Allergic or Not: Final Interpretation of Doubtful Patch Test Reactions From the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 2019-2020.

Background: Doubtful patch test reactions generally do not meet criterion for positivity in patch testing. However, the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) allows for doubtful reactions to be coded with a final determination of "allergic/positive" based on the temporal pattern, appearance, known characteristics of the allergen, and/or other supportive patch test reactions. Objectives: To analyze NACDG data from the 2019-2020 patch test cycle to identify patterns in the interpretation and relevance of doubtful reactions. Methods: The frequency and proportions of doubtful reactions were tabulated and analyzed for patterns. Statistical analyses were limited to allergens with ≥30 doubtful reactions to ensure adequate sample size. Results: Of patch-tested patients, 31.9% (1315/4121) had ≥1 doubtful reaction. Of 2538 total doubtful reactions, 46% (n = 1167) had a final interpretation of "allergic/positive." The allergens with the highest proportion of doubtful reactions at the final visit were hydroperoxides of linalool 1% (4.5%), fragrance mix I 8.0% (3.9%), and cetrimonium chloride 0.5% (3.4%). Methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI) 0.02% (P < 0.001), MI 0.2% (P < 0.001), nickel sulfate hexahydrate 2.5% (P = 0.001), and neomycin sulfate 20.0% (P = 0.003) doubtful reactions were more likely to be interpreted as allergic than nonallergic. Methyldibromoglutaronitrile/phenoxyethanol 0.2% (P < 0.001), oleamidopropyl dimethylamine 0.1% (P < 0.001), formaldehyde 2.0% (P < 0.001), cetrimonium chloride 0.5% (P < 0.001), benzophenone-4 (sulisobenzone) 10% (P < 0.001), iodopropynyl butylcarbamate 0.5% (P < 0.001), cocamidopropyl betaine 1.0% (P = 0.002), and benzisothiazolinone 0.1% (P = 0.012) doubtful reactions were less likely to be interpreted as allergic. Of the 1167 doubtful reactions interpreted as allergic, 84.9% had current relevance. Conclusions: Doubtful reactions were common and approximately one half were coded with a final interpretation of "allergic/positive." Of those, most were clinically relevant. MCI/MI, MI, nickel, and neomycin were more likely to be interpreted as allergic.

Patch Testing With Nickel, Cobalt, and Chromium in Patients With Suspected Allergic Contact Dermatitis.

Background: Allergic contact dermatitis is frequently caused by metals, including multiple metals simultaneously. Objectives: To assess characteristics and associations of positive and clinically relevant patch test (PT) reactions with solitary and concurrent metal sensitization. Methods: A retrospective analysis of PT results for nickel, cobalt, and/or chromium from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group between 2001 and 2018 (n = 43,522). Results: 18.0% had a positive/allergic reaction to nickel sulfate hexahydrate, 7.3% to cobalt chloride hexahydrate, and 3.0% to potassium dichromate. 87.9% patients had a currently relevant reaction to 0, 9.4% to 1, and 2.7% to multiple metals tested. Patients with 1 versus no currently relevant reactions to metal were more likely to have a primary dermatitis site of trunk, feet, and ears; patients with currently relevant reactions to multiple metals had more dermatitis affecting the trunk and ears. Metal sources varied by co-reacting metal, especially for patients with cobalt and chromium allergy. Jewelry was the most commonly identified source of nickel and cobalt for both solitary and concurrent metal allergy. Conclusions: Sensitization to multiple metals occurred in 6% of patients. Allergen sources varied between patients with sensitivity to 1 metal versus those who had concurrent sensitivity to cobalt and/or chromium.

More than just methylisothiazolinone: Retrospective analysis of patients with isothiazolinone allergy in North America, 2017-2020.

BACKGROUND: Isothiazolinones are a common cause of allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence of positive patch test reactions to isothiazolinones from 2017-2020 and characterize isothiazolinone-allergic (Is+) patients compared with isothiazolinone nonallergic (Is-) patients. METHODS: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 9028 patients patch tested to methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI)/methylisothiazolinone (MI) 0.02% aqueous, MI 0.2% aqueous, benzisothiazolinone (BIT) 0.1% petrolatum, and/or octylisothiazolinone (OIT) 0.025% petrolatum. Prevalence, reaction strength, concurrent reactions, clinical relevance, and source of allergens were tabulated. RESULTS: In total, 21.9% (1976/9028) of patients had a positive reaction to 1 or more isothiazolinones. Positivity to MI was 14.4% (1296/9012), MCI/MI was 10.0% (903/9017), BIT was 8.6% (777/9018), and OIT was 05% (49/9028). Compared with Is-, Is+ patients were more likely to have occupational skin disease (16.5% vs 10.3%, P <.001), primary hand dermatitis (30.2% vs 19.7%, P <.001), and be >40 years (73.1% vs 61.9%, P <.001). Positive patch test reactions to >1 isothiazolinone occurred in 44.1% (871/1976) of Is+ patients. Testing solely to MCI/MI would miss 47.3% (611/1292) of MI and 60.1% (466/776) of BIT allergic reactions. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective cross-sectional study design and lack of follow-up data. CONCLUSION: Sensitization to isothiazolinones is high and concurrent sensitization to multiple isothiazolinone allergens is common.

Patch Test Results Among Older Adults: A Retrospective Analysis of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group Data (2009-2020).

Background: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in older adults (OA) represents a significant health burden, but few studies examine the prevalence and characteristics of contact allergy and ACD in this population. Objective: To compare positive and clinically relevant patch test results in OA versus younger adults (YA) and children. Methods: Retrospective analysis of patch test results obtained in OA (≥65 years), YA (19-64 years), and children (≤18 years) by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 2009 to 2020. Results: Of 28,177 patients patch tested, 5366 (19.0%) were OA. OA were more likely to have a final primary diagnosis of ACD as compared with YA (50.8% vs 49.2%, P = 0.035) and children (44.6%, P < 0.0001). The primary site of dermatitis also differed by age group, with OA having a higher proportion of dermatitis affecting the trunk, scalp, anogenital region, and "under clothing," and a lower proportion of dermatitis affecting the face, lips, and feet. Limitations: Retrospective design, lack of follow-up, and referral population. Conclusion: OA were as likely and were statistically even more likely to have a final primary diagnosis of ACD compared with YA and children. Anatomic site of dermatitis also differed by age group. This underscores the need for patch testing in OA when ACD is suspected.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Sociodemographic, Clinical, and Treatment Characteristics Among Patients with Atopic Dermatitis in the United States and Canada: Real-World Data from the CorEvitas Atopic Dermatitis Registry.

INTRODUCTION: This real-world, cross-sectional study compared sociodemographic, clinical and treatment characteristics, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among racial/ethnic groups in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) who are candidates for systemic therapy. METHODS: This study included adults with dermatologist- or dermatology practitioner-diagnosed AD enrolled in the CorEvitas AD Registry (July 2020-July 2021). All patients initiated systemic therapy within 12 months prior to or at enrollment or had moderate-to-severe AD (vIGA-AD® ≥ 3 and Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI] ≥ 12) at enrollment. Patients were categorized into five mutually exclusive racial/ethnic groups: non-Hispanic White, Black, Asian, Other/Multiracial, and Hispanic (any race). Patient, clinical, and treatment characteristics were captured at enrollment. Differences in means or proportions of characteristics among racial/ethnic groups were descriptively summarized using effect sizes. Adjusted prevalence ratios and mean differences were estimated (White race/ethnicity group as the reference category) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Among 1288 patients, 64% (n = 822) were White, 13% (n = 167) Black, 10% (n = 129) Asian, 8% (n = 97) Hispanic, and 6% (n = 73) Other/Multiracial. In adjusted analyses, statistically more severe EASI lichenification was noted among Black compared with White patients at the head and neck (mean difference, 0.21, [95% CI 0.06, 0.36]; p = 0.01), trunk (0.32, [0.17, 0.47]; p < 0.001), upper extremities (0.27, [0.09, 0.44]; p = 0.008), and lower extremities (0.39, [0.21, 0.57]; p < 0.001). Statistically more severe EASI lichenification was observed among Asian vs White patients in certain areas (mean difference, head and neck, 0.22 [0.04, 0.39], p = 0.01; trunk, 0.25 [0.07, 0.43], p < 0.001; lower extremities, 0.22 [0.01, 0.43], p < 0.001) and SCORing for AD lichenification (mean difference: 0.34 [0.15, 0.52]; p < 0.001). Significantly higher mean pruritus over the past 7 days for Black (mean difference: 0.63 [0.01, 1.26] and Hispanic patients (0.60 [0.11, 1.09]; p = 0.03) vs White patients was observed. Among AD clinical features, the prevalence of facial erythema was significantly lower among Black compared with White patients (prevalence ratio = 0.38, [0.22, 0.67]; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Racial/ethnic differences exist in sociodemographic, clinical and treatment characteristics, disease severity, and PROs among real-world AD patients who are candidates for systemic therapy. Recognizing these variations may be of critical importance for dermatologists for the design and delivery of targeted/personalized medicine approaches.

Patch Testing to Paraphenylenediamine: The North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience (1994-2018).

Background/Objectives: Paraphenylenediamine (PPD) is an aromatic amine dye that may cause allergic contact dermatitis. This study examines the epidemiology of allergic patch test reactions to PPD. Methods: This retrospective analysis characterizes individuals tested to PPD (1% petrolatum) by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (1994-2018). Demographics and dermatitis site(s) were compared between PPD-allergic and PPD-negative patients. PPD reactions were analyzed by reaction strength, clinical relevance, occupational relatedness, and source as well as coreactivity with structurally related compounds. Results: Of 54,917 patients tested to PPD, 3095 (5.6%) had an allergic patch test reaction. Compared with PPD-negative patients, PPD-allergic patients had significantly greater odds of age >40 years (odds ratio [OR] 1.55 [95% confidence interval; CI 1.43-1.69]) and female gender (OR 1.52 [95% CI 1.41-1.66]), but lower odds of being White (OR 0.66 [95% CI 0.60-0.71]). The most common primary anatomic sites of dermatitis were face (25.5%), hands (21.9%), and scattered/generalized pattern (15.5%). Over half (55.3%) of PPD reactions were ++ or +++ at the final reading and 60.9% were currently relevant. Common exposure sources included hair dye (73.5%) and clothing/shoes/apparel (3.9%). Occupationally related reactions occurred in 8.3%, most commonly in hairdressers/cosmetologists (72.8%). The most common coreactions were benzocaine (11.3%), N-isopropyl-N'-phenyl-p-phenylenediamine (6.7%), disperse dye mix (6.5%), and black rubber mix (5.1%). Conclusions: The 24-year percentage of allergic reactions to PPD was 5.6%. PPD allergy was associated with female gender and age >40 years. PPD allergic patients were less likely to be White. Allergic reactions were usually clinically relevant and hair dye was the most frequently identified source.

Patch Testing to Chlorhexidine Digluconate, 1% Aqueous: North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience, 2015-2020.

Background: Chlorhexidine is an antiseptic that may cause allergic contact dermatitis. Objectives: To describe the epidemiology of chlorhexidine allergy and characterize positive patch test reactions. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients patch tested to chlorhexidine digluconate 1% aqueous by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 2015-2020. Results: Of 14,731 patients tested to chlorhexidine digluconate, 107 (0.7%) had an allergic reaction; of these, 56 (52.3%) reactions were currently clinically relevant. Most (59%) reactions were mild (+), followed by strong (++, 18.7%) and very strong (+++, 6.5%). Common primary dermatitis anatomic sites in chlorhexidine-positive patients were hands (26.4%), face (24.5%), and scattered/generalized distribution (17.9%). Compared with negative patients, chlorhexidine-positive patients were significantly more likely to have dermatitis involving the trunk (11.3% vs 5.1%; P = 0.0036). The most commonly identified source category was skin/health care products (n = 41, 38.3%). Only 11 (10.3%) chlorhexidine reactions were occupationally related; of these, 81.8% were in health care workers. Conclusions: Chlorhexidine digluconate allergy is uncommon, but often clinically relevant. Involvement of the hands, face, and scattered generalized patterns was frequent. Occupationally related reactions were found predominantly in health care workers.

Patch Testing With Cobalt in Adults: A North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience, 2001-2018.

Background: Cobalt is a recognized cause of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD); however, detailed information on patient characteristics, sites, and sources is lacking. Objective: The aim of the study is to assess trends in patch test reactions to cobalt and associated patient characteristics, common sources, and body sites affected. Methods: The study used a retrospective analysis of adult patients who were patch tested to cobalt by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group between 2001 and 2018 (n = 41,730). Results: Overall, 2986 (7.2%) and 1362 (3.3%) had allergic or currently relevant patch test reaction to cobalt, respectively. Patients with versus without an allergic patch test reaction to cobalt were more likely to be female, employed, have a history of eczema or asthma, be Black, Hispanic, or Asian, and have occupational-related dermatitis. The most commonly identified sources of cobalt in allergic patients included jewelry, belts, and cement, concrete, and mortar. Affected body site(s) varied by cobalt source among patients with currently relevant reactions. Occupational relevance was found in 16.9% of patients with positive reactions. Conclusions: Positive patch test reactions to cobalt were common. The most common body sites were the hands, and affected site varied by the source of cobalt.

North American Contact Dermatitis Group Patch Test Results: 2019-2020.

Background: Patch testing is an important diagnostic tool for assessment of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). Objective: This study documents the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) patch testing results from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2020. Methods: At 13 centers in North America, patients were tested in a standardized manner with a screening series of 80 allergens, and, as indicated, supplemental allergens. Results: Overall, 4121 patients were tested; 2871 (69.7%) had at least 1 positive/allergic patch test reaction and 2095 patients (51.2%) had a primary diagnosis of ACD. The most commonly positive allergens were nickel (18.2%), methylisothiazolinone (MI) (13.8%), fragrance mix (FM) I (12.8%), hydroperoxides of linalool (HPL) (11.1%), and benzisothiazolinone (BIT) (10.4%). Compared with that of 2017-2018, prevalence of top 20 allergens statistically increased for FM I, HPL, BIT, propolis, and hydroperoxides of limonene (3.5%). For the first time, MI positivity did not increase between reporting periods. Approximately one-fifth of patients (20.3%) had ≥1 clinically relevant reaction(s) to allergens/substances not on the NACDG series. Conclusions: The epidemic of MI contact allergy in North America may have reached a plateau. Patch testing using a robust screening series, and supplemental allergens as indicated, is necessary for comprehensive evaluation of ACD.

Patch Testing With Benzophenone-3 and -4: The North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience, 2013-2020.

Background: Benzophenone (BZP)-3 and BZP-4 are ultraviolet (UV) absorbers used in sunscreens and personal care products (PCPs) and may cause allergic contact dermatitis. Objective: To characterize positive patch test reactions to BZP-3 (10% in petrolatum [pet]) and BZP-4 (2% pet) in a screening allergen series. Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients tested to BZP-3 and BZP-4 was conducted by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group from 2013 to 2020. Results: Of 19,618 patients patch tested to BZP-3 and BZP-4, 103 (0.5%) and 323 (1.6%) had positive reactions, respectively: 413 (2.1%) reacted to at least 1 BZP (BZP-positive patient). As compared with BZP-negative patients, BZP-positive patients were significantly more likely to have a history of hay fever (39.3% vs 33.4%, P = 0.0134), history of atopic dermatitis (39.8% vs 30.7%, P = 0.0001), and facial involvement (37.4% vs 32.2%, P = 0.0272). Most reactions were currently clinically relevant (BZP-3: 90.4%; BZP-4: 65.8%). Common identified sources included PCPs and sunscreens. Coreactivity between BZP-3 and BZP-4 was low: 13.5% (14/104) of BZP-3-positive patients were allergic to BZP-4 and 4.3% (14/322) of BZP-4-positive patients were allergic to BZP-3. Conclusions: Eight-year prevalence of BZP positivity was 2.1%. Reactions were frequently clinically relevant and linked to PCPs and sunscreens.

Prevalence and trend of allergen sensitization in patients with cheilitis referred for patch testing, North American Contact Dermatitis Group data, 2001-2018.

BACKGROUND: An updated understanding of allergic contact cheilitis is needed. OBJECTIVES: To characterize clinical characteristics and allergen relevance in patients with cheilitis referred for patch testing. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 43 772 patients patch tested with the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) screening series from 2001 to 2018. RESULTS: Overall, 2094 patients (4.8%) had lips as one of three sites of dermatitis, 1583 (3.6%) had lips as the primary site and 1167 (2.7%) had lips as the sole site of dermatitis. Prevalences of cheilitis at any, primary, and sole sites significantly increased throughout the study cycle from 2001-2002 (2.7%, 2.2% and 1.7%) to 2017-2018 (7.8%, 5.2% and 3.7%). Approximately 60% of patients with any, a primary, or a sole site of cheilitis had one or more positive allergic patch-test reactions compared to 65% of those without cheilitis. CONCLUSION: Patients with cheilitis who were referred for patch testing had high rates of positive and relevant allergens. More than one in four patients with any, primary, or sole cheilitis had a positive reaction to non-NACDG screening allergens (28.0%, 26.8%, 31.1% vs. 21.6%) compared to patients without cheilitis, emphasizing the need for expanded patch test series in cheilitis.

Patch testing with cobalt in children and adolescents: North American contact dermatitis group experience, 2001-2018.

BACKGROUND: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to cobalt is more common in children and adolescents than adults. However, detailed information on sites and sources of cobalt ACD is limited. OBJECTIVES: To assess trends in positive and clinically relevant patch test reactions to cobalt in children and associated patient characteristics, common sources and body sites affected. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of children (<18 years) patch tested to cobalt by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group between 2001 and 2018. RESULTS: Of 1919 children patch tested, 228 (11.9%) and 127 (6.6%) had a positive/allergic or currently relevant patch test reaction to cobalt, respectively. The most common primary body sites affected were scattered generalized (30.0%), face, not otherwise specified (10.6%) and trunk (10.1%). Patients with allergic and currently relevant allergic patch test reactions were more likely to have a primary site of trunk (p = 0.0160 and p = 0.0008) and ears (p = 0.0005 and p < 0.0001). Affected body site(s) varied by cobalt source among patients with currently relevant reactions, especially for less common sources. The most commonly identified sources of cobalt included jewellery, belts and clothing. CONCLUSIONS: Positive patch test reactions to cobalt were common in children. The most common body site was scattered generalized and the sources of cobalt varied by body site.

Patch testing with glucosides: The North American Contact Dermatitis Group experience, 2009-2018.

BACKGROUND: Alkyl glucosides are nonionic surfactants that are increasingly used in personal care products. OBJECTIVE: To characterize positive patch test reactions to decyl glucoside (5% petrolatum, tested 2009-2018) and lauryl glucoside (3% petrolatum, tested 2017-2018). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group. RESULTS: Of 24,097 patients patch tested to decyl and/or lauryl glucoside, 470 (2.0%) had positive reactions. Compared with glucoside-negative patients, glucoside-positive patients had higher odds of occupational skin disease (13.4% vs 10.1%; P = .0207), history of hay fever (38.5% vs 31.6%; P = .0014), atopic dermatitis (39.0% vs 28.6%; P < .0001), and/or asthma (21.8% vs 16.5%; P = .0023). Most glucoside reactions (83.9%) were currently relevant. The most common source was personal care products (63.0%), especially hair products (16.5%) and skin cleansers (15.2%). Of 4933 patients tested to decyl and lauryl glucoside, 134 (2.7%) were positive to 1 or both; 43.4% (43 of 99) of decyl-positive patients were also positive to lauryl glucoside and 55.1% (43/78) of lauryl glucoside patients were also positive to decyl glucoside. LIMITATIONS: The cohort predominantly reflects a referral population, and follow-up after testing was not captured. CONCLUSION: Glucoside positivity occurred in 2.0% of the tested patients. Reactions were often clinically relevant and linked to personal care products. Cross-reactivity was >40%.

Lanolin Allergic Reactions: North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience, 2001 to 2018.

BACKGROUND: Lanolin is an important cause of allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to describe the epidemiology of lanolin allergy and to assess trends in patch test reactions to lanolin over time. METHODS: This study used a retrospective analysis of patients patch tested with lanolin alcohol 30% or Amerchol L-101 50% in petrolatum by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group between 2001 and 2018 (n = 43,691). RESULTS: Overall, 1431 (3.3%) had a positive reaction, and 1238 (2.8%) were currently relevant. Prevalence of lanolin allergy was 4.63% between 2011 and 2018 (P < 0.0001). Most lanolin-allergic patients had + (52%) reactions; 18%, and 6% had ++ and +++ reactions, respectively. Common primary anatomic sites of dermatitis were the hands (20.7%), scattered/generalized distribution (19.6%), and face (17.0%). Allergic reactions to lanolin were more common in children (4.5%) than in adults (3.2%, P = 0.0018). Compared with nonallergic patients, lanolin-allergic patients were more likely to have history of eczema or hay fever, male sex, older than 40 years, or Black race (P < 0.05). Common lanolin sources were personal care products and drugs/medications. Only 2.24% of the positive reactions were linked to occupation. CONCLUSIONS: Lanolin sensitivity was common. Reactions were often clinically relevant and linked to personal care products and medications.

Occupational Contact Dermatitis in Dental Personnel: A Retrospective Analysis of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group Data, 2001 to 2018.

BACKGROUND: Dental personnel are at risk of developing occupational contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVES: The aims of the study were to determine prevalence of occupational contact dermatitis in dental personnel referred for patch testing and to characterize relevant allergens and sources. METHODS: The study used a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) data, 2001-2018. RESULTS: Of 41,109 patients, 585 (1.4%) were dental personnel. Dental personnel were significantly more likely than nondental personnel to be female (75.7% vs 67.4%, P < 0.0001), have occupationally related dermatitis (35.7% vs 11.5%, P < 0.0001), and/or have primary hand involvement (48.6% vs 22.5%, P < 0.0001). More than one quarter of dental personnel (62/585, 27.7%) had 1 or more occupationally related allergic patch test reaction(s). There were 249 occupationally related reactions to NACDG screening allergens, most commonly glutaraldehyde (18.1%), thiuram mix (16.1%), and carba mix (14.1%). The most common sources of NACDG screening allergens were gloves (30.7%), dental materials (26.6%), and sterilizing solutions (13.1%). Seventy-three dental personnel (12.5%) had 1 or more positive patch test reactions to occupationally related allergen(s)/substances not on the screening series. Occupationally related irritant contact dermatitis was identified in 22.2% (n = 130) of dental personnel, most commonly to nonskin soaps/detergents/disinfectants (32.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Occupational contact dermatitis is common in dental personnel referred for patch testing. Comprehensive testing beyond screening series is important in these patients.

Occupational contact dermatitis: Retrospective analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group Data, 2001 to 2016.

BACKGROUND: Patch testing is an important diagnostic tool for suspected allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in occupational settings. OBJECTIVE: Provide an overview of occupational skin disease (OSD) and an analysis of occupational ACD in North American patients undergoing patch testing between 2001and 2016. METHODS: Patients with OSD were analyzed for frequency of allergic reactions to a screening series of allergens, occupational relevance, location of skin disease, and exposure sources. Demographic, occupation, and industry information were recorded. RESULTS: Of 38,614 patients evaluated, 4471 (11.6%) had OSD, of whom 3150 (70.5%) had ACD. The most common occupationally related allergens included rubber accelerators, preservatives, and bisphenol A epoxy resin. Hands (75.8%), arms (30.0%), and face (15.9%) were common sites of dermatitis. The occupations most affected were service workers and machine operators. LIMITATIONS: Our cohort may not reflect the general working population. CONCLUSION: This study identified common occupational allergens, exposure sources, and occupations/industries at risk. This information may help the clinician evaluate and manage patients with occupational contact dermatitis.

Patch Testing to Carvone: North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience, 2009 to 2018.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Carvone, a flavoring agent, may cause allergic contact dermatitis. This study summarizes patch test reactions to carvone in patients tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 2009 to 2018. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of patients positive to carvone (5% petrolatum). Demographics were compared with those of patients who were negative. Other analyses included reaction strength, clinical relevance, coreactivity with other fragrance/flavor allergens, and exposure sources. RESULTS: Of 24,124 patients tested to carvone, 188 (0.78%) were positive. As compared with carvone-negative patients, carvone-positive patients were significantly more likely older than 40 years (P = 0.0284). Women (76.1%) and/or facial involvement (33.0%) were common in the carvone-positive group but not statistically different from carvone-negative patients; 73.3% (n = 138) of the reactions were currently relevant. Relevant sources were personal care products (46.3%, n = 87) and food (14.3%, n = 27). Coreactivity with other fragrance/flavor markers was present in 60.6% of carvone-positive patients, most commonly fragrance mix I (34.6%), balsam of Peru (24.5%), and cinnamic aldehyde (15.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Ten-year prevalence of carvone sensitivity was 0.78%. Most carvone-positive patients were female, were older than 40 years, and/or had facial dermatitis. Personal care products were the most common source. Two-fifths of carvone reactions would have been missed by relying on other fragrance/flavoring allergens.

Prevalence and trend of allergen sensitization in patients with a diagnosis of stasis dermatitis referred for patch testing, North American contact dermatitis group data, 2001-2016.

BACKGROUND: Few studies explored the relationship between stasis dermatitis (SD) and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). OBJECTIVE: To examine trends, associations, and clinical relevance of ACD in patients referred for patch testing who had a final SD diagnosis. METHODS: Retrospective analysis from 2001 to 2016 of 38,723 patients from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group. RESULTS: After patch testing, 303 (0.7%) patients were diagnosed with SD; 46.7% had a concomitant diagnosis of ACD. Patients with vs. without a final SD diagnosis had similar proportions of ≥ 1 positive allergic reaction (59.7% vs. 64.7%; Chi-square, P = 0.0724) but higher odds of allergic reactions to fragrance mix I, bacitracin, quaternium-15, Myroxylon pereirae, benzalkonium chloride, ethyleneurea melamine formaldehyde, diazolidinyl urea, and propylene glycol. The most commonly relevant allergens in patients with final SD diagnosis were fragrance mix I, Myroxylon pereirae, bacitracin, quaternium-15, and formaldehyde. The most common allergen sources were personal care products, topical medications and other health aid products. CONCLUSION: Nearly half of patients with a final SD diagnosis were also diagnosed with ACD, supporting the role of patch testing in select SD patients.

Patch Testing to Ethylhexylglycerin: The North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience, 2013-2018.

BACKGROUND: Ethylhexylglycerin (EHG) is a recently recognized contact allergen. OBJECTIVE: The aims of the study were to characterize individuals with positive patch test reactions to EHG and to analyze reaction strength, clinical relevance, and allergen sources. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of the patients patch tested to EHG (5% petrolatum) by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (2013-2018). RESULTS: Of 15,560 patients tested to EHG, 39 (0.25%) had positive (final interpretation of "allergic") reactions. Most were female (71.8%) and/or older than 40 years (76.9%). There were no statistically significant differences between age, sex, or atopic history when compared with EHG-negative patients. The most common anatomic sites of dermatitis were the face (28.2%) and scattered generalized distribution (25.6%). Most EHG-positive reactions were + (35.9%) or ++ (33.3%). Current clinical relevance was high (79.5%); none, however, were related to occupation. Personal care products were the most common source of exposure to EHG (59.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Ethylhexylglycerin is a rare contact allergen; the positive frequency of 0.25% is similar to other low allergenic preservatives including parabens, benzyl alcohol, and phenoxyethanol. The patch test concentration of 5.0% seems to be nonirritating. Although relatively uncommon, EHG reactions were usually clinically relevant (79.5%), often because of moisturizers/lotions/creams.