2017Contact DermatitisRequires access

Photoaggravated allergic contact dermatitis and transient photosensitivity caused by methylisothiazolinone

Olivier Aerts, An Goossens, M.C. Marguery, Michel Castelain, Lucile Boursault, F. Giordano‐Labadie, Julien Lambert, B. Milpied

Open publisher page 34 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Photoaggravated allergic contact dermatitis caused by methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI)/methylisothiazolinone (MI) and MI has been reported. OBJECTIVES: To describe the clinical characteristics and results of (photo)patch tests and photo-tests of 10 patients in Belgium and France suffering from photoaggravated contact dermatitis caused by MI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five men and five women, with a median age of 49.5 years, were investigated between January 2012 and February 2017 because of suspected photoaggravated contact dermatitis. Patch tests, photopatch tests and/or photo-tests were performed. RESULTS: Seven patients had positive patch test reactions to both MCI/MI and MI, whereas 3 patients had positive patch test reactions only to MI. In most cases, MI was the (strong) primary sensitizer. Photopatch tests with MCI/MI and/or MI gave stronger reactions than patch tests with these derivatives, indicating photoaggravation. Sensitization probably took place from cosmetics and work-related biocides, whereas elicitation of dermatitis was remarkably often related to airborne exposure to MI present in paints or industrial biocides. Four patients suffered from transient photosensitivity. CONCLUSION: Photoaggravated allergic contact dermatitis and transient photosensitivity caused by MI is a peculiar clinical presentation of allergic contact dermatitis caused by this preservative, and should be considered in daily clinical practice.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND: Photoaggravated allergic contact dermatitis caused by methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI)/methylisothiazolinone (MI) and MI has been reported. OBJECTIVES: To describe the clinical characteristics and results of (photo)patch tests and photo-tests of 10 patients in Belgium and France suffering from photoaggravated contact dermatitis caused by MI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five men and five women, with a median age of 49.5 years, were investigated between January 2012 and February 2017 because of suspected photoaggravated contact dermatitis. Patch tests, photopatch tests and/or photo-tests were performed. RESULTS: Seven patients had positive patch test reactions to both MCI/MI and MI, whereas 3 patients had positive patch test reactions only to MI. In most cases, MI was the (strong) primary sensitizer. Photopatch tests with MCI/MI and/or MI gave stronger reactions than patch tests with these derivatives, indicating photoaggravation. Sensitization probably took place from cosmetics and work-related biocides, whereas elicitation of dermatitis was remarkably often related to airborne exposure to MI present in paints or industrial biocides. Four patients suffered from transient photosensitivity. CONCLUSION: Photoaggravated allergic contact dermatitis and transient photosensitivity caused by MI is a peculiar clinical presentation of allergic contact dermatitis caused by this preservative, and should be considered in daily clinical practice.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 34 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND: Photoaggravated allergic contact dermatitis caused by methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI)/methylisothiazolinone (MI) and MI has been reported. OBJECTIVES: To describe the clinical characteristics and results of (photo)patch tests and photo-tests of 10 patients in Belgium and France suffering from photoaggravated contact dermatitis caused by MI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five men and five women, with a median age of 49.5 years, were investigated between January 2012 and February 2017 because of suspected photoaggravated contact dermatitis. Patch tests, photopatch tests and/or photo-tests were performed. RESULTS: Seven patients had positive patch test reactions to both MCI/MI and MI, whereas 3 patients had positive patch test reactions only to MI. In most cases, MI was the (strong) primary sensitizer. Photopatch tests with MCI/MI and/or MI gave stronger reactions than patch tests with these derivatives, indicating photoaggravation. Sensitization probably took place from cosmetics and work-related biocides, whereas elicitation of dermatitis was remarkably often related to airborne exposure to MI present in paints or industrial biocides. Four patients suffered from transient photosensitivity. CONCLUSION: Photoaggravated allergic contact dermatitis and transient photosensitivity caused by MI is a peculiar clinical presentation of allergic contact dermatitis caused by this preservative, and should be considered in daily clinical practice.

Key concepts: Dermatology, Allergic contact dermatitis, Medicine, Contact dermatitis, Patch test, Photosensitivity, Allergy, Patch testing

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Photoaggravated allergic contact dermatitis and transient photosensitivity caused by methylisothiazolinone — Research Paper | ScholarLens