Hyposensitization Against Rhus Dermatitis

Kligman, Albert M.

doi:10.1001/archderm.1958.01560070051008

Cited by 91 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kligman [44] attempted to hyposensitize persons with rhus dermatitis by giving increasing oral doses of the allergen. Half of the moderately to severely sensitive patients developed either pruritus or a rash.…”

Section: Other Contact Allergensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systemic Contact Dermatitis

Menné¹,

Veien²

2001

Textbook of Contact Dermatitis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Other Contact Allergensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systemic Contact Dermatitis

Menné¹,

Veien²

2001

Textbook of Contact Dermatitis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In Rhus (poison oak/ivy) and nickel allergic contact hypersensitivity (ACH) oral administration of the contact sensitizer has been investigated as a potential therapeutical modality in allergic patients, in addition to conventional anti-inflammatory treatments. This was, however, found to induce only transient desensitization, often at the cost of general itching, urticaria and skin rashes (Kligman, 1958a: Epstein, 1987Santueci et ai. 1988).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reduced frequency of nickel allergy upon oral nickel contact at an early age

Hoogstraten

Andersen²,

Blomberg

et al. 1991

Clinical and Experimental Immunology

148

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYFrom anitnal studies we know that oral administration of T-dependent antigens before sensitization effectively induces systemic immune iinresponsiveness. Such 'oral tolerance" is persistent, dosedependent, antigen-specific and presumably T suppressor cell-mediated. Oral tolerance induction could be an effective way to prevent undesired T cell-mediated immune functions, sueh as playing a role in altograft reaciion, autoimmune and allergic diseases. In the present study allergic eontaet hypersensitivity (ACH) to nickel, currently presenting the most frequent contact allergy in man. was chosen to establish the feasibility of oral prevention of undesired T cell-mediated immunity in man. Potentially tolerizing {oral nickel contacts via orthodontic braces) as well as sensitizing (ear piercing) events were studied retrospectively in 2176 patients attending nine European patch test clinics. Patients were interviewed by means ofa confidential questionnaire. The results show that ear piercing strongly favoured development of nickel ACH. More importantly, patients having had oral contacts with nickel-releasing appliances (dental braces) at an early age, but only if prior lo ear piercing, showed a reduced frequency of nickel hypersensitivity. Frequencies of other hypersensitivities, in particular to fragrance, were not affected. These results support our view that induction of specific systemic immunologic tolerance by timely oral administration of antigens is feasible in man.

show abstract

“…At the beginning, he reacted to a 1:5000 dilution of the oleoresins, while at the end of the trial, he reportedly not only tolerated the dilution of 1:10, but also the rubbing of his body with Rhus toxicodendron leaves [45]. Kligman has confirmed this observation experimentally in a group of eight volunteers; however, he also stressed on this occasion the impracticality of such 'therapy': it required over 300 applications of 3-n-pentadecylcatechol (PDC, the sensitizing compound of Rhus resin) over 9-11 months and caused initial aggravation of the symptoms after each increase of the dose [46]. It appeared that this kind of epicutaneous hyposenstization (perhaps via induction of a sustained refractory phase of ACD), although effective, seemed less tolerable than the disease itself.…”

Section: Animal Versus Humanmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this most extensive ever study of hyposentizitation to haptens, Kligman tried out many different dosages, schedules and routes of administration, including intramuscular, intracutaneous, epicutaneous and oral. He found oral administration of PDC to indeed cause a definite decrease in Rhus hypersensitivity; however, this effect was only moderate and started to diminish a few weeks after discontinuing the treatment [46]. Due to abundance of data, Kligman's extensive paper, though 26 pages long, is rather a selective review of unpublished study results, than a detailed report of a therapeutic trial.…”

Section: Clinical Trials Of Immunotherapy With Haptensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immunotherapy of Allergic Contact Dermatitis

Śpiewak

2011

Immunotherapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term 'immunotherapy' refers to treating diseases by inducing, enhancing or suppressing immune responses. As allergy is an excessive, detrimental immune reaction to otherwise harmless environmental substances, immunotherapy of allergic disease is aimed at the induction of tolerance toward sensitizing antigens. This article focuses on the historical developments, present state and future outlook for immunotherapy with haptens as a therapeutic modality for allergic contact dermatitis. Inspired by the effectiveness of immunotherapy in respiratory allergies, attempts were undertaken at curing allergic contact dermatitis by means of controlled administration of the sensitizing haptens. Animal and human experiments confirmed that tolerance to haptens can be induced most effectively when the induction of tolerance precedes attempted sensitization. In real life, however, therapy is sought by people who are already sensitized and an effective reversal of hypersensitivity seems more difficult to achieve. Decades of research on Rhus hypersensitivity led to a conclusion that immunotherapy can suppress Rhus dermatitis, however, only to a limited degree, for a short period of time, and at a high risk of side effects, which makes this method therapeutically unprofitable. Methodological problems with most available studies of immunotherapy of contact allergy to nickel make any definite conclusions impossible at this stage.

show abstract

Hyposensitization Against Rhus Dermatitis

Cited by 91 publications

References 41 publications

Systemic Contact Dermatitis

Systemic Contact Dermatitis

Reduced frequency of nickel allergy upon oral nickel contact at an early age

Immunotherapy of Allergic Contact Dermatitis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About