TRUE Test System

  • Jean-Marie Lachapelle
  • Howard I. Maibach
Chapter

Abstract

Conventional patch testing technology has been fully described in Chap. 3. The method is extensively used by the dermatological community throughout the world. A potential drawback is that allergens are not always evenly dispersed in petrolatum. This is illustrated by histological examination of different samples; indeed, allergen crystals of different size can be visualized. Nevertheless, the situation has improved considerably, in relation with the use of more performant machinery in the manufacture of allergens. On the other hand, the dosage of allergens may vary in different areas, as the allergens are manually dispensed. TRUE Test represents an alternative way of patch testing, which intends to avoid variations of the allergens applied on the skin.

Keywords

Patch Testing Transepidermal Water Loss Specific Allergen Gold Sodium Hydroxypropyl Cellulose 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Van Neste D, Martin P, Lachapelle JM (1980) Comparative study of the density of particles in suspensions for patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 6:197–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lachapelle J-M (2010) Etude microscopique comparative entre les allergènes dispersés dans la vaseline (tests conventionnels d’aujourd’hui) et le TRUE Test®. In: Progrès en Dermato-Allergologie, Strasbourg 2010. John Libbey Eurotext, Montrouge (France), pp 257–265Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fischer T, Maibach HI (1985) The thin layer rapid use epicutaneous test (TRUE-Test), a new patch test method with high accuracy. Br J Dermatol 112:63–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fischer T, Maibach HI (1989) Easier patch testing with TRUE Test. J Am Acad Dermatol 20:447–453PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fischer T, Hansen J, Kreilgärd B, Maibach HI (2001) The science of patch test standardization. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am 9:417–434Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fischer T, Kreilgärd B, Maibach HI (2001) The True value of the True Test for allergic contact dermatitis. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 1:316–322PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Andersen KE (2002) The interest of the True Test in patch testing. Ann Dermatol Venereol 129:1S148Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lachapelle JM, Bruynzeel DP, Ducombs G, Hannuksela M, Ring J, White IR, Wilkinson JD, Fischer T, Bilberg K (1988) European multicenter study of the True Test®. Contact Dermatitis 19:91–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wilkinson JD, Bruynzeel DP, Ducombs G, Frosch PJ, Gunnarsson Y, Hannuksela M, Lachapelle JM, Ring J, Shaw S, White IR (1990) European multicenter study of True Test®, Panel 2. Contact Dermatitis 22:218–225PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goh CL (1992) Comparative study of TRUE Test and Finn Chamber patch test techniques in Singapore. Contact Dermatitis 27:84–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ale SI, Maibach HI (2004) Reproducibility of patch test results: a concurrent right-versus-left study using TRUE Test. Contact Dermatitis 50:304–312PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jensen CD, Andersen KE (2005) Course of contact allergy in consecutive eczema patients patch tested with TRUE Test panels 1 and 2 at least twice over a 12-year period. Contact Dermatitis 52:242–246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lazarov A, David M, Abraham D, Trattner A (2007) Comparison of reactivity to allergens using the TRUE Test and IQ chamber system. Contact Dermatitis 56:140–145PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lerbaek A, Kyvik KO, Menné T, Agner T (2007) Retesting with the TRUE Test in a population – based twin cohort with hand eczema – allergies and persistence in a 8-year follow-up study. Contact Dermatitis 57:248–252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thyssen JP, Linneberg A, Menné T, Nielsen NH, Johansen JD (2009) Contact allergy to allergens of the TRUE Test (panels 1 and 2) has decreased modestly in the general population. Br J Dermatol 161:1124–1129PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nelson JL, Mowad CM (2010) Allergic contact dermatitis: patch testing beyond the TRUE Test. J Clin Aesth Dermatol 3:36–41Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mortz CG, Andersen KE (2010) Fragrance mix I patch test reactions in 5006 consecutive dermatitis patients tested simultaneously with TRUE Test® and Trolab® test material. Contact Dermatitis 63:248–253PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    de Groot AC, Blok J, Coenraads PJ (2010) Relationship between formaldehyde and ­quaternium-15 contact allergy. Influence of strength of patch test reactions. Contact Dermatitis 63:187–191PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Andersen KE, Paulsen E (2009) Concordance of patch test results with four new TRUE test allergens compared with the same allergens from chemotechnique. Contact Dermatitis 60:59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean-Marie Lachapelle
    • 1
  • Howard I. Maibach
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of DermatologyCatholic University of LouvainBrusselsBelgium
  2. 2.Department of Dermatology, School of MedicineUniversity of CaliforniaSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations