Delayed Skin Testing for Systemic Medications: Helpful or Not?

Cutaneous adverse drug reactions collectively are delayed drug reactions such as morbilliform drug eruption and severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs). Morbilliform drug eruption may wane over time, be the result of drug viral interactions, and be amenable to slow reintroduction or rechallenge, whereas SCARs are HLA class I restricted, T-cell-mediated reactions that demonstrate durable immunity and warrant lifelong avoidance. SCARs such as drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms, Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis, acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis, and generalized bullous fixed drug eruption often occur in the setting of multiple drugs dosed together. Collectively, they lead to significant morbidity, mortality, and drug safety concerns that could severely limit future treatment options. Currently, no single or combination of diagnostic tests for SCARs such as ex vivo or in vitro testing, in vivo (skin) testing, or other adjunctive tests such as HLA typing have 100% negative predictive value. In this "Controversies in Allergy Review" article, we review the current literature on delayed skin testing (patch and delayed prick/intradermal test) and critically assess the evidence base of its utility across different drugs and clinical phenotypes of delayed hypersensitivity reactions.

Patch tests in non-immediate cutaneous adverse drug reactions: Late readings on Day 4 is more sensitive than on Day 3.

BACKGROUND: Patch tests (PTs) are recommended to identify the culprit drug in non-immediate cutaneous adverse drug reactions (NICADRs). We recently reported that, in patients with NICADRs, a unique reading of PTs at day (D)2 compared with an additional second late reading at D4 missed almost half (45.3%) of the positive PTs. OBJECTIVES: To assess the change in sensitivity of the PT reading on D4 compared with the reading on D3. METHODS: We performed a retrospective (July 2020-June 2023) monocentric study of patients who had PTs with two readings for a NICADR. We compared reading on D3 and the second reading on D4 for the suspected drug (primary outcome) and for the related drugs tested simultaneously (secondary outcome). RESULTS: During the study period, 249 patients underwent patch testing with D3 and D4 readings. Regarding the primary outcome, the first reading at D3 was positive for 13.7% of patients, and the reading at D4 for 24.9% of patients (p < 0.0001). Regarding the secondary outcome, only 9.6% of patients had all their positive PT at D3 compared with 24.9% of patients at D4 (p < 0.0001). Considering the evaluated drug classes, no statistical difference was observed. However, we highlight that D3 reading detected all positive carbamazepine PTs (n = 3) while positive clindamycin PTs (n = 4) were identified only with the help of the second reading on D4. CONCLUSION: This study showed that, an additional D4 reading compared with a single D3 reading enhanced the sensitivity of PTs to identify culprit drugs and related. Further studies should replicate these findings and evaluate the medico-economic balance and safety of a single reading of PTs on D4.

Evaluation of Delayed Contact Hypersensitivity in Patients with Rosacea.

Introduction: Rosacea is a common chronic inflammatory dermatosis characterized by erythema, telangiectasia, papules, and pustules on the central face. The frequency of contact sensitization complicating rosacea and its therapy is unknown, with only few studies published in the literature. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate contact sensitivity in patients with rosacea. Methods: A total of 50 rosacea patients and 50 age- and sex-matched healthy controls were enrolled. Both groups were patch tested with the European Baseline Series. Results: A positive reaction to at least one allergen of the European Baseline Series was observed in 15 (30%) of rosacea patients and 10 (20%) of the healthy controls. Although the rate of positive reaction in the rosacea group was higher than in the controls, no statistically significant difference was documented. In addition, the total number of positive reactions to allergens in the rosacea group was higher than the control group, namely, 26 versus 17. Conclusion: Contact hypersensitivity may coexist with rosacea. Its identification holds significant clinical relevance, influencing the long-term management and justifying the application of patch testing in rosacea patients.

Vigilancia epidemiológica en los últimos 4 años del Registro Español de Investigación en Dermatitis de Contacto y Alergia Cutánea: situación actual y tendencias / Four-year Epidemiological Surveillance of the Spanish Registry of Research in Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy: Current Situation and Trends

Antecedentes: El Registro Español de Investigación en Dermatitis de Contacto y Alergia Cutánea tiene entre sus objetivos la vigilancia epidemiológica de la dermatitis de contacto. Para ello es importante conocer si se producen alteraciones en el tiempo de las prevalencias de las positividades a los distintos alérgenos. Objetivos: Describir las variaciones en las tendencias temporales en positividades a alérgenos en la serie estándar del GEIDAC en el periodo comprendido entre 2018 y el 31 de diciembre de 2022. Métodos: Estudio observacional multicéntrico de pacientes estudiados consecutivamente mediante pruebas epicutáneas dentro del estudio de un posible eczema alérgico de contacto recogidos de forma prospectiva en el seno del Registro Español de Investigación en Dermatitis de Contacto y Alergia Cutánea. Se analizaron los datos mediante 2 pruebas estadísticas: una de homogeneidad (para ver si hay cambios en los diferentes años) y otra de tendencia (para ver si los cambios siguen una tendencia lineal). Resultados: Se incluyeron un total de 11.327 pacientes en el periodo de estudio. Los alérgenos en los que de forma global se detectó una sensibilización mayor fueron sulfato de níquel, metilisotiazolinona, cloruro de cobalto, metilcloroisotiazolinona/metilisotiazolinona y mezcla de fragancias i. Se detectó una disminución estadísticamente significativa en el porcentaje de positividades de metilisotiazolinona a lo largo de años de estudio con una tendencia ordenada. Conclusiones: Si bien se pueden apreciar diferentes cambios en las tendencias a sensibilizaciones a varios de los alérgenos de la batería estándar, se observa que persiste una alta sensibilización al níquel, a la metilcloroisotiazolinona/metilisotiazolinona y a la mezcla de fragancias i. Solo se aprecia una tendencia a disminuir de forma significativa en el caso de la metilisotiazolinona.(AU)

Background: The epidemiological surveillance of contact dermatitis is one of the objectives of the Spanish Registry of Research in Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy. Knowing whether the prevalence of positive tests to the different allergens changes over time is important for this monitoring process. Objectives: To describe the various temporary trends in allergen positivity in the GEIDAC standard series from 2018 through December 31, 2022. Methods: This was a multicenter, observational trial of consecutive patients analyzed via patch tests as part of the study of possible allergic contact dermatitises collected prospectively within the Spanish Registry of Research in Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy. The data was analyzed using 2 statistical tests: one homogeneity test (to describe the changes seen over time) and one trend test (to see whether the changes described followed a linear trend). Results: A total of 11327 patients were included in the study. Overall, the allergens associated with a highest sensitization were nickel sulfate, methylisothiazolinone, cobalt chloride, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, and fragrance mix i. A statistically significant decrease was found in the percentage of methylisothiazolinone positive tests across the study years with an orderly trend. Conclusions: Although various changes were seen in the sensitizations trends to several allergens of the standard testing, it became obvious that a high sensitization to nickel, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone and fragrances mix i remained. Only a significant downward trend was seen for methylisothiazolinone.(AU)

[Translated article] Four-year Epidemiological Surveillance of the Spanish Registry of Research in Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy: Current Situation and Trends / Vigilancia epidemiológica en los últimos 4 años del Registro Español de Investigación en Dermatitis de Contacto y Alergia Cutánea: situación actual y tendencias

Antecedentes: El Registro Español de Investigación en Dermatitis de Contacto y Alergia Cutánea tiene entre sus objetivos la vigilancia epidemiológica de la dermatitis de contacto. Para ello es importante conocer si se producen alteraciones en el tiempo de las prevalencias de las positividades a los distintos alérgenos. Objetivos: Describir las variaciones en las tendencias temporales en positividades a alérgenos en la serie estándar del GEIDAC en el periodo comprendido entre 2018 y el 31 de diciembre de 2022. Métodos: Estudio observacional multicéntrico de pacientes estudiados consecutivamente mediante pruebas epicutáneas dentro del estudio de un posible eczema alérgico de contacto recogidos de forma prospectiva en el seno del Registro Español de Investigación en Dermatitis de Contacto y Alergia Cutánea. Se analizaron los datos mediante 2 pruebas estadísticas: una de homogeneidad (para ver si hay cambios en los diferentes años) y otra de tendencia (para ver si los cambios siguen una tendencia lineal). Resultados: Se incluyeron un total de 11.327 pacientes en el periodo de estudio. Los alérgenos en los que de forma global se detectó una sensibilización mayor fueron sulfato de níquel, metilisotiazolinona, cloruro de cobalto, metilcloroisotiazolinona/metilisotiazolinona y mezcla de fragancias i. Se detectó una disminución estadísticamente significativa en el porcentaje de positividades de metilisotiazolinona a lo largo de años de estudio con una tendencia ordenada. Conclusiones: Si bien se pueden apreciar diferentes cambios en las tendencias a sensibilizaciones a varios de los alérgenos de la batería estándar, se observa que persiste una alta sensibilización al níquel, a la metilcloroisotiazolinona/metilisotiazolinona y a la mezcla de fragancias i. Solo se aprecia una tendencia a disminuir de forma significativa en el caso de la metilisotiazolinona.(AU)

Background: The epidemiological surveillance of contact dermatitis is one of the objectives of the Spanish Registry of Research in Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy. Knowing whether the prevalence of positive tests to the different allergens changes over time is important for this monitoring process. Objectives: To describe the various temporary trends in allergen positivity in the GEIDAC standard series from 2018 through December 31, 2022. Methods: This was a multicenter, observational trial of consecutive patients analyzed via patch tests as part of the study of possible allergic contact dermatitises collected prospectively within the Spanish Registry of Research in Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy. The data was analyzed using 2 statistical tests: one homogeneity test (to describe the changes seen over time) and one trend test (to see whether the changes described followed a linear trend). Results: A total of 11327 patients were included in the study. Overall, the allergens associated with a highest sensitization were nickel sulfate, methylisothiazolinone, cobalt chloride, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, and fragrance mix i. A statistically significant decrease was found in the percentage of methylisothiazolinone positive tests across the study years with an orderly trend. Conclusions: Although various changes were seen in the sensitizations trends to several allergens of the standard testing, it became obvious that a high sensitization to nickel, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone and fragrances mix i remained. Only a significant downward trend was seen for methylisothiazolinone.(AU)

[Translated article] Epidemiological, Clinical, and Allergic Profile of Psoriatic Patients. Evaluation of the Spanish Registry of Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy (REIDAC).

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory dermatosis whose clinical and topographic distribution requires differential diagnosis, or the possible association with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), requiring patch testing (PT) as part of the diagnostic procedure. OBJECTIVES: To describe the epidemiological, clinical, and allergic profile of patients with a primary or secondary diagnosis of psoriasis undergoing PT and compare them with patients with a diagnosis of ACD at the end of the diagnostic process. METHODS: Cross-sectional study with data from REIDAC from 2018 through 2023 of selected patients with a diagnosis of psoriasis and/or ACD. RESULTS: A total of 11 502 patients were included, 513 of whom had been diagnosed with primary or secondary psoriasis, 3640 with ACD, and 108 with both diseases. Men were more predominant in the groups of patients with psoriasis, psoriasis+ACD, and lesions were more predominantly seen in the hands with little association with atopic factors vs the ACD group. The rate of positivity in PT to the 2022 Spanish battery of allergens was lower in the group with psoriasis only in 27% of the patients. The most common allergens found in the psoriasis group were also the most common ones found in the overall ACD population. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 36.2% of psoriatic patients tested positive in PT to the 2022 Spanish battery of allergens, which proved that this association is not uncommon. Overall, psoriatic patients had a higher mean age, were more predominantly men, and showed more hand involvement.

Dispositivos médicos en pacientes diabéticos y dermatitis de contacto / Medical Devices in Patients With Diabetes and Contact Dermatitis

El desarrollo y comercialización de los sensores de glucosa y las bombas de insulina han supuesto una revolución en el control de los pacientes diabéticos. En los últimos años se han detectado múltiples casos de dermatitis de contacto relacionados con estos dispositivos médicos, con el creciente interés sobre los alérgenos responsables de la sensibilización. Isobornil acrilato fue sin duda el alérgeno principal del dispositivo FreeStyle, motivando al fabricante a modificar la composición eliminando este alérgeno. Curiosamente, este alérgeno está presente en casi todos los sensores comercializados. La colofonia y derivados del ácido abiético desempeñan un papel relevante en cuanto al adhesivo. Recientemente aparecen nuevos componentes identificados como alérgenos, no comercializadas, como el dipropilene glicol diacrilato, la N,N-dimetilacrilamida, o el metacrilato de trietilenglicol, que están siendo foco de estudio. El impacto positivo que tiene el uso de estos dispositivos puede verse mermado por la sensibilización a uno de sus ingredientes, obligando en ocasiones a abandonar el dispositivo, y por ende, restando calidad de vida. El dermatólogo debe posicionarse respecto al estudio dirigido de estos pacientes, dando soporte a los servicios de endocrinología, con la finalidad de orientar tanto el cuidado de la piel como las alternativas posibles, especialmente con la colaboración de los fabricantes.(AU)

The development and commercialization of glucose sensors and insulin pumps has revolutionized the management of diabetes. These devices have been linked to multiple cases of contact dermatitis in recent years, however, giving rise to a growing interest in identifying the sensitizing allergens. Isobornyl acrylate was clearly identified as one of the main allergens responsible for contact dermatitis among users of the FreeStyle glucose sensor and was subsequently removed from the product ingredients. Remarkably, however, it is still used in most other sensors on the market. The common adhesive ingredients colophony and abietic acid derivatives have also been shown to be sensitizing agents. New components under study, such as dipropylene glycol diacrylate, N,N-dimethylacrylamide, and triethylene glycol methacrylate have recently been identified as allergens, though they are not commercially available for clinical testing. The benefits offered by glucose sensors and insulin pumps may be offset by sensitization to product ingredients, in some cases forcing discontinuation and diminishing quality of life. Dermatologists should play a role in this clinical and research scenario, offering case-by-case guidance to endocrinologists on skin care and possible alternatives for patients with glucose sensors and insulin pumps who develop contact dermatitis. They should also collaborate with the manufacturers developing these devices.(AU)

[Translated article] Medical Devices in Patients With Diabetes and Contact Dermatitis / Dispositivos médicos en pacientes diabéticos y dermatitis de contacto

El desarrollo y comercialización de los sensores de glucosa y las bombas de insulina han supuesto una revolución en el control de los pacientes diabéticos. En los últimos años se han detectado múltiples casos de dermatitis de contacto relacionados con estos dispositivos médicos, con el creciente interés sobre los alérgenos responsables de la sensibilización. Isobornil acrilato fue sin duda el alérgeno principal del dispositivo FreeStyle, motivando al fabricante a modificar la composición eliminando este alérgeno. Curiosamente, este alérgeno está presente en casi todos los sensores comercializados. La colofonia y derivados del ácido abiético desempeñan un papel relevante en cuanto al adhesivo. Recientemente aparecen nuevos componentes identificados como alérgenos, no comercializadas, como el dipropilene glicol diacrilato, la N,N-dimetilacrilamida, o el metacrilato de trietilenglicol, que están siendo foco de estudio. El impacto positivo que tiene el uso de estos dispositivos puede verse mermado por la sensibilización a uno de sus ingredientes, obligando en ocasiones a abandonar el dispositivo, y por ende, restando calidad de vida. El dermatólogo debe posicionarse respecto al estudio dirigido de estos pacientes, dando soporte a los servicios de endocrinología, con la finalidad de orientar tanto el cuidado de la piel como las alternativas posibles, especialmente con la colaboración de los fabricantes.(AU)

The development and commercialization of glucose sensors and insulin pumps has revolutionized the management of diabetes. These devices have been linked to multiple cases of contact dermatitis in recent years, however, giving rise to a growing interest in identifying the sensitizing allergens. Isobornyl acrylate was clearly identified as one of the main allergens responsible for contact dermatitis among users of the FreeStyle glucose sensor and was subsequently removed from the product ingredients. Remarkably, however, it is still used in most other sensors on the market. The common adhesive ingredients colophony and abietic acid derivatives have also been shown to be sensitizing agents. New components under study, such as dipropylene glycol diacrylate, N,N-dimethylacrylamide, and triethylene glycol methacrylate have recently been identified as allergens, though they are not commercially available for clinical testing. The benefits offered by glucose sensors and insulin pumps may be offset by sensitization to product ingredients, in some cases forcing discontinuation and diminishing quality of life. Dermatologists should play a role in this clinical and research scenario, offering case-by-case guidance to endocrinologists on skin care and possible alternatives for patients with glucose sensors and insulin pumps who develop contact dermatitis. They should also collaborate with the manufacturers developing these devices.(AU)

Epidemiological, Clinical, and Allergic Profile of Psoriatic Patients. Evaluation of the Spanish Registry of Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy (REIDAC). / Perfil epidemiológico, clínico y alérgico en pacientes con psoriasis. Evaluación del Registro Español de Dermatitis de Contacto (REIDAC).

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory dermatosis whose clinical and topographic distribution requires differential diagnosis, or the possible association with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), requiring patch testing (PT) as part of the diagnostic procedure. OBJECTIVES: To describe the epidemiological, clinical, and allergic profile of patients with a primary or secondary diagnosis of psoriasis undergoing PT and compare them with patients with a diagnosis of ACD at the end of the diagnostic process. METHODS: Cross-sectional study with data from REIDAC from 2018 through 2023 of selected patients with a diagnosis of psoriasis and/or ACD. RESULTS: A total of 11 502 patients were included, 513 of whom had been diagnosed with primary or secondary psoriasis, 3640 with ACD, and 108 with both diseases. Men were more predominant in the groups of patients with psoriasis, psoriasis+ACD, and lesions were more predominantly seen in the hands with little association with atopic factors vs the ACD group. The rate of positivity in PT to the 2022 Spanish battery of allergens was lower in the group with psoriasis only in 27% of the patients. The most common allergens found in the psoriasis group were also the most common ones found in the overall ACD population. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 36.2% of psoriatic patients tested positive in PT to the 2022 Spanish battery of allergens, which proved that this association is not uncommon. Overall, psoriatic patients had a higher mean age, were more predominantly men, and showed more hand involvement.

Sensitization to textile dyes in Spain: Epidemiological situation (2019-2022).

BACKGROUND: Current frequency and features for positivity to textile dye mix (TDM) in Spain are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To study the frequency, clinical features and simultaneous positivity between TDM, para-phenylenediamine (PPD) and specific disperse dyes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analysed all consecutive patients patch-tested with TDM from the Spanish Contact Dermatitis Registry (REIDAC), from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2022. Within this group, we studied all selected patients patch-tested with a textile dye series. RESULTS: Out of 6128 patients analysed, 3.3% were positive to the TDM and in 34% of them, the sensitization was considered currently relevant. TDM positivity was associated with working as a hairdresser/beautician and scalp, neck/trunk and arm/forearm dermatitis. From TDM-positive patients, 57% were positive to PPD. One hundred and sixty-four patients were patch-tested with the textile dye series. Disperse Orange 3 was the most frequent positive dye (16%). One of every six cases positive to any dye from the textile dye series would have been missed if patch-tested with the TDM alone. CONCLUSIONS: Positivity to TDM is common in Spain and often associated with PPD sensitization. TDM is a valuable marker of disperse dyes allergy that should be part of the Spanish and European standard series.

[Translated article] Medical Devices in Patients With Diabetes and Contact Dermatitis.

The development and commercialization of glucose sensors and insulin pumps has revolutionized the management of diabetes. These devices have been linked to multiple cases of contact dermatitis in recent years, however, giving rise to a growing interest in identifying the sensitizing allergens. Isobornyl acrylate was clearly identified as one of the main allergens responsible for contact dermatitis among users of the FreeStyle glucose sensor and was subsequently removed from the product ingredients. Remarkably, however, it is still used in most other sensors on the market. The common adhesive ingredients colophony and abietic acid derivatives have also been shown to be sensitizing agents. New components under study, such as dipropylene glycol diacrylate, N,N-dimethylacrylamide, and triethylene glycol methacrylate have recently been identified as allergens, though they are not commercially available for clinical testing. The benefits offered by glucose sensors and insulin pumps may be offset by sensitization to product ingredients, in some cases forcing discontinuation and diminishing quality of life. Dermatologists should play a role in this clinical and research scenario, offering case-by-case guidance to endocrinologists on skin care and possible alternatives for patients with glucose sensors and insulin pumps who develop contact dermatitis. They should also collaborate with the manufacturers developing these devices.

In Situ Patch Test and Repeated Open Application Test for Fixed Drug Eruption: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated allergy workup in fixed drug eruption (FDE) in a large population. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the sensitivity of a standardized allergy workup for diagnosing the cause of FDE, with a focus on in situ repeated open application tests (ROATs). METHODS: In a retrospective multicenter study, we analyzed the practice of conducting a complete allergy workup for the etiological diagnosis of FDE. It consisted of 3 steps: in situ patch tests (PTs) for all cases except pure mucosal involvement, followed by in situ ROAT if in situ PT results were negative, and finally a drug challenge (DC). The in situ ROAT involved daily application of the suspected drug on a previously affected FDE site for 7 days. RESULTS: Of 98 suspected FDE cases, 61 patients (median age 61 y; male-to-female ratio 1.8) with a complete allergy workup were included. In 4 cases, even the DC yielded negative results. Among the remaining 57 patients with a positive workup, implicated drugs included paracetamol (12 cases), ß-lactams (11 cases), imidazoles (9 cases, including 5 with metronidazole), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (8 cases), iodinated contrast media (4 cases), cotrimoxazole (3 cases), and various other drugs in 10 patients. The diagnosis was confirmed by in situ PT in 17 of 54 cases (31.5%), in situ ROAT in 14 of 40 cases (35%) (with 4 cases showing remote reactivation of FDE sites), and DC in 26 cases. CONCLUSIONS: The sequential allergy workup involving successively in situ PT, in situ ROAT, and DC is a reliable and safe method for diagnosing the cause of FDE. In situ tests exhibited a sensitivity of over 50%.

Four-year Epidemiological Surveillance of the Spanish Registry of Research in Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy: Current Situation and Trends. / Vigilancia epidemiológica en los últimos 4 años del Registro Español de Investigación en Dermatitis de Contacto y Alergia Cutánea: situación actual y tendencias.

BACKGROUND: The epidemiological surveillance of contact dermatitis is one of the objectives of the Spanish Registry of Research in Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy. Knowing whether the prevalence of positive tests to the different allergens changes over time is important for this monitoring process. OBJECTIVES: To describe the various temporary trends in allergen positivity in the GEIDAC standard series from 2018 through December 31, 2022. METHODS: This was a multicenter, observational trial of consecutive patients analyzed via patch tests as part of the study of possible allergic contact dermatitises collected prospectively within the Spanish Registry of Research in Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy. The data was analyzed using 2 statistical tests: one homogeneity test (to describe the changes seen over time) and one trend test (to see whether the changes described followed a linear trend). RESULTS: A total of 11327 patients were included in the study. Overall, the allergens associated with a highest sensitization were nickel sulfate, methylisothiazolinone, cobalt chloride, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, and fragrance mix i. A statistically significant decrease was found in the percentage of methylisothiazolinone positive tests across the study years with an orderly trend. CONCLUSIONS: Although various changes were seen in the sensitizations trends to several allergens of the standard testing, it became obvious that a high sensitization to nickel, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone and fragrances mix i remained. Only a significant downward trend was seen for methylisothiazolinone.

Perfil de sensibilização de pacientes submetidos ao teste de contato no Instituto Lauro de Souza Lima no período de 2017 a 2023 / Sensitization profile of patients undergoing patch testing at the Lauro de Souza Lima Institute from 2017 to 2023

Introdução: O teste de contato (patch teste) é o padrão ouro para diagnóstico de dermatites alérgicas de contato (DACs), possibilitando a identificação do agente desencadeante. Mudanças nos hábitos de vida e exposição a novos agentes sensibilizantes presentes em medicamentos, cosméticos e outros produtos podem induzir mudanças no perfil de sensibilização da população. Objetivo: Realizar um levantamento do perfil dos pacientes que efetuaram o teste de contato no Instituto Lauro de Souza Lima (ILSL) no período entre 2017 e 2023, bem como a frequência de sensibilização aos elementos testados, para identificar alterações devido à pandemia de COVID-19. Material e Métodos: Foi realizado um estudo retrospectivo no ILSL, analisando os registros dos testes realizados de julho de 2017 a junho de 2023. Parâmetros como sexo, idade, atividade profissional, localização das lesões e sensibilização aos elementos testados da bateria padrão (n=30) e de cosméticos (n=10) foram avaliados. As reações foram classificadas de acordo com as recomendações do International Contact Dermatitis Research Group e os dados foram analisados usando o teste do qui-quadrado. Resultados: O estudo incluiu 738 indivíduos, sendo 67,9% do sexo feminino, com idade média de 45,4 anos. As regiões mais afetadas foram mãos (62,45%), pés (45,99%) e braços (26,58%). 75,80% apresentaram reação positiva a pelo menos uma das 40 substâncias testadas. O sulfato de níquel foi o elemento mais prevalente (35,91%), seguido por cloreto de cobalto (24,12%) e timerosol (15,04%). Na análise da bateria de cosméticos, verificamos maior prevalência de sensibilização ao amerchol L-101 (11,24%), bronopol (3,79%) e tonsilamida (3,11%). A sensibilização ao amerchol L-101 mostrou-se crescente a partir de 2020 com maior incidência em 2021 e permaneceu elevada até o final do período avaliado. Conclusão: O perfil de sensibilização a substâncias da bateria padrão no ILSL permaneceu semelhante ao observado em estudo anterior. Entretanto, houve um aumento na sensibilização ao amerchol L-101 no período da pandemia de COVID-19 o que pode estar associado a mudança de hábitos de higiene como aumento da frequência de lavagem de mãos e uso de produtos antissépticos

ABSTRACT: Patch testing is considered the gold standard for the diagnosing allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and allows the identification of triggering allergens. Changes in lifestyle as well as exposure to new sensitizers present in medications, cosmetics, and other products, may induce changes in the sensitization profile of the population. Objective: To investigate the sensitization profile of patients who underwent patchtesting at the Lauro de Souza Lima Institute (ILSL) between 2017 and 2023, and the frequency of sensitization to the elements tested, to identify changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was conducted at the ILSL, analyzing medical records of tests performed from July 2017 to June 2023. Parameters such as sex, age, occupation, location of the lesion, and sensitization to the elements of the standard battery (n=30) and the cosmetic battery (n=10) were evaluated. Reactions were classified according to the recommendations of the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group, and the data were analyzed using the chi-squared test. Results: The study included 738 subjects, 67.9% female, mean age 45.4 years. The most commonly affected areas were the hands (62,4%), feet (46.0%), and arms (26.6%). 75.8% had a positive reaction to at least one of the 40 substances tested. Nickel sulfate was the most prevalent element (35.9%), followed by cobalt chloride (24.1%) and thimerosal (15.0%). Regarding the cosmetic battery, we found a higher prevalence of sensitization to amerchol L-101 (11.2%), bronopol (3.8%), and tonsilamide (3.1%). There was an increasing trend for sensitization to amerchol L-101 from 2020 onwards, reaching a peaking in 2021 and remaining at an elevated level until the end of the evaluated period. Conclusion: The sensitization profile to the standard series at ILSL remained similar to that observed in a previous study. However, there was an increase in sensitization to amerchol L-101 during the pandemic period, possibly related to changes in hygiene habits such as increased hand washing and the use of antiseptic products

Analysis of Adverse Reactions of Cosmetics in Chinese Han Population in Recent Five Years.

Background: There are still some gaps in the summary and generalization of cosmetic-related adverse reaction reports. Objective: The aim of this study is to summarize and analyze the occurrence of cosmetic adverse reactions in Shanghai Han population by using available survey data. Materials and Methods: Collection, statistics and analysis of patients with cosmetic adverse reactions in Shanghai Huashan Hospital from 2017 to 2021. Results: Among the 1004 patients, most of them (96.71%) were diagnosed as cosmetic contact dermatitis, which often occurred within 3 days of using cosmetics (51.79%). A total of 260 patients were tested with patch test, but the compliance rate was only 18.08%. Among them, 240 patients underwent additional European standard allergen tests, and positive allergens were detected in 210 cases (87.5%). Univariate analysis revealed that dosage form (emulsion and cream), age (≤25 years) and the allergic ingredients triethanolamine, rose oil, propylene glycol, thiomersal and musk ambrette are associated with the occurrence of cosmetic adverse reactions within seven days. A logit prediction model was also successfully constructed: Logit (P) = 1.710-0.796×1 + 1.185×2 -3.650X3-1.335X4. Conclusion: This study complements the data reported on cosmetic adverse reactions in the Chinese Han population and suggests that in future clinical diagnosis and data collection, emphasis should be placed on patch testing, combining the patch test with cosmetic protoplast with the European standard allergen test to improve the detection rate.

Allergic contact dermatitis from essential oil in consumer products: Mode of uses and value of patch tests with an essential oil series. Results of a French study of the DAG (Dermato-Allergology group of the French Society of Dermatology).

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.