Patch Testing To a Textile Dye Mix by the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group

Isaksson, Marléne; Ale, Iris; Andersen, Klaus Ejner; Diepgen, Thomas L.; Goh, C. J.; R, An Goossens; Jerajani, Hemangi; Maibach, Howard I.; Sasseville, Denis; Bruze, Magnus

doi:10.1097/der.0000000000000125

Cited by 24 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this 2‐year period study on 11 697 consecutively tested Italian patients the prevalence of sensitization to TDM was 1.5%. This prevalence is considerably lower than that observed among European and American patients in 2011 (108/2907, 3.7%) 3 and in 2013 (90/2493, 3.6%), 5 and recently in Malmö patients (54/2250, 2.4%) 6 . These data, together with ours, support a decreasing trend of contact sensitization to DDs, probably due to the entry of DDs into the REACH restricted substance list (REACH Annex XVII) of EU directives (Regulation No.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

Patch testing with textile dye mix in Italy: A 2‐year multicenter SIDAPA study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

Patch testing with textile dye mix in Italy: A 2‐year multicenter SIDAPA study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…They have replaced the traditional pigments such as cinnabar (red), chromium (green), cobalt (blue), cadmium (yellow) or manganese (purple) derivatives . Azo dyes are present in many consumer products, such as textiles and leather clothing, and may cause allergy . Metabolism or chemical degradation of the azo bond may result in the formation of primary aromatic amines, some of which have been proven to possess mutagenic and carcinogenic or sensitizing properties…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the skin sensitization potential of 3 red and 2 black tattoo inks using interleukin‐18 as a biomarker in a reconstructed human skin model

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDuring the last decade, the number of people with ≥1 tattoo has increased noticeably within the European population. Despite this, limited safety information is available for tattoo inks.ObjectivesTo test the skin sensitization potential of 5 tattoo inks in vitro by using reconstructed human skin (RHS) and the contact sensitization biomarker interleukin (IL)‐18.MethodsTwo red and 3 black tattoo inks, 1 additive (Hamamelis virginiana extract) and 1 irritant control (lactic acid) were tested. The culture medium of RHS (reconstructed epidermis on a fibroblast‐populated collagen hydrogel) was supplemented with test substances in a dose‐dependent manner for 24 hours, after which cytotoxicity (histology; thiazolyl blue tetrazolium bromide assay) and skin sensitization potential (IL‐18 secretion; enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay) were assessed.ResultsAll but 1 ink showed cytotoxicity. Notably, 1 red ink and 1 black ink were able to cause an inflammatory response, indicated by substantial release of IL‐18, suggesting that these inks may be contact sensitizers.ConclusionsThe in vitro RHS model showed that 4 tattoo inks were cytotoxic and 2 were able to cause an inflammatory IL‐18 response, indicating that an individual may develop allergic contact dermatitis when exposed to these tattoo inks, as they contain contact sensitizers.

show abstract

“…Although it is common in fabrics, the azo dye Disperse Blue 106 was not specifically identified in our search of store‐based and salon‐based semi‐permanent hair dye products, but the products' labels indicated that ‘azo’ dyes might be present. Our case of a patient who reacted positively to Disperse Blue 106 but not to PPD highlights the fact that there are many potentially sensitizing chemicals in hair dye, and it may be difficult to determine the allergen that a particular patient is sensitive to with standard patch testing .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%