The relationships between exposure dose and response in induction and elicitation of contact hypersensitivity in humans

British Journal of Dermatology

Volumn 157, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 1093-1102

  Friedmann, P S ^a  

^a SOUTHAMPTON GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Contact sensitization; Dose per unit area; Dose response; Patch test; Repeated open application test; Sensitizing dose

Indexed keywords

1 CHLORO 2,4 DINITROBENZENE; 2 BROMO 2 BROMOMETHYLGLUTARONITRILE; ALLERGEN; DIPHENCYPRONE; DODECYL SULFATE SODIUM; OXAZOLONE; ROSIN; SQUARIC ACID DIBUTYL ESTER;

B LYMPHOCYTE; CD4+ T LYMPHOCYTE; CD8+ T LYMPHOCYTE; CONTACT ALLERGY; CONTACT SENSITIZATION; DENDRITIC CELL; DOSE RESPONSE; EFFECTOR CELL; FOREARM; HUMAN; IMMUNE RESPONSE; IMMUNE SYSTEM; MACROPHAGE; MEMORY T LYMPHOCYTE; PATCH TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; REVIEW; SKIN ALLERGY; SKIN SENSITIVITY; SKIN TEST; T LYMPHOCYTE; TH1 CELL; ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION;

DERMATITIS, CONTACT; DINITROCHLOROBENZENE; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, IMMUNOLOGIC; FEMALE; HUMANS; IRRITANTS; MALE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN; SKIN TESTS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 36148974772     PISSN: 00070963     EISSN: 13652133     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2007.08162.x     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. Moulon C, Wild D, Dormoy A et al. MHC-dependent and -independent activation of human nickel-specific CD8+ cytotoxic T cells from allergic donors. J Invest Dermatol 1998 111 : 360 6.
2. Sieben S, Hertl M, Al Masaoudi T et al. Characterization of T cell responses to fragrances. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2001 172 : 172 8.
3. Pickard C, Smith AM, Cooper H et al. Investigation of mechanisms underlying the T-cell response to the hapten 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene. J Invest Dermatol 2007 127 : 630 7.
4. Menné T, Wilkinson JD. Individual predisposition to contact dermatitis. In : Textbook of Contact Dermatitis (Rycroft RJG, Menné T, Frosch P, eds 2nd edn. Berlin : Springer-Verlag, 1995 123 30.
5. Patrick E, Maibach HI. Predicitive assays: animal and man, and in vitro and in vivo. In : Textbook of Contact Dermatitis (Rycroft RJG, Menné T, Frosch P, eds 2nd edn. Berlin : Springer-Verlag, 1995 705 47.
6. Kligman AM. The identification of contact allergens by human assay. 3. The maximization test: a procedure for screening and rating contact sensitizers. J Invest Dermatol 1966 47 : 393 409.
7. Loveless SE, Ladics GS, Gerberick GF et al. Further evaluation of the local lymph node assay in the final phase of an international collaborative trial. Toxicology 1996 108 : 141 52.
8. Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Kimber I et al. Local lymph node assay: validation assessment for regulatory purposes. Am J Contact Dermat 2000 11 : 3 18.
9. Kligman AM. The identification of contact allergens by human assay. II. Factors influencing the induction and measurement of allergic contact dermatitis. J Invest Dermatol 1966 47 : 375 92.
10. Warbrick EV, Dearman RJ, Lea LJ et al. Local lymph node assay responses to paraphenylenediamine: intra- and inter-laboratory evaluations. J Appl Toxicol 1999 19 : 255 60.
11. 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 33.
12. Menné T. Quantitative aspects of nickel dermatitis. Sensitization and eliciting threshold concentrations. Sci Total Environ 1994 148 : 275 81.
13. Friedmann PS, Moss C, Shuster S et al. Quantitative relationships between sensitising dose of DNCB and reactivity in normal subjects. Clin Exp Immunol 1983 53 : 709 11.
14. Friedmann PS. Graded continuity, or all or none - studies of the human immune response. Clin Exp Dermatol 1991 16 : 79 84.
15. Moss C, Friedmann PS, Shuster S et al. Susceptibility and amplification of sensitivity in contact dermatitis. Clin Exp Immunol 1985 61 : 232 41.
16. Ford GP, Friedmann PS, White SI et al. Possible inhibitory mechanisms for contact sensitization by DNCB following UV-B induced damage to Langerhans cells. Br J Dermatol 1984 111 : 701 2.
17. Cumberbatch M, Clelland K, Dearman RJ et al. Impact of cutaneous IL-10 on resident epidermal Langerhans' cells and the development of polarized immune responses. J Immunol 2005 175 : 43 50.
18. Macatonia SE, Edwards AJ, Knight SC. Dendritic cells and the initiation of contact sensitivity to fluorescein isothiocyanate. Immunology 1986 59 : 509 14.
19. Cardin CW, Weaver JE, Bailey PT. Dose-response assessments of Kathon biocide. (II). Threshold prophetic patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 1986 15 : 10 16.
20. Rietschel RL, Nethercott JR, Emmett EA et al. Methylchloroisothiazolinone-methylisothiazolinone reactions in patients screened for vehicle and preservative hypersensitivity. J Am Acad Dermatol 1990 22 : 734 8.
21. Friedmann PS, Rees J, White SI et al. Low-dose exposure to antigen induces sub-clinical sensitization. Clin Exp Immunol 1990 81 : 507 9.
22. Memon AA, Friedmann PS. Studies on the reproducibility of allergic contact dermatitis. Br J Dermatol 1996 134 : 208 14.
23. White SI, Friedmann PS, Moss C et al. The effect of altering area of application and dose per unit area on sensitization by DNCB. Br J Dermatol 1986 115 : 663 8.
24. Hextall JM, Alagaratnam NJ, Glendinning AK et al. Dose-time relationships for elicitation of contact allergy to para-phenylenediamine. Contact Dermatitis 2002 47 : 96 9.
25. McFadden JP, Wakelin SH, Holloway DB et al. The effect of patch duration on the elicitation of para-phenylenediamine contact allergy. Contact Dermatitis 1998 39 : 79 81.
26. 2. Contact Dermatitis 1984 10 : 25 9.
27. Rhodes LE, Friedmann PS. A comparison of the ultraviolet B-induced erythemal response of back and buttock skin. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 1992 9 : 48 51.
28. Waterston K, Naysmith L, Rees JL. Physiological variation in the erythemal response to ultraviolet radiation and photoadaptation. J Invest Dermatol 2004 123 : 958 64.
29. Lawrence CM, Howel D, Shuster S. Site variation in anthralin inflammation on forearm skin. Br J Dermatol 1986 114 : 609 13.
30. Hannuksela M. Sensitivity of various skin sites in the repeated open application test. Am J Contact Dermat 1991 2 : 102 4.
31. Friedmann PS, Strickland I, Memon AA et al. Early time course of recruitment of immune surveillance in human skin after chemical provocation. Clin Exp Immunol 1993 91 : 351 6.
32. McLelland J, Shuster S, Matthews JN. 'Irritants' increase the response to an allergen in allergic contact dermatitis. Arch Dermatol 1991 127 : 1016 19.
33. McLelland J, Shuster S. Contact dermatitis with negative patch tests: the additive effect of allergens in combination. Br J Dermatol 1990 122 : 623 30.
34. Grabbe S, Steinert M, Mahnke 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.
35. Johansen JD, Andersen KE, Menné T. Quantitative aspects of isoeugenol contact allergy assessed by use and patch tests. Contact Dermatitis 1996 34 : 414 18.
36. Andersen KE, Johansen JD, Bruze M et al. The time-dose-response relationship for elicitation of contact dermatitis in isoeugenol allergic individuals. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2001 170 : 166 71.
37. Johansen JD, Andersen KE, Svedman C et al. Chloroatranol, an extremely potent allergen hidden in perfumes: a dose-response elicitation study. Contact Dermatitis 2003 49 : 180 4.
38. Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Svedman C et al. Hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde - known as Lyral: quantitative aspects and risk assessment of an important fragrance allergen. Contact Dermatitis 2003 48 : 310 16.
39. Bruze M, Johansen JD, Andersen KE et al. Deodorants: an experimental provocation study with isoeugenol. Contact Dermatitis 2005 52 : 260 7.
40. Flyvholm MA, Hall BM, Agner T et al. Threshold for occluded formaldehyde patch test in formaldehyde-sensitive patients. Relationship to repeated open application test with a product containing formaldehyde releaser. Contact Dermatitis 1997 36 : 26 33.
41. Gruvberger B, Andersen KE, Brandao FM et al. Repeated open application test with methyldibromo glutaronitrile, a multicentre study within the EECDRG. Contact Dermatitis 2005 52 : 19 23.
42. Jensen CD, Johansen JD, Menné T, Andersen KE. Methyldibromo glutaronitrile contact allergy: effect of single versus repeated daily exposure. Contact Dermatitis 2005 52 : 88 92.
43. Schnuch A, Kelterer D, Bauer A et al. Quantitative patch and repeated open application testing in methyldibromo glutaronitrile-sensitive patients. Contact Dermatitis 2005 52 : 197 206.
44. Zachariae C, Lerbaek A, McNamee PM et al. An evaluation of dose/unit area and time as key factors influencing the elicitation capacity of methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI) in MCI/MI-allergic patients. Contact Dermatitis 2006 55 : 160 6.
45. Nielsen NH, Menné T, Kristiansen J et al. Effects of repeated skin exposure to low nickel concentrations: a model for allergic contact dermatitis to nickel on the hands. Br J Dermatol 1999 141 : 676 82.
46. Wahlberg JE, Liden C. Cross-reactivity patterns of cobalt and nickel studied with repeated open applications (ROATS) to the skin of guinea pigs. Am J Contact Dermat 2000 11 : 42 8.
47. Chang YC, Clarke GF, Maibach HI. The provocative use test (PUT) [repeated open application test (ROAT)] in topical corticosteroid allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1997 37 : 309 11.
48. Farm G. Repeated open application tests (ROAT) in patients allergic to colophony - evaluated visually and with bioengineering techniques. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1998 78 : 130 5.
49. Krasteva M, Cristaudo A, Hall B et al. Contact sensitivity to hair dyes can be detected by the consumer open test. Eur J Dermatol 2002 12 : 322 6.
50. Villarama CD, Maibach HI. Correlations of patch test reactivity and the repeated open application test (ROAT)/provocative use test (PUT). Food Chem Toxicol 2004 42 : 1719 25.
51. Rees JL, Friedmann PS, Matthews JN. The influence of area of application on sensitization by dinitrochlorobenzene. Br J Dermatol 1990 122 : 29 31.
52. Friedmann PS. Clinical aspects of allergic contact dermatitis. In : Immunopharmacology and Immunotoxicology (Dean JH, Luster MI, Munson AE et al., eds 2nd edn. New York : Raven Press, 1994 589 616.