Chlorpromazine photoallergy. Coexistence of immediate and delayed type

Horio, Takeshi

doi:10.1001/archderm.111.11.1469

Cited by 36 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A photopatch test was carried out with 0.05% chlor promazine in physiological saline solution, because im mediate allergic photosensitivity to chlorpromazine had previously been described [5], 24 It after application of the substance on the back, the test site was uncovered and exposed to black light for 15 min at a distance of 15 cm. Neither immediate nor delayed reactions were observed at the patch test site.…”

Section: Pliotopaich Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Solar Urticaria Inhibited by Visible Light

1983

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 25-year-old man with solar urticaria is described. The action spectrum ranged from 400 to 500 nm. An inhibition spectrum was found to be in the visible light range above 660 nm. Simultaneous or alternate exposure to ‘blue-violet light’ and ‘red light’ mostly inhibited weal formation. The urticarial reaction was not blocked by local injection of antihistamines and not prevented by histamine depletion with polymyxin B sulfate. These data suggest that histamine may not play a major role in weal production in this case.

show abstract

Section: Pliotopaich Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Solar Urticaria Inhibited by Visible Light

1983

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was concluded that the chronic photosensitive dermatitis was due to phenothiazines. phenothiazines; photopatch test; photosensitivityChlorpromazine and other phenothiazines, such as promethazine, perphenazine, thioridazine and levomepromazine, have been widely used as tranquilizers, antipyretics, analgesics and/or antihistamines, and it is known that some of them may produce not only allergic contact dermatitis but also phototoxic and photoallergic reactions (Fisher 1967;Horio 1975;Horio et al 1975). In the present case, photosensitive dermatitis was suspected because the eruptions were limited to sunexposed areas and became aggravated in summer.…”

mentioning

confidence: 79%

“…In the literature, Epstein et al (1957) reported cutaneous photosensitivity caused by these drugs, and presently, phenothiazines are considered to produce not only allergic contact dermatitis (Levan 1957), but phototoxic and photoallergic reactions (Fisher 1967;Horio et al 1975). Immediate allergic photosensitivity due to chlorpromazine was also reported by Horio (1975).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chronic photosensitive dermatitis due to phenothiazines.

Torinuki

Kumai

Miura

1982

Tohoku J. Exp. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 74-year-old man had eczematous eruptions on sun-exposed areas.Photopatch tests were positive to chlorpromazine and promethazine, and the action spectrum for the photosensitivity was in the long-wave ultraviolet light (UV-A) range. It was concluded that the chronic photosensitive dermatitis was due to phenothiazines. phenothiazines; photopatch test; photosensitivityChlorpromazine and other phenothiazines, such as promethazine, perphenazine, thioridazine and levomepromazine, have been widely used as tranquilizers, antipyretics, analgesics and/or antihistamines, and it is known that some of them may produce not only allergic contact dermatitis but also phototoxic and photoallergic reactions (Fisher 1967;Horio 1975;Horio et al. 1975). In the present case, photosensitive dermatitis was suspected because the eruptions were limited to sunexposed areas and became aggravated in summer. Patch tests and photopatch tests with phenothiazines and halogenated salicylanilides that are typical photosensitizers were performed, and it was confirmed that phenothiazines caused the development of the eruptions. Whether these lesions resulted from a phototoxic or a photoallergic reaction of phenothiazine was also discussed. REPORT OF A CASEA 74-year old farmer had a 10-year history of recurrent pruritic eczematous eruptions on sun-exposed areas. The lesions first appeared on the forearms and hands, and then spread to the face, nape and V-shaped area of the neck. According to the patient, the skin conditions became worse in summer and better in winter.He had no known systemic illness. There was no family history of photosensitivity-related diseases. A physical examination revealed scaling and lichenified dermatitis on the scalp, face, V-shaped area of the neck, extensor aspect of the forearms and the dorsa of the hands (Fig. 1). There was fissuring and infiltration in many sites, particularly on the hand backs. From these findings, it was suspected that the case was photosensitive dermatotis.Blood cell counts, urinalysis, serum GOT and BUN were all within normal limits. Histologic examination of the eruption on the left forearm showed hyperkeratosis, irregular acanthosis and mild, perivascular mononuclear cell infiltration of the upper dermis (Fig. 2).Received for publication, February 6, 1982. 223

show abstract

“…In a few cases an underlying cause (e.g. chlorpromazine) [7] or disease (erythropoetic protopor phyria) [8] can be found. The pathogenesis of SU is not fully understood.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%