Role of Regional Lymph Nodes in Contact Sensitization

Epstein, William L.

doi:10.1001/archderm.1963.01590240113019

Cited by 23 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are a number of variations in these procedures including the use of provocative chemical agents such as sodium Iaury! sulfate (SLS) , special skin preparation such as stripping (Spier & Sixt 1955) or freezing (Epstein et al 1963), special patches (Magnusson & Hersle 1965), high concentrations at induction and from 25 to 200 test subjects (Draize et al 1944. Other background information and references to studies on predictive methods are contained in review papers by Giovacchini (1972) and Hardy (1973).…”

Section: Predictive Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contact allergy: Predictive testing in man

Marzulli

Maibach

1976

Contact Dermatitis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predictive tests are of value in forecasting the response of a population to a sensitizer; diagnostic testing is used to determine what substances may actually be producing dermatologic problems. Skin sensitization predictive and diagnostic data for the eleven most frequently encountered skin sensitizers in Western Europe, Canada and the United States are reviewed. These compounds include two drugs (benzocaine and neomycin), two cosmetic ingredients (p-phenylenediamine and balsam of Peru), four preservatives (formaldehyde, ethylenediamine, parabens and mercurials) and three ingredients of wearing apparel (nickel, chromium and thiram). Many of the data were collected by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group and the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group on tests with 1,200 and 4,825 dermatologic patients, respectively; the remainder were obtained by individual investigators with smaller groups of subjects. The data obtained by various investigators are discussed in relation to the factors which affect the extent and degree of sensitization which they can cause.

show abstract

Section: Predictive Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contact allergy: Predictive testing in man

Marzulli

Maibach

1976

Contact Dermatitis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Allergic contact dermatitis is a form of cell-mediated immune response to an allergen (Ackerman, 1978;Adams, 1990;Bosman and Feldman, 1970;Epstein et al, 1963;Gell and Benacerraf, 1961;Lammintausta and Maibach, 1990a;Maibach, 1987;Weston and Weston, 1984). This allergic response is a threshold response; single or repeated exposure to low levels of a sensitizer may not produce an allergic response if the threshold dose is not reached.…”

Section: Chromium-induced Dermatitismentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of the allergic contact dermatitis hazard posed by chromium‐contaminated soil: Identifying a “safe” concentration

Paustenbach

Sheehan

Paull

et al. 1992

Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At least 200 sites in the United States contain soil with elevated levels of trivalent and hexavalent chromium [Cr(III) and Cr(VI)]. Although the potential cancer hazard posed by airborne Cr(VI) has been the primary concern for these sites, a soil cleanup standard based on the potential elicitation of allergic contact dermatitis has been proposed for sites in Hudson County, N.J. This paper describes the rationale for identifying a soil concentration of Cr(VI) that should not pose an allergic contact dermatitis hazard-even in sensitized persons. A literature review of eight published patch test studies that evaluated the allergic response to potassium dichromate was conducted. These studies were evaluated for clinical and statistical relevance in establishing a threshold dose of Cr(VI) to which no more than 10% of the subpopulation sensitized to chromium would respond, and that would protect at least 99.84% of the general population. Although each of the studies had certain methodological limitations when evaluated against current test methods, the data set proved useful for deriving an estimated threshold. Using computer data-fitting techniques based on truncated lognormal distributions, a weighted mean 10% threshold of approximately 150 ppm potassium dichromate or 54 ppm Cr(VI) was identified for the eight studies. Due to the types of limitations noted for these studies, this threshold is likely to be somewhat conservative. Test results have shown that between 5 and 10% of the Cr(VI) at concentrations less than about 500 ppm are released from a soil matrix into an isotonic saline solution simulating sweat. Using human sweat as the extractant, it has been shown that only 0.1% of the CR(VI) at concentrations of approximately 1,000 ppm are released from a soil matrix into sweat. Based on 10% solubilization of soil-bound Cr(VI) and the results of our statistical analysis of previous threshold studies, a concentration of approximately 350 to 500 ppm Cr(VI) in soil should be sufficiently low to protect virtually all exposed people, including children, from chromium-induced allergic contact dermatitis.

show abstract

Allergic Contact Dermatitis in Children

Weston¹

1984

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Role of Regional Lymph Nodes in Contact Sensitization

Cited by 23 publications

References 9 publications

Contact allergy: Predictive testing in man

Contact allergy: Predictive testing in man

Review of the allergic contact dermatitis hazard posed by chromium‐contaminated soil: Identifying a “safe” concentration

Allergic Contact Dermatitis in Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About