Photosensitivity is an important cause of refractory facial erythema in atopic dermatitis: A retrospective study of 82 Chinese patients.

BACKGROUND: Ultraviolet radiation can aggravate facial erythema in atopic dermatitis (AD) patients. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the photobiological testing results of Chinese AD patients with refractory facial erythema. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 82 AD patients with refractory facial erythema who visited our department during 2004-2021. All of them completed phototesting and photopatch testing. RESULTS: 82 patients were enrolled in the study, and 53 (64.6%) were between 18 and 30 years old. 51.2% (42/82) had positive phototesting results and were considered photosensitive AD (PhAD) patients. One-third of them were both allergic to ultraviolet A and ultraviolet B. 65.9% (54/82) suffered from photoallergic contact dermatitis. Chlorpromazine (50.7%), potassium dichromate (13.2%), and thimerosal (11.8%) were the top three common photoallergens. Overall, 86.3% of AD patients with refractory facial erythema had direct photoallergy or photocontact allergy. PhAD patients had fewer allergic comorbidities than the other group (p = .007). More non-PhAD patients (55.0%) suffered from AD at 2-14 years old (p = .015). CONCLUSIONS: Photosensitivity contributes a lot to the facial lesions of AD patients, especially in their 20s. 86.3% of these patients had direct photoallergy or photocontact allergy. Therefore, AD patients with facial erythema should undergo phototesting and photopatch testing routinely.

Ketoprofen-induced Photoallergic Reaction.

Dear Editor, Photoallergic reactions are classic T-cell-mediated or delayed-type hypersensitivity reactions of the skin in response to a photoallergen (or a cross-reacting chemical) to which a subject was sensitized in the past (1). The immune system recognizes the changes caused by ultraviolet (UV) radiation; it produces antibodies and causes inflammation of the skin in the exposed areas (2). Common photoallergic drugs and ingredients are included in some sunscreens, aftershave lotions, antimicrobials (especially sulfonamides), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), diuretics, anticonvulsants, chemotherapy drugs, fragrances, and other hygiene products (1,3,4). A 64-year-old female patient was admitted to the Department of Dermatology and Venereology with erythema and underlining edema on her left foot (Figure 1). A few weeks earlier, the patient had had a fracture of the metatarsal bones and since then she had been taking NSAIDs systemically every day to suppress pain. Five days before being admitted to our Department, the patient started applying 2.5% ketoprofen gel to her left foot twice daily and was frequently exposed to the sun. For the last twenty years, the patient had been struggling with chronic back pain and was frequently taking different NSAIDs (ibuprofen, diclofenac, etc.). The patient also suffered from essential hypertension and was regularly taking ramipril. She was advised to discontinue ketoprofen application, avoid sunlight, and apply betamethasone cream twice daily for 7 days, which lead to complete resolution of the skin lesions in a few weeks. Two months later, we performed patch and photopatch tests to baseline series and topical ketoprofen. Only the irradiated side of the body where ketoprofen-containing gel was applied showed positive reaction to ketoprofen. Photoallergic reactions manifest as eczematous, pruritic lesions, which may spread to involve other areas of the skin that were not previously exposed to the sun (4). Ketoprofen is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug composed of a benzoylphenyl propionic acid that is commonly used both topically and systemically for the treatment of musculoskeletal diseases because of its analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects and low toxicity, but it is one of the most frequent photoallergens (1,5,6). Ketoprofen-induced photosensitivity reactions usually present as photoallergic dermatitis characterized as acute dermatitis with edema, erythema, papulovesicles, blisters, or erythema exsudativum multiforme-like lesions at the application site 1 week to 1 month after the initiation of use (7). Depending on the frequency and intensity of sun exposure, ketoprofen photodermatitis may continue or reoccur up to 1 to 14 years after discontinuing the medication (6,8). Moreover, ketoprofen contaminates clothing, shoes, and bandages, and some cases of photoallergy relapses have been reported that were induced by ketoprofen-contaminated objects after they were used again in the presence of UV radiation (5,6). Due to their similar biochemical structure, patients with ketoprofen photoallergy should avoid using some drugs such as some NSAIDs (suprofen, tiaprofenic acid), antilipidemic agent (fenofibrate) and sunscreens based on benzophenones (6,9). Physicians and pharmacists should advise patients of the potential risks when topical NSAIDs are applied on the photoexposed skin.

[Cutaneous drug reactions]. / Toxidermies.

Cutaneous drug reactions are a common reason for calls and visits. This term chiefly refers to hypersensitivity reactions ranging from benign rash without contraindication of treatment to severe life-threatening clinical pictures, such as anaphylactic shock and epidermal necrolysis. They should be carefully managed from the outset. Indeed, history taking and precise semiological description of the lesions are crucial to the formulation of recommendations for the patient. Allergological investigation of such reactions has developed greatly in recent decades and must now be carried out much more extensively. The arrival of new drug families such as biotherapies and the development of drug habituation protocols constitute the challenges of tomorrow for cutaneous drug reactions.

Interstitial granulomatous drug reaction related to hydrochlorothiazide.

Interstitial granulomatous drug reaction is a rare condition presenting as erythematous-to-violaceous plaques on the lateral trunk, axillae, buttocks, and thighs. Calcium-channel blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, beta-blockers, and statins have been described as drugs that can trigger interstitial granulomatous drug reaction. We present a case of interstitial granulomatous drug reaction related to hydrochlorothiazide and our approach to management of this condition. The diagnosis was confirmed with a skin biopsy and a rechallenge of hydrochlorothiazide, which exacerbated the patient's symptoms. The patient improved significantly with rigorous photoprotection, combination dapsone-alitretinoin therapy, and discontinuation of hydrochlorothiazide.

Photodermatoses in skin of colour.

Photodermatoses represent a heterogeneous collection of disorders unified by the characteristic of being provoked through exposure to ultraviolet radiation. Generally, these conditions are classified into the following categories: immunologically mediated photodermatoses, chemical- and drug-induced photosensitivity, photoaggravated dermatoses and photosensitivity associated with defective DNA repair mechanisms or chromosomal instabilities. The list of photodermatoses is extensive, and each individual photodermatosis is understood to a different extent. Regardless, there exists a paucity of information with regards to the clinical presentation among those with skin of colour. With ever-changing global demographics, recognition of photosensitive disorders in a diverse population is essential for accurate diagnoses and therapeutic guidance. The scope of this article seeks to review the epidemiology and clinical variability in presentation of such photodermatoses in patients with skin of colour.

New approach to predict photoallergic potentials of chemicals based on murine local lymph node assay.

Photoallergic dermatitis, caused by pharmaceuticals and other consumer products, is a very important issue in human health. However, S10 guidelines of the International Conference on Harmonization do not recommend the existing prediction methods for photoallergy because of their low predictability in human cases. We applied local lymph node assay (LLNA), a reliable, quantitative skin sensitization prediction test, to develop a new photoallergy prediction method. This method involves a three-step approach: (1) ultraviolet (UV) absorption analysis; (2) determination of no observed adverse effect level for skin phototoxicity based on LLNA; and (3) photoallergy evaluation based on LLNA. Photoallergic potential of chemicals was evaluated by comparing lymph node cell proliferation among groups treated with chemicals with minimal effect levels of skin sensitization and skin phototoxicity under UV irradiation (UV+) or non-UV irradiation (UV-). A case showing significant difference (P < .05) in lymph node cell proliferation rates between UV- and UV+ groups was considered positive for photoallergic reaction. After testing 13 chemicals, seven human photoallergens tested positive and the other six, with no evidence of causing photoallergic dermatitis or UV absorption, tested negative. Among these chemicals, both doxycycline hydrochloride and minocycline hydrochloride were tetracycline antibiotics with different photoallergic properties, and the new method clearly distinguished between the photoallergic properties of these chemicals. These findings suggested high predictability of our method; therefore, it is promising and effective in predicting human photoallergens.

Comparison of Demographic and Photobiological Features of Chronic Actinic Dermatitis in Patients With Lighter vs Darker Skin Types.

Importance: Chronic actinic dermatitis (CAD) is classically described in older, white men, although increasing reports describe younger patients with darker skin types, particularly South Asians. Photocontact allergy occurs in CAD but is less studied than contact allergy in this exquisitely photosensitive condition. Objective: To evaluate for differences in demographic and photobiological features between persons with darker and lighter skin types who have CAD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective review included 70 consecutive adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing investigation for photosensitivity who were diagnosed with CAD from November 1, 2000, through August 31, 2015, at the specialist Photobiology Unit of a tertiary academic referral center. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient age, sex, ethnicity, clinical features, and phototesting outcomes. Results: A total of 70 patients (37 men [53%] and 33 women [47%]; mean [SD] age, 50.9 [2.3] years) were diagnosed with CAD. Of these, 36 were non-Hispanic and non-Latino white, 31 were Asian (including 24 South Asian, 4 East Asian, and 3 Middle Eastern), and 3 were black. Patients were aged 9 to 83 years at diagnosis, with a mean (SD) age at onset of 42.6 (2.4) years and duration of disease of 8.8 (1.3) years. Forty-one had lighter skin types (Fitzpatrick skin types I-IV), and 29 had darker skin types (Fitzpatrick skin types V and VI). Patients with darker skin types and CAD were younger at diagnosis (mean [SD] age, 40.7 [3.5] vs 58.1 [2.5] years; P < . 001) and had earlier onset of photosensitivity (mean [SD] age, 35.5 [3.9] vs 47.5 [2.9] years; P = .01) compared with patients with lighter skin types. Of note, the male to female ratio in the lighter skin group was 2:1 compared with 1:2 in the darker skin group. Phototest reactions were equally severe in Fitzpatrick skin types V to VI and I to IV, with minimal erythemal doses to monochromatic UV-B, UV-A, and visible radiation and broadband provocation testing showing similar results. Photoallergic contact reactions to UV filters, personal sunscreen products, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were seen in both groups; 14 of 61 patients (23%) undergoing photopatch testing showed positive photopatch reactions. Conclusions and Relevance: Chronic actinic dermatitis presents with an earlier age at onset and an inverted male to female ratio in patients with darker compared with lighter skin types. Clinicians should thus be cognizant of CAD in younger women with darker skin types. Photopatch testing should be considered in patients with CAD, with coexistent photocontact allergy occurring in a substantial proportion.

The clinical severity score of chronic actinic dermatitis correlates with in vivo photoallergic reactions and the immunologic parameters related to a shift towards Th2 immunity from the Th2/Th1 balanced status in patients with chronic actinic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic actinic dermatitis (CAD) has a more complicated pathogenetic basis than others. The clinical grading system and its correlations with the clinical and immunological parameters still remained to be investigated to define the nature of CAD in a more detailed manner. OBJECTIVES: We investigated correlations of the clinical severity score of CAD (CSS-CAD) with the clinical and immunological parameters. METHODS: We evaluated 72 patients with CAD and classified them into three groups according to the CSS-CAD. We analysed total IgE level, peripheral blood (PB) eosinophil count, the ratio of Th2cell (CCR4 + CD4 +) percentage over Th1 cell (CXCR3 + CD4 +) percentage (Th2/Th1) and/or the sum of suppressor/cytotoxic T cells. RESULTS: The total IgE levels and the percentage of PB eosinophils were higher in the severer group than other groups. A shift towards Th2 from Th2/Th1 balanced status may be affected by total counts of suppressor T cells, and the patient with higher Th2/Th1 ratio than balanced status had the more proportion in the severer CSS-CAD group than other groups. CONCLUSION: The CSS-CAD correlates with total IgE level, PB eosinophil count and a shift towards Th2 immunity from Th2/Th1. So we suggest the Th1/Th2 dysbalance may be affected by the CSS-CAD.

Ketoprofen-induced photoallergic dermatitis.

Drug-induced photosensitivity reactions are significant adverse effects. Ketoprofen is one of the most common drugs that can cause skin rash in sun-exposed areas. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), such as ketoprofen, are often used for a variety of symptoms, including pain and fever. An understanding of the presentation and clinical course of ketoprofen-induced photosensitivity is necessary to correctly diagnose and manage this condition. Ketoprofen-induced photosensitivity reactions usually present as photoallergic dermatitis, which is a cell-mediated immune process. The benzophenone moiety in ketoprofen plays a major role in ketoprofen's ability to act as a photosensitizer. Several agents, such as fenofibrate and octocrylene have been found to be associated with aggravation of ketoprofen-induced photoallergic dermatitis or cross-photosensitization, and these reactions result from structural similarities with ketoprofen. Treatment of ketoprofen-induced photoallergic dermatitis includes discontinuation of ketoprofen, topical or systemic corticosteroids and avoidance of sun exposure and agents known to exacerbate dermatitis. In conclusion, photoallergic dermatitis is a significant adverse effect of ketoprofen. Some agents known to worsen dermatitis may be found in sun protection products (notably, octocrylene in sunscreen). Educating the patient to avoid these products is critical to treatment. Since NSAIDs, such as ketoprofen, are used commonly for a variety of illnesses, drug-induced photoallergic dermatitis should be high on the differential in individuals using these medications who present with acute onset of a rash in sun-exposed areas.

Cutaneous adverse reactions of amiodarone.

Dermatological complications of amiodarone are commonly encountered problems in therapy. The incidence in the population of patients with prolonged use of amiodarone reaches nearly 75% according to various sources. Nevertheless, they are often misdiagnosed or overlooked. The aim of this review is to present the current state of knowledge about skin changes induced by amiodarone, including phototoxic and photoallergic reactions, as well as hyperpigmentation. In most cases, the adverse effects are reversible and disappear after discontinuation of the drug. Although the dermatological complications usually do not influence the outcome of the therapy and rarely cause discontinuation of treatment, they have a great impact on patient quality of life.

Dos casos de alergia de contacto a octocrileno en niños / Contact Allergy to Octocrylene in Children: A Report of 2 Cases

No disponible

The phototoxic and photoallergy potential of clindamycin phosphate 1.2%/ tretinoin 0.025% gel for facial acne: results of two single-center, evaluator-blinded, randomized, vehicle-controlled phase 1 studies in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: A fixed-dose combination of clindamycin phosphate 1.2% and tretinoin 0.025% gel (VELTIN® (clindamycin phosphate and tretinoin) 1.2%/0.025% Gel [VELTIN]) (clindamycin/tretinoin gel) is currently available for the once-daily topical treatment of acne. OBJECTIVES: Two-phase I studies were conducted to evaluate the phototoxic and photoallergic potential of clindamycin/tretinoin gel. METHODS: Study 1 (phototoxic) (n=37) and Study 2 (photoallergic) (n=58) were single-center, evaluator-blinded, randomized, vehicle-controlled, phase 1 studies conducted in healthy volunteers. In Study 1, clindamycin/tretinoin gel patches, vehicle gel patches and blank patches (no gel) were applied concurrently for 24 hours to naïve sites. After patch removal, sites were irradiated with 16 joules/cm2 of ultraviolet A light (UVA) then 0.75 minimal erythema dose (MED) of UVA/ultraviolet B light (UVB), the same irradiation protocol followed by 15 joules/cm2 of visible light (VIS), or served as non-irradiated controls. Study 2 examined the effect of repeated drug exposure and involved an induction period (6 repeat phases at the same body sites during which clindamycin/tretinoin gel and vehicle gel patches were applied for 24 hours, removed and sites irradiated with UVB +/- VIS), followed by a rest period (10 to 17 days), then a challenge period that used the protocol described for Study 1. In both studies, inflammatory responses and other cutaneous effects were evaluated at 1, 24, 48, and 72 hours after patch removal. RESULTS: No subject experienced any adverse events in Study 1 (phototoxic). One subject in Study 2 (photoallergic) experienced AEs (diffuse erythema; mild application site irritation at one each of UV/VIS-irradiated clindamycin/tretinoin gel and vehicle gel patch sites) considered definitely related to study product that resulted in discontinuation from the study. Data from Study 1 and the challenge phase from Study 2 showed most subjects had no visible inflammatory reaction to clindamycin/tretinoin gel after irradiation. CONCLUSIONS: Clindamycin/tretinoin gel has a favorable safety profile following UV/visible irradiation and a low potential for phototoxicity and photoallergenicity.