Cargando…

Clinical relevance of positive patch test reactions to lanolin: A ROAT study

BACKGROUND: Lanolin is often included when patch testing for common contact allergens. The clinical relevance of a positive patch test reaction to lanolin markers is, however, still a subject for debate. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate Amerchol L101 as a marker of lanolin allergy and investigate the clinica...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Uldahl, Ada, Engfeldt, Malin, Svedman, Cecilia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7756495/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32844454
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cod.13689
_version_ 1783626554753941504
author Uldahl, Ada
Engfeldt, Malin
Svedman, Cecilia
author_facet Uldahl, Ada
Engfeldt, Malin
Svedman, Cecilia
author_sort Uldahl, Ada
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Lanolin is often included when patch testing for common contact allergens. The clinical relevance of a positive patch test reaction to lanolin markers is, however, still a subject for debate. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate Amerchol L101 as a marker of lanolin allergy and investigate the clinical impact of lanolin‐containing moisturizers on healthy and damaged skin using the repeated open application test (ROAT). METHODS: Twelve test subjects and 14 controls were patch tested with Amerchol L 101 and additional lanolin markers. Subsequently, a blinded ROAT was performed on the arms of the study participants for 4 weeks. Each participant applied a lanolin‐free cream base and two different lanolin‐containing test creams twice daily on one arm with intact skin and on the other arm with irritant dermatitis, induced by sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS). RESULTS: Eleven test subjects (92%) had positive patch test reactions to Amerchol L 101 when retested and one test subject (8%) had a doubtful reaction. None of the study participants had any skin reactions to the ROAT on intact skin and all participants healed during the ROAT on damaged skin. CONCLUSIONS: Lanolin‐containing emollients do not cause or worsen existing dermatitis when performing ROAT in volunteers patch test positive to Amerchol L101.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7756495
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77564952020-12-28 Clinical relevance of positive patch test reactions to lanolin: A ROAT study Uldahl, Ada Engfeldt, Malin Svedman, Cecilia Contact Dermatitis Original Articles BACKGROUND: Lanolin is often included when patch testing for common contact allergens. The clinical relevance of a positive patch test reaction to lanolin markers is, however, still a subject for debate. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate Amerchol L101 as a marker of lanolin allergy and investigate the clinical impact of lanolin‐containing moisturizers on healthy and damaged skin using the repeated open application test (ROAT). METHODS: Twelve test subjects and 14 controls were patch tested with Amerchol L 101 and additional lanolin markers. Subsequently, a blinded ROAT was performed on the arms of the study participants for 4 weeks. Each participant applied a lanolin‐free cream base and two different lanolin‐containing test creams twice daily on one arm with intact skin and on the other arm with irritant dermatitis, induced by sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS). RESULTS: Eleven test subjects (92%) had positive patch test reactions to Amerchol L 101 when retested and one test subject (8%) had a doubtful reaction. None of the study participants had any skin reactions to the ROAT on intact skin and all participants healed during the ROAT on damaged skin. CONCLUSIONS: Lanolin‐containing emollients do not cause or worsen existing dermatitis when performing ROAT in volunteers patch test positive to Amerchol L101. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2020-10-05 2021-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7756495/ /pubmed/32844454 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cod.13689 Text en © 2020 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-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Uldahl, Ada
Engfeldt, Malin
Svedman, Cecilia
Clinical relevance of positive patch test reactions to lanolin: A ROAT study
title Clinical relevance of positive patch test reactions to lanolin: A ROAT study
title_full Clinical relevance of positive patch test reactions to lanolin: A ROAT study
title_fullStr Clinical relevance of positive patch test reactions to lanolin: A ROAT study
title_full_unstemmed Clinical relevance of positive patch test reactions to lanolin: A ROAT study
title_short Clinical relevance of positive patch test reactions to lanolin: A ROAT study
title_sort clinical relevance of positive patch test reactions to lanolin: a roat study
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7756495/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32844454
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cod.13689
work_keys_str_mv AT uldahlada clinicalrelevanceofpositivepatchtestreactionstolanolinaroatstudy
AT engfeldtmalin clinicalrelevanceofpositivepatchtestreactionstolanolinaroatstudy
AT svedmancecilia clinicalrelevanceofpositivepatchtestreactionstolanolinaroatstudy