2-Cyanoethyl dimethyldithiocarbamate, a new contact allergen found in accelerator-free nitrile gloves.
2‐cyanoethyl dimethyldithiocarbamate
CAS no. 10264‐38‐7
allergic contact dermatitis
chemical analysis
gloves
rubber additive
rubber chemicals
vulcanization
Journal
Contact dermatitis
ISSN: 1600-0536
Titre abrégé: Contact Dermatitis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7604950
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Apr 2024
11 Apr 2024
Historique:
revised:
12
03
2024
received:
16
01
2024
accepted:
19
03
2024
medline:
11
4
2024
pubmed:
11
4
2024
entrez:
11
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from rubber glove usage is usually caused by rubber additives such as the accelerators. However, in analyses of the suspected gloves, ordinary rubber allergens are not always found. Accelerator-free rubber gloves are available, but some patients with accelerator allergy do not tolerate them and might also be patch test positive to them. To identify and chemically characterize a new allergen, 2-cyanoethyl dimethyldithiocarbamate (CEDMC), in rubber gloves. We describe two patient cases: patient 1 that led us to the identification of CEDMC and patient 2 with occupational ACD caused by CEDMC. The patients were examined with patch testing including baseline and rubber series, and their own rubber gloves. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) was used for chemical analysis of rubber gloves. The allergen was synthesized and identified by nuclear magnetic resonance, mass spectrometry and infrared spectrometry, and tested on patient 2. CEDMC was identified by HPLC in a nitrile glove associated with hand eczema in patient 1. Patient 2 whose nitrile gloves contained CEDMC was patch test positive to CEDMC. CEDMC is a new contact allergen in nitrile gloves and probably forms during vulcanization from residual monomer acrylonitrile and rubber additives.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from rubber glove usage is usually caused by rubber additives such as the accelerators. However, in analyses of the suspected gloves, ordinary rubber allergens are not always found. Accelerator-free rubber gloves are available, but some patients with accelerator allergy do not tolerate them and might also be patch test positive to them.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
To identify and chemically characterize a new allergen, 2-cyanoethyl dimethyldithiocarbamate (CEDMC), in rubber gloves. We describe two patient cases: patient 1 that led us to the identification of CEDMC and patient 2 with occupational ACD caused by CEDMC.
METHODS
METHODS
The patients were examined with patch testing including baseline and rubber series, and their own rubber gloves. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) was used for chemical analysis of rubber gloves. The allergen was synthesized and identified by nuclear magnetic resonance, mass spectrometry and infrared spectrometry, and tested on patient 2.
RESULTS
RESULTS
CEDMC was identified by HPLC in a nitrile glove associated with hand eczema in patient 1. Patient 2 whose nitrile gloves contained CEDMC was patch test positive to CEDMC.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
CEDMC is a new contact allergen in nitrile gloves and probably forms during vulcanization from residual monomer acrylonitrile and rubber additives.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : AFA Insurance
Organisme : Alfred Österlunds Stiftelse
Organisme : Edvard Welanders Stiftelse
Organisme : Research Council Formas
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Bergendorff O, Persson C, Ludtke A, Hansson C. Chemical changes in rubber allergens during vulcanization. Contact Dermatitis. 2007;57(3):152‐157. doi:10.1111/j.1600‐0536.2007.01194.x
Aalto‐Korte K. Contact allergy to protective gloves. In: Johansen JD, Mahler V, Lepoittevin J‐P, Frosch PJ, eds. Contact Dermatitis. Springer International Publishing; 2021:1057‐1065.
Hamnerius N, Svedman C, Bergendorff O, et al. Hand eczema and occupational contact allergies in healthcare workers with a focus on rubber additives. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;79(3):149‐156. doi:10.1111/cod.13042
Aalto‐Korte K, Koskela K, Pesonen M. Allergic contact dermatitis and other occupational skin diseases in health care workers in the Finnish register of occupational diseases in 2005‐2016. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;84(4):217‐223. doi:10.1111/cod.13753
Uter W, Werfel T, White IR, Johansen JD. Contact allergy: a review of current problems from a clinical perspective. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(6):1108. doi:10.3390/ijerph15061108
Uter W, Warburton K, Weisshaar E, et al. Patch test results with rubber series in the European surveillance system on contact allergies (ESSCA), 2013/14. Contact Dermatitis. 2016;75(6):345‐352. doi:10.1111/cod.12651
Aalto‐Korte K, Pesonen M. Patterns of simultaneous patch test reactions to thiurams and dithiocarbamates in 164 patients. Contact Dermatitis. 2016;75(6):353‐357. doi:10.1111/cod.12687
Hansson C, Ponten A, Svedman C, Bergendorff O. Reaction profile in patch testing with allergens formed during vulcanization of rubber. Contact Dermatitis. 2014;70(5):300‐308. doi:10.1111/cod.12168
Brans R, Werner S, Obermeyer L, Hansen A, Altenburg C, Nienhaus A. Allergic contact dermatitis to accelerators in rubber gloves marketed as accelerator‐free. Contact Dermatitis. 2023;89(1):65‐68. doi:10.1111/cod.14321
Bergendorff O, Persson C, Hansson C. High‐performance liquid chromatography analysis of rubber allergens in protective gloves used in health care. Contact Dermatitis. 2006;55(4):210‐215. doi:10.1111/j.1600‐0536.2006.00912.x
Hulstaert E, Bergendorff O, Persson C, et al. Contact dermatitis caused by a new rubber compound detected in canvas shoes. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78(1):12‐17. doi:10.1111/cod.12886
Azizi N, Aryanasab F, Torkiyan L, Ziyaei A, Saidi MR. One‐pot synthesis of dithiocarbamates accelerated in water. J Org Chem. 2006;71(9):3634‐3635. doi:10.1021/jo060048g
Hamnerius N, Mowitz M. Intense skin reaction to a new glucose monitoring and insulin pump system. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;83(6):524‐527. doi:10.1111/cod.13663
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. doi:10.1111/cod.12432
Fregert S. Manual of Contact Dermatitis. 2nd ed. Munksgaard; 1981:76.
Koch HP. Absorption spectra and structure of organic sulphur compounds. Part III. Vulcanisation accelerators and related compounds. J Chem Soc (Resumed). 1949;401‐408. doi:10.1039/JR9490000401
Brahemi G, Kona FR, Fiasella A, et al. Exploring the structural requirements for inhibition of the ubiquitin E3 ligase breast cancer associated protein 2 (BCA2) as a treatment for breast cancer. J Med Chem. 2010;53(7):2757‐2765. doi:10.1021/jm901757t
Pontes RM, Basso EA, dos Santos FP. Medium effect on the rotational barrier of carbamates and its sulfur congeners. J Org Chem. 2007;72(6):1901‐1911. doi:10.1021/jo061934u
Richards JL, Tarbell DS, Hoffmeister EH. Hindered rotation in dithiocarbamoyl compounds by NMR measurements. Alkylation of sulfur compounds by trialkyloxonium ions. Tetrahedron. 1968;24(22):6485‐6493. doi:10.1016/s0040‐4020(01)96860
Jefferson A, Smith RWB, Willoughby B. Mass‐spectral characterization of some derivatives of tetramethylthiuram disulfide – a contribution to the chemistry of process and quality‐control. Chem Ind. 1986;7:244‐245.
Zhang Z, Shi L, Deng W, Jiang D, Lan Y. Synthesis of N,N‐diethyldithiocarbamate nitrile ethyl and the chelating behaviors with metal ions. J Chem. 2015;2015:252967. doi:10.1155/2015/252967
Tarvainen K, Estlander T, Pfäffli P, Suuronen K. Plastic composites. In: Rustemeyer T, Elsner P, John SM, Maibach HI, eds. Kanerva's Occupational Dermatology. Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2012:621‐634.
Aerts O, Mortelmans D, Bracke A, Romaen E, Dendooven E. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from acrylonitrile, a highly toxic industrial chemical. Contact Dermatitis. 2023;88(6):493‐494. doi:10.1111/cod.14305
Bakker JG, Jongen SM, Van Neer FC, Neis JM. Occupational contact dermatitis due to acrylonitrile. Contact Dermatitis. 1991;24(1):50‐53. doi:10.1111/j.1600‐0536.1991.tb01630.x
Chu CY, Sun CC. Allergic contact dermatitis from acrylonitrile. Am J Contact Dermat. 2001;12(2):113‐114. doi:10.1053/ajcd.2001.24160
Fregert S. Batch‐consciousness in dermatologic management. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh). 1979;59:63‐65.
Crepy MN, Lecuen J, Ratour‐Bigot C, Stocks J, Bensefa‐Colas L. Accelerator‐free gloves as alternatives in cases of glove allergy in healthcare workers. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78(1):28‐32. doi:10.1111/cod.12860
European Standard. EN 455‐3, Medical Gloves for Single Use‐Part 3: Requirements and Testing for Biological Evaluation. Comité Européen de Normalisation; 2015.
Schuttelaar ML, Meijer JM, Engfeldt M, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by dimethylthiocarbamylbenzothiazole sulfide (DMTBS) in canvas shoes: in search of the culprit allergen. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78(1):7‐11. doi:10.1111/cod.12857
Isaksson M, Bergendorff O, Hamnerius N, et al. Active sensitization to dimethylthiocarbamylbenzothiazol sulphide: an unexpectedly strong rubber contact allergen. Contact Dermatitis. 2023;88(6):472‐479. doi:10.1111/cod.14311
Siegel PD, Fowler JF Jr, Storrs FJ, et al. Allergen content of patient problem and nonproblem gloves: relationship to allergen‐specific patch‐test findings. Dermatitis. 2010;21(2):77‐83. doi:10.2310/6620.2010.09088
Raison‐Peyron N, Bergendorff O, Bourrain JL, Bruze M. Acetophenone azine: a new allergen responsible for severe contact dermatitis from shin pads. Contact Dermatitis. 2016;75(2):106‐110. doi:10.1111/cod.12579
Raison‐Peyron N, Bergendorff O, Du‐Thanh A, Bourrain JL, Bruze M. Two new cases of severe allergic contact dermatitis caused by acetophenone azine. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;76(6):380‐381. doi:10.1111/cod.12777
De Fre C, Bergendorff O, Raison‐Peyron N, et al. Acetophenone azine: a new shoe allergen causing severe foot dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;77(6):416‐417. doi:10.1111/cod.12843
Warburton KL, Uter W, Geier J, et al. Patch testing with rubber series in Europe: a critical review and recommendation. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;76(4):195‐203. doi:10.1111/cod.12736
Aalto‐Korte K, Pesonen M. The additive value of patch testing non‐commercial test substances and patients' own products in a clinic of occupational dermatology. Contact Dermatitis. 2023;88(1):27‐34. doi:10.1111/cod.14191
Schubert S, Geier J, Skudlik C, et al. Relevance of contact sensitizations in occupational dermatitis patients with special focus on patch testing of workplace materials. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;83(6):475‐486. doi:10.1111/cod.13688