ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Contact allergy to oxidized limonene, with hydroperoxides of limonene (Lim-OOHs) as the main allergens, is common. However, high proportions of weak positive and doubtful patch test reactions have been reported. OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical relevance, elicitation threshold and dose-response relationship of Lim-OOHs in individuals with a positive or doubtful patch test reaction to standard Lim-OOHs 0.3% pet. METHODS: A multicentre 3-week double-blind vehicle-controlled repeated open application test (ROAT) study with a simulated fine fragrance containing Lim-OOHs at 1260, 420 and 140 ppm, equal to a dose/area per application of Lim-OOHs of 3.0, 0.99 and 0.33 µg/cm2 , was performed. RESULTS: Among 11 subjects allergic to Lim-OOHs, 11 (100%), 7 (64%), and 3 (27%), respectively, reacted to the applied doses. No reactions were seen in 17 healthy controls exposed to the highest dose. This difference in reactivity was statistically significant (P < 0.0001). Among 13 subjects with doubtful patch test reactions to Lim-OOHs, two (15%) had positive ROAT reactions to the highest Lim-OOH dose applied (P = 0.36 as compared with controls). CONCLUSIONS: Contact allergy to Lim-OOHs is of clinical relevance in patients with positive patch test reactions. A doubtful patch test reaction to Lim-OOHs 0.3% pet. can be of clinical relevance.
Subject(s)
Allergens/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Hydrogen Peroxide/adverse effects , Monoterpenes/adverse effects , Perfume/adverse effects , Adult , Allergens/administration & dosage , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Hydrogen Peroxide/administration & dosage , Male , Middle Aged , Monoterpenes/administration & dosage , Patch Tests , Perfume/administration & dosageABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Gynecomastia and/or mastodynia is a common medical problem in patients receiving antiandrogen (bicalutamide or flutamide) treatment for prostate cancer; up to 70% of these patients result to be affected; furthermore, this can jeopardise patients' quality of life. AIMS: To systematically review the quality of evidence of the current literature regarding treatment options for bicalutamide-induced gynecomastia, including efficacy, safety and patients' quality of life. METHODS: The PubMed, Medline, Scopus, The Cochrane Library and SveMed+ databases were systematically searched between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2014. All searches were undertaken between January and February 2015. The search phrase used was:"gynecomastia AND treatment AND prostate cancer". Two reviewers assessed 762 titles and abstracts identified. The search and review process was done in accordance with the PRISMA statement. The PICOS (patients, intervention, comparator, outcomes and study design) process was used to specify inclusion criteria. Quality of evidence was rated according to GRADE. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were: treatment effects, number of complications and side effects. Secondary outcome was: Quality of Life. RESULTS: Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria and are analysed in this review. Five studies reported pharmacological intervention with tamoxifen and/or anastrozole, either as prophylactic or therapeutic treatment. Four studies reported radiotherapy as prophylactic and/or therapeutic treatment. Two studies compared pharmacological treatment to radiotherapy. Most of the studies were randomized with varying risk of bias. According to GRADE, quality of evidence was moderate to high. CONCLUSIONS: Bicalutamide-induced gynecomastia and/or mastodynia can effectively be managed by oral tamoxifen (10-20 mg daily) or radiotherapy without relevant side effects. Prophylaxis or therapeutic treatment with tamoxifen results to be more effective than radiotherapy.
