles included. Two used ML to identify key biomarkers to help distinguish between allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and irritant contact dermatitis (ICD), three used image data to distinguish between ACD and ICD, and one used clinical and demographical data to predict the risk of positive patch tests. All studies used supervision in their ML model training with a total of 49 704 patients across all data sets. There was sparse reporting of the accuracy of these models. CONCLUSIONS: Although the available research is still limited, there is evidence to suggest that ML has potential to support diagnostic outcomes in a clinical setting. Further research on the use of ML in clinical practice is recommended.

Patch Test Results with the Latin American Baseline Series in a Colombian Population. 2016-2021.

Background: Contact dermatitis (CD) is one of the most prevalent skin diseases. It is commonly divided into irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). Patch testing is a procedure used to support the diagnosis of ACD. This test should be interpreted along with the clinical history and morphology of the skin lesions to determine clinical relevance. Objective: To describe the sensitization patterns of patients undergoing patch testing with the Latin American baseline series. Methods: A single-center retrospective study was performed. For the study, patients older than 18 years with a clinical diagnosis of contact dermatitis, who underwent patch testing using the Latin American baseline series were considered. These tests took place at the Alma Mater Hospital of Antioquia between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2021. Results: A total of 648 patients were included. Patch tests were positive in 63% of cases, with a mean age of 51.5 years. Around 36.6% had atopy-related diseases. The main occupation was housework (30.7%). The hands were the most affected area in the body (31%). The main allergens were nickel sulfate (34%), sodium tetrachloropalladate (24.2%), and thimerosal (8.0%). Fifteen allergens had a percentage below 1%. Hydrocortisone and budesonide did not yield positive results. Conclusion: Nickel sulfate was the most frequent allergen, and women were the most affected. The information gathered could be useful for adjusting the allergens that should be included in the regional baseline series, taking into account the frequency found.

Preservative contact allergy in occupational dermatitis: a machine learning analysis.

Occupational dermatoses impose a significant socioeconomic burden. Allergic contact dermatitis related to occupation is prevalent among healthcare workers, cleaning service personnel, individuals in the beauty industry and industrial workers. Among risk factors, the exposure to preservatives is frequent, since they are extensively added in products for occupational use. The goal of this study is to investigate the contact allergy patterns in order to understand the linkage among hypersensitivity to preservatives, occupational profiles, patients' clinical and demographic characteristics. Patch test results were collected from monosensitized patients to Formaldehyde 2%, KATHON 0.02%, thimerosal 0.1%, and MDBGN 0.5%; information was also collected for an extended MOAHLFA (Male-Occupational-Atopic-Hand-Leg-Face-Age) index. To assess the relationship between allergen group and occupational-related ACD, the chi-square test for independence was utilized. To uncover underlying relationships in the data, multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and categorical principal components analysis (CATPCA), which are machine learning approaches, were applied. Significant relationships were found between allergen group and: occupation class, atopy, hand, leg, facial, trunk, neck, head dermatitis, clinical characteristics, ICDRG 48 h and ICDRG 72 h clinical evaluation. MCA and CATPCA findings revealed a link among allergen group, occupation class, patients' demographic and clinical characteristics, the MOAHLFA index, and the ICDRG scores. Significant relationships were identified between the allergen group and various manifestations of dermatitis. The utilization of machine learning techniques facilitated the discernment of meaningful patterns in the data.

Comparison of Patch Testing Results of White and Black Patients.

Patch testing is the standard diagnostic test used for patients presenting with symptoms of allergic contact dermatitis. The grading of patch test results classically varies from 1 to 3. The assessment of these results begins with a visual inspection of the presence of erythema, vesiculation, and induration. This leads to a subjectivity in visual evaluation of a patch test. Positive patch testing results can present differently in patients with darker skin tones. A greater variety of images of allergic contact dermatitis in patients with darker skin phototypes can better guide the diagnosis of this condition in skin of color. People with darker phototypes are historically underrepresented in dermatologic images and texts; thus, identifying erythema in darker phototypes may be more difficult for dermatologists, whether or not they were trained in areas of decreased phototype diversity. In this article, we present positive patch testing findings on several different phototypes, with the intention of contributing to images of phototypes underrepresented in dermatology literature.

Managing Contact Dermatitis Without Patch Testing.

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is a common skin condition caused by contact with an exogenous agent that elicits an inflammatory response. Patch testing (PT) is considered the gold standard for diagnosing ACD. Unfortunately, PT may not be available to some patients due to insurance and financial limitations, contributing to health care disparity and leaving patients with undiagnosed, incompletely managed dermatitis that can have further detrimental health and occupational effects. For other patients, PT is precluded by lack of availability of specialist/expert care, comorbid medications, or diffuse disease. This article will present a patient with ACD and will work through the differential diagnosis and share strategies for empiric avoidance of suspected/common triggers. The epidemiology of ACD with respect to race and ethnicity, considerations for affordability of hypoallergenic products, access to testing, and the need for future research are addressed in this article.

Diagnosis of Allergic Dermatoses in Skin of Color.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to deliver a comprehensive report of the most recent knowledge on diagnosing allergic dermatoses in skin of color (SOC) patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Allergic dermatoses can affect populations of all backgrounds. However, racial/ethnic variations in epidemiology, clinical features, and associated allergens have been reported. Nuances in the approach to diagnosis, including the assessment of erythema and interpretation of patch tests, are important considerations when treating patients with SOC. In this review, we outline various manifestations of allergic dermatoses in SOC with a focus on important clinical presentations and diagnostic tools, aiming to support clinicians in accurate recognition of diseases, thereby opening avenues to improve outcomes across diverse skin types.

Methylisothiazolinone sensitisation in New Zealand is decreasing.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: In the last 10 years methylisothiazolinone (MI) emerged as a global cause of preservative-related ACD. New Zealand has liberal regulations for the MI concentration limit in cosmetic products compared to Europe and Australia. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of MI sensitisation in New Zealand, explore sources of MI exposure and make recommendations on New Zealand regulations for MI use. METHODS: This retrospective study included data from patients who underwent patch testing with MI from 2008 to 2021 in a tertiary hospital dermatology clinic and a private dermatology clinic in Auckland, New Zealand. Patient baseline characteristics were recorded along with results of patch testing. Sources of MI exposure were identified from medical records. RESULTS: Over the study period, 1049 patch tests were performed in 1044 patients. MI was only tested as a stand-alone allergen from 2015; positive reactions to MI increased from 5.3% in 2015 to a peak of 11.9% in 2017 and then decreased to 6.4% in 2021. The most common source of MI exposure was shampoo or conditioner (27.7% of all relevant reactions) followed by occupational exposures to paints, biocides or glue (19.1%). CONCLUSION: Both sensitisation and ACD to MI appear to be decreasing, likely secondary to changes in product compounding due to stricter concentration limits internationally. We recommend New Zealand adopt lower MI concentration limits for cosmetics to match the limits of Australia and Europe.

Associations between tobacco smoking status and patch test results-A cross-sectional pilot study from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK).

BACKGROUND: Earlier studies suggested a potential association between tobacco smoking and nickel sensitization, but little is known about other contact allergens. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association of smoking status and contact sensitizations as well as subtypes of dermatitis, and to analyse the sensitization profiles of tobacco smokers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Within the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), we performed a cross-sectional multicentre pilot study comprising 1091 patch-tested patients from 9 departments, comparing 541 patients with a history of cigarette smoking (281 current and 260 former smokers) with 550 never-smokers. RESULTS: We could not confirm the previously reported association between nickel sensitization and tobacco smoking. Moreover, sensitizations to other allergens, including colophony, fragrance mix I, Myroxylon pereirae and formaldehyde, were not increased in cigarette smokers compared with never smokers. Hand dermatitis (50.6% vs. 33.6%) and occupational cause (36.2% vs. 22.5%) were significantly more frequent among cigarette smokers compared with never-smokers as shown by non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals. CONCLUSIONS: Although our study does not allow a firm conclusion on whether smoking status contributes to certain contact sensitizations, it confirms an association of smoking with hand dermatitis and occupational cause.

"Recognizing and managing allergic contact dermatitis: Focus on major allergens".

Patch testing is the gold standard for the diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis. The identification and avoidance of culprit allergen/s is essential in the treatment of this disease. Each year, new allergens are identified as emerging or important. The authors discuss allergens that are common, enduring, emergent, incompletely recognized and controversial for the practicing allergist and dermatologist. This Clinical Management Review will encompass a review of fragrances, preservatives, rubber, acrylates, metals, and medications, their common sources of exposure, controversies in diagnosis and patch testing, management and how to avoid those allergens. This review will also include practical aspects of diagnosis and management and will provide resources that can be used as guidance for physicians and patients on nickel, MCI/MI, fragrance, the most common allergens positive on patch testing.

Standard and Expanded Series Patch Testing Update by the Spanish Contact Dermatitis and Skin Allergy Research Group (GEIDAC). / Actualización de la batería estándar y batería ampliada de pruebas alérgicas de contacto por el Grupo Español de Investigación en Dermatitis de Contacto y Alergia Cutánea (GEIDAC).

After the meeting held by the Spanish Contact Dermatitis and Skin Allergy Research Group (GEIDAC) back in October 2021, changes were suggested to the Spanish standard series patch testing. Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2% pet.), textile dye mixt (6.6% pet.), linalool hydroperoxide (1% pet.), and limonene hydroperoxide (0.3% pet.) were, then, added to the series that agreed upon in 2016. Ethyldiamine and phenoxyethanol were excluded. Methyldibromoglutaronitrile, the mixture of sesquiterpene lactones, and hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene (Lyral) were alo added to the extended Spanish series of 2022.

Role of Patch Testing in Facial Contact Dermatitis: A Cross-Sectional Study from Central India.

Background: Facial contact dermatitis is an emerging skin disorder due to the use of a large array of materials over the face. It leads to psychological distress in patients, impacting their quality of life. Most of the allergens applied over the face vary as per cosmetic or herbal products' availability, usage, or religious practices. Identifying and discontinuing the implicated allergens will lead to a better prognosis and reduced morbidity in clinical practice. Objectives: To determine the frequency of different allergens responsible for causing facial contact dermatitis, in an urban part of central India, using patch test with the help of Indian standard and cosmetic series. Materials and Methods: All suspected patients (>18 years) of facial contact dermatitis visiting the outpatient department of dermatology were patch tested with both Indian standard and cosmetic series. Results: Out of 38/58 patch-test-positive patients, 71.06% were females, and 28.94% were males. Most patch-test-positive females were housewives. The most common allergens implicated were thiomersal (17.24%), followed by fragrance mix (15.51%), and paraphenylene diamine (12.06%). Conclusion: In our study, forehead and malar areas were most commonly involved indicating fairness creams and perfumes as the important contributors to facial contact dermatitis. Antigen batteries need to be updated with changing social and cultural trends, as many with a consistent history of aggravation with some products tested negative in patch tests.