Skip to main content

Individual Predisposition to Contact Dermatitis

  • Chapter
Textbook of Contact Dermatitis
  • 156 Accesses

Abstract

Contact dermatitis is a consequence of environmental factors and a susceptible host. Although the individual propensity to develop both sensitization and irritation of the skin is well known to the dermatologist working with occupationally related problems, systematic studies in the field have been relatively sparse. Even under extreme exposure some individuals continue to remain unaffected whereas others develop either contact sensitization or irritation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Parker D, Sommer G, Turk JL (1975) Variation in guinea pig responsiveness. Cell Immunol 18: 233–238

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Menné T, Holm NV (1986) Genetic Susceptibility in human allergic contact sensitization. Semin Dermatol 5: 301–306

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sulzberger MB, Rostenberg A Jr (1939) Acquired specific hypersensitivity (allergy) to simple chemicals. J Immunol 36: 17–27

    Google Scholar 

  4. Landsteiner K, Rostenberg A Jr, Sulzberger MB (1939) Individual differences in susceptibility to eczematous sensitization with simple chemical substances. J Invest Dermatol 2: 25–29

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Moss C, Friedmann PS, Shuster S, Simpson JM (1985) Susceptibility and amplification of sensitivity in contact dermatitis. Clin Exp Immunol 61: 232–241

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Menné T, Holm NV (1983) Nickel allergy in a female twin population. Int J Dermatol 22: 22–28

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ansar Ahmed S, Penhale WJ, Talal N (1985) Sex hormones, immune responses, and autoimmune diseases. Am J Pathol 121: 531–551

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kalman B, Olsson O, Linto H, Kam-Hansen S (1989) Estradiol potentiates poke-weed mitogen-induced B cell stimulation in multiple scleroisis and healthy subjects. Acta Neurol Scand 79: 340–346

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Walker FB, Smith PD, Maibach HI (1967) Genetic factors in human allergic contact dermatitis. Int Arch Allergy 32: 453–462

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Sch0nning L, Hjorth N (1969) Sex difference in capacity for sensitization. Contact Dermatitis Newslett 5: 100

    Google Scholar 

  11. Leyden JJ, Kligman AM (1977) Allergic contact dermatitis. Sex differences. Contact Dermatitis 3: 333–336

    Google Scholar 

  12. Rees JL, Friedmann PS, Matthews JNS (1989) Sex difference in susceptibility to development of contact hypersensitivity to dinitrochlorobenzene ( DNCB ). Br J Dermatol 120: 371–374

    Google Scholar 

  13. Meding B (1990) Epidemiology of hand eczema in an industrial city. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 153

    Google Scholar 

  14. Christophersen J, Menné T, Tanghoj P, Andersen KE, Brandrup F, Kaaber K, Osmundsen PE, Thestrup-Pedersen K, Veien NK (1989) Clinical patch test data evaluated by multivariate analysis. Contact Dermatitis 5: 291–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Widström L, Erikssohn I (1989) Nickel allergy and ear piercing in young men. In: Frosch PJ, Dooms-Goosens A, Lachapelle JM, Rycroft RJ, Scheper RJ (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 188–190

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Rea TH (1979) Quantitative enhancement of dinitrochlorobenzene responsivity in women receiving oral contraceptives. Arch Dermatol 115: 361–362

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Alexanader S (1988) Patch testing and menstruation. Lancet ii: 751

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hjorth N (1981) Contact dermatitis in children. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 95: 36–39

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Veien NK, Hattel T, Justesen O, Nörholm A (1982) Contact dermatitis in children. Contact Dermatitis 8: 373–375

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Balato N, Lembo G, Patruno C, Ayala F (1989) Patch testing in children. In: Frosch PJ et al. (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 73–79

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Schwartz M (1953) Eczematous sensitization in various age groups. J Allergy 24: 143–148

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Lejman E, Stoudemayer T, Grove G, Kligman AM (1984) Age differences in poison ivy dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 11: 163–167

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Keczkes K, Basheer AM, Wyatt EH (1982) The persistence of allergic contact sensitivity: 10 year follow-up in 100 patients. Br J Dermatol 107: 461–464

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kligman AM (1966) The identification of contact allergens by human assay. II. Factors influencing the induction and measurements of allergic contact dermatitis. J Invest Dermatol 47: 375–392

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Andersen KE, Maibach HI (1979) Black and white human skin differences. J Am Acad Dermatol 1: 276–282

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Meneghini CL (1985) Sensitization in traumatized skin. Am J Ind Med 8: 319–321

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Magnusson B, Hersle K (1965) Patch test methods. II. Regional variations of patch test responses. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 45: 257–261

    Google Scholar 

  28. Maibach HI, Prystowsky SD (1977) Glutaraldehyde (pentanedial). Allergic contact dermatitis. Usage test on sole and antecubital fossa: regional variations in response. Arch Dermatol 113: 170–171

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Hanifin JM (1983) Clinical and basic aspects of atopic dermatitis. Semin Dermatol 2: 9–19

    Google Scholar 

  30. Clark RAF (1989) Cell-mediated and IgE-mediated immune responses in atopic dermatitis. Arch Dermatol 125: 413–416 (editorial)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Cronin E, Bandmann HJ, Calnan CD, Fregert S, Hjorth N, Magnusson B, Maibach HI, Malten K, Meneghini CL, Pirilä V, Wilkinson DS (1970) Contact dermatitis in the atopics. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 50: 1983–1987

    Google Scholar 

  32. Marghescu S (1985) Patch test reactions in atopic dermatitis. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 114: 113–116

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Blondeel A, Achten G, Dooms-Goossens A, Buekens P, Broeckx W, Oleffe J (1987) Atopic et allergie de contact. Ann Dermatol Venereol 114: 203–209

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. von Huber A, Fartasch M, Diepgen TL, Bäurle G, Hornstein OP (1987) Auftreten von Kontaktallergien beim atopischen Ekzem. Dermatosen 35: 119–123

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. de Groot AC (1990) The frequency of contact allergy in atopic patients with dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 22: 273–277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Uehara M, Sawai T (1989) A longitudinal study of contact sensitivity in patients with atopic dermatitis. Arch Dermatol 125: 366–368

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Möller H, Svensson A(1986) Metal sensitivity: positive history but negative test indicates atopy. Contact Dermatitis 14: 57–60

    Google Scholar 

  38. Diepgen TL, Fartasch M, Hornstein OP (1989) Evaluation and relevance of atopic basic and minor features in patients with atopic dermatitis and in the general population. Acta Denn Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 144: 50–54

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Ring J, Braun-Falco O (1991) Atopy and contact allergy. In: Ring J (ed) New trends in allergy. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  40. Dooms-Goossens A, Lasaffre E, Heidbuchel M, Dooms M, Degreef H (1988) UV sunlight and patch test reactions in humans. Contact Dermatitis 19: 36–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Björnberg A (1968) Skin reactions to primary irritants in patients with hand eczema. Thesis, Göteborg

    Google Scholar 

  42. Frosch P (1985) Hautirritation and empfindliche Haut. Grosse, Berlin (Grosse Scripta 7 )

    Google Scholar 

  43. Lammintausta K, Maibach HI (1988) Exogenous and endogenous factors in skin irritation. Int J Dermatol 27: 213–222

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Pinnagoda J, Tupker RA, Coenraads PJ, Nater JP (1989) Prediction of susceptibility to an irritant response by transepidermal water loss. Contact Dermatitis 20: 341–346

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Nilsson E, Bäck 0 (1986) The importance of anamnestic information of atopy, metal-dermatitis and earlier hand eczema for the development of hand dermatitis in woman in wet hospital work. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 66: 45–50

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Holst R, Möller H (1975) One hundred twin pairs patch tested with primary irritants. Br J Dermatol 93: 145–149

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Berardesca E, Maibach HI (1988) Racial differences in sodium lauryl sulphate induced cutaneous irritation: black and white. Contact Dermatitis 18: 65–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Rystedt I (1985) Hand eczema in patients with history of atopic manifestations in childhood. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 65: 305–313

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Rystedt I (1985) Factors influencing the occurrence of hand eczema in adults with a history of atopic dermatitis in childhood. Contact Dermatitis 12: 185–191

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Nilsson E, Mikaelsson B, Andersson S (1986) Atopy, occupation and domistic work as risk factors for hand eczema in hospital workers. Contact Dermatitis 13: 216–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Berardesca E, Fideli D, Borroni G, Rabbiosi G, Maibach M (1990) In vivo hydration and water-retention capacity of stratum corneum in clinically uninvolved skin in atopic and psoriatic patients. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 70: 400–404

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Bos JO, Wierenga EA, Smitt JHS, van der Heijden FL, Kaspenberg ML (1992) Immune dysregulation in atopic eczema. Arch Dermatol 128: 1509–1512

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Agner T, Serup J (1990) Sodium lauryl sulphate for irritant patch testing–a dose-response study using bioengineering methods for determination of skin irritation. J Invest Dermatol 95: 543–547

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Agner T (1991) Skin susceptibility in uninvolved skin of hand eczema patients and healthy controls. Br J Dermatol 125: 140–146

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Frosch PJ, Kligman AM (eds) (1993) Noninvasive methods for the quantification of skin functions. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  56. Agner T, Damm P, Skouby SO (1991) Menstrual cycle and skin reactivity. J Am Acad Dermatol 24: 566–570

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Agner T (1991) Susceptibility of atopic dermatitis patients to irritant dermatitis caused by sodium lauryl sulphate. Acta Derm Venereol 71: 296–300

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Menné, T., Wilkinson, J.D. (1995). Individual Predisposition to Contact Dermatitis. In: Rycroft, R.J.G., Menné, T., Frosch, P.J. (eds) Textbook of Contact Dermatitis. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-03104-9_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-03104-9_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-03106-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-03104-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics