Cargando…

Diagnosing lanolin contact allergy with lanolin alcohol and Amerchol L101

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of lanolin contact allergy in dermatitis patients varies from 1.2% to 6.9%. Different lanolin derivatives are used in patch testing. OBJECTIVES: To determine which combination of lanolin derivatives is most effective in patch testing for the diagnosis of lanolin contact al...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Knijp, Jannet, Bruynzeel, Derk P., Rustemeyer, Thomas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6593808/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30624788
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cod.13210
_version_ 1783430129148493824
author Knijp, Jannet
Bruynzeel, Derk P.
Rustemeyer, Thomas
author_facet Knijp, Jannet
Bruynzeel, Derk P.
Rustemeyer, Thomas
author_sort Knijp, Jannet
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The prevalence of lanolin contact allergy in dermatitis patients varies from 1.2% to 6.9%. Different lanolin derivatives are used in patch testing. OBJECTIVES: To determine which combination of lanolin derivatives is most effective in patch testing for the diagnosis of lanolin contact allergy. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients patch tested between 2016 and 2017 was performed. Patients were eligible if they had been tested with lanolin alcohol 30% pet., Amerchol L101 50% pet., and a supplementary series containing other lanolin derivatives. Lanolin alcohol and Amerchol L101 were tested in duplicate. RESULTS: Of 594 patients, 28.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 25.1%‐32.3%) had a positive patch test reaction to at least one lanolin derivative. Reactions to lanolin alcohol (14.7%, 95%CI: 11.3%‐18.2%) and Amerchol L101 (15.0%, 95%CI: 11.5%‐18.5%) were common in the routinely tested series. Reactions to other test preparations were significantly less frequent (P < 0.05). The addition of Amerchol L101 to lanolin alcohol significantly increased the number of positive cases (odds ratio 1.79, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of lanolin alcohol and Amerchol L101 is effective in patch testing for the diagnosis of lanolin contact allergy. Routinely testing with other lanolin derivatives may not be worthwhile, as it detects only a few additional patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6593808
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65938082019-07-10 Diagnosing lanolin contact allergy with lanolin alcohol and Amerchol L101 Knijp, Jannet Bruynzeel, Derk P. Rustemeyer, Thomas Contact Dermatitis Original Articles BACKGROUND: The prevalence of lanolin contact allergy in dermatitis patients varies from 1.2% to 6.9%. Different lanolin derivatives are used in patch testing. OBJECTIVES: To determine which combination of lanolin derivatives is most effective in patch testing for the diagnosis of lanolin contact allergy. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients patch tested between 2016 and 2017 was performed. Patients were eligible if they had been tested with lanolin alcohol 30% pet., Amerchol L101 50% pet., and a supplementary series containing other lanolin derivatives. Lanolin alcohol and Amerchol L101 were tested in duplicate. RESULTS: Of 594 patients, 28.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 25.1%‐32.3%) had a positive patch test reaction to at least one lanolin derivative. Reactions to lanolin alcohol (14.7%, 95%CI: 11.3%‐18.2%) and Amerchol L101 (15.0%, 95%CI: 11.5%‐18.5%) were common in the routinely tested series. Reactions to other test preparations were significantly less frequent (P < 0.05). The addition of Amerchol L101 to lanolin alcohol significantly increased the number of positive cases (odds ratio 1.79, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of lanolin alcohol and Amerchol L101 is effective in patch testing for the diagnosis of lanolin contact allergy. Routinely testing with other lanolin derivatives may not be worthwhile, as it detects only a few additional patients. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2019-03-19 2019-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6593808/ /pubmed/30624788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cod.13210 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Knijp, Jannet
Bruynzeel, Derk P.
Rustemeyer, Thomas
Diagnosing lanolin contact allergy with lanolin alcohol and Amerchol L101
title Diagnosing lanolin contact allergy with lanolin alcohol and Amerchol L101
title_full Diagnosing lanolin contact allergy with lanolin alcohol and Amerchol L101
title_fullStr Diagnosing lanolin contact allergy with lanolin alcohol and Amerchol L101
title_full_unstemmed Diagnosing lanolin contact allergy with lanolin alcohol and Amerchol L101
title_short Diagnosing lanolin contact allergy with lanolin alcohol and Amerchol L101
title_sort diagnosing lanolin contact allergy with lanolin alcohol and amerchol l101
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6593808/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30624788
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cod.13210
work_keys_str_mv AT knijpjannet diagnosinglanolincontactallergywithlanolinalcoholandamercholl101
AT bruynzeelderkp diagnosinglanolincontactallergywithlanolinalcoholandamercholl101
AT rustemeyerthomas diagnosinglanolincontactallergywithlanolinalcoholandamercholl101