scispace - formally typeset
Journal ArticleDOI

North American Contact Dermatitis Group Patch Test Results 2013-2014

TLDR
The NACDG patch testing results confirm that the epidemic of sensitivity to methylisothiazolinone previously documented in Europe is also occurring in North America.
Abstract
Background Patch testing is the most important diagnostic tool for the assessment of allergic contact dermatitis. Objective This study documents the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) patch testing results from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2014. Methods At 13 centers in North America, patients were tested in a standardized manner with a screening series of 70 allergens. Data were manually verified and entered into a central database. Descriptive frequencies were calculated, and trends were analyzed using χ test. Results A total of 4871 patients were tested. There were 3255 patients (66.8%) who had at least 1 positive reaction and 2412 patients (49.5%) who were ultimately determined to have a primary diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis. A total of 434 patients (8.9%) had occupationally related skin disease. There were 9726 positive allergic reactions. Compared with the previous reporting periods (2011-2012 and 2001-2012, including at least three 2-year cycles), positive reaction rates for the top 25 screening allergens statistically increased for 2 allergens: methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (6.4%; risk ratios, 1.26 [1.07-1.50] and 2.08 [1.84-2.37]) and hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2.6%; risk ratios, 1.34 [1.02-1.76] and 1.23 [1.00-1.51]). Methylisothiazolinone, which was added to the screening series for this 2013-2014 cycle, had the third highest positive reaction rate of allergens tested (10.9%). Four other newly added allergen preparations-formaldehyde 2% (7%), diphenylguanidine (3.8%), propylene glycol 100% (2.8%), and benzophenone-4 (2.1%)-all had reaction rates greater than 2%. Twenty-one percent of tested patients had at least 1 relevant allergic reaction to an allergen not on the NACDG series; 14.6% of these were occupationally related. The T.R.U.E. TEST (SmartPractice Denmark, Hillerod, Denmark) would have hypothetically missed one quarter to one third of reactions detected by the NACDG screening series. Conclusions These results confirm that the epidemic of sensitivity to methylisothiazolinone previously documented in Europe is also occurring in North America. Patch testing with allergens beyond a standard screening tray is necessary for the complete evaluation of occupational and nonoccupational allergic contact dermatitis.

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Prevalence of contact allergy in the general population: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

TL;DR: Contact allergy and allergic contact dermatitis are frequent conditions in the general population and should not be considered a cause for concern.
Journal ArticleDOI

Consumer Preferences, Product Characteristics, and Potentially Allergenic Ingredients in Best-Selling Moisturizers

TL;DR: Best-selling moisturizer products vary widely by price and product characteristics, and dermatologists should balance consumer preference, price, and allergenicity in their recommendations.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch test results, 2001-2002 study period

TL;DR: The findings of patch testing from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2002 reinforce the need for a more comprehensive group of diagnostic allergens than those found in the standard screening kits.
Journal ArticleDOI

Patch-test results of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group 2005-2006.

TL;DR: Nickel has been the most frequently positive allergen detected by the NACDG; rates significantlyincreased in the current study period and most reactions were clinically relevant.
Journal ArticleDOI

Guidelines for the descriptive presentation and statistical analysis of contact allergy data

TL;DR: Clinical researchers are supported in adequately presenting data on contact allergy, and to use statistical tests appropriate for their data, using standard measures like sensitivity and specificity as well as the prevalence‐dependent positive and negative predictive values.
Related Papers (5)