Distribution of allergens detected on patch tests of patients with allergic contact dermatitis and investigation of their atopic background

Aim: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is a delayed hypersensitivity reaction to specific allergens that come in contact with the skin. Detection of the culprit allergen plays a central role in the effective treatment and management of this chronic disease. The present study aims to report distribution of allergens that cause ACD by analyzing patch test results, and investigate atopic background of these patients. Materials and Methods: Results from patch tests performed on patients with ACD in the Department of Adult Allergy and Clinical Immunology at a tertiary hospital in Anatolian side of Istanbul were retrospectively assessed. Data regarding age, gender, occupation, lesion localization, history of suspected exposure, total Immunoglobulin E levels, concomitant allergic rhinitis and skin prick test results were inspected. Results: Of the 131 patients, female/male ratio was 91 (69.5%)/40 (30.5%). Patch test results were negative in 56 (42.7%) patients, and positive for at least one allergen in 75 (57.3%) patients. Five most common allergens with a positive result were nickel sulphate (25.2%), gold sodium thiosulfate (13%), cobalt (9.9%), thiomersal (9.9%), and colophony (5.3%), respectively. A comparison between patch test results and genderdid not demonstrate any statistical significance. Young patients had a significantly higher positive reaction to thiomersal (p = 0.008). No correlation was found between atopic background and ACD. Conclusion: Patch test results significantly contribute in the differential diagnosis and management of patients with dermatitis. Metals and thiomersal were the most common allergens detected by patch tests in our study. This is in correlation with previous research. We believe that types of allergens may go through an alteration as the environment and lifestyle changes over time, and that our findings contribute to determine which allergens to be used in patch tests in the future.

PDF

___

1. Cohen DE, Rao S, Brancaccio RR. Use of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group standard 65-allergen series alone in the evaluation of allergic contact dermatitis: a series of 794 patients. Dermatitis 2008;19: 137-141.
2. Landeck L, Schalock PC, Baden LA, Neumann K, Gonzalez E. Patch-testing with the standard series at the Massachusetts General Hospital, 1998 to 2006. Dermatitis 2009;20: 89-94.
3. Tyssen JP, Linnenberg A, Manne T, Johansen JD. The epidemiology of contact allergy in the general population-prevalence and main findings. Contact Dermatitis. 2007; 57: 287-299.
4. Carlsen Bc, Menne T, Johonsen JD. 20 years of standard patch testing in eczema population with focus on patients with multiple contact allergies. Contact Dermatitis 2007; 57: 76-83.
5. Czarnobilska E, Obtulowicz K, Dyga W, Spiewak R. A half of schoolchildren with ‘ISAAC eczema’ are ill with allergic contact dermatitis. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology 2011; 25: 1104–1107
6. Nelson HS. Variables in allergy skin testing. In: Dolen W, ed. Skin Testing. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 2001:281–290.
7. Wahlberg JE. Patch testing. In: Rycroft RJG, Menne T, Frosch PJ, Lepoittevin JP,eds. Textbook of Contact Dermatitis. 3rd ed.Berlin:Springer-verlag, 2001. p.437-68
8. Reduta T, Bacharewicz J, Pawlos A. Patch test result in patients with allergic contact dermatitis in the Podlasie region. Postepderm Alergol 2013; 6: 350-357.
9. Shakoor Z, Al-Mutairi AS, Al-Shenaifi AF, Al-Abdulsalam AM, Al-Shirah BZ, Al-Harbi S. Screening for skin-sensitizing allergens among patients with clinically suspected allergic contact dermatitis. Saudi Med J 2017; 38: 922-927.
10. Türkmen D, Altunışık N. Malatya ilinde 169 alerik kontakt dermatitli hastada yama test sonuçları. Türkiye Klinikleri J Dermatol 2018; 28: 114-122
11. Shah M, Lewis FM, Gawkrodger DJ. Nickel as an occupational allergen. A survey of 368 nickel-sensitive subjects. Arch Dermatol 1998;134: 1231-1236.
12. Shum KW, Meyer JD, Chen Y, et al. Occupational contact dermatitis to nickel: experience of the British dermatologists (EPIDERM) and occupational physicians (OPRA) surveillance schemes. Occup Environ Med 2003; 60: 954-957
13. Warshaw EM, Aschenbeck KA, DeKoven et al. J Am Acad Dermatol.2018;79:664-671.
14. Ricciardi L, Arena A, Arena E, et al. Systemic nickel allergy syndrome: Epidemiological data from four Italian allergy units. International Journal of Immunopathology and Pharmacology. 2014; 27:131–136.
15. Ricciardi L, Arena A, Arena E, et al. Systemic nickel allergy syndrome: Epidemiological data from four Italian allergy units International Journal of Immunopathology and Pharmacology 2014; 27: 131–136.
16. Matsuzaka K, Mabuchi R, Nagasaka H, Yoshinari M, Inoue T. Improvement of eczematous symptoms after removal of amalgam-like metal in alveolar bone. Bull. Tokyo Dent. Coll 2006; 47: 13–17.
17. Laeijendecker R, Dekker SK, Burger PM, Mulder PG, Van Joost T, Neumann MH. Oral lichen planus and allergy to dental amalgam restorations. Arch Dermatol 2004; 140: 1434–1438.
18. Yaqob A, Danersund A, Stejskal VD, Lindvall A, Hudecek R, Lindh U. Metal-specific lymphocyte reactivity is downregulated after dental metal replacement. Neuro Endocrinol Lett 2006; 27: 189–197.
19. Marcusson JA. Contact allergies to nickel sulfate, gold sodium thiosulfate and palladium chloride in patients claiming sideeffects from dental alloy components. Contact Dermatitis 1996;34: 320-323.
20. Fowler J Jr, Taylor J, Storrs F, et al. Gold allergy in North America. Am J Contact Dermat 2001;12: 3-5
21. Wohrl S, Hammer W, Focke M,Gotz M, Jarisch R. Patch testing in children, adults ant the elderly: Influence of age and sex on sensitization patterns. Pediatr Dermatol 2003; 20: 119-123.
22. Yu DS, Kim HJ, Park YG, Bae JM, Kim JW, Lee YB.J Dermatolog Treat. 2017 May;28(3):258-262.
23. van ’t Veen AJ, van Joost T.Contact Dermatitis. 1994 Nov;31(5):293-8.
24. Warburton KL, Bauer A, Chowdhury MM, Cooper S, Krecisz B, Chomiczewska-Skora D et al. ESSCA results with the baseline series, 2009-2012: rubber allergens. Contact Dermatitis 2015; 73: 305-312.
25. Warshaw EM, Raju S, DeKoven JG, Belsito DV, Zug KA, Zirwas MJ, Maibach HI et al. Positive patch test reactions to carba mix and iodopropynyl butylcarbamate: data from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 1998-2008. Dermatitis 2013; 24: 241-245.
26. Malinauskiene L, Blaziene A, Chomiciene A, Isaksson M. Formaldehyde may be found in cosmetic products even when unlabellel. Open Med 2015; 10: 323-328.
27. Duarte I, Lazzarini R,Kobata CM. Contact dermatitis in adolescents. Am j Contact Dermat 2003; 14: 200-202
28. Giordano-Labadie F, Rance F, Pellegrin F, Bazex J, Dutau G, SchwarzeHP. Frequency of contact allergy in children with atopic dermatitis: results of a prospective study of 137 cases. Contact dermatitis 1999; 40: 192-195