Suitable test concentration of cobalt and concomitant reactivity to nickel and chromium: A multicentre study from the Swedish Contact Dermatitis Research Group.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Allergens
/ administration & dosage
Child
Cobalt
/ administration & dosage
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact
/ diagnosis
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Nickel
/ administration & dosage
Patch Tests
/ methods
Potassium Dichromate
/ administration & dosage
Sweden
Young Adult
allergic contact dermatitis
chromium allergy
cobalt allergy
contact sensitization
delayed hypersensitivity
nickel allergy
patch testing
Journal
Contact dermatitis
ISSN: 1600-0536
Titre abrégé: Contact Dermatitis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7604950
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2021
Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
26
06
2020
revised:
17
09
2020
accepted:
27
09
2020
pubmed:
1
10
2020
medline:
27
10
2021
entrez:
30
9
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In Sweden, cobalt chloride 0.5% has been included in the baseline series since the mid-1980s. A recent study from Stockholm showed that cobalt chloride 1% petrolatum (pet.) was more suitable than 0.5%. Cobalt chloride at 1.0% has been patch tested for decades in many European countries and around the world. To study the suitability of patch testing to cobalt 1.0% vs 0.5% and to analyze the co-occurrence of allergy to cobalt, chromium, and nickel. Contact allergy to cobalt was shown in 90 patients (6.6%). Eighty (5.9%) patients tested positive to cobalt 1.0%. Thirty-seven of the 90 patients (41.1%) with cobalt allergy were missed by cobalt 0.5% and 10 (0.7%) were missed by cobalt 1.0% (P < .001). No case of patch test sensitization was reported. Allergy to chromium was seen in 2.6% and allergy to nickel in 13.3%. Solitary allergy to cobalt without nickel allergy was shown in 61.1% of cobalt-positive individuals. Female patients had larger proportions of positive reactions to cobalt (P = .036) and nickel (P < .001) than males. The results speak in favor of replacing cobalt chloride 0.5% with cobalt chloride 1.0% pet. in the Swedish baseline series, which will be done 2021.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In Sweden, cobalt chloride 0.5% has been included in the baseline series since the mid-1980s. A recent study from Stockholm showed that cobalt chloride 1% petrolatum (pet.) was more suitable than 0.5%. Cobalt chloride at 1.0% has been patch tested for decades in many European countries and around the world.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
To study the suitability of patch testing to cobalt 1.0% vs 0.5% and to analyze the co-occurrence of allergy to cobalt, chromium, and nickel.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Contact allergy to cobalt was shown in 90 patients (6.6%). Eighty (5.9%) patients tested positive to cobalt 1.0%. Thirty-seven of the 90 patients (41.1%) with cobalt allergy were missed by cobalt 0.5% and 10 (0.7%) were missed by cobalt 1.0% (P < .001). No case of patch test sensitization was reported. Allergy to chromium was seen in 2.6% and allergy to nickel in 13.3%. Solitary allergy to cobalt without nickel allergy was shown in 61.1% of cobalt-positive individuals. Female patients had larger proportions of positive reactions to cobalt (P = .036) and nickel (P < .001) than males.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The results speak in favor of replacing cobalt chloride 0.5% with cobalt chloride 1.0% pet. in the Swedish baseline series, which will be done 2021.
Substances chimiques
Allergens
0
Cobalt
3G0H8C9362
nickel sulfate
4FLT4T3WUN
Nickel
7OV03QG267
cobaltous chloride
EVS87XF13W
Potassium Dichromate
T4423S18FM
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
153-158Informations de copyright
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Lidén C, Andersson N, Julander A, Matura M. Cobalt allergy: suitable test concentration, and concomitant reactivity to nickel and chromium. Contact Dermatitis. 2016;74(6):360-367.
Alinaghi F, Zachariae C, Thyssen JP, Johansen JD. Causative exposures and temporal development of cobalt allergy in Denmark between 2002 and 2017. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81(4):242-248.
Uter W, Gefeller O, Geier J, Schnuch A. Contact sensitization to cobalt-multifactorial analysis of risk factors based on long-term data of the information network of departments of dermatology. Contact Dermatitis. 2014;71(6):326-337.
Warshaw EM, Aschenbeck KA, DeKoven JG, et al. Piercing and metal sensitivity: extended analysis of the North American Contact Derma- titis Group data, 2007-2014. Dermatitis. 2017;28(6):333-341.
Fischer T, Rystedt I. False-positive, follicular and irritant patch test reactions to metal salts. Contact Dermatitis. 1985;12(2):93-98.
Bruze M, Isaksson M, Gruvberger B, Frick-Engfeldt M. Recommendation of appropriate amounts of petrolatum preparation to be applied at patch testing. Contact Dermatitis. 2007;56(5):281-285.
Fregert S. Manual of Contact Dermatitis. 2nd ed. Copenhagen, Denmark: 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.
Micallef L, Rodgers P. eulerAPE: drawing area-proportional 3-Venn diagrams using ellipses. PLos One. 2014;9(7):e101717
Lagrelius M, Wahlgren CF, Matura M, Kull I, Lidén C. High prevalence of contact allergy in adolescence: results from the population-based BAMSE birth cohort. Contact Dermatitis. 2016;74(1):44-51.
Hegewald J, Uter W, Pfahlberg A, Geier J, Schnuch A, IVDK. A multifactorial analysis of concurrent patch-test reactions to nickel, cobalt, and chromate. Allergy. 2005;60(3):372-378.
Svedman C, Isaksson M, Björk J, Mowitz M, Bruze M. Calibration' of our patch test reading technique is necessary. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;66(4):180-187.
Bruze M. Thoughts on how to improve the quality of multicentre patch test studies. Contact Dermatitis. 2016;74(3):168-174.
Thyssen JP, Ahlström MG, Bruze M, Rustemeyer T, Lidén C. Contact allergy to metals. In: Johansen JD, Mahler V, Lepoittevin J-P, Frosch P, eds. Contact Dermatitis. 6th ed. Berlin, Germany: Springer Cham; 2020.
Hamann C, Hamann D, Hamann KK, Thyssen JP. Cobalt release from inexpensive earrings from Thailand and China. Contact Dermatitis. 2011;64(4):238-240.
Thyssen JP, Jellesen MS, Menné T, et al. Cobalt release from inexpensive jewellery: has the use of cobalt replaced nickel following regulatory intervention? Contact Dermatitis. 2010;63(2):70-76.
Boonchai W, Maneeprasopchoke P, Suiwongsa B, Kasemsarn P. Assessment of nickel and cobalt release from jewelry from a non- nickel directive country. Dermatitis. 2015;26(1):44-48.
Uter W, Schmid M, Schmidt O, Bock C, Wolter J. Cobalt release from earrings and piercing jewellery-analytical results of a German survey. Contact Dermatitis. 2014;70(6):369-375.