The dose-response relationship between the patch test and ROAT and the potential use for regulatory purposes

Contact Dermatitis

Volumn 61, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 201-208

  Fischer, Louise Arup ^a   Voelund, Aage ^b   Andersen, Klaus Ejner ^c   Menné, Torkil ^a   Johansen, Jeanne Duus ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b University of Southern Denmark ^*  (Denmark)

^c ODENSE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Dose response; Elicitation; Patch test; Repeated exposure; ROAT

Indexed keywords

2 BROMO 2 BROMOMETHYLGLUTARONITRILE; ALLERGEN; FRAGRANCE; HYDROXYISOHEXYL 3 CYCLOHEXENE CARBOXALDEHYDE; ISOEUGENOL; NICKEL; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VOLATILE AGENT;

ALLERGIC REACTION; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; HUMAN; PATCH TEST; REPEATED OPEN APPLICATION TEST; SENSITIZATION; SKIN ALLERGY; SKIN TEST;

ALDEHYDES; CYCLOHEXENES; DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC CONTACT; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; EUGENOL; HUMANS; MATHEMATICS; NICKEL; NITRILES; PATCH TESTS; PERFUME; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PRESERVATIVES, PHARMACEUTICAL; SKIN TESTS;

EID: 70350007886     PISSN: 01051873     EISSN: 16000536     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2009.01607.x     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Menné T, Wahlberg J E. Risk assessment failures of chemicals commonly used in consumer products. Contact Dermatitis 2002 : 46 : 189 190.
2. Friedmann P S. The immunology of allergic contact dermatitis: the DNCB story. Adv Dermatol 1990 : 5 : 175 195.
3. Griem P, Goebel C, Scheffler H. Proposal for a risk assessment methodology for skin sensitization based on sensitization potency data. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2003 : 38 : 269 290.
4. Hannuksela M, Salo H. The repeated open application test (ROAT). Contact Dermatitis 1986 : 14 : 221 227.
5. Nakada T, Hostynek J J, Maibach H I. Use tests: ROAT (repeated open application test)/PUT (provocative use test): an overview. Contact Dermatitis 2000 : 43 : 1 3.
6. Andersen K E, Johansen J D, Bruze M et al. The time-dose-response relationship for elicitation of contact dermatitis in isoeugenol allergic individuals. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2001 : 170 : 166 171.
7. Färm G. Repeated open application tests (ROAT) in patients allergic to colophony-evaluated visually and with bioengineering techniques. Acta Derm Venereol 1998 : 78 : 130 135.
8. Johansen J D, Andersen K E, Rastogi S C, Menné T. Threshold responses in cinnamic-aldehyde-sensitive subjects: results and methodological aspects. Contact Dermatitis 1996 : 34 : 165 171.
9. Johansen J D, Frosch P J, Svedman C, Andersen K E, Bruze M, Pirker C, Menné T. Hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde-known as Lyral: quantitative aspects and risk assessment of an important fragrance allergen. Contact Dermatitis 2003 : 48 : 310 316.
10. Menné T. Relationship between use test and threshold patch test concentration in patients sensitive to 5-chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one and 2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one (MCI/MI). Contact Dermatitis 1991 : 24 : 375.
11. 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.
12. Svedman C, Bruze M, Johansen J D et al. Deodorants: an experimental provocation study with hydroxycitronellal. Contact Dermatitis 2003 : 48 : 217 223. (Pubitemid 36776027)
13. Fischer L A, Johansen J D, Menné T. Nickel allergy-relationship between patch test and repeated open application test thresholds. Br J Dermatol 2007 : 157 : 723 729.
14. Fischer L A, Johansen J D, Menné T. Methyldibromo glutaronitrile allergy-relationship between patch test and repeated open application test thresholds. Br J Dermatol 2008 : 159 : 1138 1143.
15. Fischer L A, Menné T, Avnstorp C, Kasting G B, Johansen J D. Hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde allergy-relationship between patch test and repeated open application test thresholds. Br J Dermatol 2009 : 161 : 560 567.
16. Friedmann P S, Moss C, Shuster S, Simpson J M. Quantitative relationships between sensitizing dose of DNCB and reactivity in normal subjects. Clin Exp Immunol 1983 : 53 : 709 715.
17. Friedmann P S. Contact hypersensitivity. Curr Opin Immunol 1989 : 1 : 690 693.
18. Kimber I, Dearman R J, Basketter D A, Ryan C A, Gerberick G F, McNamee P M, Lalko J, Api A M. Dose metrics in the acquisition of skin sensitization: thresholds and importance of dose per unit area. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2008 : 52 : 39 45.
19. Kligman A M. The identification of contact allergens by human assay. II. Factors influencing the induction and measurement of allergic contact dermatitis. J Invest Dermatol 1966 : 47 : 375 392.
20. Magnusson B, Kligman A M (eds). Induction of hypersensitivity. Allergic Contact Dermatitis in the Guinea Pig. In: Identifications of Contact Allergens. Springfield, Illinois, CC Thomas: 1970 : 44 76.
21. Rees J L, Friedmann P S, Matthews J N. The influence of area of application on sensitization by dinitrochlorobenzene. Br J Dermatol 1990 : 122 : 29 31.
22. Schnitzer A. Beitrag zur Frage das Mechanisms der Sensibiliserung. Dermatologica 1942 : 85 : 339 347.
23. Upadhye M R, Maibach H I. Influence of area of application of allergen on sensitization in contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1992 : 27 : 281 286.
24. White S I, Friedmann P S, Moss C, Simpson J M. The effect of altering area of application and dose per unit area on sensitization by DNCB. Br J Dermatol 1986 : 115 : 663 668.
25. Johansen J D, Bruze M, Andersen K E et al. The repeated open application test: suggestions for a scale of evaluation. Contact Dermatitis 1998 : 39 : 95 96.
26. Andersen K E, Lidén C, Hansen J, Volund A. Dose-response testing with nickel sulphate using the TRUE test in nickel-sensitive individuals. Multiple nickel sulphate patch-test reactions do not cause an 'angry back'. Br J Dermatol 1993 : 129 : 50 56.
27. Frankild S, Volund A, Wahlberg J E, Andersen K E. Comparison of the sensitivities of the Buehler test and the guinea pig maximization test for predictive testing of contact allergy. Acta Derm Venereol 2000 : 80 : 256 262.
28. Johansen J D, Bernard G, Gimenez-Arnau E, Lepoittevin J P, Bruze M, Andersen K E. Comparison of elicitation potential of chloroatranol and atranol-2 allergens in oak moss absolute. Contact Dermatitis 2006 : 54 : 192 195.
29. Cox D R. The Analysis of Binary Data. London, Menthuen, 1970.
30. Finney D J. Statistical Method in Biological Assay. London, Griffin C, 2009.
31. Vuilleumier C, Flament I, Sauvegrain P. Headspace analysis study of evaporation rate of perfume ingredients applied onto skin. Int J Cosmet Sci 1995 : 17 : 61 76.
32. Hextall J M, Alagaratnam N J, Glendinning A K, Holloway D B, Blaikie L, Basketter D A, McFadden J P. Dose-time relationships for elicitation of contact allergy to para-phenylenediamine. Contact Dermatitis 2002 : 47 : 96 99.
33. Jensen C D, Johansen J D, Menné T, Andersen K E. Methyldibromo glutaronitrile contact allergy: effect of single versus repeated daily exposure. Contact Dermatitis 2005 : 52 : 88 92.
34. White J M, Basketter D A, Pease C K, Sanders D A, McFadden J P. Intermittent exposure to low-concentration paraphenylenediamine can be equivalent to single, higher-dose exposure. Contact Dermatitis 2007 : 56 : 262 265.
35. Basketter D A, Jefferies D, Safford B J et al. The impact of exposure variables on the induction of skin sensitization. Contact Dermatitis 2006 : 55 : 178 185.
36. Friedmann P S. The relationships between exposure dose and response in induction and elicitation of contact hypersensitivity in humans. Br J Dermatol 2007 : 157 : 1093 1102.
37. Thyssen J P, Menné T, Schnuch A, Uter W, White I, White J M, Johansen J D. Acceptable risk of contact allergy in the general population assessed by CE-DUR-a method to detect and categorize contact allergy epidemics based on patient data. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2009 : 84 : 183 187.
38. Lidén C, Bruze M, Menné T. Metals. In: Contact Dermatitis, 4th edition, Frosch P, Menne T, Lepoittevin J P (eds): Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Springer, 2006 : 537 568.
39. European Parliament and Council Directive 94/27/EC of 30 June 1994 amending for the 12th time Directive 76/769/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations, 1994. Available at : www.teg.co.uk/nickel/94-27-EC.htm (last accessed 04 August 2009).
40. Commission Directive 2004/96/EC of 27 September 2004 amending Council Directive 76/769/EEC as regards restrictions on the marketing and use of nickel for piercing post assemblies for the purpose of adapting its Annex I to technical progress, 2004. Available at : www.eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:301:0051:0052:EN:PDF (last accessed 04 August 2009).
41. Jensen C S, Lisby S, Baadsgaard O, Volund A, Menné T. Decrease in nickel sensitization in a Danish schoolgirl population with ears pierced after implementation of a nickel-exposure regulation. Br J Dermatol 2002 : 146 : 636 642.
42. Johansen J, Menné T, Christophersen J, Kaaber K, Veien N. Changes in the pattern of sensitization to common contact allergens in Denmark between 1985-86 and 1997-98, with a special view to the effect of preventive strategies. Br J Dermatol 2000 : 142 : 490 495.
43. Schnuch A, Uter W. Decrease in nickel allergy in Germany and regulatory interventions. Contact Dermatitis 2003 : 49 : 107 108.
44. Opinion of the scientific committee on cosmetic products and non-food products intended for consumers concerning Methyldibromo Glutaronitrile, Colipa no. P77 adopted by the SCCNFP during the 20th plenary meeting of 4 June 2002 Available at : www.ec.europa.eu/health/ph-risk/committees/sccp/documents/out169- en.pdf (last accessed 04 August 2009).
45. Opinion on Methyldibromo glutaronitrile. Adopted 15 March 2005/20 June 2006: of the House Comm. on Scientific Committee on Consumer Products SCCP, COLIPA n P77, 2005. Available at : www.ec.europa.eu/health/ph-risk/committees/ 04-sccp/does/sccp-o-060.pdf (last accessed 04 August 2009).
46. Johansen J D, Veien N, Laurberg G et al. Decreasing trends in methyldibromo glutaronitrile contact allergy-following regulatory intervention. Contact Dermatitis 2008 : 59 : 48 51.
47. Basketter D A, Gerberick G F, Kimber I. Skin sensitisation, vehicle effects and the local lymph node assay. Food Chem Toxicol 2001 : 39 : 621 627. (Pubitemid 32429476)
48. Kynemund P L, Agner T, Held E, Johansen J D. Methyldibromoglutaronitrile in leave-on products elicits contact allergy at low concentration. Br J Dermatol 2004 : 151 : 817 822.
49. Jensen C D, Johansen J D, Menné T, Andersen K E. Methyldibromoglutaronitrile in rinse-off products causes allergic contact dermatitis: an experimental study. Br J Dermatol 2004 : 150 : 90 95.
50. Hannuksela M. Sensitivity of various skin sites in the repeated open application. Am J Contact Dermat 1991 : 2 : 102 104.
51. Johansen J D, Skov L, Volund A, Andersen K, Menné T. Allergens in combination have a synergistic effect on the elicitation response: a study of fragrance-sensitized individuals. Br J Dermatol 1998 : 139 : 264 270.
52. Krasteva M, Garrigue J L, Horrand F, Tchou I, Descotes J, Nicolas J F. Suboptimal non-inflammatory concentrations of haptens may elicit a contact sensitivity reaction when used as a mix. Contact Dermatitis 1996 : 35 : 279 282.
53. McLelland J, Shuster S. Contact dermatitis with negative patch tests: the additive effect of allergens in combination. Br J Dermatol 1990 : 122 : 623 630.
54. Wahlberg J E, Skog E. Nickel allergy and atopy. Threshold of nickel sensitivity and immunoglobulin E determinations. Br J Dermatol 1971 : 85 : 97 104.