Skin Models pp 140-146 | Cite as

Experimental Contact Dermatitis Using 2,4-Dinitrochlorobenzene in Humans

  • J. A. A. Hunter
  • M. M. Carr
  • P. A. Botham
  • D. J. Gawkrodger
  • E. McVittie
  • J. A. Ross
  • I. C. Stewart
Conference paper


Contact dermatitis, due to both allergenic (sensitising) and irritant (non-sensitising) agents is a major clinical problem in industry and the home. Although its prevalence in a population depends on the nature of employment and industry, and environmental factors, it has been shown that one type of contact dermatitis alone, hand eczema, affects 2% of men and 3% of women [1]. Industrial dermatitis in fact accounts for about 65% of all spells of absence from work in the United Kingdom recorded under prescribed diseases [9].


Toxicity Mercury Rubber explOSives Ferritin 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Agrup G (1969) Hand eczema and other hand dermatoses in Sweden. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 49: 1–91Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ames BN, McCann J, Yamasaki E (1975) Methods for detecting carcinogens and mutagens with the Salmonella/mammalian-microsome mutagenicity test. Mutation Res 31: 347–374PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ashby J (1983) The unique role of rodents in the detection of possible human carcinogens and mutagens. Mutation Res 115: 177–213PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buckner D, Price NM (1978) Immunotherapy of verrucae vulgares with dinitrochlorobenzene. Br. J Dermatol 98: 451–454Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carr MM, Botham PH, Gawkrodger DJ, McVittie E, Ross JA, Stewart IC, Hunter JAA (1984) Early cellular reactions induced by dinitrochlorobenzene in sensitised human skin. Br J Dermatol 110: 631–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Catalona WB, Taylor P, Rabson A, Chretien P (1972) A method for dinitrochlorobenzene contact sensitization. A clinico-pathological study. New Engl J Med 286: 399Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eriksen K (1978) Cross allergy between paranitro compounds with special reference to DNCB and chloramphenicol. Contact Dermatitis 4: 29–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Happle R, Cebulla K, Echternacht-Happle K (1978) Dinitrochlorobenzene therapy for alopecia areata. Arch Dermatol 114: 1629–1631PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Office of Health Economics (1973) Skin Disorders O.H. E. Publication No 46: 10Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Polak L (1980) Monographs in Allergy, vol 15. Immunological Aspects of Contact Sensitivity. KargerGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Silberberg I (1973) Apposition of mononuclear cells to Langerhans cells in contact allergic reactions. An ultrastructural study. Acta Derm Venerol (Stockh) 53: 1–12Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Silberberg-Sinakin I, Thorbecke GJ (1980) Contact hypersensitivity and Langerhans cells. Acta Derm Venerol (Stockh) 75: 61–67Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Strauss GH, Bridges BA, Greaves M, Hall-Smith P, Price M, Vella-Briffa D (1980) Inhibition of delayed hypersensitivity reaction in skin (DNCB) test by 8-methoxypsoralen photochemotherapy. Lancet ii: 556Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Weisburger EK, Russfield AB, Hamburger F, Weisburger JH, Boger E, Van Dougen CG, Chu KC (1978) Testing of twenty-one environmental aromatic amines or derivatives for long-term toxicity or carcinogenicity. J Environ Path Tox 2: 325–356Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wolff K, Stingl G (1983) The Langerhans cell. J Invest Dermatol 80:17S–21S (Suppl)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. A. A. Hunter
  • M. M. Carr
  • P. A. Botham
  • D. J. Gawkrodger
  • E. McVittie
  • J. A. Ross
  • I. C. Stewart

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations