不仅仅是甲基异噻唑啉酮：2017-2020 年北美异噻唑啉酮过敏患者的回顾性分析。

More than just methylisothiazolinone: Retrospective analysis of patients with isothiazolinone allergy in North America, 2017-2020.

机构信息

Department of Dermatology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.

出版信息

J Am Acad Dermatol. 2024 Feb;90(2):319-327. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2023.10.032. Epub 2023 Oct 23.

DOI:10.1016/j.jaad.2023.10.032

PMID:37879460

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Isothiazolinones are a common cause of allergic contact dermatitis.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prevalence of positive patch test reactions to isothiazolinones from 2017-2020 and characterize isothiazolinone-allergic (Is+) patients compared with isothiazolinone nonallergic (Is-) patients.

METHODS

Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 9028 patients patch tested to methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI)/methylisothiazolinone (MI) 0.02% aqueous, MI 0.2% aqueous, benzisothiazolinone (BIT) 0.1% petrolatum, and/or octylisothiazolinone (OIT) 0.025% petrolatum. Prevalence, reaction strength, concurrent reactions, clinical relevance, and source of allergens were tabulated.

RESULTS

In total, 21.9% (1976/9028) of patients had a positive reaction to 1 or more isothiazolinones. Positivity to MI was 14.4% (1296/9012), MCI/MI was 10.0% (903/9017), BIT was 8.6% (777/9018), and OIT was 05% (49/9028). Compared with Is-, Is+ patients were more likely to have occupational skin disease (16.5% vs 10.3%, P <.001), primary hand dermatitis (30.2% vs 19.7%, P <.001), and be >40 years (73.1% vs 61.9%, P <.001). Positive patch test reactions to >1 isothiazolinone occurred in 44.1% (871/1976) of Is+ patients. Testing solely to MCI/MI would miss 47.3% (611/1292) of MI and 60.1% (466/776) of BIT allergic reactions.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective cross-sectional study design and lack of follow-up data.

CONCLUSION

Sensitization to isothiazolinones is high and concurrent sensitization to multiple isothiazolinone allergens is common.

摘要

背景

异噻唑啉酮是一种常见的接触性皮炎过敏原。

目的

研究 2017-2020 年异噻唑啉酮斑贴试验阳性反应的发生率，并对异噻唑啉酮过敏（Is+）患者与非过敏（Is-）患者进行特征比较。

方法

回顾性分析了 9028 例接受甲基氯异噻唑啉酮（MCI）/甲基异噻唑啉酮（MI）0.02%水溶液、MI 0.2%水溶液、苯并异噻唑啉酮（BIT）0.1%凡士林和/或辛基异噻唑啉酮（OIT）0.025%凡士林斑贴试验的患者。记录了阳性率、反应强度、同时发生的反应、临床相关性和过敏原来源。

结果

共有 21.9%（1976/9028）的患者对 1 种或多种异噻唑啉酮有阳性反应。MI 阳性率为 14.4%（1296/9012），MCI/MI 为 10.0%（903/9017），BIT 为 8.6%（777/9018），OIT 为 0.5%（49/9028）。与 Is-患者相比，Is+患者更易患有职业性皮肤病（16.5%比 10.3%，P<.001）、原发性手部皮炎（30.2%比 19.7%，P<.001）和年龄>40 岁（73.1%比 61.9%，P<.001）。44.1%（871/1976）的 Is+患者对>1 种异噻唑啉酮的斑贴试验呈阳性。仅检测 MCI/MI 会漏诊 47.3%（611/1292）的 MI 和 60.1%（466/776）的 BIT 过敏反应。