The Frequency and Causes of Photoallergic Contact Dermatitis among Dermatology Outpatients

Too many patients with photoallergy remain undiagnoseddue to unsatisfactory knowledge among doctors and limited access tophotopatch testing. The objectives of this study were to analyze thefrequency of patients requiring diagnostic work-up for photoallergiccontact dermatitis among dermatology patients, and to identify thecausative photosensitizers. This prospective study involved 1000 consecutive,first-referred dermatology outpatients. All patients with ahistory of dermatitis induced or aggravated by exposure to light werequalified for photopatch testing. In the study group, 36 (3.6%; 95%CI:2.4-4.8%) persons required photopatch testing based on their clinicalsymptoms. As the total number of patients requiring patch tests ofany kind amounted to 205, the percentage of photopatch tested patientsamong all patch-tested patients was 17.5% (95%CI: 12.2-22.8%).Photoallergic contact dermatitis was ultimately confirmed in 15 (1.5%;0.7-2.3%) persons: 7 females and 8 males aged 6-60 (median 33) years.Nine patients turned out photoallergic to at least one nonsteroidal antiinflammatorydrug, with ketoprofen photoallergy being most frequent(5 patients, in each case clinically relevant), followed by etofenamate(4 non-relevant reactions) and diclofenac (1 relevant reaction). Five patientswere positive to at least one organic sunscreen, most frequentlyto benzophenone-3 (2 patients). “Classical” contact allergy to testedphotohaptens was found in 15 persons, including 7 with coexistingphotoallergy. In conclusion, patients requiring diagnostic work-up forphotoallergy constitute a relevant group among dermatology patients,therefore, it seems advisable that all second-level dermatology referralcenters be capable of photopatch testing. Due attention should also bepaid to photoallergy in dermatology training.</p

European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA): Characteristics of patients patch tested and diagnosed with irritant contact dermatitis

Background Irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) is caused by the acute locally toxic effect of a strong irritant, or the cumulative exposure to various weaker physical and/or chemical irritants. Objectives To describe the characteristics of patients with ICD in the population patch tested in the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA; ) database. Methods Data collected by the ESSCA in consecutively patch-tested patients from January 2009 to December 2018 were analyzed. Results Of the 68 072 patients, 8702 were diagnosed with ICD (without concomitant allergic contact dermatitis [ACD]). Hand and face were the most reported anatomical sites, and 45.7% of the ICD was occupational ICD (OICD). The highest proportions of OICD were found in metal turners, bakers, pastry cooks, and confectionery makers. Among patients diagnosed with ICD, 45% were found sensitized with no relevance for the current disease. Conclusions The hands were mainly involved in OICD also in the subgroup of patients with contact dermatitis, in whom relevant contact sensitization had been ruled out, emphasizing the need for limiting irritant exposures. However, in difficult-to-treat contact dermatitis, unrecognized contact allergy, or unrecognized clinical relevance of identified allergies owing to incomplete or wrong product ingredient information must always be considered

Current patch test results with the European baseline series and extensions to it from the 'European Surveillance System on Contact Allergy' network, 2007-2008

BACKGROUND: The pattern of contact sensitization to the supposedly most important allergens assembled in the baseline series differs between countries, presumably at least partly because of exposure differences. Objectives. To describe the prevalence of contact sensitization to allergens tested in consecutive patients in the years 2007 and 2008, and to discuss possible differences. METHODS: Data from the 39 departments in 11 European countries comprising the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergy network (www.essca-dc.org) in this period have been pooled and analysed according to common standards. RESULTS: Patch test results with the European baseline series, and country-specific or department-specific additions to it, obtained in 25 181 patients, showed marked international variation. Metals and fragrances are still the most frequent allergens across Europe. Some allergens tested nationally may be useful future additions to the European baseline series, for example methylisothiazolinone, whereas a few long-term components of the European baseline series, namely primin and clioquinol, no longer warrant routine testing. CONCLUSIONS: The present analysis points to 'excess' prevalences of specific contact sensitization in some countries, although interpretation must be cautious if only few, and possibly specialized, centres are representing one country. A comparison as presented may help to target in-depth research into possible causes of 'excess' exposure, and/or consideration of methodological issues, including modifications to the baseline series

Research needs in allergy: an EAACI position paper, in collaboration with EFA

Abstract In less than half a century, allergy, originally perceived as a rare disease, has become a major public health threat, today affecting the lives of more than 60 million people in Europe, and probably close to one billion worldwide, thereby heavily impacting the budgets of public health systems. More disturbingly, its prevalence and impact are on the rise, a development that has been associated with environmental and lifestyle changes accompanying the continuous process of urbanization and globalization. Therefore, there is an urgent need to prioritize and concert research efforts in the field of allergy, in order to achieve sustainable results on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of this most prevalent chronic disease of the 21 st century. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is the leading professional organization in the field of allergy, promoting excellence in clinical care, education, training and basic and translational research, all with the ultimate goal of improving the health of allergic patients. The European Federation of Allergy and Airways Diseases Patients&apos; Associations (EFA) is a non-profit network of allergy, asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disorder (COPD) patients&apos; organizations. In support of their missions, the present EAACI Position Paper, in collaboration with EFA, highlights the most important research needs in the field of allergy to serve as key recommendations for future research funding at the national and European levels. Although allergies may involve almost every organ of the body and an array of diverse external factors act as triggers, there are several common themes that need to be prioritized in research efforts. As in many other chronic diseases, effective prevention, curative treatment and accurate, rapid diagnosis represent major unmet needs. Detailed phenotyping/endotyping stands out as widely required in order to arrange or re-categorize clinical syndromes into more coherent, uniform and treatment-responsive groups. Research efforts to unveil the basic pathophysiologic pathways and mechanisms, thus leading to the comprehension and resolution of the pathophysiologic complexity of allergies will allow for the design of novel patient-oriented diagnostic and treatment protocols. Several allergic diseases require well-controlled epidemiological description and surveillance, using disease registries, pharmacoeconomic evaluation, as well as large biobanks. Additionally, there is a need for extensive studies to bring promising new biotechnological innovations, such as biological agents, vaccines of modified allergen molecules and engineered components for allergy diagnosis, closer to clinical practice. Finally, particular attention should be paid to the difficult-to-manage, precarious and costly severe disease forms and/or exacerbations. Nonetheless, currently arising treatments, mainly in the fields of immunotherapy and biologicals, hold great promise for targeted and causal management of allergic conditions. Active involvement of all stakeholders, including Patient Organizations and policy makers are necessary to achieve the aims emphasized herein

Artificial Intelligence That Predicts Sensitizing Potential of Cosmetic Ingredients with Accuracy Comparable to Animal and In Vitro Tests—How Does the Infotechnomics Compare to Other “Omics” in the Cosmetics Safety Assessment?

The aim of the current study was to develop an in silico model to predict the sensitizing potential of cosmetic ingredients based on their physicochemical characteristics and to compare the predictions with historical animal data and results from “omics”-based in vitro studies. An in silico model was developed with the use of WEKA machine learning software fed with physicochemical and structural descriptors of haptens and trained with data from published epidemiological studies compiled into estimated odds ratio (eOR) and estimated attributable risk (eAR) indices. The outcome classification was compared to the results of animal studies and in vitro tests. Of all the models tested, the best results were obtained for the Naive Bayes classifier trained with 24 physicochemical descriptors and eAR, which yielded an accuracy of 86%, sensitivity of 80%, and specificity of 90%. This model was subsequently used to predict the sensitizing potential of 15 emerging and less-studied haptens, of which 7 were classified as sensitizers: cyclamen aldehyde, N,N-dimethylacrylamide, dimethylthiocarbamyl benzothiazole sulphide, geraniol hydroperoxide, isobornyl acrylate, neral, and prenyl caffeate. The best-performing model (NaiveBayes eAR, 24 parameters), along with an alternative model based on eOR (Random Comittee eOR, 17 parameters), are available for further tests by interested readers. In conclusion, the proposed infotechnomics approach allows for a prediction of the sensitizing potential of cosmetic ingredients (and possibly also other haptens) with accuracy comparable to historical animal tests and in vitro tests used nowadays. In silico models consume little resources, are free of ethical concerns, and can provide results for multiple chemicals almost instantly; therefore, the proposed approach seems useful in the safety assessment of cosmetics