Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact , Patch Tests , Phenylenediamines , Humans , Phenylenediamines/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Female , Coloring Agents/adverse effects , Scalp Dermatoses/chemically induced , Hypopigmentation/chemically induced , Male , Middle Aged , ScalpABSTRACT
Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors are anti-tumour agents that are frequently used for the treatment of neoplastic disorders. In addition to their cutaneous adverse effects, these drugs can rarely lead to erosive pustular dermatosis of the scalp. We report a case of a 67-year-old female who developed erosive pustular dermatosis of the scalp after being started on erlotinib from a trichoscopic perspective, which has been described in literature only once till now.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents , Scalp Dermatoses , Female , Humans , Aged , Scalp Dermatoses/chemically induced , Scalp Dermatoses/drug therapy , Scalp Dermatoses/pathology , Erlotinib Hydrochloride/adverse effects , Scalp/pathology , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Gefitinib is a selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) used for the treatment of malignant neoplasms. The most frequent skin complication during gefitinib therapy is an acneiform papulopustular eruption, usually distributed in the seborrheic areas but occasionally widespread. We report a patient with erosive pustular dermatosis of the scalp, a neutrophil-mediated skin disease presenting with sterile pustules evolving into erosions and crusts on the scalp, during treatment with the EGFR inhibitor gefitinib for lung cancer. A literature review of the drug-induced cases of this rare entity is provided.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Drug Eruptions/etiology , Gefitinib/adverse effects , Scalp Dermatoses/chemically induced , Skin Diseases, Vesiculobullous/chemically induced , Aged, 80 and over , Humans , MaleSubject(s)
Azo Compounds/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Hair Dyes/adverse effects , Patch Tests , Phenylenediamines/adverse effects , Scalp Dermatoses/chemically induced , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Drug Interactions , Female , Humans , Scalp Dermatoses/diagnosis , Time Factors , Young AdultSubject(s)
Benzoquinones/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Plant Oils/adverse effects , Allergens/adverse effects , Alopecia/drug therapy , Benzoquinones/immunology , Cross Reactions/immunology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/immunology , Facial Dermatoses/chemically induced , Female , Humans , Hydroquinones/immunology , Middle Aged , Nigella sativa , Scalp Dermatoses/chemically inducedSubject(s)
Antithyroid Agents/adverse effects , Carbimazole/adverse effects , Ectodermal Dysplasia/chemically induced , Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects/chemically induced , Scalp Dermatoses/chemically induced , Scalp Dermatoses/congenital , Adult , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications/drug therapySubject(s)
Anticonvulsants/adverse effects , Drug Eruptions/etiology , Lamotrigine/adverse effects , Pseudolymphoma/chemically induced , Anticonvulsants/administration & dosage , Child , Drug Eruptions/diagnosis , Drug Eruptions/pathology , Female , Humans , Lamotrigine/administration & dosage , Pseudolymphoma/diagnosis , Scalp Dermatoses/chemically induced , Scalp Dermatoses/diagnosis , Scalp Dermatoses/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: An essential step in ensuring the toxicological safety of cosmetic or personal care products is the evaluation of the skin sensitizing potential of product ingredients. OBJECTIVE: We used a standardized protocol from cosmetic trade industry and consumer safety groups to evaluate the sensitization potential of ingredients in 3 commercially available cleansing conditioners. METHODS: A total of 33 ingredients were evaluated. Each ingredient underwent (1) dermatological evaluation, (2) in silico analysis for irritation and sensitization potential, and (3) a literature evaluation to determine risk of sensitization. Consumer exposure level was compared with the weight-of-evidence no-expected sensitization induction level for the constituent. If a no-expected sensitization induction level for a specific ingredient was not available, the dermal sensitization threshold approach was used. A margin of safety was calculated for each constituent. RESULTS: The margins of safety for all evaluated ingredients in the cleansing conditioners were greater than 1. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates that exposure to the individual ingredients present in these cleansing conditioners would not be expected to induce dermal sensitization in a consumer under the examined exposure scenario.