The significance of previous contact dermatitis for elicitation of contact allergy to nickel

Acta Dermato-Venereologica

Volumn 78, Issue 5, 1998, Pages 367-370

  Hindsén, Monica ^a   Bruze, Magnus ^a  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Cobalt dermatitis; Hyper reactivity; Hyporeactivity; Memory function; Nickel allergy; Re challenge; SLS dermatitis

Indexed keywords

COBALT; NICKEL;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTACT ALLERGY; CONTACT DERMATITIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSS REACTION; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; HAND ECZEMA; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; NICKEL HYPERSENSITIVITY; PATCH TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROVOCATION TEST; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 0031859227     PISSN: 00015555     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/000155598443088     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Hindsén M, Bruze M, Christensen OB. The significance of previous allergic contact dermatitis for elicitation of delayed hypersensitivity to nickel. Contact Dermatitis 1997; 37: 101-106.
2. Widmer J, Elsner P, Burg G. Skin irritant reactivity following experimental cumulative irritant contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1994; 30: 35-39.
3. Fregert S. Patch testing. In: Fregert S, ed. Manual of contact dermatitis. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1981: 71-81.
4. Allenby CF, Basketter DA. An arm immersion model of compromised skin. II. Influence on minimal eliciting patch test concentrations of nickel. Contact Dermatitis 1993; 28: 129-133.
5. Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman & Hall, 1991.
6. StatXact 3 for Windows. User's Manual. Cambridge MA: CYTEL Software Corporation, 1995.
7. Andersen KE, Burrows D, White IR. Allergens from the standard series. In: Rycroft RJG, Menné T, Frosch PJ, Benezra C, eds. Textbook of contact dermatitis. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 1992: 413-456.
8. Agner T. Non-invasive measuring methods for the investigation of irritant patch test reactions. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1992; Suppl 173: 7-10.
9. Lindelöf B. Regional variations of patch test response in nickel-sensitive patients. Contact Dermatitis 1992; 26: 202-203.
10. Young Lee J, Effendy I, Maibach HI. Acute irritant contact dermatitis: recovery time in man. Contact Dermatitis 1997; 36: 285-290.
11. Hindsén M, Christensen OB. Delayed hypersensitivity reactions following allergic and irritant inflammation. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1992; 72: 220-221.
12. Christensen OB, Möller H. External and internal exposure to the antigen in hand eczema of nickel allergy. Contact Dermatitis 1975; 1: 136-141.
13. Cronin E, Di Michiel AD, Drown SS. Oral challenge in nickel-sensitive women with hand eczema. In: Brown SS, Sunderman FW, eds. Nickel toxicology. London: Academic Press, 1980: 149-152.
14. Christensen OB, Lindström C, Löfberg H, Möller H. Micromorphology and specificity of orally induced flare-up reactions in nickel-sensitive patients. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1981; 61: 505-510.
15. Möller H, Björkner B, Bruze M. Clinical reactions to systemic provocation with gold sodium thiomalate in patients with contact allergy to gold. Br J Dermatol 1996; 135: 423-427.
16. Lammintausta K, Maibach HI, Wilson D. Human cutaneous irritation: induced hyporeactivity. Contact Dermatitis 1987; 17: 193-198.
17. Nielsen NH, Menné T. Nickel sensitization and ear piercing in an unselected Danish population. Contact Dermatitis 1993; 29: 16-21.
18. Lantinga H, Nater JP, Coenraads PJ. Prevalence, incidence and course of eczema on the hands and forearms in a sample of the general population. Contact Dermatitis 1984; 10: 135-139.
19. Fregert S. Occupational dermatitis in 10-year material. Contact Dermatitis 1975; 1: 96-107.
20. Grandolfo M, Pinoli M, Foti C, Bonamonte D, Rigano L, Vena GA, et al. Influence of vehicle on patch test response to nickel sulfate. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 35: 173-174.