The critical review of methodologies and approaches to assess the inherent skin sensitization potential (skin allergies) of chemicals Part III

Contact Dermatitis

Volumn 66, Issue SUPPL.1, 2012, Pages 53-70

  Thyssen, Jacob P ^a   Giménez Arnau, Elena ^b   Lepoittevin, Jean Pierre ^b   Menné, Torkil ^a   Boman, Anders ^c   Schnuch, Axel ^d  

^a GENTOFTE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE STRASBOURG   (France)

^c KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^d UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

2 BROMO 2 BROMOMETHYLGLUTARONITRILE; CHEMICAL AGENT; CHROMIUM; COSMETIC; FORMALDEHYDE; HYDROXYISOHEXYL 3 CYCLOHEXENECARBOXALDEHYDE; ISOEUGENOL; ISOTHIAZOLINONE DERIVATIVE; NICKEL; PHENYLENEDIAMINE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

CONCENTRATION RESPONSE; CONTACT ALLERGY; CONTACT DERMATITIS; DATA ANALYSIS; DENMARK; EUROPEAN UNION; GERMANY; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; ITALY; METHODOLOGY; MORBIDITY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; REVIEW; SKIN ALLERGY; SKIN SENSITIZATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SWEDEN; UNITED KINGDOM;

CHROMIUM; CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY; COSMETICS; DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC CONTACT; EUROPEAN UNION; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; MORBIDITY; NICKEL;

EID: 84858129536     PISSN: 01051873     EISSN: 16000536     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2011.02004_4.x     Document Type: Review

References (84)

1. Menné T, Rasmussen K., Regulation of nickel exposure in Denmark. Contact Dermatitis 1990: 23: 57-58. (Pubitemid 20211264)
2. Lidén C., Nickel in jewellery and associated products. Contact Dermatitis 1992: 26: 73-75.
3. Thyssen J P, Linneberg A, Menné T, Nielsen N H, Johansen J D., The association between hand eczema and nickel allergy has weakened among young women in the general population following the Danish nickel regulation: results from two cross-sectional studies. Contact Dermatitis 2009: 61: 342-348.
4. 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. (Pubitemid 30159073)
5. Veien N K, Hattel T, Laurberg G., Reduced nickel sensitivity in young Danish women following regulation of nickel exposure. Contact Dermatitis 2001: 45: 104-106. (Pubitemid 32738429)
6. Thyssen J P, Hald M, Avnstorp C, et al., Characteristics of nickel-allergic dermatitis patients seen in private dermatology clinics in Denmark: a questionnaire study. Acta Derm Venereol 2009: 89: 384-388.
7. Thyssen J P, Johansen J D, Carlsen B C, Menné T., Prevalence of nickel and cobalt allergy among female patients with dermatitis before and after Danish government regulation: a 23-year retrospective study. J Am Acad Dermatol 2009: 61: 799-805.
8. Jensen C S, Lisby S, Baadsgaard O, Völund 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. (Pubitemid 34437777)
9. Thyssen J P, Johansen J D, Menné T, Nielsen N H, Linneberg A., Nickel allergy in Danish women before and after nickel regulation. N Engl J Med 2009: 360: 2259-2260.
10. Thyssen J P, Menné T, Johansen J D., Patch test reactivity to metal allergens following regulatory interventions: a 33-year retrospective study. Contact Dermatitis 2010: 63: 102-106.
11. Lindberg M, Edman B, Fischer T, Stenberg B., Time trends in Swedish patch test data from 1992 to 2000. A multi-centre study based on age- and sex-adjusted results of the Swedish standard series. Contact Dermatitis 2007: 56: 205-210. (Pubitemid 46365229)
12. Schnuch A, Uter W., Decrease in nickel allergy in Germany and regulatory interventions. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 49: 107-108. (Pubitemid 37523859)
13. Schnuch A, Geier J, Lessmann H, Uter W., Decrease in nickel sensitization in young patients-successful intervention through nickel exposure regulation? Results of the IVDK, 1992-2001. Hautarzt 2003: 54: 626-632. (Pubitemid 36841499)
14. Bocca B, Forte G, Senofonte O, et al., A pilot study on the content and the release of Ni and other allergenic metals from cheap earrings available on the Italian market. Sci Total Environ 2007: 388: 24-34.
15. Biesterbos J, Yazar K, Lidén C., Nickel on the Swedish market: follow-up ten years after entry into force of the Nickel Directive. Contact Dermatitis 2011: 65: 115-117.
16. Lidén C, Johnsson S., Nickel on the Swedish market before the Nickel Directive. Contact Dermatitis 2001: 44: 7-12. (Pubitemid 32014927)
17. Lidén C, Norberg K., Nickel on the Swedish market. Follow-up after implementation of the Nickel Directive. Contact Dermatitis 2005: 52: 29-35. (Pubitemid 40293088)
18. Rui F, Bovenzi M, Prodi A, et al., Nickel, cobalt and chromate sensitization and occupation. Contact Dermatitis 2010: 62: 225-231.
19. Uter W, Ramsch C, Aberer W, et al., The European baseline series in 10 European countries, 2005/2006-results of the European Surveillance System of Contact Allergies (ESSCA). Contact Dermatitis 2009: 61: 31-38.
20. Rudzki E, Rebandel P., Changes in the pattern of sensitization to nickel in different age groups in Poland. Contact Dermatitis 2005: 53: 177. (Pubitemid 41297671)
21. Rudzki E, Rebandel P., Contact dermatitis in children. Contact Dermatitis 1996: 34: 66-67. (Pubitemid 26019836)
22. Czarnobilska E, Obtulowicz K, Dyga W, Wsolek-Wnek K, Spiewak R., Contact hypersensitivity and allergic contact dermatitis among school children and teenagers with eczema. Contact Dermatitis 2009: 60: 264-269.
23. Czarnobilska E, Obtulowicz K, Dyga W, Spiewak R., The most important contact sensitizers in Polish children and adolescents with atopy and chronic recurrent eczema as detected with the expanded European Baseline Series. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2011: 22: 252-256.
24. Thyssen J P, Johansen J D, Menné T., Contact allergy epidemics and their controls. Contact Dermatitis 2007: 56: 185-195. (Pubitemid 46365227)
25. Schnuch A, Wolter J, Geier J, Uter W., Nickel allergy is still frequent in young German females-probably due to insufficient protection from nickel-releasing objects. Contact Dermatitis 2011: 64: 142-150.
26. Thyssen J P, Menné T, Johansen J D., Nickel release from inexpensive jewelry and hair clasps purchased in an EU country-are consumers sufficiently protected from nickel exposure? Sci Total Environ 2009: 407: 5315-5318.
27. Thyssen J P, Menné T, Johansen J D., Identification of metallic items that caused nickel dermatitis in Danish patients. Contact Dermatitis 2010: 63: 151-156.
28. Thyssen J P, Johansen J D, Zachariae C, Menné T., The outcome of dimethylglyoxime testing in a sample of cell phones in Denmark. Contact Dermatitis 2008: 59: 38-42. (Pubitemid 351990044)
29. Thyssen J P, Johansen J D., Mobile phones are now covered by the European Union Nickel Directive. Contact Dermatitis 2009: 61: 57.
30. Rietschel R L, Fowler J F, Warshaw E M, et al., Detection of nickel sensitivity has increased in North American patch-test patients. Dermatitis 2008: 19: 16-19. (Pubitemid 351428406)
31. Lidén C, Bruze M, Thyssen J P, Menné T., Metals. In: Contact Dermatitis, Johansen J D, Lepoittevin J-P, Frosch P J, (eds): Berlin, Springer, 2011: pp. 643-679.
32. Avnstorp C., Prevalence of cement eczema in Denmark before and since addition of ferrous sulfate to Danish cement. Acta Derm Venereol 1989: 69: 151-155. (Pubitemid 19057356)
33. Avnstorp C., Risk factors for cement eczema. Contact Dermatitis 1991: 25: 81-88.
34. Avnstorp C., Follow-up of workers from the prefabricated concrete industry after the addition of ferrous sulphate to Danish cement. Contact Dermatitis 1989: 20: 365-371. (Pubitemid 19167190)
35. Thyssen J P, Jensen P, Carlsen B C, Engkilde K, Menné T, Johansen J D., The prevalence of chromium allergy in Denmark is currently increasing as a result of leather exposure. Br J Dermatol 2009: 161: 1288-1293.
36. Zachariae C O, Agner T, Menné T., Chromium allergy in consecutive patients in a country where ferrous sulfate has been added to cement since. Contact Dermatitis 1981: 35: 83-85.
37. Gailhofer G, Ludvan M., Change in the allergen spectrum in contact eczema 1975-1984. Derm Beruf Umwelt 1987: 35: 12-16.
38. Bock M, Schmidt A, Bruckner T, Diepgen T L., Occupational skin disease in the construction industry. Br J Dermatol 2003: 149: 1165-1171. (Pubitemid 38058092)
39. Geier J, Krautheim A, Uter W, Lessmann H, Schnuch A., Occupational contact allergy in the building trade in Germany: influence of preventive measures and changing exposure. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2011: 84: 403-411.
40. Olsavszky R, Rycroft R J, White I R, McFadden J P., Contact sensitivity to chromate: comparison at a London contact dermatitis clinic over a 10-year period. Contact Dermatitis 1998: 38: 329-331. (Pubitemid 28339545)
41. Irvine C, Pugh C E, Hansen E J, Rycroft R J., Cement dermatitis in underground workers during construction of the Channel Tunnel. Occup Med (Lond) 1994: 44: 17-23. (Pubitemid 24057590)
42. Farm G., Changing patients in chromate allergy. Contact Dermatitis 1986: 15: 298-299.
43. Young E, Houwing R H., Patch test results with standard allergens over a decade. Contact Dermatitis 1987: 17: 104-107. (Pubitemid 17125302)
44. Goh C L, Gan S L., Change in cement manufacturing process, a cause for decline in chromate allergy? Contact Dermatitis 1996: 34: 51-54. (Pubitemid 26019828)
45. Wong S S, Chan M T, Gan S L, Ng S K, Goh C L., Occupational chromate allergy in Singapore: a study of 87 patients and a review from 1983 to 1995. Am J Contact Dermat 1998: 9: 1-5. (Pubitemid 28123669)
46. Chou T C, Chang H Y, Chen C J, et al., Effect of hand dermatitis on the total body burden of chromium after ferrous sulfate application in cement among cement workers. Contact Dermatitis 2008: 59: 151-156.
47. Wilkinson J D, Shaw S, Andersen K E, et al., Monitoring levels of preservative sensitivity in Europe. A 10-year overview (1991-2000). Contact Dermatitis 2002: 46: 207-210. (Pubitemid 34761675)
48. Thyssen J P, Engkilde K, Lundov M D, Carlsen B C, Menné T, Johansen J D., Temporal trends of preservative allergy in Denmark (1985-2008). Contact Dermatitis 2010: 62: 102-108.
49. Jong C T, Statham B N, Green C M, et al., Contact sensitivity to preservatives in the UK, 2004-2005: results of multicentre study. Contact Dermatitis 2007: 57: 165-168. (Pubitemid 47228513)
50. Banerjee P, McFadden J P, Ross J S, Rycroft R J, White I R., Increased positive patch test reactivity to methyldibromo glutaronitrile. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 49: 111-113. (Pubitemid 37523864)
51. de Groot A C, Flyvholm M A, Lensen G, Menné T, Coenraads P J., Formaldehyde-releasers: relationship to formaldehyde contact allergy. Contact allergy to formaldehyde and inventory of formaldehyde-releasers. Contact Dermatitis 2009: 61: 63-85.
52. Tudela E, MacPherson C, Maibach H I., Long-term trend in patch test reactions: a 32-year statistical overview (1970-2002), part II. Cutan Ocul Toxicol 2008: 27: 187-202.
53. Thyssen J P, Carlsen B C, Şsted H, Menné T, Johansen J D., Frequency of p-phenylenediamine (PPD) sensitization among Danish eczema patients tested between 1985 and 2007. Contact Dermatitis 2008: 59: 184-185.
54. Thyssen J P, Menné T, Johansen J D., The increase of PPD allergy in Denmark is not explained by an increase of contact allergy to para group chemicals. Contact Dermatitis 2011: 64: 176-179.
55. Patel S, Basketter D A, Jefferies D, et al., Patch test frequency to p-phenylenediamine: follow up over the last 6 years. Contact Dermatitis 2007: 56: 35-37. (Pubitemid 44924261)
56. Hoeller O D, Vens N, Merk H F, Schroeder C M., Contact allergens in the standard patch test series from 1980-2004 at the University Clinic Aachen. Hautarzt 2005: 56: 1125-1132. (Pubitemid 41719561)
57. Rudzki E, Rebandel P., Sensitivity to paraphenylenediamine in Warsaw (Poland). Contact Dermatitis 2007: 57: 347-348. (Pubitemid 47568785)
58. Hasan T, Rantanen T, Alanko K, et al., Patch test reactions to cosmetic allergens in 1995-1997 and 2000-2002 in Finland-a multicentre study. Contact Dermatitis 2005: 53: 40-45. (Pubitemid 40977220)
59. Thyssen J P, Andersen K E, Bruze M, et al., p-Phenylenediamine sensitization is more prevalent in central and southern European patch test centres than in Scandinavian: results from a multicentre study. Contact Dermatitis 2009: 60: 314-319.
60. Thyssen J P, White J M., Epidemiological data on consumer allergy to p-phenylenediamine. Contact Dermatitis 2008: 59: 327-343.
61. Machovcova A, Dastychova E, Kostalova D, et al., Common contact sensitizers in the Czech Republic. Patch test results in 12,058 patients with suspected contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 2005: 53: 162-166. (Pubitemid 41297660)
62. Hansen H S, Johansen J D, Thyssen J P, Linneberg A, Şsted H., Personal use of hair dyes and temporary black tattoos in Copenhagen hairdressers. Ann Occup Hyg 2010: 54: 453-458.
63. Schnuch A, Lessmann H, Frosch P J, Uter W., para-Phenylenediamine: the profile of an important allergen. Results of the IVDK. Br J Dermatol 2008: 159: 379-386. (Pubitemid 352009841)
64. de Groot A C, de Cock P A, Coenraads P J, et al., Methyldibromoglutaronitrile is an important contact allergen in The Netherlands. Contact Dermatitis 1996: 34: 118-120. (Pubitemid 26034693)
65. 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. (Pubitemid 351990050)
66. Frosch P J, Pilz B, Andersen K E, et al., Patch testing with fragrances: results of a multicenter study of the European Environmental and Contact Dermatitis Research Group with 48 frequently used constituents of perfumes. Contact Dermatitis 1995: 33: 333-342.
67. Buckley D A, Wakelin S H, Seed P T, et al., The frequency of fragrance allergy in a patch-test population over a 17-year period. Br J Dermatol 2000: 142: 279-283. (Pubitemid 30117698)
68. White J M, White I R, Glendinning A, et al., Frequency of allergic contact dermatitis to isoeugenol is increasing: a review of 3636 patients tested from 2001 to 2005. Br J Dermatol 2007: 157: 580-582. (Pubitemid 47256118)
69. Schnuch A, Lessmann H, Geier J, Frosch P J, Uter W., Contact allergy to fragrances: frequencies of sensitization from 1996 to 2002. Results of the IVDK. Contact Dermatitis 2004: 50: 65-76. (Pubitemid 38657359)
70. Uter W, Geier J, Frosch P, Schnuch A., Contact allergy to fragrances: current patch test results (2005-2008) from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology. Contact Dermatitis 2010: 63: 254-261.
71. Schnuch A, Uter W, Geier J, Lessmann H, Frosch P J., Sensitization to 26 fragrances to be labelled according to current European regulation. Results of the IVDK and review of the literature. Contact Dermatitis 2007: 57: 1-10. (Pubitemid 46944433)
72. Nardelli A, Carbonez A, Ottoy W, Drieghe J, Goossens A., Frequency of and trends in fragrance allergy over a 15-year period. Contact Dermatitis 2008: 58: 134-141. (Pubitemid 351248571)
73. Thyssen J P, Carlsen B C, Menné T, Johansen J D., Trends of contact allergy to fragrance mix I and Myroxylon pereirae among Danish eczema patients tested between 1985 and 2007. Contact Dermatitis 2008: 59: 238-244.
74. Thyssen J P, Linneberg A, Menné T, Nielsen N H, Johansen J D., The prevalence and morbidity of sensitization to fragrance mix I in the general population. Br J Dermatol 2009: 161: 95-101.
75. Rastogi S C, Menné T, Johansen J D., The composition of fine fragrances is changing. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 130-132. (Pubitemid 36683478)
76. Mildau G., INCI labelling of fragrances and preservatives on 5451 randomly selected cosmetic products in Germany, 2006 to 2009. 2010.
77. Rastogi S C, Johansen J D., Significant exposures to isoeugenol derivatives in perfumes. Contact Dermatitis 2008: 58: 278-281. (Pubitemid 351537615)
78. White I R, Johansen J D, Arnau E G, et al., Isoeugenol is an important contact allergen: can it be safely replaced with isoeugenyl acetate? Contact Dermatitis 1999: 41: 272-275. (Pubitemid 29490836)
79. Tanaka S, Royds C, Buckley D, et al., Contact allergy to isoeugenol and its derivatives: problems with allergen substitution. Contact Dermatitis 2004: 51: 288-291. (Pubitemid 40037055)
80. Geier J, Brasch J, Schnuch A, Lessmann H, Pirker C, Frosch P J., Lyral has been included in the patch test standard series in Germany. Contact Dermatitis 2002: 46: 295-297. (Pubitemid 34753733)
81. Braendstrup P, Johansen J D., Hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde (Lyral) is still a frequent allergen. Contact Dermatitis 2008: 59: 187-188.
82. Bruze M, Andersen K E, Goossens A., Recommendation to include fragrance mix 2 and hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde (Lyral) in the European baseline patch test series. Contact Dermatitis 2008: 58: 129-133. (Pubitemid 351248573)
83. Schnuch A, Uter W, Dickel H, et al., Quantitative patch and repeated open application testing in hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde sensitive-patients. Contact Dermatitis 2009: 61: 152-162.
84. Fischer L A, Menné T, Völund A, Johansen J D., Can exposure limitations for well-known contact allergens be simplified?-An analysis of dose-response patch test data. Contact Dermatitis 2011: 64: 337-342.