Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 63
Filtrar
2.
Contact Dermatitis ; 90(3): 262-265, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38093676

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Over the last 10 years, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from acrylate-containing nail cosmetics (acrylic nails, gel nails, gel nail polish) has been reported repeatedly. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the frequency and clinical features of ACD in nail cosmetics in a university hospital in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study in patients diagnosed with ACD from acrylate-containing nail cosmetics at the Amsterdam University Medical Centers between January 2015 and August 2023. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients, all women, were diagnosed with ACD from nail cosmetics, representing 1.6% of all individuals and 2.3% of all women patch tested in this period. Sixty-five of sixty-seven (97%) subjects had a positive patch test to 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA). Forty-nine patients (73%) were consumers and 18 (27%) were professional nail stylists. The sites most frequently affected with dermatitis were the fingers (79%), hands (40%) and the head and/or neck. Avoidance of contact with acrylate-containing products resulted in complete clearing of dermatitis in 80% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: ACD from acrylate-containing nail cosmetics is frequent in women patch tested in Amsterdam. Nearly all were identified by a positive patch test to 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate in the (meth)acrylate series or the European baseline series.


Asunto(s)
Cosméticos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto , Humanos , Femenino , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/diagnóstico , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/epidemiología , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Uñas , Metacrilatos/efectos adversos , Acrilatos/efectos adversos , Cosméticos/efectos adversos , Pruebas del Parche/métodos
3.
Contact Dermatitis ; 90(1): 1-16, 2024 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37778325

RESUMEN

This is the second part of a literature review of the clinical aspects of contact allergy to and allergic contact dermatitis from 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA). Topics include cross- and co-sensitization, atypical manifestations of contact allergy, frequency of positive patch tests to HEMA compared with other (meth)acrylates, sensitivity of HEMA as a screening agent, the presence of HEMA in commercial products, and practical information on patch testing procedures. Primary sensitization to methacrylates including HEMA may result in methacrylate and acrylate cross-sensitization. There is a strong cross-allergy between HEMA, ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (EGDMA), and hydroxypropyl methacrylate; many reactions to EGDMA are cross-reactions to primary HEMA sensitization. Rare atypical manifestations of HEMA-allergy include lichen planus, lymphomatoid papulosis, systemic contact dermatitis, leukoderma after positive patch tests, and systemic side effects such as nausea, diarrhoea, malaise, and palpitations. The occurrence of respiratory disease caused by methacrylates such as asthma is not infrequent. HEMA is the most frequently patch test-positive methacrylate. It is a good screening agent for allergy to other (meth)acrylates. Patch test sensitization to HEMA 2% pet. is extremely rare. There are (some) indications that HEMA is frequently used in dental products and nail cosmetics.


Asunto(s)
Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto , Dermatitis Profesional , Humanos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/diagnóstico , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/epidemiología , Pruebas del Parche/métodos , Dermatitis Profesional/etiología , Metacrilatos/efectos adversos , Acrilatos/efectos adversos
4.
Contact Dermatitis ; 90(1): 60-65, 2024 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37848187

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: During the last 15-20 years, allergic contact dermatitis from acrylates-containing nail cosmetics (acrylic nails, gel nails, gel nail polish) has been increasingly reported. 2-Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) is considered to be the major allergenic culprit; few data on its presence in nail cosmetics are available. OBJECTIVES: To investigate (1) the frequency in which HEMA and di-HEMA trimethylhexyl dicarbamate are present in nail cosmetics; (2) whether nail cosmetics comply with EU regulations; (3) which other (meth)acrylates are present in nail cosmetics and how often. METHODS: One-line market survey. RESULTS: HEMA was present in nearly 60% of 394 cosmetic nail products and di-HEMA trimethylhexyl dicarbamate in 34%. Mandatory warnings on the packages of products containing HEMA were absent in 35% ('For professional use only') resp. 55% ('Can cause an allergic reaction'). Forty-five other (meth)acrylates were identified, of which the most frequent were hydroxypropyl methacrylate (25%), isobornyl methacrylate (16%) and trimethylolpropane triacrylate (12%). Some ingredient lists mentioned non-INCI names or non-specific names. CONCLUSIONS: HEMA was by far the most common ingredient of nail cosmetics, being present in nearly 60% of the products. Violations of EU legislation occurred in >30% (mandatory warnings missing) resp. 10% (mislabelling) of nail cosmetics.


Asunto(s)
Cosméticos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto , Humanos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Uñas , Pruebas del Parche/efectos adversos , Metacrilatos/efectos adversos , Acrilatos/efectos adversos , Cosméticos/efectos adversos
5.
Contact Dermatitis ; 90(5): 466-469, 2024 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38146793

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: 2-Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) was added to the European baseline series (EBS) in 2019. Few recent data are available on the frequency and relevance of positive reactions to this hapten. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the frequency and relevance of positive patch tests to HEMA in the EBS in a university hospital in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective study in patients with positive patch tests to HEMA investigated between June 2019 and August 2023. RESULTS: Of 2927 consecutive patients, 88 (79 women and 9 men; 3.0%) had a positive reaction to HEMA. The prevalence in women was 3.9%, in men 1.0%. Forty-three (49%) reactions were judged to be of current clinical relevance and 21 (24%) of past relevance. In this group of 64 patients with relevant reactions, 18 (28%) had occupational contact with (meth)acrylate-containing products, of who 11 (61%) were nail stylists. In 46 patients with non-occupational allergic contact dermatitis, 31 (67%) had allergic reactions to nail cosmetics. Glues and glue-containing products accounted for 22% of the materials causing allergic contact dermatitis and dental products for 8%. CONCLUSIONS: Allergic reactions to HEMA are very frequent in women investigated in Amsterdam. Nearly two thirds of cases were caused by nail cosmetics.


Asunto(s)
Cosméticos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto , Dermatitis Profesional , Masculino , Humanos , Femenino , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/diagnóstico , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/epidemiología , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Pruebas del Parche/métodos , Metacrilatos/efectos adversos , Acrilatos/efectos adversos , Dermatitis Profesional/diagnóstico , Dermatitis Profesional/epidemiología , Dermatitis Profesional/etiología
6.
Contact Dermatitis ; 89(6): 401-433, 2023 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37752620

RESUMEN

2-Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) has been increasingly recognised as a contact allergen and was added to the European baseline series in 2019. In this article (2 parts), the results of an extensive literature review of the clinical aspects of contact allergy/allergic contact dermatitis to HEMA are presented. In part 1, the epidemiology of HEMA contact allergy is discussed and detailed information on published case series and case reports presented. HEMA is an important cause of contact allergy/allergic contact dermatitis in North America and Europe with recent prevalences of >3% in the USA + Canada and 1.5%-3.7% in Europe. Currently, most cases are caused by nail cosmetics, both in consumers and professional nail stylists. In our literature review, we have found 24 studies presenting case series of patients with allergic contact dermatitis attributed to HEMA and 168 case reports. However, the presence of HEMA in the products causing ACD was established in only a minority. Part 2 will discuss cross- and co-sensitisation, and other skin reactions to HEMA, will assess whether HEMA is the most frequent (meth)acrylate allergen and how sensitive HEMA as a screening agent is, investigate the presence of HEMA in commercial products and provide practical information on patch testing procedures.


Asunto(s)
Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto , Dermatitis Profesional , Humanos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Dermatitis Profesional/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Metacrilatos , Acrilatos , Alérgenos , Pruebas del Parche/métodos
7.
Contact Dermatitis ; 86(6): 443-479, 2022 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35233782

RESUMEN

The literature on positive patch test results in drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is reviewed. One hundred and five drugs were identified that have together caused 536 positive patch tests in 437 DRESS patients. By far, the most reactions (n = 145) were caused by carbamazepine, followed by amoxicillin, isoniazid, phenytoin, ethambutol, fluindione, phenobarbital, rifampicin, and ceftriaxone; 43 drugs each caused a single case only. The drug classes causing the highest number of reactions were anticonvulsants (39%), beta-lactam antibiotics (20%), antituberculosis agents (11%), non-beta-lactam antibiotics (6%), and iodinated contrast media (5%). The sensitivity of patch testing (percentage of positive reactions) is high for anticonvulsants (notably carbamazepine), beta-lactam antibiotics (notably amoxicillin), and, possibly, iodinated contrast media. Allopurinol and sulfasalazine frequently cause DRESS but never give positive patch tests. Patch testing in DRESS appears to be safe, although mild recurrence of DRESS symptoms, mostly skin reactions, may not be rare. Multiple drug hypersensitivity was found to occur in 16% of all patients, but it is argued that the true frequency is higher. Clinical aspects of DRESS, including diagnosing the disease and identifying culprit drugs (patch tests, intradermal tests, in vitro tests, challenge tests) are also provided, emphasizing the role of patch testing.


Asunto(s)
Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidad a Medicamentos , Eosinofilia , Amoxicilina , Anticonvulsivantes/efectos adversos , Antituberculosos , Carbamazepina/efectos adversos , Medios de Contraste/efectos adversos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/complicaciones , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidad a Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidad a Medicamentos/etiología , Eosinofilia/inducido químicamente , Eosinofilia/diagnóstico , Humanos , Pruebas del Parche/efectos adversos
8.
Contact Dermatitis ; 87(2): 119-141, 2022 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35187690

RESUMEN

The literature on positive patch-test results in acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP) is reviewed. Ninety-three drugs were identified that have together caused 259 positive patch tests in 248 patients with AGEP. The drug classes causing the highest number of reactions are beta-lactam antibiotics (25.9%), other antibiotics (20.8%), iodinated contrast media (7.3%), and corticosteroids (5.4%), together accounting for nearly 60% of all reactions. The highest number of reactions to individual drugs was to amoxicillin (n = 36), followed by pristinamycin (n = 25), diltiazem (n = 14), amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (n = 13), clindamycin (n = 11), and iomeprol (n = 8); 59 of the 93 drugs each caused a single case only. The "Top-10" drugs together caused over 50% of all reactions. The sensitivity of patch testing (percentage of positive reactions) in patients with AGEP is largely unknown, but may generally be ~50%, which also applies to pristinamycin. Patch testing in AGEP appears to be safe, although mild recurrence of AGEP skin symptoms or other rashes may occur occasionally. Clinical aspects of AGEP, including epidemiology, etiology and pathophysiology, clinical features, histology, treatment, and prognosis are briefly presented, as are diagnosing the disease and identifying the culprit drugs with patch tests, intradermal tests, in vitro tests, and challenge tests.


Asunto(s)
Pustulosis Exantematosa Generalizada Aguda , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto , Pustulosis Exantematosa Generalizada Aguda/diagnóstico , Pustulosis Exantematosa Generalizada Aguda/tratamiento farmacológico , Pustulosis Exantematosa Generalizada Aguda/etiología , Amoxicilina/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/complicaciones , Humanos , Pruebas del Parche , Pristinamicina/efectos adversos
9.
Dermatitis ; 33(1): 16-30, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35029348

RESUMEN

ABSTRACT: There is overwhelming evidence that many delayed cutaneous adverse drug reactions (beginning >6 hours after drug intake) are mediated by delayed-type (type IV) hypersensitivity, including maculopapular eruptions, erythroderma, symmetrical drug-related intertriginous and flexural exanthema/baboon syndrome, eczematous eruptions, fixed drug eruptions, acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis, and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms/drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome. Therefore, after resolution of the reaction, patch tests should be performed as first diagnostic method to identify the culprit drug(s). This article provides tools to perform drug patch tests properly and safely, discussing clinical history, indications, procedure, drug patch test materials, sensitivity, the meaning of negative patch tests, and safety of the procedure. In addition, a literature review of eruptions and culprit drugs is provided in tabular format.


Asunto(s)
Erupciones por Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidad a Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Pruebas del Parche/métodos , Erupciones por Medicamentos/etiología , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidad a Medicamentos/etiología , Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos/etiología , Exantema/etiología , Humanos
10.
Contact Dermatitis ; 86(3): 145-164, 2022 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34837391

RESUMEN

The literature on systemic allergic dermatitis (SAD; also known as systemic contact dermatitis) is reviewed. Both topical drugs (from absorption through mucosae or skin) and systemic drugs (oral, parenteral, rectal) may be responsible for the disorder. The topical route appears to be rare with 41 culprit topical drugs found to cause SAD in 95 patients. Most reactions are caused by budesonide (especially from inhalation), bufexamac, and dibucaine. SAD from systemic drugs is infrequent with 95 culprit drugs found to cause SAD in 240 patients. The drugs most frequently implicated are mitomycin C, methylprednisolone (salt, ester), and hydrocortisone (salt). The largest group of culprit drugs consisted of corticosteroids (19%), being responsible for >30% of the reactions, of which nearly 40% were not caused by therapeutic drugs, but by drug provocation tests. The most frequent manifestations of SAD from drugs are eczematous eruptions (scattered, widespread, generalized, worsening, reactivation), maculopapular eruptions, symmetrical drug-related intertriginous and flexural exanthema (SDRIFE [baboon syndrome]) and widespread erythema or erythroderma. Therapeutic systemic drugs hardly ever cause reactivation of previously positive patch tests and infrequently of previous allergic contact dermatitis. The pathophysiology of SAD has received very little attention. Explanations for the rarity of SAD are suggested.


Asunto(s)
Erupciones por Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Erupciones por Medicamentos/etiología , Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos/complicaciones , Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/diagnóstico , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Humanos , Pruebas Cutáneas
11.
Nat Commun ; 12(1): 6560, 2021 11 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34772923

RESUMEN

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are among the most deleterious types of DNA damage as they can lead to mutations and chromosomal rearrangements, which underlie cancer development. Classical non-homologous end-joining (cNHEJ) is the dominant pathway for DSB repair in human cells, involving the DNA-binding proteins XRCC6 (Ku70) and XRCC5 (Ku80). Other DNA-binding proteins such as Zinc Finger (ZnF) domain-containing proteins have also been implicated in DNA repair, but their role in cNHEJ remained elusive. Here we show that ZNF384, a member of the C2H2 family of ZnF proteins, binds DNA ends in vitro and is recruited to DSBs in vivo. ZNF384 recruitment requires the poly(ADP-ribosyl) polymerase 1 (PARP1)-dependent expansion of damaged chromatin, followed by binding of its C2H2 motifs to the exposed DNA. Moreover, ZNF384 interacts with Ku70/Ku80 via its N-terminus, thereby promoting Ku70/Ku80 assembly and the accrual of downstream cNHEJ factors, including APLF and XRCC4/LIG4, for efficient repair at DSBs. Altogether, our data suggest that ZNF384 acts as a 'Ku-adaptor' that binds damaged DNA and Ku70/Ku80 to facilitate the build-up of a cNHEJ repairosome, highlighting a role for ZNF384 in DSB repair and genome maintenance.


Asunto(s)
Roturas del ADN de Doble Cadena , Transactivadores/metabolismo , Factores de Transcripción/metabolismo , ADN/metabolismo , Humanos , Transactivadores/genética , Factores de Transcripción/genética
12.
Dermatitis ; 32(4): 197-213, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34415695

RESUMEN

ABSTRACT: Allergic contact dermatitis from topical drugs is frequent and is seen in 10% to 17% of patients patch tested for suspected contact dermatitis. More than 360 drugs have been implicated as contact allergens, of which-generally-antibiotics, corticosteroids, local anesthetics, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are the most frequent culprits. This article provides an overview of allergic contact dermatitis to topical drugs, discussing their prevalence of sensitization, predisposing factors, clinical manifestations (both typical and atypical), the drugs described as allergens, cross-reactivity and coreactivity, and diagnostic procedures.


Asunto(s)
Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Administración Tópica , Reacciones Cruzadas , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/diagnóstico , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/epidemiología , Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos/complicaciones , Humanos , Pruebas del Parche , Prevalencia
13.
J Exp Med ; 217(11)2020 11 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32865561

RESUMEN

The autosomal recessive immunodeficiency, centromeric instability, and facial anomalies (ICF) syndrome is a genetically heterogeneous disorder. Despite the identification of the underlying gene defects, it is unclear how mutations in any of the four known ICF genes cause a primary immunodeficiency. Here we demonstrate that loss of ZBTB24 in B cells from mice and ICF2 patients affects nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) during immunoglobulin class-switch recombination and consequently impairs immunoglobulin production and isotype balance. Mechanistically, we found that ZBTB24 associates with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 (PARP1) and stimulates its auto-poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation. The zinc-finger in ZBTB24 binds PARP1-associated poly(ADP-ribose) chains and mediates the PARP1-dependent recruitment of ZBTB24 to DNA breaks. Moreover, through its association with poly(ADP-ribose) chains, ZBTB24 protects them from degradation by poly(ADP-ribose) glycohydrolase (PARG). This facilitates the poly(ADP-ribose)-dependent assembly of the LIG4/XRCC4 complex at DNA breaks, thereby promoting error-free NHEJ. Thus, we uncover ZBTB24 as a regulator of PARP1-dependent NHEJ and class-switch recombination, providing a molecular basis for the immunodeficiency in ICF2 syndrome.


Asunto(s)
Reparación del ADN por Unión de Extremidades/genética , Cara/anomalías , Cambio de Clase de Inmunoglobulina/genética , Mutación , Enfermedades de Inmunodeficiencia Primaria/genética , Proteínas Represoras/genética , Factores de Transcripción/genética , Animales , Linfocitos B/inmunología , Roturas del ADN , Cara/patología , Células HEK293 , Humanos , Región de Cambio de la Inmunoglobulina , Ratones , Poli(ADP-Ribosa) Polimerasa-1/metabolismo , Enfermedades de Inmunodeficiencia Primaria/sangre , Enfermedades de Inmunodeficiencia Primaria/patología , Proteínas Represoras/metabolismo , Factores de Transcripción/metabolismo , Transfección
14.
Arch Toxicol ; 94(5): 1655-1671, 2020 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32189037

RESUMEN

Damage to cellular macromolecules and organelles by chemical exposure evokes activation of various stress response pathways. To what extent different chemical stressors activate common and stressor-specific pathways is largely unknown. Here, we used quantitative phosphoproteomics to compare the signaling events induced by four stressors with different modes of action: the DNA damaging agent: cisplatin (CDDP), the topoisomerase II inhibitor: etoposide (ETO), the pro-oxidant: diethyl maleate (DEM) and the immunosuppressant: cyclosporine A (CsA) administered at an equitoxic dose to mouse embryonic stem cells. We observed major differences between the stressors in the number and identity of responsive phosphosites and the amplitude of phosphorylation. Kinase motif and pathway analyses indicated that the DNA damage response (DDR) activation by CDDP occurs predominantly through the replication-stress-related Atr kinase, whereas ETO triggers the DDR through Atr as well as the DNA double-strand-break-associated Atm kinase. CsA shares with ETO activation of CK2 kinase. Congruent with their known modes of action, CsA-mediated signaling is related to down-regulation of pathways that control hematopoietic differentiation and immunity, whereas oxidative stress is the most prominent initiator of DEM-modulated stress signaling. This study shows that even at equitoxic doses, different stressors induce distinctive and complex phosphorylation signaling cascades.


Asunto(s)
Proteoma/metabolismo , Animales , Proteínas de la Ataxia Telangiectasia Mutada , Diferenciación Celular , Cisplatino/toxicidad , Roturas del ADN de Doble Cadena , Etopósido/toxicidad , Humanos , Ratones , Estrés Oxidativo , Fosforilación , Transducción de Señal , Inhibidores de Topoisomerasa II
16.
Dermatitis ; 31(1): 13-35, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31433384

RESUMEN

This article gives an overview of fragrance allergy. The following subjects are discussed: composition of perfumes, contact with fragrances, diagnosing fragrance allergy, frequency of allergy, clinical picture of allergic contact dermatitis, culprit products, occupational contact dermatitis, and other adverse effects of fragrances. For diagnosing fragrance sensitization, personal products and a fragrance series may need to be tested in addition to the baseline series. In the general adult population, up to 4.5% may be allergic to fragrance materials, and in consecutive patients patch tested for suspected contact dermatitis, the frequency may reach 20% to 25%. More than 150 fragrances have caused contact allergy. The most frequent sensitizers are linalool and limonene hydroperoxides, hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde, treemoss and oakmoss absolute, isoeugenol, cinnamyl alcohol, and cinnamal. Culprit products for induction of sensitization are often deodorants, fine fragrances, and aftershaves. Occupational contact dermatitis from fragrances is seen occasionally. Other adverse effects are all discussed but occur infrequently.


Asunto(s)
Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Odorantes , Perfumes/efectos adversos , Monoterpenos Acíclicos/efectos adversos , Aldehídos/efectos adversos , Alérgenos/efectos adversos , Cosméticos , Ciclohexenos/efectos adversos , Desodorantes , Dermatitis Profesional/etiología , Eugenol/efectos adversos , Eugenol/análogos & derivados , Productos Domésticos , Humanos , Limoneno/efectos adversos , Pruebas del Parche , Propanoles/efectos adversos , Resinas de Plantas/efectos adversos , Terpenos/efectos adversos
17.
J Biol Chem ; 294(52): 20122-20134, 2019 12 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31699900

RESUMEN

Histone post-translational modifications (PTMs) are critical for processes such as transcription. The more notable among these are the nonacetyl histone lysine acylation modifications such as crotonylation, butyrylation, and succinylation. However, the biological relevance of these PTMs is not fully understood because their regulation is largely unknown. Here, we set out to investigate whether the main histone acetyltransferases in budding yeast, Gcn5 and Esa1, possess crotonyltransferase activity. In vitro studies revealed that the Gcn5-Ada2-Ada3 (ADA) and Esa1-Yng2-Epl1 (Piccolo NuA4) histone acetyltransferase complexes have the capacity to crotonylate histones. Mass spectrometry analysis revealed that ADA and Piccolo NuA4 crotonylate lysines in the N-terminal tails of histone H3 and H4, respectively. Functionally, we show that crotonylation selectively affects gene transcription in vivo in a manner dependent on Gcn5 and Esa1. Thus, we identify the Gcn5- and Esa1-containing ADA and Piccolo NuA4 complexes as bona fide crotonyltransferases that promote crotonylation-dependent transcription.


Asunto(s)
Histona Acetiltransferasas/metabolismo , Histonas/metabolismo , Proteínas de Saccharomyces cerevisiae/metabolismo , Secuencia de Aminoácidos , Crotonatos/química , Histona Acetiltransferasas/genética , Histonas/química , Lisina/química , Lisina/metabolismo , Espectrometría de Masas , Péptidos/análisis , Regiones Promotoras Genéticas , Procesamiento Proteico-Postraduccional , Saccharomyces cerevisiae/metabolismo , Proteínas de Saccharomyces cerevisiae/genética , Factores de Transcripción/genética , Factores de Transcripción/metabolismo , Transcripción Genética
18.
Dermatitis ; 30(6): 331-335, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31433385

RESUMEN

Limonene is a fragrance widely used in cosmetics and household products. Until recently, contact allergy to limonene was considered rare because positive patch tests to it were infrequently observed. In recent years, however, it has been demonstrated that exposure of limonene to oxygen (air) results in the formation of a number of oxidation products, of which the hydroperoxides have a far stronger sensitizing potency than the pure compound. By routine testing of patients suspected of contact dermatitis with hydroperoxides of limonene, high frequencies of positive reactions were found, indicating that these chemicals are important fragrance allergens. It should be realized, however, that a number of "positive" reactions may well be false-positive, irritant responses.


Asunto(s)
Alérgenos/efectos adversos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Productos Domésticos/efectos adversos , Limoneno/efectos adversos , Citrus , Cosméticos/efectos adversos , Cosméticos/química , Monoterpenos Ciclohexánicos/efectos adversos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/diagnóstico , Humanos , Peróxido de Hidrógeno , Aceites Volátiles , Oxidación-Reducción , Pruebas del Parche
19.
Dermatitis ; 30(4): 243-246, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31313746

RESUMEN

Linalool is a fragrance widely used in cosmetics and household products. Until recently, contact allergy to linalool was considered rare because positive patch tests to it were infrequently observed. In recent years, however, it has been demonstrated that exposure of linalool to oxygen (air) results in formation of a number of oxidation products, of which the hydroperoxides have a far stronger sensitizing potency than the pure compound. By routine testing of patients suspected of having contact dermatitis with hydroperoxides of linalool, high frequencies of positive reactions were found, indicating these chemicals are important fragrance allergens. It should be realized, however, that a number of "positive" reactions may well be false-positive, irritant responses.


Asunto(s)
Monoterpenos Acíclicos/efectos adversos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Perfumes/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Oxidación-Reducción , Pruebas del Parche
20.
Contact Dermatitis ; 81(3): 221-225, 2019 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31177535

RESUMEN

Positive reactions to fragrance mix I (FM I) are frequent in consecutively patch tested patients suspected of having allergic contact dermatitis. However, the FM I test preparations contain 5% of the emulsifier sorbitan sesquioleate (SSO), and it is well known that SSO can cause contact allergic reactions in its own right. Indeed, the available data show that some patients with contact allergy to SSO react to FM I but are not allergic to fragrances. When SSO is not tested, this situation may go unnoticed, a wrong diagnosis of fragrance allergy may be given to the patient, and unjustified advice to avoid fragrances and fragranced products will be given in such cases. To avoid such suboptimal patient care, we postulate that testing with SSO in all patch tested individuals is mandatory. As it is well known that only a minority of FM I-reactive patients will undergo a breakdown test with the ingredients and SSO, testing with SSO in all patients can only be achieved by adding it to the European baseline series. Not testing with SSO may also result in misinterpretation of patch test reactions to Myroxylon pereirae resin and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate in the baseline series, as both (may) contain SSO, and, for the same reason, of reactions to several other hapten test materials.


Asunto(s)
Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Emulsionantes/efectos adversos , Hexosas/efectos adversos , Pruebas del Parche/métodos , Europa (Continente) , Humanos , Perfumes/efectos adversos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA