Allergic contact photodermatitis to para-aminobenzoic acid

Mathias, C. G.

doi:10.1001/archderm.114.11.1665

Cited by 16 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Testing photopatches in triplicate (UVB, UVA and control) is also reported previously (58, 59). Also described in France is triplicate [Polychromatic (UVB, UVA, Visible), UVA and control] (16, 43, 44).…”

Section: Light Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 86%

Photoallergic contact dermatitis

Kerr¹,

Ferguson²

2010

Photodermatology, Photoimmunology &Amp; Photomedicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryBackground: Photoallergic contact dermatitis (PACD) presents in patients after certain exogenous agents come into contact with the skin in the presence of ultraviolet and/or visible light. The best method currently available for investigating PACD is photopatch testing. However, photopatch testing as an investigation is under-used by clinicians, and therefore PACD may go undetected in many patients. Purpose: To highlight the importance of PACD and photopatch testing when investigating patients with a photo-exposed site dermatosis. Method: A comprehensive review of the available literature relating to PACD and photopatch testing. Results: Experimental evidence suggests that PACD is a delayed type hypersensitivity reaction. Various agents have been historically shown to cause PACD, but currently the most common photosensitizers are sunscreens and topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Photopatch testing has in the past been subject to differing methodologies; however, a European consensus methodology now exists and should allow a greater comparison of results across centres. As chemical, pharmaceutical, and cosmetic industries produce new agents, photopatch testing of such agents in humans before release in the marketplace may prevent widespread contact with potent photosensitizers. It will also be important for ongoing multi-centre studies of existing agents to be conducted in order to keep the photopatch test batteries used by clinicians investigating PACD up to date.

show abstract

Section: Light Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 86%

Photoallergic contact dermatitis

Kerr¹,

Ferguson²

2010

Photodermatology, Photoimmunology &Amp; Photomedicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Patil and Maibach, 1994). Duration of exposure, contact frequency, occlusion (Chew and Maibach, 2006), period and method of exposure (Mathias et al, 1978) are also important influences in the appearance of clinical symptoms.…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

Irritantcy potential and sub acute dermal toxicity study of <i>Pistacia Lentiscus</i> fatty oil as a topical traditional remedy

Djerrou¹,

Djaalab²,

Riachi³

et al. 2013

Afr. J. Trad. Compl. Alt. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study was undertaken to assess safety of Pistacia lentiscus fruits fatty oil (PLFO) as a topical traditional remedy. A primary skin and eye irritation tests were conducted with New Zealand white rabbits to determine the potential for PLFO to produce irritation from a single application. In addition, a sub acute dermal toxicity study was performed on 18 NZW rabbits to evaluate possible adverse effect following application of PLFO for 28 days. Based on the results of the current study, PLFO is classified as slightly irritating to the skin and the eye of rabbits (Primary Irritation Index (P.I.I.) = 1.037; Ocular Irritation Index (O.I.I.) = 5.33 at 1 h). In the sub-acute toxicity test, PLFO produced neither mortality nor significant differences in the body and organ weights between control group and treated rabbits. However, a reversible irritant contact dermatitis was observed in the treated areas from the end of the second week of application until the end of experiment. This local phenomenon was accompanied by a significant skin thickening (P≤0.01) since the 12 th day (ANOVA, F = 11, 07143, P = 0, 00765) which is confirmed with an inflammatory granuloma in histological study. Haematological analysis and blood chemistry values of the 2 groups showed no significant differences in any of the parameters examined. In summary, PLFO is minimally irritating to the eye and skin after a single exposure, but it may cause irritant contact dermatitis and a reversible thickening of skin after prolonged use.

show abstract

“…Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is one of the two types of contact dermatitis, that is, it represents the manifestations of an allergic response caused by contact with a substance, the other type being irritant contact dermatitis. [ 1 ] It represents an eczematous pathology, wherein a specific exogenous allergen triggers an inflammatory response through the mechanism of delayed hypersensitivity. ACD occurs due a milieu of allergens and involves different anatomical sites, including the eyelids and periorbital areas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%