Dermatitis®

Synthetic fragrances and natural essential oils (EOs) are used in perfumery and found in various cosmetics. Essential oils are also increasingly used to promote wellness. In previous studies, the sensitization potential of some EOs has been identified; however, the current prevalence of sensitivity is largely unknown.

The aim of this study was to determine frequency of positive patch-test reactions to EOs tested in the baseline series, along with 3 fragrance markers (FMs) (fragrance mix I, fragrance mix II, and Myroxylon pereirae), in consecutive patients in the US/Canadian North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) (2009–2014) and the central European, trinational Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) (2010–2014).

This study used a retrospective analysis of patch-test results and relevant demographic/clinical data collected electronically by the networks, obtained with Santalum album 10% petrolatum (pet) (IVDK only); Cananga odorata 2% (NACDG) and 10% (IVDK) pet; Jasminum species 2% (NACDG) and 5% (IVDK) pet; Mentha piperita 2% pet; Melaleuca alternifolia, oxidized (tea tree oil), 5% pet; and Lavandula angustifolia 2% pet (latter 3 NACDG only).

Overall, 62,354 patients were tested to 3 FMs and EOs (NACDG, 13,398; IVDK, 48,956); 11,568 (18.6%) reacted to at least 1 FM or EO, whereas 857 (1.4%) reacted to 1 or more EOs but none of the 3 FMs. For both the NACDG and IVDK populations, individuals who were positive to 1 or more of the 9 study allergens were significantly less likely to be male, have occupational skin disease, or have hand involvement and significantly more likely to have leg dermatitis and be 40 years and older (P’s ≤ 0.005). Prevalence rates for EOs were as follows: S. album, 1.4% IVDK; C. odorata, 1.1% NACDG and 2.4% IVDK; Jasminum species, 0.7% NACDG and 1.4% IVDK; M. piperita, 0.9% NACDG; L. angustifolia, 0.3% NACDG; and M. alternifolia, 0.3% NACDG. Of the 140 NACDG patients who reacted to 1 or more of the 5 NACDG EOs but none of the FMs, M. alternifolia yielded most positive reactions (45%); half of these reactions were strong (++ or +++, 50.8%) and of definite/probable clinical relevance (52.4%). Of the 717 IVDK patients who reacted to 1 or more of the 3 IVDK EOs but none of the 3 FMs, 38% were positive to C. odorata, 38% to S. album and 36% to Jasminum species."

Testing to EOs may be important for detecting sensitivity not detected by FMs alone. In North America, M. alternifolia is an important and clinically relevant sensitizer often not detected by FM. In Europe, as well as in North America, clinical relevance is often difficult to evaluate because (1) labeling of EOs when used as fragrance is not mandatory, and (2) these mixtures may indicate sensitization to 1 or more of their individual constituents from other sources, including synthetic fragrances.

Patch-test readings after day 5 have previously been used to identify delayed reactions to metals and topical antibiotics.

The aims of this study were to identify allergens for which late readings (beyond day 5) would be most valuable and to compare our results with our previous study on delayed patch-test readings.

This was a retrospective study of 298 patients who underwent metal and corticosteroid series patch testing from January 1, 2007, through December 31, 2013. Patch-test readings were conducted on days 3 and 5 and at least once sometime between days 7 and 14. All reactions were examined at each reading.

These results were concordant with our previous findings that additional readings after day 7 are particularly useful for identifying reactions to metals (gold, cobalt, beryllium, palladium), specific preservatives (dodecyl gallate, propolis), and the topical antibiotic neomycin. New delayed reactions to bacitracin, p-phenylenediamine, and topical corticosteroids were not seen in this cohort.

Patients with generalized dermatitis are common in dermatology practices. Allergic contact dermatitis is often suspected, and patients frequently undergo patch testing. When the patch testing result is negative, further evaluation and management of these patients are challenging.

The purpose of this study was to survey members of the American Contact Dermatitis Society regarding the evaluation and management of patch test–negative patients with generalized dermatitis.

Generalized dermatitis was the most common term identified for patch test–negative patients with diffuse dermatitis. After having negative expanded patch testing results, most physicians proceeded with additional testing including skin biopsy, complete blood cell count with differential, and liver and renal function tests. The most commonly used systemic treatment is prednisone, followed by methotrexate. Narrow-band ultraviolet B (UVB) is the most commonly used light source. Antihistamines are frequently prescribed. Food allergy is not felt to be causative. This cohort of patients experiences significant impairment in quality of life, stress on personal relationships, and time off work.

The management of patch test–negative patients with generalized dermatitis is challenging. This study provides insight into management of these complex patients. It also demonstrates practice gaps in the management of these patients, indicating a need for further studies to direct the evaluation and management of this patient population.

There is currently no standardized protocol for photopatch testing and phototesting in the United States. Certain testing paramaters (such as chemicals tested, time between test application and irradiation, and time of final interpretation) vary from provider to provider. These variations may impact comparability and consistency of test results.

The goal of our survey-based study was to outline the photopatch test and phototest protocols used by US contact dermatologists. The information obtained will aid in the development of a national consensus on testing methodologies.

Based on a literature search conducted on differences in testing methodologies, we constructed a questionnaire. The survey was distributed at the American Contact Dermatitis Society annual meeting and via the American Contact Dermatitis Society Web site. Standard descriptive analysis was performed on data obtained.

Of the 800 dermatologists contacted, 117 agreed to participate in the survey. Among these respondents, 64 (54.8%) conduct photopatch testing. Results of the survey are presented, and they confirm that a variety of techniques and testing materials are used.

It would be beneficial to enlist a panel of expert contact dermatologists to create by formal consensus, using these research findings, a standard photopatch test protocol for use in this country.

Perianal complaints are often consulted in dermatology clinics, and in many cases, a conclusive diagnosis is not easily made.

The aim of this study was to study and identify the epidemiological, clinical, and contact allergy features of patients with perianal dermatitis who attended at a contact dermatitis unit in a tertiary hospital in Spain.

Adult patients with long-lasting (>4 weeks) perianal dermatitis were recruited during the past 10 years for investigation and follow-up. Every patient underwent a diagnostic workup consisting of dermatological exploration and patch tests with the standard and specific series, as well as the patients' own products. General surgical exploration was also performed in some patients.

One hundred twenty-four patients were included. The MOAHLFA index was as follows: 43.5, 0, 4.8, 11.3, 1.6, 8.1, and 75. The main final diagnoses were allergic contact dermatitis (32.3%), psoriasis (24.2%), irritant contact dermatitis (17.7%), and lichen simplex (neurodermatitis) (10%). Eighty-one patients (66.1%) showed 1 or more positive reactions, and in 52 patients (43%), positive reactions relevant to the present disease were found.

Contact allergy in patients with long-lasting perianal complaints is frequent. It is mandatory for these patients to be referred to a dermatologist for an adequate evaluation and patch testing. Methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone seems as the most common allergen implicated in perianal contact dermatitis.

The lack of standardized nomenclature for atopic dermatitis (AD) creates challenges for scientific communication, patient education, and advocacy.

We sought to determine the relative popularity of the terms eczema, AD, and atopic eczema (AE) using global search engine volumes.

A retrospective analysis of average monthly search volumes from 2014 to 2016 of Google, Bing/Yahoo, and Baidu was performed for eczema, AD, and AE in English and 37 other languages. Google Trends was used to determine the relative search popularity of each term from 2006 to 2016 in English and the top foreign languages, German, Turkish, Russian, and Japanese.

Overall, eczema accounted for 1.5 million monthly searches (84%) compared with 247 000 searches for AD (14%) and 44 000 searches for AE (2%). For English language, eczema accounted for 93% of searches compared with 6% for AD and 1% for AE. Search popularity for eczema increased from 2006 to 2016 but remained stable for AD and AE.

Given the ambiguity of the term eczema, we recommend the universal use of the next most popular term, AD.

Hand eczema (HE) is a fluctuating disease, and an objective assessment of HE severity is coveted.

This study was undertaken to test the association between Hand Eczema Severity Index (HECSI) score and panel scores of photographs taken by dermatologists.

A total of 33 patients with mild HE were included. The patients were part of an intervention study, and HECSI scores and standardized photographs were taken at baseline and at follow-up after 5 months. Actual change in HECSI score was compared with rating of change from photographs. A total of 15 dermatologists were engaged in blinded evaluation of photographs.

The highest correlation coefficients between delta HECSI scores and delta panel scores of photographs in the first and second evaluation rounds were found for moderate improvement and moderate worsening, rs = −0.46 (P = 0.009) and 0.52 (P = 0.003), respectively, and major worsening, r = 0.41 (P = 0.021). With respect to minor changes, no statistically significant correlations were found (P > 0.05).

In patients with mild HE, photographic assessment was found useful for major and moderate changes only. Further studies would need to be performed in patients with moderate or severe HE, to evaluate whether clinical photographs are able to capture similar changes as HECSI scores.