Erin M Warshaw1, Jamie P Schlarbaum2, Jonathan I Silverberg3, Joel G DeKoven4, Anthony F Fransway5, James S Taylor6, Howard I Maibach7, Joseph F Fowler8, Amber R Atwater9, Margo J Reeder10, Kathryn A Zug11, Donald V Belsito12, Denis Sasseville13, Vincent A DeLeo14, Melanie D Pratt15. 1. Department of Dermatology, Park Nicollet Health Services, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Department of Dermatology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Department of Dermatology, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 2. Department of Dermatology, Park Nicollet Health Services, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Department of Dermatology, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota; University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Electronic address: schla255@umn.edu. 3. Department of Dermatology, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC. 4. Division of Dermatology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 5. Associates in Dermatology, Fort Myers, Florida. 6. Department of Dermatology, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio. 7. Department of Dermatology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California. 8. University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky. 9. Department of Dermatology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 10. Department of Dermatology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin. 11. Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire. 12. Department of Dermatology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York. 13. Division of Dermatology, Montreal General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 14. Department of Dermatology, Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California. 15. Division of Dermatology, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Personal care products (PCPs) are commonly responsible for allergic contact dermatitis and irritant contact dermatitis. PCP use was historically associated with females, but male-targeted PCPs are increasingly being marketed. OBJECTIVE: To characterize and compare males with PCP-related contact dermatitis (MPCPs) and females with PCP-related contact dermatitis (FPCPs). METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data (1996-2016). RESULTS: Four thousand six hundred eighty of 16,233 men (28.8%) and 12,730 of 32,222 (39.5%) women had a PCP identified as a source of irritant contact dermatitis or a positive patch test reaction. The proportion of PCP-related dermatitis in both sexes significantly increased (>2.7-fold) over the decade of study. Compared with FPCPs, a larger proportion of MPCPs were older or had trunk or extremity dermatitis (P < .0001). MPCPs were twice as likely to have soaps as a source while FPCPs were twice as likely to have hair care products (P < .0001). The most common PCP-related North American Contact Dermatitis Group allergens for both sexes were methylisothiazolinone (MPCP 28.8% and FPCP 21.5%), fragrance mix I (MPCP 22.3% and FPCP 20.1%), balsam of Peru (MPCP 18.5% and FPCP 14.1%), quaternium-15 (MPCP 16.1% and FPCP 12.3%), and paraphenylenediamine (MPCP 11.5% and FPCP 11.1%). LIMITATIONS: Patient population referred for suspected contact dermatitis. CONCLUSIONS: PCP-related dermatitis is increasing. Sites of involvement and relevant PCP sources are distinct between sexes. Male and female variation in exposure history may explain differences in reactivity to some allergen groups. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: Personal care products (PCPs) are commonly responsible for allergic contact dermatitis and irritant contact dermatitis. PCP use was historically associated with females, but male-targeted PCPs are increasingly being marketed. OBJECTIVE: To characterize and compare males with PCP-related contact dermatitis (MPCPs) and females with PCP-related contact dermatitis (FPCPs). METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data (1996-2016). RESULTS: Four thousand six hundred eighty of 16,233 men (28.8%) and 12,730 of 32,222 (39.5%) women had a PCP identified as a source of irritant contact dermatitis or a positive patch test reaction. The proportion of PCP-related dermatitis in both sexes significantly increased (>2.7-fold) over the decade of study. Compared with FPCPs, a larger proportion of MPCPs were older or had trunk or extremity dermatitis (P < .0001). MPCPs were twice as likely to have soaps as a source while FPCPs were twice as likely to have hair care products (P < .0001). The most common PCP-related North American Contact Dermatitis Group allergens for both sexes were methylisothiazolinone (MPCP 28.8% and FPCP 21.5%), fragrance mix I (MPCP 22.3% and FPCP 20.1%), balsam of Peru (MPCP 18.5% and FPCP 14.1%), quaternium-15 (MPCP 16.1% and FPCP 12.3%), and paraphenylenediamine (MPCP 11.5% and FPCP 11.1%). LIMITATIONS: Patient population referred for suspected contact dermatitis. CONCLUSIONS: PCP-related dermatitis is increasing. Sites of involvement and relevant PCP sources are distinct between sexes. Male and female variation in exposure history may explain differences in reactivity to some allergen groups. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Entities:
Keywords:
allergic contact dermatitis; irritant contact dermatitis; methylisothiazolinone; patch testing; personal care products; sex; soaps