Page 1
CONTACT DERMATITIS IN CHILDREN WITH AND
WITHOUT ATOPIC DERMATITIS; WHICH ARE THE
FREQUENT ALLERGENS?
Stefanie Lubbes
s1924524
Stage wetenschap: 05 augustus 2013 t/m 31 januari 2014
Extern (hoofd)begeleider AMC: Dr. M.A. Middelkamp Hup
Extern begeleider VUmc: Dr. T. Rustemeyer
Facultair begeleider UMCG: Dr. M.L.A. Schuttelaar
Page 2
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
1
ABSTRACT
Background. Data on contact dermatitis in children is poor. This study aims to identify the
occurrence of contact dermatitis in children. This will allow better identification of potential
sensitizers and improve patients’ care in children.
Methods. We retrospectively analyzed data of patients aged 0-17 years, that were patch tested
with at least the European baseline series between 1996-2013 in three University Hospitals
across the Netherlands.
Results. 1012 Children (male 37%, mean age 13 years) were included, of which 469 (46%)
developed ≥1 positive reactions. The most frequent reactions were found to nickel (16.4%),
cocamidopropyl betaine (15.9%), fragrance mix I (9.9%), amerchol L-101 (8.8%) and wool
alcohols (6.2%). Children with atopic dermatitis reacted significantly more frequent to wool
alcohols (p<0.04), amerchol L-101 (p<0.04) and fragrances compared to children without
atopic dermatitis. Strikingly, significantly less positive reactions to wool alcohols, fragrances
and caine mix were found testing with the TRUE-test compared to chamber patch test
preparations.
Conclusion. Cocamidopropyl betaine frequently has positive reactions in children. Atopic
dermatitis is a risk factor for developing reactions to wool alcohols and fragrances. Especially
in children with recalcitrant atopic dermatitis, contact dermatitis caused by these allergens
should be considered. The difference in positive reactions to important allergens between
TRUE test and chamber patch test preparations is striking and needs further investigation.
This observation is especially important as the TRUE test is easy to use in children, and these
allergens could therefore be missed in this population.
SAMENVATTING
Achtergrond. Data over contacteczeem bij kinderen is schaars. Het doel van deze studie is
het voorkomen van contacteczeem bij kinderen te analyseren. Dit geeft betere identificatie
van potentiële allergenen en hiermee zal de zorg voor de patiënt verbeteren.
Methoden. We hebben de data van patiënten van 0 tot 17 jaar oud retrospectief geanalyseerd,
deze hebben een plakproef gehad met minimaal de Europese standaard reeks in de periode
van 1996 tot 2013 in drie Universitaire medische centra verspreid over Nederland.
Results. 1012 Kinderen (man 37%, gemiddelde leeftijd 13 jaar) werden geincludeerd, hiervan
hadden 469 (46%) ≥ 1 positieve reacties. De meest frequente reacties waren op nikkel
(16,4%), cocamidopropyl betaïne (15,9%), fragrance mix I (9,9%), amerchol L-101 (8,8%) en
wolalcoholen (6,2%). Kinderen met atopisch eczeem reageerden significant vaker op
wolalcoholen (p<0,04), amerchol L-101 (p<0,04) en fragrances vergeleken met kinderen
zonder atopisch eczeem. Opvallend was dat er significant minder reacties gevonden werden
op wolalcoholen, fragrances en caïne mix bij het gebruik van de TRUE-test.
Conclusion. Cocamidopropyl betaïne had frequent positieve reacties bij kinderen. Atopisch
eczeem is een risicofactor voor reacties op wolalcoholen en fragrances. Zeker bij kinderen
met therapieresistent atopisch eczeem zou contacteczeem ten gevolge van deze allergenen
overwogen moeten worden. Het verschil in reacties op belangrijke allergenen tussen de
TRUE-test en kamer-testmethodes is opvallend en hier is meer onderzoek naar nodig. Deze
observatie is voornamelijk van belang omdat de TRUE-test eenvoudig te gebruiken is bij
kinderen en deze allergenen hierom gemist zouden kunnen worden in deze populatie.
Page 3
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
When I started this internship I was absolutely clueless about how much work research on
contact dermatitis actually is. Just a half year ago, I had never heard of substances like
cocamidopropyl betaine, dimethylaminopropyl amine and sorbitan sesquioleate. When I
started in the Academic Medical Center about 400 clinical charts were waiting for me, so
there was work to do! I really took a dive in the world of contact dermatitis which is a great
area for research. At first it was a little tough but I managed my way through and terms like
cocamidopropyl betaine nowadays sound very familiar and I really learned to appreciate the
value of science.
I would like to thank a few people for giving me this unique opportunity to perform this
research. Dr. Schuttelaar, for guiding me through the data of the UMCG. Dr. Rustemeyer, for
explaining me a lot about contact dermatitis and answering about a thousand of my emails.
And last but not least; dr. Middelkamp Hup, for having endless discussions with me and great
guidance through this research internship.
Thank you!
Stefanie Lubbes
Page 4
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTACT DERMATITIS IN CHILDREN WITH AND WITHOUT ATOPIC DERMATITIS; WHICH ARE
THE FREQUENT ALLERGENS? ..................................................................................................1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................................................2 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................4
METHODS ...............................................................................................................................5 RELEVANCE ........................................................................................................................5
RESULTS.................................................................................................................................8
PRIMARY ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................8 SECONDARY ANALYSIS; EMERGING ALLERGENS? ............................................................ 12
TRUE-TEST VERSUS CHAMBER PATCH TEST PREPARATIONS ............................................ 13 DISCUSSION.......................................................................................................................... 14
ATOPIC DERMATITIS AND CONTACT DERMATITIS ............................................................. 15 AGE AND CONTACT DERMATITIS ...................................................................................... 16
SECONDARY ANALYSIS; EMERGING ALLERGENS? ............................................................ 17 TRUE-TEST VERSUS CHAMBER DEVICES .......................................................................... 17
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 19 REFERENCE LIST .................................................................................................................. 20
APPENDIX............................................................................................................................. 25 TUSSENTIJDSE EVALUATIE WEEK 6 ................................................................................... 25
TUSSENTIJDSE EVALUATIE WEEK 12 ................................................................................. 26 EINDBEOORDELING .......................................................................................................... 27
Page 5
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
4
INTRODUCTION Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in children was considered to be rare in the past. Exposure
to allergens in childhood was thought to be less compared with adults and ACD in children
was therefore unexpected. However, recent data suggests that it might be more common than
previously thought [1-3]. Research in unselected groups of children in the general population
on the prevalence of ACD is scarce, varying numbers ranging from 13.3 up to 23.3% have
been reported [4-7]. In selected populations of children, who were referred for patch testing
because of a suspected ACD, an increase of reported sensitization rates was observed [1;2].
This may indicate that ACD has become more common in childhood. However this is
influenced by patch testing children more frequently and ACD in children might be detected
more often compared to the past.
ACD has a considerable morbidity and can start at a very young age [8]. The exposure to
allergens in the environment differs due to the age of the patients, as for example adolescents
are often exposed to other allergens than pre-school children. The age of the patient also
determines the amount of available skin for patch testing, resulting in patch testing of only a
selection of allergens.
The relation between atopic dermatitis (AD) and ACD is unclear and is a matter of
controversies. Higher, lower and equal positive patch test rates in patients with AD have been
reported in several studies [9-12]. Lower rates are traditionally explained by the activated
immune system in patients with AD resulting in a decreased risk of contact sensitization,
higher rates might be caused by an increased penetration of allergens resulting in contact
dermatitis [13]. In any case, ACD can occur in children with AD and its impact should not be
underestimated.
The golden standard for diagnosing ACD is generally accepted to be the epicutaneous patch
test in which sets of allergens are applied to the upper back. Sensitization to a selection of the
most common allergens is tested with the European baseline series (EBS). The EBS is tested
routinely in all patients regardless of their clinical history. Previous reviews have identified
multiple allergens in several populations of children with presumable ACD [1-3]. The most
common allergens reported in children are metals (nickel, cobalt and chromate), fragrances,
preservatives, wool alcohols, topical antibiotics and chemicals used in rubber [3].
Data from the Netherlands reporting causative allergens in children is limited. A prospective
study by de Waard-van der Spek et al. [14] gathered the results of the patch test data of 79
children. The most common allergen was nickel (n=17) which was followed by a sensitization
for the patients’ own shoes (n=6). Children are being exposed to a number of different
allergens. In today’s modern life potential allergens are present in cosmetics, toiletries, skin
care products, materials used in clothing and shoes, shin guards, hair dyes, body piercings and
temporary tattoos. Changes in exposure also depend on prevalent fashion trends and may
change in time, contributing to a shift in allergen exposure in children. Exposure to these
agents varies according to the age group. The location of the dermatitis also reflects
differences in allergen exposure. And finally, children with atopic dermatitis are exposed to
different allergens compared to non-atopic children due to their frequent use of topical
medicaments and emollients.
The primary aim of the study is to determine frequent allergens in children suspected of
having allergic contact dermatitis, especially in children with atopic dermatitis. The secondary
aim of the study was to detect emerging allergens in this study population. With these aims
we try to evaluate the occurrence of contact dermatitis in children which will improve the
identification of potential allergens.
Page 6
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
5
METHODS
A retrospective analysis of 1083 cases of patients aged up to 17 years was performed. These
patients were referred for patch testing in three University Hospitals (AMC, VUmc and
UMCG) in the period 1996 to 2013 because of a suspected contact dermatitis. Inclusion
criteria in this study was that, at least a selection of allergens, of the European Baseline series
(EBS) had to be patch tested at minimum. In 21 children a shortened version of the EBS was
patch tested, these patients were included as well. A number of patients were excluded due to
an invalid test or because the inclusion criterion could not be met, this is demonstrated in
diagram 1. The EBS was patch tested on a routine basis in all children regardless of their
clinical history. A set of extra allergens (outside of the EBS), as listed below in table 1, were
used in two University Hospitals (VUmc and UMCG) and were patched tested on a routine
basis in all children.
Optionally additional patch test series were performed on indication and this was dependent
of the patients’ clinical history. This includes for example cosmetic series, hairdresser series,
metal series and others. In patients that were patch tested twice all substances to which the
patients reacted were included in this research with no regards to reproducibility of the
reactions.
We performed the primary analysis only on the data from the allergens that were tested on a
routine basis in all patients to prevent a selection bias. The secondary analysis was performed
on the data from allergens that were tested routinely and on indication outside the EBS. The
aim of this analysis was to detect emerging allergens that are not tested in the EBS. In this
analysis a cut-off value of 200 times a substance was patch tested was used as a baseline to
prevent a selection bias as much as possible. A value of 200 was chosen to reach a
comparable number of patients that were tested at minimum for substances in the EBS.
Epicutaneous patch testing was performed in a standard manner. The patch test was applied
on intact skin on the patients’ upper back for 48 hours minimum and was subsequently
removed and an evaluation of the reactions was performed. The results were evaluated after
72 hours (day 3) as well and in some cases also at day 7 depending on the allergens that were
tested. The reactions were scored according to the guidelines from the ICDRG [15]. Different
materials were used (table 2). Van der Bend square chambers ® (van der Bend BV, Brielle,
The Netherlands) were used in the University Hospitals. One of the University Hospitals used
the TRUE-test for routine testing consisting of 24 allergens, the additional substances from
the European baseline series were supplemented with allergens from Almirall.
The patch test reactions were systematically collected in databases at each University
Hospital. Clinical charts were studied where required. Additional data was collected from the
clinical charts in all cases of the AMC because of differences in the collected data between
the University Hospitals. The following information was collected; gender, age, patch test
date, patch-test series, allergens with positive reactions, the course of the reaction, sites of
eczema, atopic status (atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, allergic asthma) and a
score for the clinical relevance. Atopic dermatitis was evaluated on basis of the expert’s
opinion at the time of consultation and was scored positive, negative, unclear or unknown.
Retrospectively atopic dermatitis was scored positive when it was noted to be positive in the
clinical chart.
RELEVANCE
The clinical relevance was determined for each allergen that was tested positive to evaluate
the relation between the reaction and the clinical symptoms. A positive reaction could be of
past, current or unknown relevance. A reaction was of current relevance when it was related
Page 7
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
6
to the current clinical symptoms and of past relevance when it was related to a past clinical
episode.
The reactions could be of "certain", "probable", "possible" or "unlikely-not" relevance which
was evaluated at the time of consultation and retrospectively. “Certain” was given when the
clinician was 100% convinced that the allergen was causative for the dermatitis. The patient
had to be exposed to the allergen, the allergen was present in the environment of the patient.
The sites of the dermatitis had a clear relation with the allergen containing product. Preferably
there was data after elimination but this was only available in a few cases. The relevance was
found “probable” when there was a strong relation between allergen and exposure but the
above criteria couldn’t be met. A “possible” relevance was given when the relation between
exposure and dermatitis was less clear but suspect for contact dermatitis. The relevance score
“unlikely-not” was given when contact dermatitis wasn’t suspected or was due to a cross
reaction.
Excel software (Microsoft Office 2007) was used to store and manage the data. Statistical
analysis was performed using SPSS software (2011, IBM SPSS Statistics, Version 20.0.
Armonk, NY). A chi square test was used to evaluate differences between groups. The
Fisher’s exact test was used in cases of low cell counts. A value of p<0,05 was considered
statistically significant.
1083 Patients referred
for patch testing
AMC
n=384
VUmc
n=463
UMCG
n=237
Excluded
n=53
Excluded
n=5
Excluded
n=13
n=5 no show on
reading day
n=48 only tested
with additional
series
n=5 only tested with
additional series
n=13 only tested
with additional
series
Diagram 1. Excluded patients
Page 8
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
7
Table 1. Overview of allergens tested in the European Baseline series and routinely tested extra allergens.
Allergens were tested in petrolate (pet) or aqua (aq) in all University hospitals unless noted otherwise. 1Tested in
AMC. 2Tested in VUmc. 3Tested in UMCG. 4TRUE-test allergens.
Table 2. Overview of the materials used in the University Hospitals
EUROPEAN BASELINE SERIES ROUTINELY TESTED EXTRA ALLERGENS
Substance Concentration Substance Concentration Potassium dichromate
0.5% pet Disperse blue 106
2,3 0.3% pet
Neomycine sulfate 20% pet Diazolidinyl urea2,3 2% pet Thiuram mix 1% pet Imidazolidinyl urea2,3 2% pet p-Phenylenediamine (PPD) 1% pet Turpentine peroxide2 0.3% Fragrance mix II 14% pet 2-Bromo-2nitropropane-1,3-diol2,3 0.25% pet Clioquinol 5% pet Amerchol L-1012 50% pet Mercapto mix 2% pet p-Tolueensulfonamide2,3 10% pet Formaldehyde 1% aq Cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB)2 1% aq Caine mix 10% pet 2-n-Octyl-4-isothiazolin-3-on2 0.1% pet Colophonium 20% pet Iodopropyl butylcarbamate (IPBD)2 0.2% pet N-isopropyl-N-phenyl-4-phenylenediamine (IPPD) 0.1% pet Sorbitan sesquioleate (SSQ)2 20% pet Lanolin (wool alcohols) 30% pet Methylisothiazolinone2 0.05% aq Myroxylon pereirae (Balsam of Peru) 25% pet Benzophenone 42 10% pet Epoxy hars 1% pet Propyl gallate2 0.5% pet Paraben mix 16% pet 3-dimethylamino-1-propylamine
(DMAPA)2 1% pet
p-tertButylfenolformaldehyderesin 1% pet p-Toluenediamine2,3 1% pet Fragrance mix I 8% pet 4-aminoazobenzene3 0,25% pet Budesonide 0.01% pet Disperse orange 3
3 1% pet
Nickel 5% pet Disperse yellow 33 1% pet Quaternium-15 1% pet Hydroxymethylpentylcyclohexenecarboxaldehyde (Lyral)
5% pet
Cl/Me-isothiazolinone (Kathon CG) 0.01% aq Mercaptobenzothiazole (MBT) 2% pet Tixocortol-21-pivalate 0.1% pet Sesquiterpene lactone mix 0.1% pet Methyldibromoglutaronitril (Euxyl K-400) 0.3% pet Cobalt chloride 1% pet Primine1,2 0.01% pet Benzocain1 5% pet 1,2-Benzisothiazolin-3-one (BIT) 0,05% pet Wood tar mix1 5% pet 4,4-diaminodiphenylmethane1,3 0,50% pet Quinolone mix2,3,4 0,19 mg/cm2 Black rubber mix2,3,4 0,075 mg/cm2 Thimerosal2,3,4 0,0080 mg/cm2 Carba mix
2,3,4 0,25 mg/cm2
Ethylene diamine dihydrochloride2,3,4 0,050 mg/cm2
University Hospital Period Allergens AMC 1996-2012 Allergens from Chemotechnique Diagnostics®
VUmc 2004-2013 Primarily allergens from Trolab® Almirall, additionaly TRUE-test
UMCG 2002-2013 Primarily TRUE-test, additional allergens from Trolab® Almirall
Page 9
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
8
RESULTS
PRIMARY ANALYSIS
A total of 1012 patients were included in this research, 37% was male and 63% female. In
total 469 children had at least one positive reaction giving a sensitization rate of 46%
(469/1012). The percentage of children with a monosensitization was 47%, 27% had a
polysensitization (≥ 3 reactions). There were 954 reactions to multiple allergens in total.
These reactions were in 12% of past relevance and of current relevance in 87%, it was
unknown in 1%. The current relevance score was “certain”, “probable” or “possible” in 73%.
The relevance of the reactions was scored as “certain” in 26%, “probable” in 19%, “possible”
in 28%, “unlikely-not” in 21% and was unknown in 6%.
The mean age in this population was 13.3 years [0-17]. We divided the patients in three age
groups. The representation of patients from different age-groups 0-4 years, 5-11 years and 12-
18,0 years old was respectively 7%, 24% and 70%. There were 322 children patch tested with
the TRUE-test, 691 children were tested with chamber test methods combined with allergens
from Chemotechnique or Almirall. One patient was patch tested with both systems. In total
525 children (52%) were affected by atopic dermatitis, 397 children (39%) had no atopic
dermatitis. In 9% the atopic status was unknown or unclear. The sensitization rate of children
with and without atopic dermatitis was respectively 48% and 47%.
The primary aim of this study was to determine the most common allergens in children with a
suspected contact dermatitis. A ranking of the most frequent reactions is listed in table 3. The
most common allergens were metals, detergents, wool alcohols, fragrances and rubbers.
Nickel was the most common sensitizer with 16.4%. It had a current “certain-probable”
relevance of 25% and was in 29% associated to a past clinical episode. Surprisingly
cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB), a substance that isn't tested in the EBS was the second most
common after nickel with positive reactions in 15,9%. Of the reactions to CAPB 56% had a
"certain-probable" current relevance. The next most common allergen was fragrance mix I
with 9.9% and had an associated "certain-probable" current relevance of 54%. The wool
alcohols (wool alcohols 30% pet and amerchol L-101) were also among the most frequent
reactions in this population with 8.8 and 6%. These were clinically relevant in about the half
of the cases with a relevance of respectively 50 and 54%. From the reactions to amerchol L-
101 there was in nine cases a simultaneous reaction to wool alcohols. The next most common
sensitizers were cobalt (6.0%), wood tar mix (5.4%) and dimethylaminopropylamine
(DMAPA) with 5.0%. DMAPA had a positive patch test together with CAPB in six cases
(60%). Budesonide and tixocortol-21 pivalate, indicators of a corticosteroid allergy, were
among the lesser frequent reactions with 0.2 and 0.8%. Not one positive reaction to clioquinol
or the quinolone mix was found, it was tested in 996 children. When comparing the patch test
reactions between genders some differences were observed. The metals nickel and cobalt
were significantly more common in females. Nickel had more reactions in females with 22%
versus 7.6% (p<0.01). In cobalt the difference was less prominent with 7.3 versus 3.8%
(p<0.05). p-Phenylenediamine PPD was a significantly more common allergen in females
(p<0.01). CAPB had more frequent positive patch test reactions in the male population
(p<0.05). Also reactions to 2-n-octyl-4-isothiazolinon-3-on (p<0,05) and neomycine (p<0,02)
were significantly more common in boys.
Page 10
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
9
Substance Percentage positive female
Percentage positive
male
p-value male vs female
Percentage positive AD+
Percentage positive AD-
p-value AD+ vs AD- Certain- probable- current relevance
16,4% (164/998) Nickel 22% 7,6% p<0,01 (0,000) 15,8% 17,5% 0,481 25%
15,9% (54/339) Cocamidopropyl betaine 13,0% 21,6% p<0,05 (0,041) 19,0% 12,1% 0,106 56% 9,9% (100/1008) Fragrance mix I 9,7% 10,4% 0,711 12,1% 8,1% p<0,05 (0,048) 54%
8,8% (30/339) Amerchol L-101 9.0% 8,6% 0,915 12,6% 5,3% p<0,04 (0,030) 50% 6,2% (63/1009) Wool alcohols 5,7% 7,1% 0,352 7,8% 4,3% p<0,04 (0,030) 54%
6,0% (60/997) Cobalt chloride 7,3% 3,8% p<0,05 (0,023) 4,5% 8,1% p<0,03 (0,023) 23%
5,4% (12/221) Wood tar mix 7,3% 3,1% 0,175 5,2% 6,7% 0,635 25%
5% (10/201) Dimethylaminopropylamine 4,1% 6,3% 0,499 5,3% 4,0% 1,00 70%
4,9% (28/574) Fragrance mix II 5,1% 4,5% 0,773 5,3% 4,3% 0,572 61%
4,4% (30/675) N-isopropyl-N-phenyl-4-phenylenediamine
5,1% 3,4% 0,296 4,7% 4,4% 0,858 20%
3,8% (38/1004) Myroxylon pereirae 3,3% 4,6% 0,324 5,6% 2,0% p<0,01 (0,005) 55%
3,4% (11/322) Black rubber mix 3,7% 2,9% 0,717 0,6% 6,5% p<0,01 (0,005) 18%
3,3% (33/999) Potassium dichromate 2,5% 4,6% 0,082 3,1% 3,8% 0,573 49%
2,8% (13/460) Diaminodiphenylmethane 3,7% 1,2% 0,154 2,6% 3,8% 0,484 46%
2,7% (4/146) Aminoazobenzene 3,4% 0 1,0 1,5% 5,2% 0,336 75%
2,7% (4/146) Disperse orange 3 3,4% 0 1,0 1,5% 5,2% 0,336 25%
2,7% (4/146) Disperse yellow 3 3,4% 0 1,0 1,5% 5,2% 0,336 50%
2,7% (6/313) p-Toluenediamine
2,6% 0 0,342 0,6% 3,9% 0,095 83%
2,7% (9/339) Sorbitan Sesquioleate 1,3% 5,2% 0,068 4,0% 1,5% 0,309 11%
2,6% (6/231) Benzophenone 4 1,4% 4,5% 0,205 3,8% 1,2% 0,407 0%
2,4% (24/997) p-Phenylenediamine 3,5% 0,5% p<0,01 (0,003) 2,1% 3,0% 0,392 75%
2,3% (18/773) Caine-Mix III 2,6% 1,8% 0,505 2,5% 2,0% 0,617 0%
2,1% (21/1001) Colophonium 2,1% 2,2% 0,913 1,4% 2,8% 0,125 43%
1,8% (4/221) Compositae mix 1,7% 2,1% 1,00 3,2% 1,1% 0,356 25%
1,7% (17/1000) Cl/Me-isothiazolinone 1,7% 1,6% 0,876 2,5% 0,8% 0,072 53%
1,7% (4/231) Propyl gallate 0,7% 3,4% 0,156 1,5% 2,3% 0,651 25%
1,7% (9/545) Hydroxymethylpentylcyclohexenecarboxaldehyde
2,3% 0,5% 0,269 2,5% 0,9% 0,312 100%
1,5% (15/998) p-tertButylfenolformaldehyderesin 1,4% 1,6% 0,972 1,6% 1,5% 0,968 13%
1,5% (15/996) Neomycine sulfate 0,8% 2,7% p<0,02 (0,017) 1,0% 1,5% 0,647 13%
1,5% (15/1002) Mercapto mix 1,0% 2,4% 0,066 1,2% 2,0% 0,297 33%
Page 11
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
10
Table 3. Ranking of the routinely tested allergens.
1,4% (14/1002) Thiuram mix 1,6% 1,1% 0,500 1,2% 1,8% 0,445 29%
1,4% (4/290) Methylisothiazolinone
1,6% 1,0 % 1,0 1,9% 0,9% 0,638 100%
1,3% (4/310) Benzocain 1,7% 0,8% 0,644 1,9% 0,8% 0,634 0%
1,2% (8/661) Carba mix 0,9% 1,8% 0,451 1,7% 0,4% 0,248 38%
1,1% (11/998) Methyldibromoglutaronitrile 0,8% 1,6% 0,225 1,4% 0,8% 0,527 36%
1,1% (7/661) Thiomersal 1,1% 0,9% 1,00 0,6% 1,6% 0,248 0%
1,0% (10/995) Sesquiterpene lactone mix 0,8% 1,4% 0,388 1,2% 0,3% 0,146 30%
1,0% (10/1000) Mercaptobenzothiazole 0,6% 1,6% 0,187 1,0% 1,0% 1,0 40%
1,0% (3/290) 2-n-Octyl-4-isothiazolin-3-on 0 2,9% p<0,05 (0,047) 1,3% 0,9% 1,00 33%
0,9% (6/661) Ethylene diamine dihydrochloride
0,5% 1,8% 0,099 0,6% 1,3% 0,426 0%
0,9% (9/995) Quaternium 15 1,1% 0,5% 0,498 1,4% 0,5% 0,313 33%
0,9% (9/1001) Parabenen mix 1,0% 0,8% 1,00 0,8% 1,3% 0,512 33%
0,9% (3/339) Iodopropynyl butyl carbamate 0,4% 1,7% 0,271 1,1% 0,8% 1,00 67%
0,8% (8/996) Epoxy resin 0,8% 0,8% 1,00 0,8% 1,0% 0,734 0%
0,8% (8/1003) Tixocortol-21-pivalate 1,1% 0,3% 0,270 1,3% 0,3% 0,148 38%
0,7% (3/438) Imidazolidinyl Urea 1% 0 0,554 0 1,8% 0,077 67%
0,6% (6/1000) Formaldehyde 0,8% 0,3% 0,421 1,0% 0,3% 0,242 50%
0,6% (4/670) Primine 0,7% 0,4% 1,000 1,2% 0 0,132 25%
0,6% (2/339) Turpentine peroxide 0 1,7% 0,116 0 0,8% 0,431 0%
0,5% (2/438) 2-Bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol
0,3% 0,7% 0,551 0,4% 0,6% 1,00 100%
0,3% (1/389) 1,2-Benzisothiazolin-3-one 0 0,7% 0,344 0 0 - 100%
0,2% (2/1003) Budesonide 0 0,5% 0,138 0,4% 0 0,509 50%
0,2% (1/438) Diazolidinyl urea 0,3% 0 1,00 0 0,6% 0,422 100%
0,2% (1/438) Disperse blue 106 0,3% 0 1,00 0,4% 0 1,00 0%
0,0% (tested:322) Quinolone mix
0.0% (tested:674) Clioquinol
Page 12
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
11
Looking at the differences between children with and without atopic dermatitis it comes to
notice that there are some prominent differences between these groups. Amerchol L-101,
which was routinely tested in VUmc, and wool alcohols, tested routinely in the European
baseline series, were significantly more common in the group of children with atopic
dermatitis (13% versus 5% and 8% versus 4% respectively) Wool alcohols had a "certain,
probable" current relevance of 66% in the group of children with atopic dermatitis versus 29%
in children without atopic dermatitis. This difference in relevance was also observed for
Amerchol L-101 with 59% versus 14% in the group of children without atopic dermatitis.
Also fragrances were more common in the group of children with atopic dermatitis. Fragrance
mix I shows a significant difference with respect to the group of children with atopic
dermatitis (12.1% versus 8.1%, p<0.05). Myroxylon pereirae also had frequently positive
reactions in this group (5.6% versus 2.0% p<0.01). Finally another interesting observation in
this group of children was that reactions to chloormethylisothiazolinone were more common
however no significance was reached (2,5% vs 0,8%).
There were some allergens that had frequently more reactions in the group without atopic
dermatitis. Cobalt chloride had a sensitization rate of 8% in children without atopic dermatitis
versus 5% in atopic dermatitis (p<0.03). The relevance rates for both groups were about equal
with 26% and 28%. Black rubber mix was more common in children without atopic dermatitis
with 7% versus 1% (p<0.01).
Differences between age-groups were observed. The percentage of positive reactions was
higher in the age group of 0-4 years old with 54% which was 42% in children of 5-11 years
and 48% in children of 12-17 years. Reactions to nickel and wool alcohols were more
common in the younger age group. The reactions to wool alcohols 30% pet seem to decrease
with age and reactions were significantly more common in the age group of 0-4 years
compared with children older than 12 years (p<0.05). Also fragrances often had reactions in
the age group of 0-4 years. In the age group of 12-18 years nickel was the most common
allergen with 17.0%.
These age-groups were also divided over children with and without atopic dermatitis. Wool
alcohols were more common in children of 0-4 years with atopic dermatitis (15.6%)
compared with the age group of 12 years and older (6.4%) but no significance was reached.
Nickel and CAPB were the most common in children older than 12 years regardless of the
atopic status. Fragrances were among the most common allergens in all age-groups.
Table 4. Reactions divided over age-groups.
0-4 YRS (n=70) Substance 5-11 YRS (n=240)
Substance 12+ YRS (n=702)
Substance
25,0% (1/4) Amerchol L-101 13,5% (7/52) Amerchol L-101 17,0% (119/701)
Nickel
25,0% (1/4) SSQ 13,5% (7/52) CAPB 16,6% (47/283)
CAPB
22,4% (15/67) Nickel 13,4% (32/238) Fragrance mix I 8,8% (62/701) Fragrance mix I
12,9% (9/70) Wool alcohols 13,0% (30/230) Nickel 7,8% (22/283) Amerchol L-101
8,7% (6/69) Fragrance mix I 7,6% (18/238) Wool alcohols 6,4% (45/701) Cobalt chloride
8,0% (2/25) 4,4 diaminodiphenylmethane
5,8% (3/52) SSQ 5,7% (9/158) DMAPA
7,1% (1/14) Fragrance mix II 5,6% (13/231) Potassium dichromate
5,5% (8/145) Wood tar mix
6,1% (4/66) Cobalt chloride 5,5% (3/55) Wood tar mix 5,3% (24/449) Fragrance mix II
6,1% (2/33) IPPD 5,0% (7/141) IPPD 5,1% (36/701) Wool alcohols
6,1% (2/33) Black rubber mix 4,8% (11/230) Cobalt chloride 4,2% (21/501) IPPD
% children ≥1 reaction
54,3% % children ≥1 reaction
42,1% % children ≥1 reaction
47,7%
Page 13
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
12
0-4 yr ATOPIC DERMATITIS NO ATOPIC DERMATITIS 50,0% (1/2) Amerchol L-101 20,0% (1/5) Black rubber mix 50,0% (1/2) Sorbitan Sesquioleate 16,7% (1/6) Ethylene diamine dihydrochloride
26,2% (11/42) Nickel 15,4% (2/13) Nickel 15,6% (7/45) Wool alcohols 12,5% (1/8) Diaminodiphenylmethane
11,1% (1/9) Fragrance mix II 7,7% (1/13) Multiple substances1
5-11 yr 25,0% (6/24) Amerchol L-101 11,9% (12/101) Fragrance mix I 20,8% (5/24) Cocamidopropyl betaïne 11,1% (4/36) Black rubber mix
15,4% (18/117) Fragrance mix I 11,1% (11/99) Nickel 15,3% (17/111) Nickel 9,1% (2/22) Wood tar mix
8,5% (10/118) Wool alcohols 8,0% (8/100) Potassium dichromate, wool alcohols
12+ yr 18,9% (28/148) Cocamidopropyl betaïne 19,9% (56/282) Nickel 14,7% (53/361) Nickel 13,8% (15/109) Cocamidopropyl betaïne 11,6% (42/361) Fragrance mix I 8,5% (24/282) Cobalt chloride 10,1% (15/148) Amerchol L-101 6,7% (19/282) Fragrance mix I
6,4% (23/361) Wool alcohols 6,7% (5/75) p-Toluenediamine
Table 5. Overview of the most common allergens divided over age groups and atopic status. 1Potassium
dichromate, cobalt chloride, fragrance mix I and wool alcohols.
SECONDARY ANALYSIS; EMERGING ALLERGENS?
We analyzed all the allergens outside the EBS from routinely tested series and series tested on
indication in order to detect emerging allergens. A cut-off value of 200 times tested at
minimum was used. There were 1362 reactions in total. Sensitization rate (children with ≥ 1
reactions) over the series tested routinely and on indication was 52% (528/1362). The
following allergens were the most common; CAPB (13.5%), amerchol L-101 (11.2%),
DMAPA (5.2%), toluenediamine (4.4%) and oleamidopropyl dimethylamine (3.9%) as listed
in table 6. Toluenediamine had a positive patch test result in 18 women (5.6%) and no
positive reactions in males were found, this difference was significant (p<0.03).
Interestingly, when comparing atopic dermatitis versus non atopic dermatitis, CAPB is
significantly more common in the group of children with atopic dermatitis (p<0.02). This
difference was not observed in the primary analysis. DMAPA was just as common in both
groups. CAPB and oleamidopropyl dimethylamine were both more common in the male
versus female population. For CAPB it was 21% versus 11% (p<0.01), and for
oleamidopropyl dimethylamine it was 11% versus 2% (p<0.03).
Outside EBS Substances tested ≥200 times
13,5% (73/539) Cocamidopropyl betaïne,2
11,2% (49/436) Amerchol L-1011
5,2% (11/210) Dimethylaminopropylamine
4,4% (18/412) p-Toluenediamine3
3,9% (8/204) Oleamidopropyl dimethylamine2
Table 6. Allergens from series tested routinely and on indication (outside the European baseline series), that
were tested at least 200 times. CAPB en Amerchol L-101 was significantly more common in the children with
atopic dermatitis. 1Significantly more common in atopic dermatitis as in the primary analysis. 2CAPB en
oleamidopropyl dimethylamine had significantly more reactions in males. 3Toluenediamine reacted significantly
more frequent in the female population (p<0.03).
Page 14
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
13
Table 7. Reactions in TRUE-test and chamber patch test preparations.
TRUE-TEST VERSUS CHAMBER PATCH TEST PREPARATIONS
When analyzing the data fewer reactions were observed in patients tested with the TRUE-test.
Only 34% of the children tested with the TRUE-test had one or more reactions. In the
population tested with the chamber methods this percentage was 42%. The population
characteristics were the same in patients tested with TRUE-test and chamber techniques with
respectively a mean age of 12.8 and 13.5 years, atopic dermatitis 53% and 51%.
It was noticed that in one University Hospital which only used the TRUE-test there were no
positive reactions to wool alcohols. When data from testing with the TRUE-test were
compared with data from chamber patch test preparations, only four reactions to wool
alcohols were found in the TRUE-test data vs. 59 reactions in the chamber test preparations.
Reactions to fragrance mix I were also significantly less commonly found in the TRUE-test
versus the patch test with chamber patch test preparations (p<0.01). This was also observed
for balsam of Peru (p<0.03) and caine mix (p<0.01).
TRUE-test Chamber devices p-value
Nickel 17,10% 16,10% 0.703
Black rubber mix/ IPPD 3,40% 4,40% 0.445
Cobalt chloride 4,30% 6,80% 0.126
Fragrance mix I 3,70% 12,70% p<0,01 (0,00)
Potassium dichromate 2,80% 3,40% 0,631
Colophonium 2,50% 1,90% 0,557
p-Phenylenediamine 2,20% 2,50% 0,74
p-tertButylfenolformaldehyderesin 2,20% 1,30% 0,322
Cl/Me-isothiazolinone 2,20% 1,50% 0,424
Myroxylon pereirae 1,90% 4,70% p<0,03 (0,028)
Mercapto mix 1,20% 1,60% 0,648
Wool alcohols 1,20% 8,60% p<0,01 (0,000)
Carba mix 0,90% 1,50% 0,523
Ethylene diamine dihydrochloride 0,90% 1,10% 1
Epoxy resin 0,90% 0,70% 0,718
Caine mix 0,60% 3,50% p<0,01 (0,008)
Quaternium 15 0,60% 1,00% 0,726
Neomycine sulfate 0,60% 1,90% 0,164
Thiuram mix 0,60% 1,80% 0,247
Thiomersal 0,30% 1,80% 0,124
Formaldehyde 0,30% 0,70% 0,67
Mercaptobenzothiazole (MBT) 0,30% 1,30% 0,181
Parabenen mix 0 1,30% 0,065
Children ≥ 1 reaction 34% 42%
Page 15
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
14
DISCUSSION
In previous studies positive patch test rates in children have been reported ranging from 25%
to 83% [9;10;16;17]. In this retrospective study 46% of the children had one or more positive
patch test reactions which were of current relevance in 87% and of past relevance in 12%. The
number of reactions in males and females was about equal (35% versus 31%). The most
common allergens were metals, fragrances, wool alcohols, rubbers and detergents which are
discussed in this paper.
Nickel had the highest sensitization rate of 16,4%. In spite of nickel regulation rules initiated
by the government, nickel is still the most common allergen [18]. Contact dermatitis for
nickel and cobalt were significantly more common in females (p<0,05). This was found in
multiple studies [10;16;19;20] and may be due to the use of jewelry and ear piercings which is
an important source of nickel sensitization [21;22]. Nevertheless the reliability of patch test
reactions to metals in children was questioned. In a study of Mortz et al. [23] a low
reproducibility was demonstrated indicating a low clinical relevance and false positive
reactions to metals. In our research nickel had a current ("certain-probable") relevance of 25%
and past relevance of 29%.
Cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) and dimethylaminopropyl amine (DMAPA) are detergents
used in rinse off products like liquid soaps. CAPB was one of the leading substances which
was tested positive frequently with 15,9%. In 56% of the cases the current relevance was
"certain-probable". Apart from eight reactions, all the 54 reactions had a crescendo pattern
suggestive of contact allergy. This suggests that CAPB could be an important cause of contact
dermatitis in children. However, detergents are difficult to patch test because they are known
to have irritating properties. Also in previous studies CAPB showed to be a substance with
dermally irritating properties [24;25]. Male sex was a risk factor for a positive patch test
(p<0.05). This was also observed in the study of Schnuch et al. [24] and might be related to
males being more reactive to irritating substances. CAPB can contain multiple impurities like
dimethylaminopropyl amine (DMAPA) and aminoamine which may be the real sensitizers in
CAPB [24]. DMAPA had a high percentage of positive reaction with 5% and was patch tested
positive with CAPB in six out of 10 cases.
Wool alcohols as tested in the European baseline series (wool alcohols 30% pet) and
amerchol L-101 frequently showed positive patch test reactions. In this research we observed
a positive patch test reaction to wool alcohols in 6% of cases. Also amerchol L-101 was one
of the most common allergens with a prevalence of 9%. A high number of children with
atopic dermatitis (52%) could be the cause of this observation as described later in this paper.
The reactions had a strong relation with the clinical symptoms in about half of all cases.
Varying sensitization rates to wool alcohols have been reported. A study by Seidenari et al.
[10] tested 1094 children with a suspected contact dermatitis below 12 years old and observed
in 10.1% a positive patch test. In a study by Roul et al. [9] in 337 children aged 1 to 15 years
a rate of 8.6% was found. In a study of Goon et al. [19] where 2340 patients below the age of
21 were tested , lanolin was one of the most common allergens with a positive patch test rate
of 8%. However, some studies in children showed a much lower prevalence of reactions to
wool alcohols [16]. This might be explained by the low prevalence of atopic dermatitis in
these populations.
Fragrances (fragrance mix I, fragrance mix II and myroxylon pereirae) were also among the
most common allergens and found to be important causes of allergic contact dermatitis in
children. Contact dermatitis to fragrances in children might be an underestimated problem.
Children are exposed at early age to a variety of different fragrance allergens in cosmetics and
Page 16
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
15
toiletries [26] which are a common source of sensitization. There was no difference in
frequency of reactions to fragrances related to gender.
Cobalt and black rubber mix frequently show more positive patch test reactions in children
without atopic dermatitis. This was the first study, to my knowledge, to report this. We found
zero reactions to clioquinol, an antibacterial agent, while it was tested in 996 children. This
suggests that contact allergy to clioquinol is a very rare cause of contact sensit ization in
children and routine testing is not indicated.
ATOPIC DERMATITIS AND CONTACT DERMATITIS
The relation between atopic dermatitis (AD) and allergic contact dermatitis is not clear and is
a matter of controversies. Higher, lower and equal positive patch test reactions in patients
with AD have been reported in several studies [8-12]. In this study the sensitization rates were
about the same; in children with AD it was 48% versus 47% in patients without AD. A lower
sensitization rate in atopic dermatitis is traditionally explained by the activated immune
response resulting in a decreased risk of contact dermatitis [27]. In spite of this, AD might be
a risk factor for developing ACD [28]. The skin of patients with atopic dermatitis may be
more vulnerable because of an impaired skin barrier and due to this dysfunctional barrier
allergens could penetrate leading to sensitization [28-31]. As a result sensitization to weak
allergens can occur more frequently in patients with AD [32;33]. Also fillagrin mutations
were associated with contact sensitization in patients with atopic dermatitis as described by
Thyssen et al [31]. Patients with AD often use topical medicaments which can contain
multiple allergens. We found reactions to tixocortol- 21-pivalate to be more common in
children with AD (seven out of eight reactions). Budesonide had only two reactions, both in
patient with AD. Previous research by Maihol et al [34] found that the use of topical
medicaments and emollients was associated with allergic contact dermatitis in AD.
In spite of children with AD being more susceptible for allergic contact dermatitis because of
a decreased barrier function also irritation is more common in this group due to the same
reason. Therefore AD is a risk factor for both allergic and irritative dermatitis. Patients with
AD have a lower threshold for irritation compared with healthy controls [35]. As a
consequence more false positive reactions due to irritation in patch testing can occur and the
reactions should be interpreted with caution because of this. However, irritancy might also
play a role in the development of contact cutaneous hypersensitivity, as argued in the danger
hypothesis that only in the presence of a 'danger' signal for example irritancy a patient
becomes senstitized [35]. Also it is not uncommon for irritative and allergic dermatitis to
coexist [36]. Nevertheless, in some studies it has been argued that children with atopic
dermatitis have hyperirritable skin and therefore false positive reactions could be more
prominent in this group (so called ‘angry back’ reactions or the excited skin syndrome) [37-
39]. In our research there was a current, "certain-probable" relevance of 45% of all observed
reactions in which there was a strong relation of the allergen with the clinical symptoms and
therefore contradicts false positive reactions.
Reactions to wool alcohols (wool alchohols 30% pet and amerchol L-101) and fragrances
(fragrance mix I and myroxylon pereirae) were significantly more common in the group of
children with atopic dermatitis. Wool alcohols (lanolin) is a substance that comes from the
sebaceous glands of sheep, and it is a complex mixture containing lanolin alcohols and acids
[40]. It is used in a variety of cosmetics, emollients and topical medicaments. Most
researchers agree that the most allergenic potential lies in the alcoholic fraction of lanolin
[40]. We found that a positive patch test for wool alcohols was significantly more common in
the group of children with atopic dermatitis (8% versus 4%, p<0.04). This difference was also
found for amerchol L-101 (13% versus 5%, p<0.04). A positive patch test for wool alcohols
was also of much higher relevance compared to children without atopic dermatitis (66%
Page 17
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
16
versus 29% "certain- probable", current relevance), indicating that these reactions are not only
more common in children with atopic dermatitis, but they are also more relevant.
In a retrospective study of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) lanolin
was among the allergens with the highest clinical relevance [41]. A large retrospective
analysis of 26,479 patients of all ages with a suspected allergic contact dermatitis, patch tested
by the NACDG found positive patch test reactions for wool alcohols in 2.5% which were of
current relevance in 83,4% [42]. This is a lower prevalence than we observed in our study but
might be explained by our younger population below 18 years old. Lanolin-positive patients
were 1.4 times more likely to have a history of atopic dermatitis when compared to allergic,
but lanolin-negative, patients (p<0.01) [42]. Whether this was due to an ‘angry skin’ reaction
of patients with atopic dermatitis or if these were true allergies caused by lanolin containing
medication was not known. Another large retrospective study of contact allergy to wool
alcohols with 24,449 patients of all ages by Wakelin et al. [43] did not find a significant
difference in patients with or without atopic dermatitis. This is a discrepancy with our study
which might be explained by our focus on children who often have atopic dermatitis and
therefore a high exposure to wool alcohols.
Apparently the value of a positive patch test to wool alcohols in the detection of lanolin
allergy is a matter of debate. Several studies have shown conflicting evidence as outlined in
reviews [40;44]. Kligman claimed that lanolin is at most a weak allergen which may also have
slight irritancy potential [45] and that sensitization rates only exist in patients with chronic
dermatitis [46]. A lanolin paradox has been described by Wolf et al. [47] which states that
patients with a impaired skin barrier can easily be sensitized by wool alcohol containing
medicaments but can use wool alcohols in cosmetics on intact skin without any problems.
These discrepancies have led to an alternative hypothesis that the high frequency of positive
patch test reactions to wool alcohols were caused by hyperirritable skin [45;46]. However, the
high clinical relevance score for wool alcohols in our research indicates that lanolin allergy is
a significant problem in children, especially those with atopic dermatitis. The clinical
experience is that it can be a real issue in children with atopic dermatitis. Children with atopic
dermatitis are exposed to lanolin based medicaments at frequent basis, sometimes for years.
This might result in sensitization and allergic contact dermatitis. It is possible that atopic
patients respond to very low concentrations of contact allergens due to the impaired skin
barrier. It is imperative that contact dermatitis should be suspected in children with
recalcitrant atopic dermatitis. When despite adequate therapy the dermatitis does not respond,
or even gets worse instead of better, contact allergy to wool alcohols needs to be considered.
However, to rule out false positive reactions to wool alcohols a provocative use test should be
recommended.
Also the fragrances, fragrance mix I and myroxylon pereirae were more common in the group
of children with atopic dermatitis. Myroxylon pereirae, better known as balsam of Peru, had
significantly more reactions in children with atopic dermatitis (p<0,01). These observations
are confirming previous research performed by Thyssen et al. [27] who also found reactions
to fragrances significantly more common in patients with atopic dermatitis. Herro et al. [48]
also found fragrance and myroxylon pereirae to be significantly more common in children
with atopic dermatitis. Apparently these are important allergens especially in children with
atopic dermatitis and sensitization should be prevented by reducing the use of fragrance
containing products.
AGE AND CONTACT DERMATITIS
The sensitization rate of the routinely tested allergens in the group of children between 0-4
years old was 54%, this was higher compared with the other age groups (42% in 5-11 years
and 48% in 12-18 years) but no significance was reached. Although it was generally accepted
Page 18
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
17
that sensitivity to allergens increases with age because of the increased exposure to allergens
[1;19] a high sensitization rate in young children was reported in several papers [8-11;49]. In
a study of Seidenari et al. [10] in 1094 children an overall sensitization rate of 52.1% was
found, while children under three years had the highest sensitization rate of 63,4% compared
with other age groups. In the study of Roul et al. [9] in 337 children the highest sensitization
rate was among the children of less than three years old with 88%. An age-related barrier
dysfunction in young children who in the majority of cases suffer from atopic dermatitis was
suggested as a cause of the high rates [9]. These high rates of positive patch tests could be
caused by irritant reactions [1] as children below the age of 8 years are considered more
susceptible to skin irritation [50]. However multiple other studies have not observed any
differences in sensitization rates [1;16;51;52].
Fragrances were common in all age groups. Wool alcohols frequently show more positive
reactions in the age group of 0-4 years compared with the age group of 12 to 17 years
(p<0.05) and the sensitization rates seems to be decreasing with age. When looking at the
allergens divided over age groups and atopic dermatitis we found that the wool alcohols are
the most prominent in the group of children with atopic dermatitis. This can be related to
young children having more active atopic dermatitis and the use of topical medicaments but
also an age-related barrier dysfunction leading to false positive reactions have to be
considered. This is consequently the explanation why there were less reactions to wool
alcohols in the older age-groups.
SECONDARY ANALYSIS; EMERGING ALLERGENS?
We performed the secondary analysis on the allergens that were tested on a routine bases and
on indication outside the EBS with the aim to detect new allergens that frequently have
positive reactions and might be emerging. Although there is a risk of selection bias with
testing on indication some observations were interesting. Cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB)
was the leading allergen with 14%, also substances that are related to CAPB frequently have
positive reactions. These were dimethylaminopropylamine (DMAPA) and oleamidopropyl
dimethylamine. In the study of Militello et al. [53] it was argued that CAPB in the pediatric
population might be a emerging allergen. Although the allergenic potential of these
substances have been questioned they might be a cause of sensitization. However additional
research is needed to detect the allergenic potential of these substances before concluding that
they are important emerging allergens.
When performing the secondary analysis we observed some other interesting differences,
cocamidopropyl betaine was more common in children with atopic dermatitis (p<0.02). This
is confirming the research by Schnuch et al. [24]. CAPB and DMAPA were more common in
the male population, this might be explained by hyper reactivity to irritant stimuli in the male
population [24].
p-Toluenediamine, which often is used as a component in commercial hair dyes, had
significantly more reactions in females (p<0.02, with 6% versus 0%, relevance 94%). This is
associated to the use of these products in the female population which is a source of
sensitization. Also the relevance was remarkably high illustrating the clear association with
the clinical symptoms and use of these products. This is not a emerging allergen but is
important to patch test when allergy for hair dyes is suspected.
TRUE-TEST VERSUS CHAMBER DEVICES
When comparing both test methods we observed some differences in the frequency of
reactions. Strikingly the number of children with a positive reaction to allergens using the
TRUE-test was significantly lower with 34% compared with the chamber method with 42%
(p<0.02). When looking at the allergens, significant differences for wool alcohols, fragrance
Page 19
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
18
mix, myroxylon pereirae and caine mix were found which all had less positive reactions using
the TRUE-test. However these test methods were not tested simultaneously in one patient
what hinders the forming of strong conclusions. Previous research has been conducted in
TRUE-test versus Finn chambers [54-56]. A study by Suneja et al. [54] also demonstrated
significantly fewer (relevant) reactions to fragrance mix and balsam of Peru using the TRUE-
test. As the TRUE-test is easy to use in children because it is a "ready to use-test", one should
keep in mind that reactions to fragrances, wool alcohols and caine mix might be missed when
using this patch test system.
Page 20
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
19
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, allergic contact dermatitis can be a problem in children and is related to
exposure to a variety of allergens. The children in this population most commonly reacted to
metals, fragrances, wool alcohols, detergents and rubbers. Clioquinol had zero reactions and
routine patch testing of this substance therefore is not indicated in children. Cocamidopropyl
betaine was tested positive frequently and might be an important source of contact allergy in
children. However reactions need to be interpreted with caution because of the possibility of a
higher frequency of irritative reactions. Further research is necessary to determine the allergic
potential of cocamidopropyl betaine and its related substances and data is needed after
elimination to estimate the clinical relevance of the substance.
It is important to consider allergic contact dermatitis in children with atopic dermatitis. The
sensitization rate in children with and without atopic dermatitis was almost equal.
Nonetheless we observed children with atopic dermatitis reacting to different allergens.
Children with atopic dermatitis reacted significantly more frequent to wool alcohols. This is
the first study, to my knowledge, to report significantly more reactions to wool alcohols in
children with atopic dermatitis. The reactions to these allergens were of high relevance, this
indicates that it can be an important problem in this group of children who are exposed to
lanolin-based medicaments. Therefore atopic dermatitis is a risk factor for developing contact
dermatitis to wool alcohols and should always be considered in children with recalcitrant
atopic dermatitis who do not respond to their therapy. However, the main pitfall in patch
testing children with atopic dermatitis is reactions to wool alcohols due to hyperirritable skin.
This is why a provocative use test (a repeat open application test) should be recommended
and the patients with a true allergy for wool alcohols can be detected. Further research is
needed to collect data of provocative use testing, excluding reactions due to the excited skin
syndrome.
Children with atopic dermatitis reacted significantly more frequent to fragrances. These
children are at risk for developing contact dermatitis to fragrances. The use of fragrances in
children with atopic dermatitis should be restricted to prevent sensitization to these allergens.
Finally the differences between the TRUE-test and chamber patch test preparations were
striking and needs further investigation. Reactions to fragrances, wool alcohols and caine mix
were significantly less frequent using the TRUE-test. This was an important observation as
the TRUE-test is a ready to use system and is easy to use in children. It has to be kept in
mind that these allergens might be missed using the TRUE-test and this observation needs
requires further investigation.
Page 21
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
20
REFERENCE LIST
1 Simonsen AB, Deleuran M, Johansen JD, Sommerlund M: Contact allergy and
allergic contact dermatitis in children - a review of current data. Contact Dermatitis
2011;65:254-265.
2 Bonitsis NG, Tatsioni A, Bassioukas K, Ioannidis JP: Allergens responsible for
allergic contact dermatitis among children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Contact Dermatitis 2011;64:245-257.
3 de Waard-van der Spek FB, Andersen KE, Darsow U, Mortz CG, Orton D,
Worm M, Muraro A, Schmid-Grendelmeier P, Grimalt R, Spiewak R, Rudzeviciene
O, Flohr C, Halken S, Fiocchi A, Borrego LM, Oranje AP: Allergic contact
dermatitis in children: which factors are relevant? (review of the literature). Pediatr
Allergy Immunol 2013;24:321-329.
4 Mortz CG, Lauritsen JM, Bindslev-Jensen C, Andersen KE: Contact allergy
and allergic contact dermatitis in adolescents: prevalence measures and associations.
The Odense Adolescence Cohort Study on Atopic Diseases and Dermatitis
(TOACS). Acta Derm Venereol 2002;82:352-358.
5 Barros MA, Baptista A, Correia TM, Azevedo F: Patch testing in children: a
study of 562 schoolchildren. Contact Dermatitis 1991;25:156-159.
6 Weston WL, Weston JA, Kinoshita J, Kloepfer S, Carreon L, Toth S, Bullard
D, Harper K, Martinez S: Prevalence of positive epicutaneous tests among infants,
children, and adolescents. Pediatrics 1986;78:1070-1074.
7 Dotterud LK, Falk ES: Contact allergy in relation to hand eczema and atopic
diseases in north Norwegian schoolchildren. Acta Paediatr 1995;84:402-406.
8 Belloni FA, Romano I, Peserico A, Eichenfield LF: Contact sensitization in
very young children. J Am Acad Dermatol 2011;65:772-779.
9 Roul S, Ducombs G, Taieb A: Usefulness of the European standard series for
patch testing in children. A 3-year single-centre study of 337 patients. Contact
Dermatitis 1999;40:232-235.
10 Seidenari S, Giusti F, Pepe P, Mantovani L: Contact sensitization in 1094
children undergoing patch testing over a 7-year period. Pediatr Dermatol 2005;22:1-
5.
11 Schena D, Papagrigoraki A, Tessari G, Peroni A, Sabbadini C, Girolomoni G:
Allergic contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis. Dermatitis
2012;23:275-280.
12 Lammintausta K, Kalimo K, Fagerlund VL: Patch test reactions in atopic
patients. Contact Dermatitis 1992;26:234-240.
Page 22
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
21
13 Thyssen JP, McFadden JP, Kimber I: The multiple factors affecting the
association between atopic dermatitis and contact sensitization. Allergy 2013.
14 de Waard-van der Spek FB, Oranje AP: Patch tests in children with suspected
allergic contact dermatitis: a prospective study and review of the literature.
Dermatology 2009;218:119-125.
15 Fregert S.: Manual of Contact Dermatitis. On behalf of the international
Contact Dermatitis Research Group and the North American Contact Dermatitis
Group; Copenhagen, Munksgaard Publishers, 1981.
16 Simonsen AB, Deleuran M, Mortz CG, Johansen JD, Sommerlund M: Allergic
contact dermatitis in Danish children referred for patch testing - a nationwide
multicentre study. Contact Dermatitis 2013.
17 Jacob SE, Brod B, Crawford GH: Clinically relevant patch test reactions in
children--a United States based study. Pediatr Dermatol 2008;25:520-527.
18 Mortz CG, Bindslev-Jensen C, Andersen KE: Prevalence, incidence rates and
persistence of contact allergy and allergic contact dermatitis in The Odense
Adolescence Cohort Study: a 15-year follow-up. Br J Dermatol 2013;168:318-325.
19 Goon AT, Goh CL: Patch testing of Singapore children and adolescents: our
experience over 18 years. Pediatr Dermatol 2006;23:117-120.
20 Giordano-Labadie F, Rance F, Pellegrin F, Bazex J, Dutau G, Schwarze HP:
Frequency of contact allergy in children with atopic dermatitis: results of a
prospective study of 137 cases. Contact Dermatitis 1999;40:192-195.
21 Dotterud LK, Falk ES: Metal allergy in north Norwegian schoolchildren and its
relationship with ear piercing and atopy. Contact Dermatitis 1994;31:308-313.
22 Mortz CG, Lauritsen JM, Bindslev-Jensen C, Andersen KE: Nickel
sensitization in adolescents and association with ear piercing, use of dental braces
and hand eczema. The Odense Adolescence Cohort Study on Atopic Diseases and
Dermatitis (TOACS). Acta Derm Venereol 2002;82:359-364.
23 Mortz CG, Kjaer HF, Eller E, Osterballe M, Norberg LA, Host A, Bindslev-
Jensen C, Andersen KE: Positive nickel patch tests in infants are of low clinical
relevance and rarely reproducible. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2013;24:84-87.
24 Schnuch A, Lessmann H, Geier J, Uter W: Is cocamidopropyl betaine a contact
allergen? Analysis of network data and short review of the literature. Contact
Dermatitis 2011;64:203-211.
25 Burnett CL, Bergfeld WF, Belsito DV, Hill RA, Klaassen CD, Liebler D,
Marks JG, Jr., Shank RC, Slaga TJ, Snyder PW, Andersen FA: Final report of the
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel on the safety assessment of
cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB). Int J Toxicol 2012;31:77S-111S.
Page 23
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
22
26 Rastogi SC, Johansen JD, Menne T, Frosch P, Bruze M, Andersen KE,
Lepoittevin JP, Wakelin S, White IR: Contents of fragrance allergens in children's
cosmetics and cosmetic-toys. Contact Dermatitis 1999;41:84-88.
27 Thyssen JP, Johansen JD, Linneberg A, Menne T, Engkilde K: The association
between contact sensitization and atopic disease by linkage of a clinical database
and a nationwide patient registry. Allergy 2012;67:1157-1164.
28 Thyssen JP, Linneberg A, Engkilde K, Menne T, Johansen JD: Contact
sensitization to common haptens is associated with atopic dermatitis: new insight. Br
J Dermatol 2012;166:1255-1261.
29 Spiewak R: Contact dermatitis in atopic individuals. Curr Opin Allergy Clin
Immunol 2012;12:491-497.
30 Darlenski R., Kazandjieva J, Tsankov N: Is there an increased skin irritation
and contact sensitization in atopic dermatitis?; Expert review of Dermatology, 2011,
pp 229-234.
31 Thyssen JP, Linneberg A, Ross-Hansen K, Carlsen BC, Meldgaard M, Szecsi
PB, Stender S, Menne T, Johansen JD: Filaggrin mutations are strongly associated
with contact sensitization in individuals with dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis
2013;68:273-276.
32 Nedorost ST, Babineau D: Patch testing in atopic dermatitis. Dermatitis
2010;21:251-254.
33 Thyssen JP, Jacob SE, Nedorost S: A holistic view on dermatitis: patch testing
should be considered in patients with atopic dermatitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol
2013;132:771-772.
34 Mailhol C, Lauwers-Cances V, Rance F, Paul C, Giordano-Labadie F:
Prevalence and risk factors for allergic contact dermatitis to topical treatment in
atopic dermatitis: a study in 641 children. Allergy 2009;64:801-806.
35 Darlenski R, Kazandjieva J, Tsankov N, Fluhr JW: Acute irritant threshold
correlates with barrier function, skin hydration and contact hypersensitivity in atopic
dermatitis and rosacea. Exp Dermatol 2013.
36 Bourke J, Coulson I, English J: Guidelines for the management of contact
dermatitis: an update. Br J Dermatol 2009;160:946-954.
37 Kligman AM: The myth of lanolin allergy. Contact Dermatitis 1998;39:103-
107.
38 Kligman AM: A personal critique of diagnostic patch testing. Clin Dermatol
1996;14:35-40.
39 Bruynzeel D.P., Ketel W.G., Blomberg-van der Flier M., Scheper R.J.: Angry
back or the excited skin syndrome; J Am Acad Dermatol, 1983, pp 392-397.
Page 24
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
23
40 Lee B, Warshaw E: Lanolin allergy: history, epidemiology, responsible
allergens, and management. Dermatitis 2008;19:63-72.
41 Fransway AF, Zug KA, Belsito DV, DeLeo VA, Fowler JF, Jr., Maibach HI,
Marks JG, Mathias CG, Pratt MD, Rietschel RL, Sasseville D, Storrs FJ, Taylor JS,
Warshaw EM, Dekoven J, Zirwas M: North American Contact Dermatitis Group
patch test results for 2007-2008. Dermatitis 2013;24:10-21.
42 Warshaw EM, Nelsen DD, Maibach HI, Marks JG, Zug KA, Taylor JS,
Rietschel RL, Fowler JF, Mathias CG, Pratt MD, Sasseville D, Storrs FJ, Belsito
DV, DeLeo VA: Positive patch test reactions to lanolin: cross-sectional data from
the north american contact dermatitis group, 1994 to 2006. Dermatitis 2009;20:79-
88.
43 Wakelin SH, Smith H, White IR, Rycroft RJ, McFadden JP: A retrospective
analysis of contact allergy to lanolin. Br J Dermatol 2001;145:28-31.
44 Wolf R, Orion E, Ruocco E, Baroni A, Ruocco V: Contact dermatitis: facts and
controversies. Clin Dermatol 2013;31:467-478.
45 Kligman AM: The myth of lanolin allergy. Contact Dermatitis 1998;39:103-
107.
46 Kligman AM: Lanolin allergy: crisis or comedy. Contact Dermatitis 1983;9:99-
107.
47 Wolf R: The lanolin paradox. Dermatology 1996;192:198-202.
48 Herro EM, Matiz C, Sullivan K, Hamann C, Jacob SE: Frequency of contact
allergens in pediatric patients with atopic dermatitis. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol
2011;4:39-41.
49 Wohrl S, Hemmer W, Focke M, Gotz M, Jarisch R: Patch testing in children,
adults, and the elderly: influence of age and sex on sensitization patterns. Pediatr
Dermatol 2003;20:119-123.
50 Zhai H, Meier-Davis SR, Cayme B, Shudo J, Maibach H: Irritant contact
dermatitis: effect of age. Cutan Ocul Toxicol 2012;31:138-143.
51 Heine G, Schnuch A, Uter W, Worm M: Frequency of contact allergy in
German children and adolescents patch tested between 1995 and 2002: results from
the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology and the German Contact
Dermatitis Research Group. Contact Dermatitis 2004;51:111-117.
52 Hammonds LM, Hall VC, Yiannias JA: Allergic contact dermatitis in 136
children patch tested between 2000 and 2006. Int J Dermatol 2009;48:271-274.
53 Militello G, Jacob SE, Crawford GH: Allergic contact dermatitis in children.
Curr Opin Pediatr 2006;18:385-390.
Page 25
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
24
54 Suneja T, Belsito DV: Comparative study of Finn Chambers and T.R.U.E. test
methodologies in detecting the relevant allergens inducing contact dermatitis. J Am
Acad Dermatol 2001;45:836-839.
55 Gollhausen R, Przybilla B, Ring J: Reproducibility of patch test results:
comparison of TRUE Test and Finn Chamber test results. J Am Acad Dermatol
1989;21:843-846.
56 Goh CL: Comparative study of TRUE Test and Finn Chamber patch test
techniques in Singapore. Contact Dermatitis 1992;27:84-89.
Page 26
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
25
APPENDIX
TUSSENTIJDSE EVALUATIE WEEK 6
Page 27
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
26
TUSSENTIJDSE EVALUATIE WEEK 12
Page 28
Contact dermatitis in children with and without atopic dermatitis; which are the frequent allergens?
27
EINDBEOORDELING