Simultaneous sodium lauryl sulphate testing improves the diagnostic validity of allergic patch tests. Results from a prospective multicentre study of the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group (Deutsche Kontaktallergie- Gruppe, DKG)

British Journal of Dermatology

Volumn 152, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 709-719

  Loffler H ^a   Becker, D ^b   Brasch, J ^c   Geier, J ^d  

^a PHILIPPS UNIVERSITY MARBURG   (Germany)

^b JOHANNES GUTENBERG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL SCHLESWIG HOLSTEIN   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Contact allergy; Detergent; False negative patch test reaction; False positive patch test reaction; Irritation; Patch test reaction

Indexed keywords

1,3 DIPHENYLGUANIDINE; AMERCHOL L 101; BENZALKONIUM CHLORIDE; BENZOYL PEROXIDE; COCAMIDOPROPYL BETAINE; CONTACT ALLERGEN; DODECYL SULFATE SODIUM; GALLIC ACID DERIVATIVE; GALLIC ACID OCTYL ESTER; GUANIDINE DERIVATIVE; PHENYLMERCURIC ACETATE; PROPYLENE GLYCOL; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ADULT; ALLERGIC REACTION; ALLERGY; ARTICLE; AUSTRIA; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; ERYTHEMA; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; PATCH TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SKIN IRRITATION; SKIN MANIFESTATION; STANDARD; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ADULT; ALLERGENS; DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC CONTACT; DERMATITIS, ATOPIC; DERMATITIS, CONTACT; DERMATITIS, OCCUPATIONAL; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; ERYTHEMA; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PATCH TESTS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SODIUM DODECYL SULFATE;

EID: 17644374147     PISSN: 00070963     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2004.06465.x     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Wahlberg JE. Patch testing. In: Textbook of Contact Dermatitis (Rycroft KJG, Menné T, Frosch PJ et al., eds), 3rd edn. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2001; 435-68.
2. Pasche-Koo F, Hauser C. How to better understand the angry back syndrome. Dermatology 1992; 184:237-40.
3. Bruynzeel DP, Maibach HI. Excited skin syndrome (angry back). Arch Dermatol 1986; 122:323-8.
4. Brasch J, Geier J, Gefeiler O. Dynamic patterns of allergic patch test reactions to 10 European standard allergens. An analysis of data recorded by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK). Contact Dermatitis 1996; 35:17-22.
5. del Savio B, Sherertz EF. Is allergic contact dermatitis being over-looked? Arch Fam Med 1994; 3:537-43.
6. Bruze M, Conde-Salazar L, Goossens A et al. Thoughts on sensitizers in a standard patch test series. The European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1999; 41:241-50.
7. Bruynzeel DP, Nieboer C, Boorsma DM et al. Allergic reactions, 'spillover' reactions, and T-cell subsets. Arch Dermatol Res 1983; 275:80-5.
8. Geier J, Uter W, Pirker C et al. Patch testing with the irritant sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) is useful in interpreting weak reactions to contact allergens as allergic or irritant. Contact Dermatitis 2003; 48:99-107.
9. Löffler H, Effendy I, Happle R. Patch testing with sodium lauryl sulfate: benefits and drawbacks in research and practice. Hautarzt 1999; 50:769-78.
10. Schnuch A, Aberer W, Agathos M et al. Leitlinien der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft (DDG) zur Durchführung von Epikutantests mit Kontaktallergenen. Hautarzt 2001; 52:864-6.
11. Tupker RA, Willis C, Berardesca E et al. Guidelines on sodium lauryl Sulfate (SLS) exposure testing. Contact Dermatitis 1997; 37:53-69.
12. Uter W, Schnuch A, Geier J et al. Epidemiology of contact dermatitis. The Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) in Germany. Eur J Dermatol 1998; 8:36-40.
13. Geier J, Uter W, Lessmann H et al. The positivity ratio-another parameter to assess the diagnostic quality of a patch test preparation. Contact Dermatitis 2003; 48:280-2.
14. Brasch J, Henseler T. The reaction index: a parameter to assess the quality of patch test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 1992; 27:203-4.
15. Brasch J, Geier J, Henseler T. Evaluation of patch test results by use of the reaction index. An analysis of data recorded by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK). Contact Dermatitis 1995; 33:375-80.
16. Schnuch A, Geier J, Uter W et al. National rates and regional differences in sensitization to allergens of the standard series. Population-adjusted frequencies of sensitization (PAFS) in 40,000 patients from a multicenter study (IVDK). Contact Dermatitis 1997; 37:200-9.
17. Uter W, Geier J, Becker D et al. The MOAHLFA index of irritant sodium lauryl sulfate reactions-first results of a multicentre study on routine SLS patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 2004; 51:259-62.
18. Aramaki J, Löffler C, Kawana S et al. Irritant patch testing with sodium lauryl sulphate: interrelation between concentration and exposure time. Br J Dermatol 2001; 145:704-8.
19. van der Valk PG, Nater JP, Bleumink E. The influence of low concentrations of irritants on skin barrier function as determined by water vapour loss. Derm Beruf Umwelt 1985; 33:89-91.
20. Löffler H, Happle R. Influence of climatic conditions on the irritant patch test with sodium lauryl sulphate. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 2003; 83:338-41.
21. Agner T, Serup J. Seasonal variation of skin resistance to irritants. Br J Dermatol 1989; 121:323-8.
22. Tupker RA, Coenraads PJ, Fidler V et al. Irritant susceptibility and weal and flare reactions to bioactive agents in atopic dermatitis. II. Influence of season. Br J Dermatol 1995; 133:365-70.
23. Basketter DA, Griffiths HA, Wang XM et al. Individual, ethnic and seasonal variability in irritant susceptibility of skin: the implications for a predictive human patch test. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 35:208-13.
24. Tupker RA, Coenraads PJ, Fidler V et al. Irritant susceptibility and weal and flare reactions to bioactive agents in atopic dermatitis. I. Influence of disease severity. Br J Dermatol 1995; 133:358-64.
25. Eisner P, Wilhelm D, Maibach HI. Effect of low-concentration sodium lauryl sulfate on human vulvar and forearm skin: age-related differences. J Reprod Med 1991; 36:77-81.
26. Frosch PJ, Kurte A. Efficacy of skin barrier creams (IV): the repetitive irritation test (RIT) with a set of 4 standard Irritants. Contact Dermatitis 1994; 31:161-8.
27. Wilhelm KP, Surber C, Maibach HI. Effect of sodium lauryl sulfate-induced skin irritation on in vivo percutaneous penetration of four drugs. J Invest Dermatol 1991; 97:927-32.
28. Lammintausta K, Maibach HI. Exogenous and endogenous factors in skin irritation. Int J Dermatol 1988; 27:213-22.
29. Agner T, Johansen JD, Overgaard L et al. Combined effects of irritants and allergens. Synergistic effects of nickel and sodium lauryl sulfate in nickel-sensitized individuals. Contact Dermatitis 2002; 47:21-6.
30. Pedersen LK, Johansen JD, Held E et al. Augmentation of skin response by exposure to a combination of allergens and irritants-a review. Contact Dermatitis 2004; 50:265-73.
31. Pedersen LK, Haslund P, Johansen JD et al. Influence of a detergent on skin response to methyldibromo glutaronitrile in sensitized individuals. Contact Dermatitis 2004; 50:1-5.
32. Ulfgren AK, Klareskog L, Lindberg M. An immunohistochemical analysis of cytokine expression in allergic and irritant contact dermatitis. Acta Derm Fenereol (Stockh) 2000; 80:167-70.
33. Hoefakker S, Caubo M, van 't Erve EH et al. In vivo cytokine profiles in allergic and irritant contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1995; 33:258-66.
34. Seidenari S, Motolese A, Belletti B. Pre-treatment of nickel test areas with sodium lauryl sulfate detects nickel sensitivity in subjects reacting negatively to routinely performed patch tests. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 34:88-92.
35. Löffler H, Steffes A, Happle R et al. Allergy and irritation: an adverse association in patients with atopic eczema. Acta Derm Venereol (Stocka) 2003; 83:328-31.
36. Riemann H, Schwarz T, Grabbe S. Pathomechanisms of the elicitation phase of allergic contact dermatitis. JDDG 2003; 1:613-19.
37. Grabbe S, Steinert M, Mahnte K et al. Dissection of antigenic and irritative effects of epicutaneously applied haptens in mice: evidence that not the antigenic component but nonspecific proinflammatory effects of haptens determine the concentration-dependent elicitation of allergic contact dermatitis. J Clin Invest 1996; 98:1158-64.
38. Ariette JP, Fritzler MJ. Reduced skin threshold to irritation in the presence of allergic contact dermatitis in the guinea pig. Contact Dermatitis 1984; 11:31-3.
39. Klas PA, Corey G, Storrs FJ et al. Allergic and irritant patch test reactions and atopic disease. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 34:121-4.
40. Uter W, Geier J, Land M et al. Another look at seasonal variation in patch test results. A multifactorial analysis of surveillance data of the IVDK. Information Network of Departments of Dermatology. Contact Dermatitis 2001; 44:146-52.
41. Kranke B, Aberer W. Seasonal influence on patch test results in central Europe. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 34:215-16.
42. Katsarou A, Koufou V, Kalogeromitros D et al. Seasonal influence on patch test results in Greece. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 1992; 9:232-4.
43. Dahl MV. Chronic, irritant contact dermatitis: mechanisms, variables, and differentiation from other forms of contact dermatitis. Adv Dermatol 1988; 3:261-75.
44. Edman B. Seasonal influence on patch test results. Contact Dermatitis 1989; 20:226.
45. Bruze M. Seasonal influence on routine patch test results. Contact Dermatitis 1986; 14:184.
46. Löffler H, Pirker C, Aramaki J et al. Evaluation of skin susceptibility to irritancy by routine patch testing with sodium lauryl sulfate. Eur J Dermatol 2001; 11:416-19.
47. Smith HR, Basketter DA, McFadden JP. Irritant dermatitis, irritancy and its role in allergic contact dermatitis. Clin Exp Dermatol 2002; 27:138-46.
48. McFadden JP, Basketter DA. Contact allergy, irritancy and 'danger'. Contact Dermatitis 2000; 42:123-7.
49. Lisby S, Muller KM, Jongeneel CV et al. Nickel and skin irritants up-regulate tumor necrosis factor-alpha mRNA in keratinocytes by different but potentially synergistic mechanisms. Int Immunol 1995; 7:343-52.
50. Barker JN, Mitra RS, Griffiths CE et al. Keratinocytes as initiators of inflammation. Lancet 1991; 337:211-14.
51. Muller Decker K, Furstenberger G, Marks F. Keratinocyte-derived proinflammatory key mediators and cell viability as in vitro parameters of irritancy: a possible alternative to the Draize skin irritation test. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1994; 127:99-108.
52. Corsini E, Marinovich M, Galli CL. In vitro keratinocytes responses to chemical allergens. Boll Chim Farm 1995; 134:569-73.
53. Matzinger P. The danger model: a renewed sense of self. Science 2002; 296:301-5.
54. Smith HR, Holloway D, Armstrong DK et al. Irritant thresholds in subjects with colophony allergy. Contact Dermatitis 2000; 42:95-7.
55. Bruynzeel DP, van Ketel WG, von Blomberg-van der Flier M et al. Angry back or the excited skin syndrome: a prospective study. J Am Acad Dermatol 1983; 8:392-7.