Towards a perfect vehicle(s) for diagnostic patch testing: An overview

Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 60-66

  Chiang, Audris ^a   Maibach, Howard I ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Allergic contact dermatitis; Patch tests; Petrolatum; Skin

Indexed keywords

ALLERGEN; DICHROMATE POTASSIUM; DISULFIRAM; DRUG VEHICLE; GERMALL 115; MANNITOL; NICKEL SULFATE; PETROLATUM; POTASSIUM CHROMATE;

AQUEOUS SOLUTION; CREAM; OINTMENT; PATCH TEST; REVIEW; SKIN ABSORPTION; SKIN ALLERGY;

ADMINISTRATION, CUTANEOUS; ALLERGENS; DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC CONTACT; DRUG STABILITY; HUMANS; PATCH TESTS; PHARMACEUTICAL VEHICLES;

EID: 84868577955     PISSN: 15569527     EISSN: 15569535     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/15569527.2012.684418     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Cyran C, Maibach HI. Alternate vehicles for diagnostic patch testing: An update. G Ital Dermatol Venereol 2008;143:91-94
2. Lee EE, Maibach HI. Role of vehicles in diagnosing contact allergy: An update. Exog Dermatol 2002;1:107-111
3. Tanglertsampan C, Maibach HI. The role of vehicles in diagnostic patch testing. A reappraisal. Contact Derm 1993;29:169-174
4. 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;47:375-392
5. Knudsen BB, Menné T. Elicitation thresholds for thiuram mix using petrolatum and ethanol/sweat as vehicles. Contact Derm 1996;34:410-413
6. de Groot AC, Conemans JM. Nystatin allergy. Petrolatum is not the optimal vehicle for patch testing. Dermatol Clin 1990;8:153-155
7. Geier J, Lessmann H, Becker D, Bruze M, Frosch PJ, Fuchs T et al. Patch testing with components of water-based metalworking fluids: Results of a multicentre study with a second series. Contact Derm 2006;55:322-329
8. Wahlberg JE. Thresholds of sensitivity in metal contact allergy. 1. Isolated and simultaneous allergy to chromium, cobalt, mercury and-or nickel. Berufsdermatosen 1973;21:22-33
9. Wahlberg JE. Thresholds of sensitivity in metal contact allergy. 2. The value of percutaneous absorption studies for selection of the most suitable vehicle. Berufsdermatosen 1973;21:151-158
10. Wahlberg JE, Skog E. Nickel allergy and atopy. Threshold of nickel sensitivity and immunoglobulin E determinations. Br J Dermatol 1971;85:97-104
11. van Ketel WG. Patch tests: Methodology, standardization and significance of positive results. Arch Belg Dermatol Syphiligr 1973;29:73-82
12. Rietschel RL, Bruze M, Gruvberger B, Zug KA, Warshaw EM, Taylor JS et al. The relationship of vehicle and concentration of imidazolidinylurea, with attention to formaldehyde allergy status. Dermatitis 2006;17:48-49
13. Rietschel RL, Warshaw EM, Sasseville D, Fowler JF Jr, DeLeo VA, Belsito DV et al.; North American Contact Dermatitis Group. Sensitivity of petrolatum and aqueous vehicles for detecting allergy to imidazolidinylurea, diazolidinylurea, and DMDM hydantoin: A retrospective analysis from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group. Dermatitis 2007;18:155-162
14. Tosti A, Guerra L, Bardazzi F, Gasparri F. Euxyl K 400: A new sensitizer in cosmetics. Contact Derm 1991;25:89-93
15. Agner T. An experimental study of irritant effects of urea in different vehicles. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 1992;177:44-46
16. Dahl MV, Roering MJ. Sodium lauryl sulfate irritant patch tests. III. Evaporation of aqueous vehicle influences inflammatory response. J Am Acad Dermatol 1984;11:477-479
17. Fowler JF, Warshaw EM, Squires L. Methylphenidate patch-test protocol and irritancy threshold determination in healthy adult subjects. Dermatitis 2009;20:271-274
18. Aspres N, Freeman S. Predictive testing for irritancy and allergenicity of tea tree oil in normal human subjects. Exog Dermatol 2003;2:258-261
19. Frick-Engfeldt M, Isaksson M, Zimerson E, Bruze M. How to optimize patch testing with diphenylmethane diisocyanate. Contact Derm 2007;57:138-151
20. Kim HO, Wester RC, McMaster JA, Bucks DA, Maibach HI. Skin absorption from patch test systems. Contact Derm 1987;17:178-180
21. Choy YB, Prausnitz MR. The rule of five for non-oral routes of drug delivery: Ophthalmic, inhalation and transdermal. Pharm Res 2011;28:943-948
22. Gammelgaard B, Fullerton A, Avnstorp C, Menné T. In vitro evaluation of water and petrolatum as vehicles in chromate patch testing. Contact Derm 1992;27:317-318
23. Benezra C, Sigman CC, Perry LR, Helmes CT, Maibach HI. A systematic search for structure-activity relationships of skin contact sensitizers: Methodology. J Invest Dermatol 1985;85:351-356
24. Fischer T, Kreilgård B, Maibach HI. The true value of the TRUE Test for allergic contact dermatitis. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 2001;1:316-322
25. Ale SI, Maibach HI. Reproducibility of patch test results: A concurrent right-versus-left study using TRUE Test. Contact Derm 2004;50:304-312
26. Gilpin SJ, Hui X, Maibach HI. Volatility of fragrance chemicals: patch testing implications. Dermatitis 2009;20:200-207
27. Frick-Engfeldt M, Gruvberger B, Isaksson M, Hauksson I, Pontén A, Bruze M. Comparison of three different techniques for application of water solutions to Finn Chambers®. Contact Derm 2010;63:284-288.