Contact dermatitis to hair cosmetics: Current diagnostic recommendations.

Hair cosmetics such as shampoos, hair dyes, bleaching agents or hair straightening creams contain frequent contact allergens. These can lead to allergic contact dermatitis especially in hairdressers, but also in their customers and in others who use hair products at home. While hairdressers suffer mainly from hand dermatitis, in customers and home-users, dermatitis primarily affects the head, neck and face. In this mini-review, we propose a diagnostic algorithm in two steps, based on patch testing, that can be used for the assessment of suspected hair product-induced contact dermatitis. In a first step, we recommend testing the German Contact Allergy Group (DKG) standard series, DKG ointment series, DKG preservative series, DKG hairdresser series, DKG fragrance series as well as (especially in hairdressers) the DKG rubber series. In a second step, if the culprit allergen cannot be identified with the help of the standardized test series and there is a well-founded suspicion, testing the patient's own products, such as shampoos, hair sprays and hair dyes, is recommended.

Structured diagnostic assessment of hand eczema in cleaning workers.

Hand dermatitis is a widespread problem among cleaners. In most cases, it is caused by a combination of wet work and contact with irritants, which can result in irritant (toxic) contact dermatitis. In some cases, the irritant contact eczema then evolves into allergic contact dermatitis, although not all cases of allergic contact dermatitis are preceded by irritant contact dermatitis. This mini-review proposes a two-step diagnostic algorithm based on patch testing, which can be used if allergic contact dermatitis is suspected in cleaning workers. As a first step, we recommend performing the DKG standard series (German Contact allergy research group, DKG), the DKG rubber series, both DKG "further fragrances" series as well as the DKG preservative and disinfectant series. If there are clear hints of an occupational contact dermatitis, the first step can also involve testing patients' own products alongside the standardized tests. In a second step (at the latest), if standardized tests do not suffice to identify the culprit allergen and there is well-founded suspicion, we recommend testing the patients' own products. If necessary, the second step can also include testing the individual contact allergens contained in the screening mixes that are part of the standard series.

A phase I trial evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of a candidate tuberculosis vaccination regimen, ChAdOx1 85A prime - MVA85A boost in healthy UK adults.

BACKGROUND: This phase I trial evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of a candidate tuberculosis vaccination regimen, ChAdOx1 85A prime-MVA85A boost, previously demonstrated to be protective in animal studies, in healthy UK adults. METHODS: We enrolled 42 healthy, BCG-vaccinated adults into 4 groups: low dose Starter Group (n = 6; ChAdOx1 85A alone), high dose groups; Group A (n = 12; ChAdOx1 85A), Group B (n = 12; ChAdOx1 85A prime - MVA85A boost) or Group C (n = 12; ChAdOx1 85A - ChAdOx1 85A prime - MVA85A boost). Safety was determined by collection of solicited and unsolicited vaccine-related adverse events (AEs). Immunogenicity was measured by antigen-specific ex-vivo IFN-γ ELISpot, IgG serum ELISA, and antigen-specific intracellular IFN-γ, TNF-α, IL-2 and IL-17. RESULTS: AEs were mostly mild/moderate, with no Serious Adverse Events. ChAdOx1 85A induced Ag85A-specific ELISpot and intracellular cytokine CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses, which were not boosted by a second dose, but were boosted with MVA85A. Polyfunctional CD4+ T cells (IFN-γ, TNF-α and IL-2) and IFN-γ+, TNF-α+ CD8+ T cells were induced by ChAdOx1 85A and boosted by MVA85A. ChAdOx1 85A induced serum Ag85A IgG responses which were boosted by MVA85A. CONCLUSION: A ChAdOx1 85A prime - MVA85A boost is well tolerated and immunogenic in healthy UK adults.

Cytomegalovirus infection is a risk factor for tuberculosis disease in infants.

Immune activation is associated with increased risk of tuberculosis (TB) disease in infants. We performed a case-control analysis to identify drivers of immune activation and disease risk. Among 49 infants who developed TB disease over the first 2 years of life, and 129 healthy matched controls, we found the cytomegalovirus-stimulated (CMV-stimulated) IFN-γ response to be associated with CD8+ T cell activation (Spearman's rho, P = 6 × 10-8). A CMV-specific IFN-γ response was also associated with increased risk of developing TB disease (conditional logistic regression; P = 0.043; OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.02-4.83) and shorter time to TB diagnosis (Log Rank Mantel-Cox, P = 0.037). CMV+ infants who developed TB disease had lower expression of NK cell-associated gene signatures and a lower frequency of CD3-CD4-CD8- lymphocytes. We identified transcriptional signatures predictive of TB disease risk among CMV ELISpot-positive (area under the receiver operating characteristic [AUROC], 0.98, accuracy, 92.57%) and -negative (AUROC, 0.9; accuracy, 79.3%) infants; the CMV- signature was validated in an independent infant study (AUROC, 0.71; accuracy, 63.9%). A 16-gene signature that previously identified adolescents at risk of developing TB disease did not accurately classify case and control infants in this study. Understanding the microbial drivers of T cell activation, such as CMV, could guide new strategies for prevention of TB disease in infants.

Sex differences in the pharmacology of itch therapies-a narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Chronic itch is the most common skin-related condition, associated with a high psychosocial and economic burden. In recent years, increasing evidence of sex differences in the perception, clinical presentation and treatment requirements of itch points towards potential benefits when using sex-adapted therapies. It is well-known that body composition, absorption, metabolism, elimination and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) differ between sexes, but only little is known about the impact of sex in the pharmacology of itch treatments, which could help to rationalise sex-adapted treatment strategies. AIM: To evaluate and review sex effects in the pharmacokinetics and /-dynamics of drugs used to treat itch. METHODS: In this narrative review we performed a PubMed and MEDLINE (Ovid) search using the terms (itch OR pruritus) AND (gender OR sex) AND (drug OR medication OR pharmacokinetics OR pharmacodynamics). Additional searches were performed for the topical and systemic drugs recommended by the European Guideline on Chronic Pruritus. RESULTS: We found numerous reports with variable levels of evidence of sex effects with respect to the pharmacokinetics and/or pharmacodynamics of 14 drug classes used for the treatment of itch, including a total of 19 systemic and 3 topical drugs. Women seem to present higher plasma levels of several drugs used in itch treatment, including tri- and tetracyclic antidepressants (e.g. doxepin, amitriptyline, mirtazapine), serotonin reuptake inhibitors (e.g. paroxetine, sertraline, fluoxetine), immunosuppressive drugs (e.g. cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil), serotonin receptor antagonists (e.g. ondansetron) and betablockers (e.g. propranolol). Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were generally more common in women. Being female was reported to be an independent risk factor for QTc-prolongation associated with antihistamines and tetracyclic antidepressants. Additionally, women seem to be more prone to sedative effects of antihistamines, and to suffer from a higher frequency as well as severity of side effects with systemic calcineurin inhibitors, opioid agonists, and opioid antagonists. Women were also sensitised more often to topically applied drugs. Of note, apart from only one experimental study with capsaicin, none of these reports were designed specifically to assess the effect of sex (and gender) in the treatment of itch. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Our review supports previous reports that sex is of importance in the pharmacokinetics and /-dynamics of several drugs used to treat itch although those drugs were mostly evaluated for non-itch indications. However, the results are limited by methodological limitations evident in most studies such as underrepresentation of women in clinical trials. This emphasises the need to study the impact of sex (and gender) in future itch trials to yield better outcomes and prevent ADRs in both sexes.