SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • 1
    Ale S I, Maibach H I. Clinical relevance in allergic contact dermatitis. An algorithmic approach. Derm Beruf Umwelt 1995: 43: 119121.
  • 2
    SIDS (Screening Information Data Set). Propylene glycol. SIDS Initial Assessment. Report for 11th SIAM (USA, January 23–26, 2001).
  • 3
    CIR (Cosmetic Ingredients Review Expert Panel). Final report on the safety assessment of propylene glycol and polypropylene glycols. J Am Coll Toxicol 1994: 13: 437491.
  • 4
    Wahlberg J E, Nilsson G. Skin irritancy from propylene glycol. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1984: 64: 286290.
  • 5
    Willis C M, Stephens J M, Wilkinson J D. Experimentally induced irritant contact dermatitis: determination of optimum irritant concentrations. Contact Dermatitis 1988: 18: 2024.
  • 6
    Zesch A. Skin irritation by topical drugs. Derm Beruf Umwelt 1983: 31: 7478.
  • 7
    Wahlberg J E. Propylene glycol: search for a proper and nonirritant patch test preparation. Am J Contact Dermat 1994: 5: 156159.
  • 8
    Andersen A E, Storrs F J. Hautreizungen durch Propylenglykol. Hautarzt 1982: 33: 1214.
  • 9
    Nater J P, Baar A J, Hoedemaeker P J. Histological aspects of skin reactions to propylene glycol. Contact Dermatitis 1977: 3: 181185.
  • 10
    Hannuksela M, Salo H. The repeated open application test (ROAT). Contact Dermatitis 1986: 14: 221227.
  • 11
    Hannuksela M, Pirilä V, Salo O P. Skin reactions to propylene glycol. Contact Dermatitis 1975: 1: 112116.
  • 12
    Fan W, Kinnunen T, Niinimäki A, Hannuksela M. Skin reactions to glycols used in dermatological and cosmetic vehicles. Am J Contact Dermat 1991: 2: 181183.
  • 13
    Kinnunen T, Hannuksela M. Skin reactions to hexylene glycol. Contact Dermatitis 1989: 21: 154158.
  • 14
    Frosch P J, Pekar U, Enzmann H. Contact allergy to propylene glycol – do we use the appropriate test concentration. Dermatol Clin 1990: 8: 111113.
  • 15
    Funk J O, Maibach H I. Propylene glycol dermatitis: re-evaluation of an old problem. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 31: 236241.
  • 16
    Aberer W, Fuchs Th, Peters K-P, Frosch P J. Propylenglykol: Kutane Nebenwirkungen und Testmethodik – Literaturübersicht und Ergebnisse einer Multicenterstudie der Deutschen Kontaktallergiegruppe (DKG). Derm Beruf Umwelt 1993: 41: 2527.
  • 17
    Geier J, Uter W, Lessmann H, Schnuch A. The positivity ratio – another parameter to assess the diagnostic quality of a patch test preparation. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 43: 280282.
  • 18
    Brasch J, Henseler T. The reaction index: a parameter to assess the quality of patch test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 1992: 27: 203204.
  • 19
    Hannuksela M, Förström L. Reactions to peroral propylene glycol. Contact Dermatitis 1978: 4: 4145.
  • 20
    Catanzaro J M, Smith J G. Propylene glycol dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol 1991: 24: 9095.
  • 21
    Adams R M, Maibach H I. A five-year study of cosmetic reactions. J Am Acad Dermatol 1985: 13: 10621069.
  • 22
    Broeckx W, Blondeel A, Dooms Goossens A, Achten G. Cosmetic intolerance. Contact Dermatitis 1987: 16: 189194.
  • 23
    Hammershoy O. Standard patch test results in 3,225 consecutive Danish patient from 1973 to 1977. Contact Dermatitis 1980: 6: 263268.
  • 24
    Shehade S A, Beck M H, Hillier V F. Epidemiological survey of standard series patch test results and observations on day 2 and day 4 readings. Contact Dermatitis 1991: 24: 119122.
  • 25
    Schnuch A, Arnold R, Bahmer F et al. Epikutantestung mit der Salbengrundlagenreihe – Ergebnisse des ‘Informationsverbundes Dermatologischer Kliniken’ (IVDK). Derm Beruf Umwelt 1993: 41: 176183.
  • 26
    Kligman A M. The identification of contact allergens by human assay. III. The Maximization test: a procedure for screening and rating contact sensitizers. J Invest Dermatol 1966: 47: 393409.
  • 27
    Marzulli F N, Maibach H I. Antimicrobials: experimental contact sensitization in man. J Sos Cosmet Chem 1973: 24: 399421.
  • 28
    Marzulli F N, Maibach H I. The use of graded concentrations in studying skin sensitizers: experimental contact sensitization in man. Food Cosmet Toxicol 1974: 12: 219227.
  • 29
    Trancik R J, Maibach H I. Propylene glycol: irritation or sensitization? Contact Dermatitis 1982: 8: 185189.
  • 30
    Nakamura A, Momma J, Sekiguchi H et al. A new protocol and criteria for quantitative determination of sensitization potencies of chemicals by guinea pig maximization test. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 31: 7285.
  • 31
    Kero M, Hannuksela M. Guinea pig maximization test, open epicutaneous test and chamber test in induction of delayed contact hypersensitivity. Contact Dermatitis 1980: 6: 341344.
  • 32
    Maurer Th. The optimization test. Curr Probl Dermatol 1985: 14: 114151.
  • 33
    Guillot J P, Gonnet J F, Clément C, Faccini J M. Comparative study of methods chosen by the Association Francaise de Normalisation (AFNOR) for evaluating sensitizing potential in the albino guinea-pig. Food Chem Toxicol 1983: 21: 795805.
  • 34
    Guillot J P, Gonnet J F. The epicutaneous maximization test. Curr Probl Dermatol 1985: 14: 220247.
  • 35
    Descotes J. Identification of contact allergens: the mouse ear sensitization assay. J Toxicol Cutaneous Ocul Toxicol 1988: 7: 263272.
  • 36
    Basketter D A, Blaikie L, Dearman R J et al. Use of the local lymph node assay for the estimation of relative contact allergenic potency. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 344348.
  • 37
    Schnuch A, Geier J, Uter W et al. National rates and regional differences in sensitization to allergens of the standard series. Population adjusted frequencies of sensitization (PAFS) in 40,000 patients from a multicenter study (IVDK). Contact Dermatitis 1997: 37: 200209.
  • 38
    Uter W, Schnuch A, Geier J, Frosch P J. Epidemiology of contact dermatitis: the information network of the departments of dermatology (IVDK) in Germany – a surveillance system on contact allergies. Eur J Dermatol 1998: 8: 3640.
  • 39
    Schnuch A, Aberer W, Agathos M, Brasch J, Frosch P J, Richter G. Leitlinien der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft (DDG) zur Durchführung des Epikutantests mit Kontaktallergenen. Hautarzt 2001: 52: 864866.
  • 40
    Fregert S. Manual of contact dermatitis. On behalf of the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group and the North American Contact Dermatitis Group. Copenhagen: Munksgaard Publishers, 2nd edition, 1981.
  • 41
    Wahlberg J E. Patch testing. In: Textbook of Contact Dermatitis, 3rd edition, RycroftR J G, MennéT, FroschP J (eds): Berlin, Springer, 2001: 435468.
  • 42
    Uter W, Schnuch A, Gefeller O. Guidelines for the descriptive presentation and statistical analysis of contact allergy data. Contact Dermatitis 2004: 51: 4756.
  • 43
    Geier J, Uter W, Pirker C, Frosch P J. Patch testing with the irritant sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) is useful in interpreting weak reactions to contact allergens as allergic or irritant. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 99107.
  • 44
    Allen M H, Wakelin S H, Holloway D, Lisby S, Baadsgaard O, Barker J N W N, Mc Fadden JP. Association of TNFA gene polymorphism at position −308 with susceptibility to irritant contact dermatitis. Immunogenetics 2000: 51: 201205.
  • 45
    Moss C, Friedmann P S, Shuster S, Simpson J M. Susceptibility and amplification of sensitivity in contact dermatitis. Clin Exp Immunol 1985: 61: 232241.
  • 46
    Westphal G A, Schnuch A, Moessner R, König I R, Kränke B, Hallier E, Ziegler A, Reich K. Cytokine gene polymorphisms in allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 9398.
  • 47
    Le Coz C J, Scivener Y, Santinelli F, Heid E. Sensibilisation de contact au cours des ulcères de jambe. Ann Dermatol Venereol 1998: 125: 694699.
  • 48
    Reichert-Pénétrat S, Barbaud A, Weber M, Schmutz J L. Ulcères de jambe – Explorations allergologiques dans 359 cas. Ann Dermatol Venereol 1999: 126: 131135.
  • 49
    Gallenkemper G, Rabe E, Bauer R. Contact sensitization in chronic venous insufficiency: modern wound dressings. Contact Dermatitis 1998: 38: 274278.
  • 50
    Saap L, Fahim S, Arsenault E, Pratt M, Pierscianowski T, Falanga V, Pedvis-Leftick A. Contact sensitivity in patients with leg ulcerations – A North American study. Arch Dermatol 2004: 140: 12411246.
  • 51
    Tavadia S, Bianchi J, Dawe R S et al. Allergic contact dermatitis in venous leg ulcer patients. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 261265.
  • 52
    Lange-Ionescu S, Pilz B, Geier J, Frosch P J. Kontaktallergien bei Patienten mit Stauungsdermatitis oder Ekzem der Beine. Ergebnisse des Informationsverbunds Dermatologischer Kliniken und der Deutschen Kontaktallergiegruppe. Derm Beruf Umwelt 1996: 44: 1422.
  • 53
    Padoan S M, Petterson A, Svensson A. Olive oil as a cause of contact allergy in patients with venous eczema, and occupationally. Contact Dermatitis 1990: 23: 7376.
  • 54
    Pasche-Koo F, Hauser C, Saurat J-H. Frequent sensitization to emulsifiers in patients with chronic leg ulcers. Dermatology 1992: 185: 223.
  • 55
    Pasche-Koo F, Piletta P A, Hunziker N, Hauser C. High sensitization rate to emulsifiers in patients with chronic leg ulcers. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 31: 226228.
  • 56
    Dearman R J, Kimber I. Factors influencing the induction phase of skin sensitization. Am J Contact Dermat 2003: 14: 188194.
  • 57
    Inaba K, Turley S, Iyoda T et al. The formation of immunogenic major histocompatibility complex class II-peptide ligands in lysosomal compartments of dendritic cells is regulated by inflammatory stimuli. J Exp Med 2000: 191: 927936.
  • 58
    McLellan A D, Bröcker E-B, Kämpgen E. Dendritic cell activation by danger and antigen-specific T-cell signalling. Exp Dermatol 2000: 9: 313322.
  • 59
    Cumberbatch M, Scott R C, Basketter D A, Scholes E W, Hilton J, Dearman R J, Kimber I. Influence of sodium lauryl sulphate on 2,4-dinitrobenzene-induced lymph node activation. Toxicology 1993: 77: 181191.
  • 60
    Zhang L, Tinkle S S. Chemical activation of innate and specific immunity in contact dermatitis. J Invest Dermatol 2000: 115: 168176.
  • 61
    McFadden J P, Basketter D A. Contact allergy, irritancy and ‘danger’. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 123127.
  • 62
    Smith H R, Holloway D, Armstrong D K, Basketter D A, McFadden J P. Irritant thresholds in subjects with colophony allergy. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 9597.
  • 63
    McLelland J, Shuster S. Contact dermatitis with negative patch tests: the additive effect of allergens in combination. Br J Dermatol 1990: 122: 623630.
  • 64
    Bourezane Y, Girardin P, Aubin F, Vigan M, Adessi B, Humbert P H, Laurent R. Allergic contact dermatitis to Zovirax cream. Allergy 1996: 51: 755759.
  • 65
    Corazza M, Virgili A, Mantovani L, La-Malfa W. Propylene glycol allergy from acyclovir cream with cross-reactivity to hydroxypropyl cellulose in a transdermal estradiol system? Contact Dermatitis 1993: 29: 283284.
  • 66
    Eun H C, Kim Y C. Propylene glycol allergy from ketoconazole cream. Contact Dermatitis 1989: 21: 274275.
  • 67
    Fisher A A. Systemic contact dermatitis due to intravenous Valium in a person sensitive to propylene glycol. Cutis 1995: 55: 327328.
  • 68
    Fisher D A. Allergic contact dermatitis to propylene glycol in calcipotriene ointment. Cutis 1997: 60: 4344.
  • 69
    Fisher A A, Brancaccio R R. Allergic contact sensitivity to propylene glycol in a lubricant jelly. Arch Dermatol 1979: 115: 1451.
  • 70
    Fowler J F Jr. Contact allergy to propylene glycol in topical corticosteroids. Am J Contact Dermat 1993: 4: 3738.
  • 71
    Gonzalo M A, De Argila D, Garcia J M, Alvarado M I. Allergic contact dermatitis to propylene glycol. Allergy 1999: 54: 8283.
  • 72
    Kim Y J, Kim J H. Allergic contact dermatitis from propylene glycol in Zovirax cream. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 30: 119120.
  • 73
    Piletta P, Pasche-Koo F, Saurat J-H, Hauser C. Contact dermatitis to propylene glycol in topical Zovirax cream. Am J Contact Dermat 1994: 5: 168169.
  • 74
    Ruas E, Goncalo M, Figueiredo A, Goncalo S. Allergic contact dermatitis from minoxidil. Contact Dermatitis 1992: 26: 5758.
  • 75
    Santucci B, Cannistraci C, Cristaudo A, Picardo M. Contact dermatitis from ketoconazole cream. Contact Dermatitis 1992: 27: 274275.
  • 76
    Uter W, Schwanitz H J. Contact dermatitis from propylene glycol in ECG electrode gel. Contact Dermatitis 1996: 34: 230231.
  • 77
    Warshaw T G, Herrmann F. Studies of skin reactions to propylene glycol. J Invest Dermatol 1952: 19: 423429.
  • 78
    Angelini G, Meneghini C L. Contact allergy from propylene glycol. Contact Dermatitis 1981: 7: 197198.
  • 79
    Blondeel A, Oleffe J, Achten G. Contact allergy in 330 dermatological patients. Contact Dermatitis 1978: 4: 270276.
  • 80
    Calas E, Castelain P Y, Piriou A. Epidemiologie des dermatoses de contact a Marseille. Ann Dermatol Venereol (Paris), 1978: 105: 345347.
  • 81
    Fransway A F. The problem of preservation in the 1990s. III. Agents with preservative function independent of formaldehyde release. Am J Contact Dermat 1991: 2: 145174.
  • 82
    Iden D L, Schroeter A L. The vehicle tray revisited: the use of the vehicle tray in assessing allergic contact dermatitis by a 24-hour application method. Contact Dermatitis 1977: 3: 122126.
  • 83
    Romaguera C, Perez A G, Moran M, Miranda A. Propylene glycol in standard patch tests. Contact Dermatitis 1981: 7: 346.
  • 84
    Angelini G, Vena G A, Meneghini C L. Allergic contact dermatitis to some medicaments. Contact Dermatitis 1985: 12: 263269.
  • 85
    George N D, Srinivas C R, Balachandran C, Shenoi S D. Sensitivity to various ingredients of topical preparations following prolonged use. Contact Dermatitis 1990: 23: 367382.
  • 86
    Lammintausta K, Kalimo K, Fagerlund V L. Patch test reactions in atopic patients. Contact Dermatitis 1992: 26: 234240.
  • 87
    Scheuer B, Rüther T, Von Bülow V et al. Häufige Kontaktallergene. Akt Dermatol 1992: 18: 4449.
  • 88
    Hannuksela M, Kousa M, Pirilä V. Allergy to ingredients of vehicles. Contact Dermatitis 1976: 2: 105110.
  • 89
    Connolly M, Buckley D A. Contact dermatitis from propylene glycol in ECG electrodes, complicated by medicament allergy. Contact Dermatitis 2004: 50: 42.
  • 90
    Eguino P, Sanchez A, Agesta N, Lasa O, Raton J A, Diaz-Perez J L. Allergic contact dermatitis due to propylene glycol and parabens in an ultrasonic gel. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 290.
  • 91
    El-Sayed F, Bayle-Lebey P, Marguery M C, Bazex J. Contact dermatitis from propylene glycol in Rifocine. Contact Dermatitis 1995: 33: 127128.
  • 92
    Farrar C W, Bell H K, King C M. Allergic contact dermatitis from propylene glycol in Efudix cream. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 345.
  • 93
    Lamb S R, Ardley H C, Wilkinson S M. Contact allergy to propylene glycol in brassiere padding inserts. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 224225.
  • 94
    Marks J G, Belsito D V, DeLeo V A et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group standard tray patch test results (1992 to 1994). Am J Contact Dermat 1995: 6: 160165.
  • 95
    Marks J G, Belsito D V, DeLeo V A et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch-test results, 1992 to 1994. Arch Dermatol 2000: 136: 272273.
  • 96
    Marks J G, Belsito D V, DeLeo V A et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch-test results, 1998–2000. Am J Contact Dermat 2003: 14: 5962.
  • 97
    Pratt M D, Belsito D V, De Leo V A et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch-test results, 2001–2002 study period. Dermatitis 2004: 15: 176183.
  • 98
    Scheman A J, West D P, Hordinksy M K, Osburn A H, West L E. Alternative formulation for patients with contact reactions to topical 2% and 5% minoxidil vehicle ingredients. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 241.