Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Chlormethine gel was approved for treatment of mycosis fungoides, the most common cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, on the basis of results from study 201 and study 202. A post-hoc analysis of study 201 found interesting trends regarding improved efficacy of chlormethine gel vs ointment and noted a potential association between dermatitis and clinical response. Objective To expand these results by performing a post-hoc analysis of study 202. Patients and Methods Patients received chlormethine gel or ointment during study 201 (12 months) and higher-concentration chlormethine gel during study 202 (7-month extension). Response was assessed using Composite Assessment of Index Lesion Severity (CAILS). Associations between treatment frequency, response, and skin-related adverse events (AEs) were assessed using multivariate time-to-event analyses. Time-to-response and repeated measures analyses were compared between patients who only used chlormethine gel and those who switched from ointment to gel. Results No associations were seen between treatment frequency and improved skin response (CAILS) or AE occurrence within the 201/202 study populations. However, an association was observed specifically between contact dermatitis and improved CAILS response at the next visit ( p < 0.0001). Patients who used chlormethine gel during both studies had a significantly ( p < 0.05) shorter time to response and higher overall response rates than patients who initiated treatment with ointment. Conclusions This post-hoc analysis shows that patients who initiated treatment using chlormethine gel had faster and higher responses compared with patients who initially used chlormethine ointment for 12 months. The development of contact dermatitis may be a potential prognostic factor for response. Trial Registration Numbers and Dates of Registration Study 201: NCT00168064, September 14, 2002; Study 202: NCT00535470, September 26, 2007.

The safety and nutritional adequacy of goat milk infant formulas have been questioned. The primary aim of the present study was to compare the growth and nutritional status of infants fed a goat milk infant formula with those of infants fed a typical whey-based cow milk infant formula. The secondary aim was to examine a range of health- and allergy-related outcomes. A double-blind, randomised controlled trial with 200 formula-fed term infants randomly assigned to receive either goat or cow milk formula from 2 weeks to at least 4 months of age was conducted. A cohort of 101 breast-fed infants was included for comparison. Weight, length and head circumference were measured at 2 weeks and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12 months of age. Nutritional status was assessed from serum albumin, urea, creatinine, Hb, ferritin, and folate and plasma amino acid concentrations at 4 months. Z-scores for weight, length, head circumference and weight for length were not different between the two formula-fed groups. There were differences in the values of some amino acids and blood biomarkers between the formula-fed groups, but the mean values for biomarkers were within the normal reference range. There were no differences in the occurrence of serious adverse events, general health, and incidence of dermatitis or medically diagnosed food allergy. The incidence of parentally reported blood-stained stools was higher in the goat milk formula-fed group, although this was a secondary outcome and its importance is unclear. Goat milk formula provided growth and nutritional outcomes in infants that did not differ from those provided by a standard whey-based cow milk formula.

Background: Non‐celiac wheat sensitivity (NCWS) is a new clinical entity in the world of gluten‐related diseases. Nickel, the most frequent cause of contact allergy, can be found in wheat and results in systemic nickel allergy syndrome and mimics irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Objective: To evaluate the frequency of contact dermatitis due to nickel allergy in NCWS patients diagnosed by a double‐blind placebo‐controlled(DBPC)challenge,and to identify the characteristics of NCWS patients with nickel allergy. Methods: We performed a prospective study of 60 patients (54 females, 6 males; mean age 34.1 ± 8.1 years) diagnosed with NCWS from December 2014 to November 2016; 80 age‐ and sex‐matched subjects with functional gastrointestina l symptoms served as controls. Patients reporting contact dermatitis related to nickel‐containing objects underwent nickel patch test (Clinicaltrials.gov registration number: NCT02750735).Results: Six out of sixty patients (10%) with NCWS suffered from contact dermatitis and nickel allergy and this frequency was statistically higher (p = 0.04)than observed in the control group(5%. The main clinical characteristic of NCWS patients with nickel allergy was a higher frequency of cutaneous symptoms after wheat ingestion compared to NCWS patients who did not suffer from nickel allergy (p < 0.0001. Conclusions: Contact dermatitis and nickel allergy are more frequent in NCWS patients than in subjects with functional gastrointestinal disorders;furthermore, these patients had a very high frequency of cutaneous manifestations after wheat ingestion. Nickel allergy should be evaluated in NCWS patients who have cutaneous manifestations after wheat ingestion.

AbstractPurpose of ReviewOccupational hand dermatitis is a common work-related disorder of the skin. Prevention and management of this disease is critical to improving workers’ quality of life and for occupation-specific retention.Recent FindingsThis is a critical review of the current literature on occupational hand dermatitis. Occupational dermatitis continues to have a high prevalence among workers although the overall incidence may be slowly decreasing. Irritant contact dermatitis due to wet work exposure is the most common cause of occupational hand dermatitis. Healthcare workers, hairdressers, and metal workers are at particularly high risk for this disease. While some prevention programs have been ineffective in mitigating occupational hand dermatitis, other more resource-intensive initiatives may have benefit.SummaryContinued research is needed on ways to manage wet work exposures and on scalable, effective prevention programs for occupational hand dermatitis. The spectrum of culprit contact allergens continues to evolve, and vigilance for potential occupation-specific allergens remains important.

Objectives The European Union (EU) strategy for health and safety at work underlines the need to reduce the incidence of occupational diseases (OD), but European statistics to evaluate this common goal are scarce. We aim to estimate and compare changes in incidence over time for occupational asthma, contact dermatitis, noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL), carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) and upper limb musculoskeletal disorders across 10 European countries. Methods OD surveillance systems that potentially reflected nationally representative trends in incidence within Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Switzerland and the UK provided data. Case counts were analysed using a negative binomial regression model with year as the main covariate. Many systems collected data from networks of ‘centres’, requiring the use of a multilevel negative binomial model. Some models made allowance for changes in compensation or reporting rules. Results Reports of contact dermatitis and asthma, conditions with shorter time between exposure to causal substances and OD, were consistently declining with only a few exceptions. For OD with physical causal exposures there was more variation between countries. Reported NIHL was increasing in Belgium, Spain, Switzerland and the Netherlands and decreasing elsewhere. Trends in CTS and upper limb musculoskeletal disorders varied widely within and between countries. Conclusions This is the first direct comparison of trends in OD within Europe and is consistent with a positive impact of European initiatives addressing exposures relevant to asthma and contact dermatitis. Taking a more flexible approach allowed comparisons of surveillance data between and within countries without harmonisation of data collection methods.

Patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) have increased penetration of allergens, immune dysregulation (including shared cytokine pathways), and frequent use of emollients and topical medications, all of which may predispose toward developing allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). Recent systematic reviews have suggested that ACD is a significant clinical problem in both children and adults with AD. While this remains controversial, ACD remains an important comorbidity and potential exacerbant of AD in clinical practice. Common relevant allergens, include lanolin, neomycin, formaldehyde, sesquiterpene lactone mix, compositae mix, and fragrances that are commonly found in AD patients’ personal care products. We herein review the clinical scenarios where patch testing is indicated in AD. In addition, we review the contraindications, preferred patch-testing series, pitfalls, and challenges determining the relevance of positive patch-test reactions in AD patients.

Contact dermatitis (CD) is among the most common inflammatory dermatological conditions and includes allergic CD, photoallergic CD, irritant CD, photoirritant CD (also called phototoxic CD) and protein CD. Occupational CD can be of any type and is the most prevalent occupational skin disease. Each CD type is characterized by different immunological mechanisms and/or requisite exposures. Clinical manifestations of CD vary widely and multiple subtypes may occur simultaneously. The diagnosis relies on clinical presentation, thorough exposure assessment and evaluation with techniques such as patch testing and skin-prick testing. Management is based on patient education, avoidance strategies of specific substances, and topical treatments; in severe or recalcitrant cases, which can negatively affect the quality of life of patients, systemic medications may be needed.Contact dermatitis results from the exposure to exogenous allergens or irritants that stimulate immune responses leading to inflammation of the skin.

A bulk of literature demonstrated that respiratory allergy, and especially asthma, is prevalent in males during childhood, while it becomes more frequent in females from adolescence, i.e., after menarche, to adulthood. The mechanisms underlying the difference between females and males are the effects on the immune response of female hormones and in particular the modulation of inflammatory response by estrogens, as well as the result of the activity of various cells, such as dendritic cells, innate lymphoid cells, Th1, Th2, T regulatory (Treg) and B regulatory (Bregs) cells, and a number of proteins and cytokines, which include interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, IL-10, and IL-13. As far as sexual dimorphism is concerned, a gender difference in the expression profiles of histamine receptors and of mast cells was demonstrated in experimental studies. A critical phase of hormone production is the menstrual cycle, which often is associated with asthma deterioration, as assessed by worsening of clinical symptoms and increase of bronchial hyperresponsiveness. In asthmatic woman, there is a high risk to develop more severe asthma during menstruation. The higher prevalence of asthma in females is confirmed also in the post-menopause age, but the underlying mechanisms are not yet understood. In pregnancy, asthma may worsen but may also improve or remain unchanged, with no significant difference in frequency of these three outcomes. For allergic rhinitis, the available studies indicate, likewise asthma, a male predominance in prevalence in childhood that shifts to a female predominance in adolescence and adulthood, but further investigation is needed.

Contact dermatitis is a common inflammatory skin condition characterized by erythematous and pruritic skin lesions that occur after contact with a foreign substance. There are two forms of contact dermatitis: irritant and allergic. Irritant contact dermatitis is caused by the non–immune-modulated irritation of the skin by a substance, leading to skin changes. Allergic contact dermatitis is a delayed hypersensitivity reaction in which a foreign substance comes into contact with the skin; skin changes occur after reexposure to the substance. The most common substances that cause contact dermatitis include poison ivy, nickel, and fragrances. Contact dermatitis usually leads to erythema and scaling with visible borders. Itching and discomfort may also occur. Acute cases may involve a dramatic flare with erythema, vesicles, and bullae; chronic cases may involve lichen with cracks and fissures. When a possible causative substance is known, the first step in confirming the diagnosis is determining whether the problem resolves with avoidance of the substance. Localized acute allergic contact dermatitis lesions are successfully treated with mid- or high-potency topical steroids, such as triamcinolone 0.1% or clobetasol 0.05%. If allergic contact dermatitis involves an extensive area of skin (greater than 20 percent), systemic steroid therapy is often required and offers relief within 12 to 24 hours. In patients with severe rhus dermatitis, oral prednisone should be tapered over two to three weeks because rapid discontinuation of steroids can cause rebound dermatitis. If treatment fails and the diagnosis or specific allergen remains unknown, patch testing should be performed.

Among contact dermatosis, irritant contact dermatitis and allergic eczema are by far the most frequent. Nevertheless, concerning occupational dermatosis, contact urticaria should be not neglected. Allergy to natural rubber latex is well-known; however, many other substances found in catering jobs and in jobs involving close contact with animals or vegetables can cause allergies. Discrete forms are not rare and should be remembered during questioning of the patient, as well as during a clinical examination. Accordingly, a physician should perform the appropriate cutaneous tests--particularly prick tests--and the relevance of these tests then needs to be assessed.