Contact Dermatitis最新文献

{"title":"From Music to Eczema: Dermatitis Caused by Para-Phenylenediamine in a Violinist","authors":"Nuria Piquer Prades, David Fabregat-Safont, María Mata-Pesquera, Alba Llorens López, Jose Antonio de Mateo Mínguez, Francisco Javier Miquel Miquel","doi":"10.1111/cod.70213","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.70213","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"95 5","pages":"501-503"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2026-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148396099","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Finger Allergic Contact Dermatitis by Proxy Induced by Feline Thiamazole Cream","authors":"Gabriela Blanchard, Ophélie Marchal, Olivier Sorg, Emmanuel Laffitte, Pierre Piletta-Zanin","doi":"10.1111/cod.70216","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.70216","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Thiamazole (also called methimazole, CAS no. 60-56-0) is a potent peroxidase inhibitor used to treat hyperthyroidism [<span>1</span>]. Transdermal application of thiamazole has been used in hyperthyroid cats as an alternative to oral therapy [<span>2</span>].</p><p>We present the case of a 50-year-old female who developed localised erythematous, scaly plaques with fissures on the right index and middle fingers, consistent with eczema (Figure 1A,B). No inflammatory lesions were present elsewhere on the body. The patient was right-handed. Further history revealed that, for the last 6 years, she had been using these fingers to apply a thiamazole-containing cream to the ears of her hyperthyroid cat. The cat did not exhibit any cutaneous signs suggestive of allergic contact dermatitis. A Repeated Open Application Test with the thiamazole-containing cream was positive (Figure 1C). Patch tests were performed using the European baseline, preservative and emulsifier series (supplied by Chemotechnique Diagnostics, Vellinge, Sweden) using IQ Ultra chambers (Chemotechnique Diagnostics) and the thiamazole-containing cream, including its individual ingredients, kindly provided by the manufacturer. Readings performed on Day (D) 2 and D4 according to the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group (ICDRG) criteria showed a single positive reaction to thiamazole (thiamazole pure and thiamazole 20% in petrolatum: D2++, D4+++; thiamazole 20% in alcohol: D2+, D4++) (Figure 1D). Five unexposed controls were negative to thiamazole 20% in petrolatum. Avoidance of direct contact with the thiamazole-containing cream with the application of topical clobetasol led to a rapid and complete clinical remission.</p><p>To the best of our knowledge, we describe the first case of allergic contact dermatitis caused by thiamazole. In such cases, avoidance of thiamazole, as well as the remaining thionamide antithyroid drugs (thiamazole prodrug carbimazole and propylthiouracil), should be recommended due to potential class cross-reactivity and the risk of systemic contact dermatitis [<span>3</span>]. Cases of thiamazole-induced vasculitis [<span>4</span>], cutaneous lupus erythematosus [<span>5</span>], erythema nodosum [<span>6</span>] and maculopapular exanthema [<span>7</span>] have been reported following systemic use of thiamazole. Topical thiamazole has been increasingly used not only in veterinary medicine, but also as an emerging depigmenting agent [<span>8, 9</span>]. Allergic contact dermatitis by proxy, also known as consort or connubial allergic contact dermatitis, is an uncommon form of allergic contact dermatitis resulting from indirect exposure to an allergen carried by another individual [<span>10</span>] or, rarely, by an animal. Pets may act as vectors for allergens such as plant resins, topical veterinary medications or grooming products. The use of protective gloves when applying topical medications to animals is recommended to minimize inadvertent allergen ","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"95 5","pages":"517-518"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2026-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cod.70216","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148618577","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Rouhani et al. ‘Formaldehyde Emissions From 2-Octyl Cyanoacrylate: Quantified Risk for Allergic Contact Dermatitis’","authors":"Jörg Tomaszewski, Monica Posgai, Julian Quintero","doi":"10.1111/cod.70236","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.70236","url":null,"abstract":"<p>We read with interest the article by Rouhani et al. [<span>1</span>] reporting formaldehyde emissions from 2-octyl-cyanoacrylate mesh based adhesive systems. While this work presents initial quantitative data, we believe that several methodological and interpretive limitations materially limit the relevance of the findings for clinical medical device safety assessment.</p><p>From a medical device toxicological perspective, the study design does not align with the principles of ISO 10993-1 risk based biological evaluation. The authors apply a microchamber method (ASTM D7706) as a surrogate for patient and healthcare provider exposure. However, this method is intended for comparative screening of volatile organic compounds from indoor products, not for quantifying clinically relevant dermal or inhalation exposure from externally applied medical devices. Although this distinction is critical, it remains insufficiently addressed when extrapolating laboratory outputs to clinical risk.</p><p>Formaldehyde emission estimates are derived from only two small area samples, without statistical characterization of variability or reproducibility, limiting confidence in both absolute values and downstream exposure modelling. Furthermore, hydrolysis was artificially initiated by a humidified chamber environment rather than the natural hydrolysis that may occur on human skin, introducing uncertainty regarding polymerization kinetics and degradation pathways that are not addressed in the manuscript.</p><p>The microchamber was operated at 1 air change per hour, a condition that does not reflect clinical environments such as operating rooms or recovery areas, where substantially higher ventilation rates are standard. No effort was made to model clinically relevant ventilation conditions. Consequently, the reported airborne concentrations cannot be considered representative of realistic patient or provider exposure. Nevertheless, these values are compared directly with occupational or health protective benchmarks, without adequate discussion of the disconnect between static laboratory conditions and dynamic clinical and post-clinical settings.</p><p>Equally important, the dermal exposure evaluation relies on benchmarks that are not intended as device safety limits. The EPA 1 μg/cm<sup>2</sup> ‘health-protective’ value used as a comparator is a conservative screening benchmark derived from occluded patch-test data in formaldehyde-sensitized individuals, incorporating precautionary uncertainty factors. Comparisons to occupational exposure limits are made without time-weighting, breathing-zone modelling, or adjustment for clinical ventilation, potentially overstating inhalation relevance. These are not regulatory acceptance criteria for medical devices and are not used by the FDA as stand-alone determinants of safety. Under ISO 10993-17 and FDA toxicological risk-assessment frameworks, such screening values must be interpreted in the context of dose magnitude, durati","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"95 5","pages":"526-527"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2026-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cod.70236","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148910849","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Post-Occlusion Application of Skin Protective Creams Does Not Affect Occlusion-Induced Barrier Changes: A Randomized Controlled Experimental Study","authors":"Michal Gina,&nbsp;Katharina Wichert,&nbsp;Thomas Behrens,&nbsp;Thomas Brüning,&nbsp;Julia Krabbe","doi":"10.1111/cod.70220","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.70220","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Glove occlusion increases skin susceptibility to irritants (‘occlusion effect’). Previous experimental data showed that applying protective creams (PCs) before glove occlusion does not prevent this effect and may even aggravate irritant responses.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To assess whether the application of PCs after glove occlusion modifies the occlusion effect.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In a randomized, single-blind (participants were blinded) study, 68 healthy volunteers were examined over 10 days. Two commercially available PCs (A, B) and one standardized model cream (C) were applied after occlusion for over 4 h to defined forearm sites. On day 8, sites were exposed to 0.5% sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS) for 24 h to evaluate skin irritation susceptibility. Additional conditions included (I) daily application of cream C without occlusion until day 7 or (II) until Day 8, with the final application 10 min before SLS exposure. Skin responses were assessed by TEWL, corneometry, colourimetry and clinical scoring. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to compare control areas to sides after PC application.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Post-occlusion application of the PCs did not demonstrate a consistent protective effect. Cream A slightly reduced SLS-induced TEWL (10.88 g/m²/h after application following glove use vs. 12.13 g/m²/h without application; adjusted <i>p</i> &gt; 0.05), whereas cream B increased TEWL (13.44 vs. 12.42 g/m²/h; adjusted <i>p</i> &gt; 0.05). Cream C showed no significant effect on TEWL (11.99 vs. 12.38 g/m²/h; <i>p</i> &gt; 0.05). In contrast, application of cream C shortly before SLS exposure in the absence of occlusion (condition II) significantly reduced TEWL (7.09 vs. 12.38 g/m²/h; adjusted <i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001) and erythema. However, earlier application (condition I) did not yield a protective effect (11.92 vs. 12.38 g/m²/h).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In the majority of study scenarios, application of PCs after glove occlusion did not have a clinically relevant positive effect on the skin responses studied. Protective efficacy probably depends on formulation and timing, underscoring the need for evidence-based recommendations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"95 5","pages":"437-449"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2026-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cod.70220","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148454821","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Allergic Contact Dermatitis From Hearing Aid Ear Moulds: Different Devices, Different (Meth)acrylate Sensitization Profiles","authors":"Maria Graciela Guzmán-Perera,&nbsp;An Goossens,&nbsp;Olivier Aerts,&nbsp;Enrique Fidel García-Perez","doi":"10.1111/cod.70238","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.70238","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"95 5","pages":"523-525"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2026-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148879297","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Patch Testing Is Useful in Patients With Lamotrigine-Induced Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions","authors":"E. Bertazzo,&nbsp;N. Laviec,&nbsp;C. Toussaint,&nbsp;P. Sanchez-Pena,&nbsp;B. Milpied","doi":"10.1111/cod.70219","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.70219","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Lamotrigine (LT) is widely used for epilepsy and bipolar disorders but may induce severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions (SCARs), including DRESS and epidermal necrolysis [&lt;span&gt;1&lt;/span&gt;]. In patients receiving multiple drugs, identifying the culprit medication remains challenging, and skin eruptions occurring during LT treatment do not necessarily indicate true hypersensitivity [&lt;span&gt;2&lt;/span&gt;]. Patch testing can help document delayed-type drug allergy [&lt;span&gt;3&lt;/span&gt;], but available data for LT are limited [&lt;span&gt;4&lt;/span&gt;], and optimal test concentrations and vehicles remain poorly standardized [&lt;span&gt;5&lt;/span&gt;].&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;We retrospectively reviewed patients patch tested for suspected LT-induced cutaneous adverse drug reactions between 2011 and 2024. Patch tests were performed according to European Society of Contact Dermatitis guidelines, with readings on Days 2, 3 and 7 if initially negative. LT was tested as active ingredient 10% petrolatum (LT 10% pet.; Chemotechnique Diagnostics) and as the patient's own commercial preparation diluted to 30% in petrolatum (commercial 30% pet.), water (commercial 30% aq.) or saline (commercial 30% saline).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thirty patients were included. Most were women (22/30) and LT was mainly prescribed for mood stabilization (24/30). The main clinical phenotypes were DRESS (11/30), maculopapular exanthema (10/30) and Stevens–Johnson syndrome (5/30).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not all preparations were tested in every patient, reflecting the retrospective design and changes in available preparations over time. Twenty-one were tested with LT CD 10% pet., 29 with the commercial 30% pet., 25 with the commercial 30% aq. and 2 with the commercial 30% saline preparation. Tests that were not performed, as well as those with missing data in the medical records, were classified as not performed (NP). The day of positivity was unavailable for most patients; however, one delayed positive reaction at D7 was documented (Table 1).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Among the 30 patients, 10 (33%) had at least one positive patch test result. Positivity rates were 70% (7/10) for commercial 30% pet., 60% (6/10) for commercial 30% aq. and 40% (4/10) for LT 10% pet. Commercial 30% saline was negative in both tested patients. Only one patient reacted to all three preparations, whereas five reacted to two preparations. No clear association was observed between clinical phenotype and patch test positivity (Table 2).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Patch testing is increasingly used to support the diagnosis of delayed-type hypersensitivity reactions to antiepileptic drugs, although sensitivity varies according to the drug, clinical phenotype and testing methodology [&lt;span&gt;6, 7&lt;/span&gt;]. Data specifically addressing LT remain limited [&lt;span&gt;4, 8-10&lt;/span&gt;].&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In our cohort, one-third of patients had at least one positive patch test reaction, consistent with previous reports [&lt;span&gt;11&lt;/span&gt;]. Commercial preparations yielded more positive results than LT 10% pet., and aqueous and petrolatum preparations appeared","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"95 5","pages":"519-522"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2026-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cod.70219","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148535546","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Allergic Cheilitis to Cane Reed in a Teenage Oboe Player","authors":"Sarah Milesi,&nbsp;Laura Lemaire,&nbsp;Françoise Giordano","doi":"10.1111/cod.70217","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.70217","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Allergic contact dermatitis associated with musical instrument playing is an underestimated occupational condition, despite musicians' exposure to multiple potential allergens.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;We report the case of a 13-year-old boy with a history of atopic dermatitis during early childhood. He had been playing oboe for 7 years at a high level and was referred to us for scaling cheilitis, sometimes associated with pustular lesions (Figure 1). The lesions had appeared 9 months earlier, mainly involved the center of the lower lip (corresponding to the contact area with the cane reed), and interfered with his ability to play. He reported applying only Dexpanthenol ointment topically and noticed improvement of the lesions when he didn't play oboe for several days. Patch testing was performed with the European baseline, cosmetic, and cheilitis series using IQ Ultra chambers. His toothpaste, Dexpanthenol ointment, and varnished and unvarnished patient's oboe reed fragments “as is” in petrolatum were also tested (Figure 2a). Readings on days 2 and 3 revealed a strong positive reaction (2+) exclusively for the unvarnished reed (Figure 2b), confirming allergic contact dermatitis to the cane rather than to the varnish.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wind instrument players are particularly affected by contact cheilitis due to prolonged contact between the instrument, perioral skin, and oral mucosa [&lt;span&gt;1&lt;/span&gt;]. Although this condition remains uncommon, only a few cases of contact dermatitis related to wind instrument reeds have been reported, mainly among clarinettists and saxophonists. To our knowledge, we report the first case of contact cheilitis to cane reed occurring in an oboist.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Oboe reeds are traditionally handmade from natural cane (\u0000 &lt;i&gt;Arundo donax&lt;/i&gt;\u0000 ), also known as Provence cane. To improve durability, reeds may be treated with varnishes or coatings.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In 1986, Friedman and Connolly [&lt;span&gt;2&lt;/span&gt;] described “clarinettist's cheilitis,” a median cheilitis of the lower lip associated with &lt;i&gt;A.d&lt;/i&gt;. reed. As patch testing was negative, the authors attributed the condition to local irritants. Later reports [&lt;span&gt;3-5&lt;/span&gt;] documented delayed-type contact allergy to &lt;i&gt;A.d&lt;/i&gt;. reeds, with positive patch tests. In contrast, Ruiz et al. [&lt;span&gt;6&lt;/span&gt;] described an immediate-type reaction resembling contact urticaria in an atopic clarinettist exposed to an &lt;i&gt;A.d&lt;/i&gt;. reed with positive skin prick test but negative patch tests.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;However, the vibrating surface in contact with lips must remain uncoated to allow moisture absorption and proper acoustic performance. Our patient was advised to consider plastic or resin reeds as an alternative but these are often considered acoustically inferior and may be unsuitable for advanced or professional musicians.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;\u0000 &lt;b&gt;Sarah Milesi:&lt;/b&gt; conceptualization, investigation, writing – original draft, funding acquisition, methodology, writing – review and editing. &lt;b&gt;Françoise Giordano","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"95 5","pages":"504-505"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2026-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cod.70217","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148418994","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Recreational Allergic Contact Dermatitis to “Epoxy UV” Resins: A New Source of Exposure to Hidden (Meth)acrylates","authors":"Nadia Raison-Peyron,&nbsp;Sylvain Caillol,&nbsp;Jean Luc Bourrain,&nbsp;Eva Ibeka,&nbsp;Claire Negrell","doi":"10.1111/cod.70225","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.70225","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Several cases of contact allergy to epoxy resins used in creative hobbies have been reported in recent years but not to “epoxy UV” resins.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To determine which components present in “epoxy UV” resins were responsible for allergic contact dermatitis in three patients who used them to make jewellery as a creative hobby and to describe the clinical and chemical analytical work-up.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The three patients with eczematous skin eruptions from “epoxy UV” resin were patch tested with a baseline series and epoxy series and/or additional (meth)acrylates, and in some cases with different benzophenones (patch tests and photo-patch tests). Proton Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) of three of the resins used was performed in order to determine their composition.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>All patients were shown to be sensitised to (meth)acrylates but not epoxy. Proton NMR could identify 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2-HEMA) and an ethoxylated bisphenol A-based diacrylate oligomer in the three tested resins. For two resins, di(ethylene glycol) diacrylate and poly(propylene glycol) diacrylate were also detected. The resin of one patient could not be analysed because of a technical problem.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Incorrectly labelled “epoxy UV” resins used in recreational activities are a new hidden source of sensitization to (meth)acrylates, not to epoxy compounds tested.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"95 5","pages":"475-481"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2026-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cod.70225","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148561046","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Occupational Contact Allergy to Components of Epoxy Resin Systems: Descriptive and Comparative Epidemiological Analyses Based on IVDK Data 2008–2022","authors":"David Reissig,&nbsp;Katharina Heymann,&nbsp;Steffen Schubert,&nbsp;Richard Brans,&nbsp;Birger Kränke,&nbsp;Eva Oppel,&nbsp;Rüdiger Panzer,&nbsp;Dagmar Simon,&nbsp;Andrea Bauer,&nbsp;for the IVDK","doi":"10.1111/cod.70222","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.70222","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Epoxy resin systems (ERS) frequently cause occupational allergic contact dermatitis.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To analyze and update sensitization frequencies to epoxy resin, reactive diluents and hardeners in patients with occupational dermatitis (OD).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Retrospective descriptive and comparative analysis of data collected by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) from OD patients patch tested with bisphenol A diglycidyl ether (DGEBA) epoxy resin, 2008–2022.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>DGEBA sensitization declined overall, with fluctuations, from 4.2% in 2008–2010 to 2.9% in 2020–2022 (<i>p</i> = 0.0014). Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were highest for plastics processors (11.7; 95% CI, 8.1–16.6), bricklayers, cement and concrete workers (6.4; 5.1–8.0), and painters/varnishers (5.3; 4.0–6.9). DGEBA-positive patients were most frequently co-sensitised to the reactive diluents 1,6-hexanediol diglycidyl ether (43.6%), 1,4-butanediol diglycidyl ether (35.7%), and phenyl glycidyl ether (30.8%), and to the hardener m-xylylenediamine (22.7%). DGEBA testing alone would not have identified 446 patients (1.9% of all DGEBA-tested OD patients) with sensitizations to reactive diluents or amine hardeners.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>If contact allergy to ERS components is suspected, not only DGEBA, but also reactive diluents and hardeners should be patch tested. Prevention should prioritise exposure control, occupational hygiene, ongoing surveillance, and periodic test series updates.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"95 5","pages":"482-491"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2026-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cod.70222","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148599776","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Gold Contact Sensitization, Clinical Characteristics and Associations With Autoimmune Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Study With Registry Linkage.","authors":"Mikkel Bak Jensen, Malin Glindvad Ahström, Jannat Ahmad, Nikolai Loft, Charlotte G Mortz, Jeanne Duus Johansen","doi":"10.1111/cod.70264","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.70264","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gold sensitization is common, but its clinical and immunologic significance remains unclear. European data from consecutively patch tested patients are scarce. Animal models suggest that gold can induce systemic autoimmunity, but studies in humans are limited.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To characterize gold sodium thiosulphate (GST) patch test positive patients, including co-sensitization patterns to other metals and determine whether gold sensitization is linked to autoimmune diseases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective register-based study including 3436 dermatitis patients consecutively patch tested between 2015 and 2024 at Odense University Hospital, Denmark. Patch test results were linked to diagnostic data from the Danish National Patient Registry. Autoimmune diseases were grouped into six categories analysed using logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Gold sensitization was found in 18.7% of tested patients and was more common in women (OR 2.38, 95% CI 1.96-2.94) and at an age above 40 years (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.09-1.60). Concomitant sensitization to Ni, Cr and Co increased with higher gold reactivity (p < 0.01). No association was observed between gold sensitization and autoimmune diseases, overall (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.82-1.22).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A positive patch test to GST was associated with other metal allergies but not with any autoimmune diseases.</p>","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2026-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149126806","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}