Do not miss a contact allergy: some guidelines

 

 

The diagnosis of a contact allergy is made on the basis of a clinical examination in which much attention is given to the nature and the location of the lesions, the recording of a thorough anamnesis, the consideration of all possible etiological factors, and the administration of patch tests, whereby the determination of the relevance of the positive results obtained is critical.  The failure to recognize a contact allergy can occur in any of the various stages of the allergological investigation.

 

 

1.  The clinical examination

 

The skin symptoms of a contact allergy manifest themselves classically in the form of eczema that, of itself, can be very polymorphic and, depending on the stage, is characterized by itching, erythematous-, squamous plaques, papules, vesicles (occasionally with blister formation), skin thickening, and fissures.  However, a contact allergic reaction can also produce non-eczematous lesions and thus follicular and dermal lesions can determine the clinical picture to a greater or lesser degree.  In addition, other forms of expression are known, caused by both professional and non-professional allergens, such as: erythema-, multiforme-like lesions or urticarial papular plaques; examples of such allergens are tropical woods and many kinds of plants, local medication - including steroidal - and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); lichen planus-like and lichenoid eruptions, the classic causes being color developers (photography) and metals, the last also being responsible for granulomatous and pustular reactions, although flavorings, synthetic resins, textile allergens, and topical medications have occasionally been reported in this regard.  Lymphomatoid contact dermatitis can also occur and has recently been reported to metals and textile dyes; pigmentation disturbances, both hyper-pigmentation and hypo-pigmentation (leukoderma) have been associated with several chemicals; even pemphigoid lesions can express a contact allergy.  Finally, psoriasis, via the Köbner phenomenon, is also a possibility.

 

The location can be an important starting point in the identification of the causal allergen since a contact eczema is generally restricted to the contact site.  The skin reactions, however, can also occur on more sensitive sites such as the eyelids, where the skin is thin and thus where substances can penetrate more easily.  Sometimes, indeed, they are the only sites when a facial cream or even a hair dye is the allergen source.  So, too, the backs of the hands rather then the palms are more affected by a contact allergy to gloves, while, in the case of a textile dermatitis, often only friction and transpiration sites are involved in the eczematous reaction.  Not only the intentional application to the skin but other exposure possibilities occur: contact with allergenic or allergen-contaminated surfaces, transfer of an allergen (for example, in nail polish) via the hands to the face or other sites, which gives rise to an "ectopic" contact dermatitis, a contact allergy caused by products that have come in contact with the partner or other persons in the environment of the patient - what is called "connubial" or "consort" dermatitis - and transfer through the air of allergenic fumes, solutions, or powders, which gives rise to an "airborne" dermatitis.  Id-like reactions, often in the form of small papules, may occur far from the original contact site and may even be generalized.  This can be explained by hematogenous dissemination of the allergen.


After prior sensitization of the skin, allergic patients can also react to oral or parenteral administration of the allergen or to a chemically related substance that cross reacts.  The clinical picture can then be a flare up of the eczema at the previous contact site or sites or have a diffuse, sometimes generalized eczematous aspect.  Examples of this are certain antibiotics and corticosteroids.  In these cases, one speaks of an endogenous or systemic contact dermatitis.  Finally, there is photo-allergic contact eczema, the consequence of exposure to a photo-contact allergen and sunlight.

 

2.  The anamnesis

Essential is an extensive and standardized anamnesis that covers all possible etiological factors like profession, leisure-time activities, use of topical pharmaceutical products and cosmetics, and contact with plants.  The patients can themselves provide many indications but often need to be convinced that the allergenic product may not have been introduced only recently into their environment.  Indeed, it can take several days before the clinical symptoms and signs appear after the contact.  In addition, potential cross sensitizers the patient came in contact with previously have to be considered and discussed.

 

 

3.  Skin tests

 

The patch test remains at present the only reliable manner to identify a contact allergy.  It is a biological test, so the results can be erroneously negative or positive.  The causes of a false-negative reaction are legion; the sensitization level of the patient may have been too low; the tests may been administered in a refractory phase; the test concentration and/or the amount of the substance may have been insufficient; the wrong test substance may have been used; the vehicle may not have released a sufficient amount of the allergen (the biological availability was too low); the occlusion might have been insufficient; the test site might have been inappropriate; the reading may have been made too soon; the reaction might have been suppressed immunologically by exposure to sunlight, local application of corticosteroid, or systemic administration of corticosteroids or other medications (e.g. cyclosporine, pentoxifylline, or diltiazem, which can suppress the immunological response.  This list is certainly not exhaustive.  For the skin tests, the possible risks of overlooking a contact allergy thus are centered on the allergen itself, the test method, test concentration, and vehicle used, the time of reading, and, finally, the relevance.

 

3.1.    The allergen

 

First of all, only an allergen that is tested can be detected!  In order to form an idea of the yield of tests with the European standard series in contact-allergy examinations, the patch-test results of 4 European centers were compared.  It turned out that the proportion of contact-allergic reactions diagnosed with the European standard series "only" varied between 37 % and 73 % and for other allergens "only" between 5 % and 23 %.  This indicates that a standard series must certainly be augmented by tests with additional series and ingredients of products supplied by the patient.  It happens that the cited allergen is not itself the cause of the allergic reaction but an impurity in it.  This is the case, for example, for cetyl alcohol (pharmaceutical quality), which contains an unidentified impurity, so patch tests with analytical quality cetyl alcohol thus give a "false" negative reaction.

Of course, allergenic impurities occur much more in industrial products, for example, allylglycidylether, a reactive epoxy thinner, was found as a contaminant in a fixation additive in silicon and polyurethane resins.  Allergenic degradation products can also be formed during storage and then primarily by oxidation, as is the case of limonene.  Of course, this has immediate implications for the patch-test material, thus the utility of stability checks.

 

Method

 

Patch tests are conducted with commercialized allergens and with substances that are diluted in the recommended concentrations and vehicles.  The products used, insofar as they are having no irritant properties, are tested as such.  However, when the concentration of an allergen is too low in the final, solid product, as can be the case, for example, with rubber, shoes, textiles, paper, and plants, or when insufficient amounts are released in tests, extracts may have to be prepared.  When dermatitis occurs after repeated use or after the use of cosmetic products on the more sensitive skin of the face and there is a negative test result, use tests and/or "Repeated Open Application Tests" (ROATs) are recommended.  The intention is to approximate as nearly as possible the use situation.  Open or semi-open tests are indicated if the product would cause irritation under occlusion.  Highly acidic or alkaline products are not tested unless they are buffered.  In the case of a protein contact dermatitis, only prick or scratch tests can reveal the allergen.  In the case of a photo-allergic contact eczema, photo-patch tests are, of course, administered.

 

3.3.    Test concentration

 

Because the sensitivity threshold of each patient is not the same, there is no optimal test concentration.  For most allergens, higher concentrations will elicit an allergic reaction more frequently than lower concentrations and also more easily cause irritant reactions.  For corticosteroids, however, because of their intrinsic anti-inflammatory properties, lower concentrations seem to be required.

 

3.4.    Test vehicles

 

The choice of the vehicle has an enormous influence on the biological availability of an allergen.  Petrolatum is used most often for practical reasons.  When a contact allergy is assumed and the tests are negative, however, another vehicle must be considered.  This has become clear primarily for corticosteroids.

 

3.5.    Time of reading

 

Patch tests are read routinely after 2 and sometimes after 3 or 4 days.  However, several articles have recently been published demonstrating the importance of later readings, not only for neomycin but also for allergens such as colophony, formaldehyde, and certainly for corticosteroids.

 


3.6.    Relevance

 

The allergy examination has reached a crucial phase when a positive reaction has been found, for then the relevance of that reaction must be determined.  Bruze rightly points out that one may not conclude too quickly that a test reaction is not relevant, for such a determination depends primarily on the expertise of the investigator and the possibility of detecting the allergen in the environment of the patient (chemical analysis of the contacted products may be necessary).  Finally, there is the possibility that the patient could have been sensitized by a cross-reacting substance and that the present test reveals only this allergy.  This is the case, for example, for tixocortol pivalate, which is a good marker for corticosteroids of the hydrocortisone type, and for budesonide, which is a marker for corticosteroids of the acetonide type and/or the labile esters.  If the results of the patch tests are negative for a patient for whom a diagnosis of allergic contact eczema has been proposed, one has to go back to the beginning, that is, with a thoroughgoing anamnesis (perhaps with a visit to his or her environment).  The assumed allergens must be re-tested (perhaps in another concentration, with another vehicle, or with another testing method), and additional allergens tested.  The patient can also be asked to keep a journal in the hope that a correlation can be discerned between exposure to a substance and the occurrence of the skin problems.

 

 

Conclusion

 

The diagnosis of a contact allergy can be missed in the various stages of the contact allergy investigation: the clinical examination of the patient, the anamnesis, the skin testing (particularly as regards for the tested allergen, the test concentration and vehicle, and the time of the reading) as well as the determination of the relevance of a positive test.

 

 

Key words:     clinical symptoms - cross-reactions - diagnosis - false-negative tests - patch testing - relevancy - test technique.