A dramatic increase in the rate of contact allergy caused by MI in cosmetics is occurring in Belgium. Notwithstanding the recent recommendation to discontinue the use of MI in leave-on cosmetics, safer use concentrations should also be determined for rinse-off products. Close monitoring of MI sensitization in the near future will be necessary, and the highest test concentrations reported for MI and MCI/MI should be included in the baseline series.

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is the most common allergic disorder and its prevalence has significantly increased worldwide, nowadays affecting up to 40% of the population in young adults. The objective of the present survey was to evaluate the prevalence of allergic sensitization and the prevalence of clinically diagnosed AR in a sample of the Belgian population, and to estimate the effect of age and gender. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional population-based study at an annual public fair in Ghent. Participants underwent a skin prick test (SPT) to 3 aeroallergens: a mix of trees (hazel, alder, and birch), grass pollen, and house dust mite (HDM). The clinical relevance of sensitization was assessed by relating relevant symptoms of AR to the corresponding SPT. Results: A total of 2,320 participants (1,475 females, median age 44.7 years, range 3–86) were included in this study. The standardized prevalence rates of sensitization were 13.2% for tree mix, 25.9% for grass pollen, and 25.9% for HDM. Sensitization to at least one of the allergens was present in 40.3% of the subjects. Symptomatic sensitization related to trees was reported in 9.7% of cases, grass-related AR was 17.6%, and HDM-related AR was 17.1%. The overall prevalence of AR was 30.9%. Conclusion: In this study we demonstrated a 40.3% prevalence of a positive SPT to one or more common aeroallergens. A clinical diagnosis of AR was present in 30.9% of cases, peaking in the third and fourth decades of life. It is to be expected that in the next decades, when this generation grows older, the general AR prevalence will further increase.

BACKGROUNDCannabis allergy (CA) has mainly been attributed to Can s 3, the nsLTP (non-specific lipid transfer proten) of Cannabis sativa. Nevertheless, standardized diagnostic tests are lacking and research on CA is scarce. OBJECTIVETo explore the performance of five cannabis diagnostic tests and the phenotypic profile of CA. METHODS120 CA patients were included and stratified according to the nature of their cannabis-related symptoms, 62 healthy and 189 atopic controls were included. Specific (s)IgE hemp, sIgE and BAT rCan s 3, BAT with a crude cannabis extract and a skin prick test (SPT) with a nCan s 3-rich cannabis extract were performed. Clinical information was based on patient-history and a standardized questionnaire. RESULTSFirstly, up to 72% of CA reporting likely-anaphylaxis (CA-A) are Can s 3 sensitized. Actually, the Can s 3-based diagnostic tests show the best combination of positive and negative predictive values; 80% and 60%, respectively. sIgE hemp displays 82% sensitivity but only 32% specificity. Secondly, Can s 3+CA reported significantly more cofactor mediated reactions and displayed significantly more sensitizations to other nsLTPs than Can s 3-CA. Finally, the highest prevalence of systemic reactions to plant-derived foods was seen in CA-A, namely 72%.

The oxidative pathway is affected in vitiligo, but its unique initiating or contributory role in the pathogenesis is less evident. Interesting data support the added value of oral antioxidants in vitiligo although confirmatory studies are missing.

BackgroundGlobal chronic urticaria (CU) disease experience and management is not well documented. This study descriptively compares these aspects among CU patients residing in Europe (EU) and Central and South America (C/SA).MethodsAWARE (A World-wide Antihistamine-Refractory chronic urticaria patient Evaluation) is a global prospective, non-interventional study of CU in the real-world setting. Patients were ≥ 18 years with a diagnosis of H1-antihistamine-refractory CU for > 2 months. Differences between the EU and C/SA regions in demographic and clinical characteristics, quality of life (QoL), work and activity impairment, pharmacological treatment, and healthcare resource use were examined.ResultsIn total, 4224 patients were included in the analysis (C/SA 492; EU 3732). Rates of untreated patients were greater in the C/SA region (45.1% vs. 31.9%; P < 0.005) and escalation to third-line therapy was rare in both regions. Differences in disease experience emerged, with C/SA patients more commonly experiencing angioedema (C/SA 50.8% vs. EU 46.1%; P = 0.03) or comorbid chronic inducible urticaria (C/SA 30% vs. EU 22%; P < 0.001). Correspondingly, rates of uncontrolled urticaria were higher among C/SA patients (82.8% vs. 77.5%; P = 0.017) and patients in the C/SA region showed significantly greater work and activity impairment (absenteeism: 10.4 ± 19.7 vs. 6.7 ± 19.0, P = 0.004; presenteeism: 30.3 ± 31.9 vs. 24.4 ± 25.8, P = 0.001; work productivity loss: 33.9 ± 33.9 vs. 26.5 ± 27.5, P < 0.001; activity impairment: 37.7 ± 34.7 vs. 32.7 ± 30.1, P = 0.001). However, QoL impairment was greater in the EU region (Dermatology Life Quality Index: C/SA 6.5 ± 5.9 vs. EU 8.3 ± 7.0; P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in use of healthcare resources, including emergency services (39.6% vs. 29.3%; P < 0.001), hospitalization (7.7% vs 21.9%; P < 0.001) general practitioners (31.7% vs 57.3%; P < 0.001), and additional allergists or dermatologists (50.6% vs. 47.3%, P < 0.001), among patients in the C/SA and EU region, respectively. In both regions, patients with a primary diagnosis of CU with angioedema had significantly greater impairment in work and non-work activities and healthcare resource utilization compared to those without angioedema.ConclusionsThis study revealed that CU is a heterogeneous condition with differences in healthcare utilization and outcomes between EU and C/SA. However, overall there is a high unmet need of H1-antihistamine-refractory CU patients, which is associated with high use of healthcare resources, and has a large negative effect on QoL and work productivity.