Seidenari S, Mantovani L, Manzini B M, Pignatti M
Department of Dermatology, University of Modena, Italy.
Contact Dermatitis. 1997 Feb;36(2):91-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1997.tb00420.x.
Combined sensitizations to different azo dyes, probably based both on true cross-sensitization and on simultaneous positive reactions, have frequently been described. However, since azo dyes are included in the standard series in a minority of countries, the case studies considered comprise, with few exceptions, a small number of subjects. The aim of our study was to investigate cross-reactions between different azo dyes and para-amino compounds in azo-dye-sensitive subjects, to study the clinical aspects of azo dye dermatitis, to assess the relevance of sensitization to azo dyes, and to relate the pattern of cross-sensitizations to the chemical structure of the different dyes. Out of 6203 consecutively tested patients, 236 were sensitized to at least 1 of 6 azo compounds employed as textile dyes, included in our standard series. 107 subjects reacted to Disperse Orange 3 (DO3), 104 to Disperse Blue 124 (DB124), 76 to p-aminoazobenzene (PAB), 67 to Disperse Red 1 (DR1), 42 to Disperse Yellow 3 (DY3), and 31 to p-dimethylaminoazobenzene (PDAAB). Co-sensitizations to para-phenylenediamine were present in most subjects sensitized to DO3 (66%) and PAAB (75%), in 27% and 36% of DR1 and DY3-sensitive subjects, and only in 16% of subjects sensitized to DB124. Apart from the hands and the face, the neck and the axillae were the most frequently involved skin sites. Whereas the involvement of flexural areas was mainly connected with sensitization to DB124, in patients with hand dermatitis and in those working as hairdressers, sensitization to DO3 and PAAB was more frequent. Moreover, in the former patient group, a history of textile dye allergy was most frequently obtained. Out of 33 patients tested with an additional textile dye series, only 5 subjects reacted to anthraquinone dyes. Cross-sensitizations between azo dyes and para-amino compounds can partially be explained on the basis of structural affinities.
对不同偶氮染料的联合致敏现象，可能基于真正的交叉致敏以及同时出现的阳性反应，这种情况经常被描述。然而，由于在少数国家偶氮染料被纳入标准系列，因此所考虑的案例研究，除少数例外，涉及的受试者数量较少。我们研究的目的是调查偶氮染料敏感受试者中不同偶氮染料与对氨基化合物之间的交叉反应，研究偶氮染料皮炎的临床特征，评估对偶氮染料致敏的相关性，并将交叉致敏模式与不同染料的化学结构联系起来。在连续检测的6203名患者中，有236人对我们标准系列中用作纺织染料的6种偶氮化合物中的至少1种致敏。107名受试者对分散橙3（DO3）有反应，104名对分散蓝124（DB124）有反应，76名对对氨基偶氮苯（PAB）有反应，67名对分散红1（DR1）有反应，42名对分散黄3（DY3）有反应，31名对对二甲基氨基偶氮苯（PDAAB）有反应。大多数对DO3（66%）和PAAB（75%）致敏的受试者中存在对对苯二胺的共同致敏，在对DR1和DY3致敏的受试者中分别为27%和36%，而在对DB124致敏的受试者中仅为16%。除了手部和面部，颈部和腋窝是最常受累的皮肤部位。虽然屈侧部位的受累主要与对DB124的致敏有关，但在手部皮炎患者和美发师中，对DO3和PAAB的致敏更为常见。此外，在前一组患者中，最常获得纺织染料过敏史。在另外33名用纺织染料系列进行检测的患者中，只有5名受试者对蒽醌染料有反应。偶氮染料与对氨基化合物之间的交叉致敏可以部分基于结构亲和力来解释。
