-
Contact Dermatitis Jun 2024Fragrance substances are a frequent cause of contact allergy worldwide. Fragrance exposure varies by sex, age and possibly country, influenced by cosmetic availability,...
BACKGROUND
Fragrance substances are a frequent cause of contact allergy worldwide. Fragrance exposure varies by sex, age and possibly country, influenced by cosmetic availability, environmental conditions and cultural practices.
OBJECTIVES
To systematically review and gather prevalence of sensitization to fragrance mix I (FM I) and fragrance mix II (FM II) in consecutively patch-tested European dermatitis patients.
METHOD
A total of 4134 publications on patch test results of European dermatitis patients, published from 1981 to 2022, were systematically reviewed according to a previously registered and published PROSPERO protocol.
RESULTS
Eighty-four eligible original articles were analysed. Overall prevalence of sensitization to fragrance mix I (FM I) was 6.81% (95% CI: 6.37-7.28), and FM II was 3.64% (95% CI: 3.3-4.01). Sensitization to FM I was most prevalent in Central and Eastern Europe and to FM II in Western Europe. No clear time trends were observed. Among paediatric dermatitis patients, sensitization prevalence for FM I and FM II was 4.09% (95% CI: 3.37-4.96) and 2.17% (95% CI: 1.53-3.07).
CONCLUSION
The frequency of positive patch test results for both FMI and FMII remains high. Sensitization is also prevalent among children. Enhanced regulation and labelling of cosmetic products play a vital role in averting exposure and sensitization to fragrance allergens.
PubMed: 38945918
DOI: 10.1111/cod.14618 -
The Indian Journal of Radiology &... Jul 2024Although abundant literature is currently available on the use of deep learning for breast cancer detection in mammography, the quality of such literature is widely... (Review)
Review
Although abundant literature is currently available on the use of deep learning for breast cancer detection in mammography, the quality of such literature is widely variable. To evaluate published literature on breast cancer detection in mammography for reproducibility and to ascertain best practices for model design. The PubMed and Scopus databases were searched to identify records that described the use of deep learning to detect lesions or classify images into cancer or noncancer. A modification of Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (mQUADAS-2) tool was developed for this review and was applied to the included studies. Results of reported studies (area under curve [AUC] of receiver operator curve [ROC] curve, sensitivity, specificity) were recorded. A total of 12,123 records were screened, of which 107 fit the inclusion criteria. Training and test datasets, key idea behind model architecture, and results were recorded for these studies. Based on mQUADAS-2 assessment, 103 studies had high risk of bias due to nonrepresentative patient selection. Four studies were of adequate quality, of which three trained their own model, and one used a commercial network. Ensemble models were used in two of these. Common strategies used for model training included patch classifiers, image classification networks (ResNet in 67%), and object detection networks (RetinaNet in 67%). The highest reported AUC was 0.927 ± 0.008 on a screening dataset, while it reached 0.945 (0.919-0.968) on an enriched subset. Higher values of AUC (0.955) and specificity (98.5%) were reached when combined radiologist and Artificial Intelligence readings were used than either of them alone. None of the studies provided explainability beyond localization accuracy. None of the studies have studied interaction between AI and radiologist in a real world setting. While deep learning holds much promise in mammography interpretation, evaluation in a reproducible clinical setting and explainable networks are the need of the hour.
PubMed: 38912238
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1775737 -
Dermatitis : Contact, Atopic,... Jun 2024Topical minoxidil is generally well tolerated, yet there have been a few reports of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) confirmed through patch testing. This systematic... (Review)
Review
Topical minoxidil is generally well tolerated, yet there have been a few reports of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) confirmed through patch testing. This systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis sought to elucidate the primary allergens in patients exhibiting ACD in response to topical minoxidil formulations and to ascertain the appropriate testing concentrations and vehicles of minoxidil itself. A comprehensive search was conducted across the PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases utilizing the keywords "minoxidil" and "contact dermatitis," or "contact allergy," or "contact eczema." Studies documenting ACD in patients using topical minoxidil confirmed by patch testing were deemed eligible. Our analysis included 46 studies encompassing 99 patients with patch-test-confirmed ACD to minoxidil-based topical treatments. The majority of these patients (93.9%) were exposed to minoxidil without additional active components. Minoxidil itself was identified as the primary allergen in 74.7% of the patients, with propylene glycol being the next most common allergen at 17.1%. Other allergens identified included estradiol, butylene glycol, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, canrenone, and latanoprost. The most effective concentration was found to be 2% minoxidil in propylene glycol, which yielded a 100% positivity rate. The findings indicate that minoxidil is the predominant allergen in ACD reactions to its topical formulations, followed by propylene glycol. For the accurate diagnosis of ACD related to minoxidil, patch testing with 2% minoxidil in propylene glycol is recommended, as are separate tests for propylene glycol and other potential allergenic ingredients.
PubMed: 38885151
DOI: 10.1089/derm.2024.0092 -
Dermatitis : Contact, Atopic,... Feb 2024(Review)
-
Contact Dermatitis Apr 2024Fixed drug eruption (FDE) is a cutaneous drug reaction characterised by recurrent skin lesions occurring at the same site after each exposure to a causative agent. There... (Review)
Review
Fixed drug eruption (FDE) is a cutaneous drug reaction characterised by recurrent skin lesions occurring at the same site after each exposure to a causative agent. There is currently limited evidence in the paediatric population. The objective of this systematic review is to investigate the clinical features, causative agents and management of paediatric FDE. A systematic search of the English and French literature on paediatric FDE was conducted using the Medline and Embase databases. After full-text article review, 92 articles were included, representing a total of 233 patients. Antibiotics were the most frequent triggering agents, mainly sulfonamides (65.0% of antibiotics). Systemic symptoms were rare, and most patients only received supportive therapy. One hundred and six patients (106) performed a test to confirm the causative agent. Of these, 72.6% had oral provocation tests (OPTs) and 28.3% had patch tests. The patient's age, presence of bullous lesions and mucosal lesions were similar between tested and untested patients. It did not seem to influence the decision to perform OPTs. Paediatric FDE is a non-severe skin drug reaction. Antibiotics were the most reported triggering agents. Drug testing, including oral provocation test, was safely performed in the paediatric population.
Topics: Humans; Child; Dermatitis, Allergic Contact; Drug Eruptions; Patch Tests; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Sulfanilamide
PubMed: 38234071
DOI: 10.1111/cod.14500 -
Interventional Neuroradiology : Journal... Jan 2024Intracranial stents and flow diverters contain significant amounts of metals, notably nickel, which can cause allergic reactions in a considerable portion of the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Intracranial stents and flow diverters contain significant amounts of metals, notably nickel, which can cause allergic reactions in a considerable portion of the population. These allergic responses may lead to complications like in-stent stenosis (ISS) and TIA/Stroke in patients receiving stents or flow diverters for intracranial aneurysms.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of studies from inception until July 2023, which reported outcomes of patients with metal allergy undergoing neurovascular stenting. The skin patch test was used to group patients into those with positive, negative, or absent patch test results but with a known history of metal allergy.
RESULTS
Our review included seven studies with a total of 39 patients. Among them, 87% had a history of metal allergy before treatment. Most aneurysms (89%) were in the anterior circulation and the rest (11%) were in the posterior circulation. Skin patch tests were performed in 59% of patients, with 24% showing positive results and 33% negative. Incidental ISS was observed in 18% of patients, and the rate of TIA/Stroke was reported in 21%. The pooled rates of ISS and TIA/Stroke were higher in the first group (43% and 38%) compared to the second (18% and 9%) and third groups (15% and 15%), but these differences were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS
The current neurosurgical literature does not provide a conclusive association between metal allergy and increased complications among patients undergoing neurovascular stenting. Further studies are necessary to gain a more comprehensive understanding of this topic.
PubMed: 38225179
DOI: 10.1177/15910199231226283 -
Dermatitis : Contact, Atopic,... Jan 2024Exogenous allergens, found in cosmetic products, jewelry items, antiseptics and antibacterials, plants, and solvents, can cause clinical allergic contact dermatitis... (Review)
Review
Exogenous allergens, found in cosmetic products, jewelry items, antiseptics and antibacterials, plants, and solvents, can cause clinical allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). To help identify and discern which allergen is causing ACD, clinicians use patch tests, but they can yield false-negative results at times. Examining potential reasoning for false negatives is particularly helpful when a patient's history and physical examination strongly suggest ACD, and the patch test is negative. A strong history and physical presentation suggestive of ACD warrants additional patch testing or other methods to verify a false-negative patch test result. We conducted a literature review to compile various reasonings and solutions for false-negative patch tests in suspected ACD patients. Utilizing EMBASE, Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholars, 49 articles were included by using search terms such as "False negative patch test" or "False-negative patch test" and "allergic contact dermatitis," or "ACD." Common factors that led to false-negative patch test results include low allergen concentration, inadequate percutaneous penetration, technique error, immunosuppressive therapy, and ultraviolet exposure. Potential solutions include using different vehicles, concentration, increasing reading time, repeating the patch test, intradermal testing, and repeat open application testing. If a false-negative patch test is suspected, then intradermal testing can be administered to ensure the specificity of the patch test result. Considering the main contributing factors and solutions to false-negative patch tests, clinicians can accurately diagnose ACD and administer proper treatment plans.
PubMed: 38181174
DOI: 10.1089/derm.2023.0065 -
Dermatitis : Contact, Atopic,... Dec 2023
PubMed: 38052035
DOI: 10.1089/derm.2023.0186 -
Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology Mar 2024Lip care cosmetics products are any external preparation used by people to prevent drying, chapping, dullness, and beautification of lips. This study aimed to review... (Review)
Review
Lip care cosmetics products are any external preparation used by people to prevent drying, chapping, dullness, and beautification of lips. This study aimed to review the literature on allergic reactions induced by different types of lip care cosmetic products. A literature search was performed in PubMed from inception to June 2022. The study included articles published in English and available in full text. References of illegible articles were searched. Studies describing any patient who developed allergic contact dermatitis after the application of lip care cosmetic products were included. A total of 47 reports consisting of 58 individuals experienced allergic reactions to lip care products. Several lip care cosmetics products, such as lipsticks, lip balms, lip salve, lip gloss, lip liner, and lip plumper, were found to be associated with allergic reactions. The most common ingredients that caused the allergic contact dermatitis were castor oil, benzophenone-3, gallate, wax, and colophony. Lip care cosmetics products contain several components that have been associated with allergic reactions. Awareness needs to be created among the general public and dermatologists regarding the presence of possible allergens in lip care cosmetic products.
Topics: Humans; Lip; Dermatitis, Allergic Contact; Cosmetics; Allergens; Patch Tests
PubMed: 37904533
DOI: 10.1080/15569527.2023.2275022 -
Dermatitis : Contact, Atopic,... 2024There are certain demographic characteristics that may serve as risk factors for exposure to a contact allergen. Volatile alkyl nitrites, colloquially known as... (Review)
Review
There are certain demographic characteristics that may serve as risk factors for exposure to a contact allergen. Volatile alkyl nitrites, colloquially known as "poppers," are commonly inhaled by men who have sex with men (MSM) for their psychoactive and muscle-relaxing effects. They have been reported to cause either allergic contact Dermatitis® (ACD) or irritant contact Dermatitis® (ICD), termed "poppers Dermatitis®." We searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to understand the patient population, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and clinical course of poppers Dermatitis®. Our search returned 13 articles detailing 18 patients total. Most patient cases were male ( = 13/15; 87%), of whom 5 were MSM. The reports on the remaining 8 men did not disclose their sexual behaviors. The chemicals deemed responsible for adverse cutaneous side effects included amyl nitrite (6/18; 33%), butyl nitrite (3/18; 167%), isobutyl nitrite (2/18; 11%), and an unspecified alkyl nitrite (7/18, 39%). The most common diagnosis was ICD (10/18; 56%). Only 3 patients underwent alkyl nitrite patch testing, with 2 testing positive for ACD. The most commonly involved anatomic sites were perinasal (13/18; 72%) and perioral regions (10/18; 56%). Rash morphology has been described as yellow crusting, impetigo-like, eczematous, vesicular, edematous, and erythematous. Ulceration can occur with direct skin contact to concentrated nitrite solution. Poppers Dermatitis® was often self-limited with complete resolution. Dermatologists should consider poppers Dermatitis® in those presenting with a characteristic midfacial rash, especially in MSM.
Topics: Humans; Male; Dermatitis, Allergic Contact; Homosexuality, Male; Nitrites; Patch Tests; Amyl Nitrite; Dermatitis, Irritant
PubMed: 37788394
DOI: 10.1089/derm.2023.0157