Contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors-15 adult patients tested with a medical device patch test series.


Journal

Contact dermatitis
ISSN: 1600-0536
Titre abrégé: Contact Dermatitis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7604950

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Oct 2020
Historique:
received: 20 04 2020
revised: 23 06 2020
accepted: 28 06 2020
pubmed: 2 7 2020
medline: 3 9 2021
entrez: 2 7 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Several cases of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to the glucose sensor FreeStyle Libre have been reported. Isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) and N,N-dimethylacrylamide (DMAA) are known culprit allergens. To evaluate patients with suspected ACD to FreeStyle Libre in a standardized manner, present causative allergens, and assess patient-reported implications. A total of 15 patients with suspected ACD to FreeStyle Libre were patch tested with the Swedish baseline series and a new medical device series. IBOA and DMAA were tested at 0.1% and 0.3% in petrolatum (pet.). Readings were performed on day (D) 3 and D7. Background data, details on skin reactions, and associated implications were assessed using a questionnaire. Thirteen patients were sensitized to IBOA and four to DMAA. Two positive reactions to IBOA and one to DMAA were seen only at 0.3% concentration on D7. Median duration of sensor use before dermatitis onset was 6 months. Half the number of the patients took precautions in everyday life due to sensor-related skin reactions. Six patients discontinued sensor usage. Patients with suspected ACD to glucose sensors should be evaluated with a relevant patch test series containing IBOA and DMAA. Adding the 0.3% pet. concentration is recommended. The reading on D7 is necessary.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Several cases of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to the glucose sensor FreeStyle Libre have been reported. Isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) and N,N-dimethylacrylamide (DMAA) are known culprit allergens.
OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE
To evaluate patients with suspected ACD to FreeStyle Libre in a standardized manner, present causative allergens, and assess patient-reported implications.
METHODS METHODS
A total of 15 patients with suspected ACD to FreeStyle Libre were patch tested with the Swedish baseline series and a new medical device series. IBOA and DMAA were tested at 0.1% and 0.3% in petrolatum (pet.). Readings were performed on day (D) 3 and D7. Background data, details on skin reactions, and associated implications were assessed using a questionnaire.
RESULTS RESULTS
Thirteen patients were sensitized to IBOA and four to DMAA. Two positive reactions to IBOA and one to DMAA were seen only at 0.3% concentration on D7. Median duration of sensor use before dermatitis onset was 6 months. Half the number of the patients took precautions in everyday life due to sensor-related skin reactions. Six patients discontinued sensor usage.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Patients with suspected ACD to glucose sensors should be evaluated with a relevant patch test series containing IBOA and DMAA. Adding the 0.3% pet. concentration is recommended. The reading on D7 is necessary.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32608015
doi: 10.1111/cod.13649
doi:

Substances chimiques

Acrylamides 0
Acrylates 0
Allergens 0
Camphanes 0
N,N-dimethylacrylamide AS46JK7Q6I
isobornyl acrylate IX0PRH184P

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

301-309

Informations de copyright

© 2020 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Références

van Beers CAJ, DeVries JH, Kleijer SJ, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring for patients with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IN CONTROL): a randomised, open-label, crossover trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016;4(11):893-902.
Berg AK, Nørgaard K, Thyssen JP, et al. Skin problems associated with insulin pumps and sensors in adults with type 1 diabetes: a cross-sectional study. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018;20(7):475-482.
Asarani NAM, Reynolds AN, Boucher SE, de Bock M, Wheeler BJ. Cutaneous complications with continuous or flash glucose monitoring use: systematic review of trials and observational studies. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2019;14(2):328-337.
Herman A, Aerts O, Baeck M, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by isobornyl acrylate in Freestyle® Libre, a newly introduced glucose sensor. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;77(6):367-373.
Raison-Peyron N, Mowitz M, Bonardel N, Aerts O, Bruze M. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by isobornyl acrylate in OmniPod, an innovative tubeless insulin pump. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;79(2):76-80.
Herman A, Baeck M, de Montjoye L, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by isobornyl acrylate in the Enlite glucose sensor and the Paradigm MiniMed Quick-set insulin infusion set. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81(6):432-437.
Hyry HSI, Liippo JP, Virtanen HM. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors in type 1 diabetes patients. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81(3):161-166.
Mowitz M, Herman A, Baeck M, et al. N,N-dimethylacrylamide-a new sensitizer in the FreeStyle Libre glucose sensor. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81(1):27-31.
Herman A, Darrigade A-S, de Montjoye L, Baeck M. Contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors in diabetic children. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;82(2):105-111.
Herman A, Mowitz M, Aerts O, et al. Unexpected positive patch test reactions to sesquiterpene lactones in patients sensitized to the glucose sensor FreeStyle Libre. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81(5):354-367.
Busschots AM, Meuleman V, Poesen N, Dooms-Goossens A. Contact allergy to components of glue in insulin pump infusion sets. Contact Dermatitis. 1995;33(3):205-206.
Jolanki R, Kanerva L, Estlander T, Henriks-Eckerman ML, Suhonen R. Allergic contact dermatitis from phenoxyethoxy ethylacrylates in optical fiber coating, and glue in an insulin pump set. Contact Dermatitis. 2001;45(1):36-37.
Moffitt DL, Sansom JE. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from tetrahydrofurfuryl acrylate in a medical-device adhesive. Contact Dermatitis. 2001;45(1):54-55.
Fregert S. Manual of Contact Dermatitis. 2nd ed. Copenhagen: Munksgaard; 1981.
Johansen JD, Aalto-Korte K, Agner T, et al. European Society of Contact Dermatitis guideline for diagnostic patch testing - recommendations on best practice. Contact Dermatitis. 2015;73(4):195-221.
Svedman C, Tillman C, Gustavsson CG, Möller H, Frennby B, Bruze M. Contact allergy to gold in patients with gold-plated intracoronary stents. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;52(4):192-196.
Hosoki M, Nishigawa K, Tajima T, Ueda M, Matsuka Y. Cross-sectional observational study exploring clinical risk of titanium allergy caused by dental implants. J Prosthodont Res. 2018;62(4):426-431.
Aerts O, Herman A, Mowitz M, Bruze M, Goossens A. Isobornyl acrylate. Dermatitis. 2020;31(1):4-12. https://doi.org/10.1097/DER.0000000000000549
Onusseit H, Wefringhaus R, Dreezen G, et al. Adhesives, 1. General. Ullmannʼs Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH Verlag; 2012:440-481.
Pyl J, Dendooven E, Van Eekelen I, et al. Prevalence and prevention of contact dermatitis caused by FreeStyle Libre: a monocentric experience. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(4):918-920.
Herman A, de Montjoye L, Baeck M. Adverse cutaneous reaction to diabetic glucose sensors and insulin pumps: irritation contact dermatitis or allergic contact dermatitis? Contact Dermatitis. 2020;83(1):25-30.
Vidal-Albareda C, Yelmo-Valverde R, Solórzano-Zepeda C, Rodríguez-Muñoz N, de-la-Hoz-Caballer B, González-de-Olano D. Prevalence of contact dermatitis to glucose sensors in pediatric population and the main allergens involved. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;83(1):47-49.
Bruze M. Thoughts on how to improve the quality of multicentre patch test studies. Contact Dermatitis. 2016;74(3):168-174.
Christoffers WA, Coenraads P-J, Schuttelaar M-LA. Two decades of occupational (meth)acrylate patch test results and focus on isobornyl acrylate. Contact Dermatitis. 2013;69(2):86-92.
Isaksson M, Lindberg M, Sundberg K, Hallander A, Bruze M. The development and course of patch-test reactions to 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate and ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;53(5):292-297.
Flyvholm M-A. Preservatives in registered chemical products. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;53(1):27-32.
Silva EA, Bosco MRM, Mozer E. Study of the frequency of allergens in cosmetics components in patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis. An Bras Dermatol. 2012;87(2):263-268.
Suzuki K, Matsunaga K, Sasaki K, Yagami A. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by tetrahydrofurfuryl acrylate in the adhesive of clip-on earrings. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;82(2):131-133.
Kieć-Świerczyńska M, Kręcisz B, Świerczyńska-Machura D, Zaremba J. An epidemic of occupational contact dermatitis from an acrylic glue. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;52(3):121-125.
Diepgen TL, Ofenloch RF, Bruze M, et al. Prevalence of contact allergy in the general population in different European regions. Br J Dermatol. 2016;174(2):319-329.
Christensen LP, Jakobsen HB, Paulsen E, Hodal L, Andersen KE. Airborne Compositae dermatitis: monoterpenes and no parthenolide are released from flowering Tanacetum parthenium (feverfew) plants. Arch Dermatol Res. 1999;291(7-8):425-431.
Foster NC, Beck RW, Miller KM, et al. State of type 1 diabetes management and outcomes from the T1D exchange in 2016-2018. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019;21(2):66-72.
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group. Effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in a clinical care environment: evidence from the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation continuous glucose monitoring (JDRF-CGM) trial. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(1):17-22.
Pickup JC, Freeman SC, Sutton AJ. Glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes during real time continuous glucose monitoring compared with self monitoring of blood glucose: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials using individual patient data. BMJ. 2011;343:d3805.
Leelarathna L, Wilmot EG. Flash forward: a review of flash glucose monitoring. Diabet Med. 2018;35(4):472-482.
Fokkert M, van Dijk P, Edens M, et al. Improved well-being and decreased disease burden after 1-year use of flash glucose monitoring (FLARE-NL4). BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2019;7(1):e000809.
Charleer S, de Block C, van Huffel L, et al. Quality of life and glucose control after 1 year of nationwide reimbursement of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults living with type 1 diabetes (FUTURE): a prospective observational real-world cohort study. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(2):389-397.
Christensen MO, Berg AK, Rytter K, et al. Skin problems due to treatment with technology are associated with increased disease burden among adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019;21(4):215-221.
Kamann S, Heinemann L, Oppel E. Usage of hydrocolloid-based plasters in patients who have developed allergic contact dermatitis to isobornyl acrylate while using continuous glucose monitoring systems. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2019;14(3):582-585.
Kamann S, Oppel E. Hydrocolloid blister plaster decreases allergic contact dermatitis caused by Freestyle Libre and isobornyl acrylate. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81(5):380-381.
UK MaHpRAi. Alert to users of FreeStyle Libre flash glucose monitoring system regarding skin reactions to sensor adhesive 2019. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/alert-to-users-of-freestyle-libre-flash-glucose-monitoring-system-regarding-skin-reactions-to-sensor-adhesive. Accessed January 6, 2020.
Kerre S, Strobbe T, Naessens T, Theunis M, Foubert K, Aerts O. Alkyl glucosides: newly identified allergens in foam wound dressings. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;79(3):191-193.
Foti C, Romita P, Rigano L, et al. Isobornyl acrylate: an impurity in alkyl glucosides. Cutan Ocul Toxicol. 2016;35(2):115-119.
Freckmann G, Buck S, Waldenmaier D, et al. Skin reaction report form: development and design of a standardized report form for skin reactions due to medical devices for diabetes management. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2020;1932296820911105. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932296820911105. Online ahead of print.

Auteurs

Josefin Ulriksdotter (J)

Department of Occupational and Environmental Dermatology, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
Department of Dermatology, Helsingborg Hospital, Helsingborg, Sweden.

Cecilia Svedman (C)

Department of Occupational and Environmental Dermatology, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.

Magnus Bruze (M)

Department of Occupational and Environmental Dermatology, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.

Jenny Glimsjö (J)

Department of Medicine, Blekinge Hospital, Karlskrona, Sweden.

Kajsa Källberg (K)

Department of Occupational and Environmental Dermatology, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.

Thanisorn Sukakul (T)

Department of Occupational and Environmental Dermatology, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Martin Mowitz (M)

Department of Occupational and Environmental Dermatology, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH