The Experts below are selected from a list of 51 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Riitta Jolanki - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
occupational methacrylate and acrylate Allergy Cross reactions and possible screening allergens
Contact Dermatitis, 2010Co-Authors: Kristiina Aaltokorte, Majlen Henrikseckerman, Outi Kuuliala, Riitta JolankiAbstract:Background. Acrylic resin monomers, especially acrylates and methacrylates, are important occupational allergens. Aims. To analyse patterns of concomitant patch test reactions to acrylic monomers in relation to exposure, and to suggest possible screening allergens. Patients/methods. We reviewed the patch test files for the years 1994–2009 at the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health for allergic reactions to acrylic monomers, and analysed the clinical records of sensitized patients. Results. In a group of 66 patients allergic to an acrylic monomer, the most commonly positive allergens were three methacrylates, namely ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate (EGDMA), 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2-HEMA) and 2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate (2-HPMA), and an acrylate, namely diethyleneglycol diacrylate (DEGDA). The patterns of concomitant reactions imply that exposure to methacrylates may induce Cross-reactivity to acrylates, whereas exposure to acrylates usually does not lead to Cross-Allergy to methacrylates. Screening for triethyleneglycol diacrylate (TREGDA) in the baseline series was found to be useful, as 3 of 8 patients with diagnosed occupational acrylate Allergy might have been missed without the screening. Conclusions. A short screening series of four allergens, EGDMA, DEGDA, 2-HPMA and pentaerythritol triacrylate (PETA), would have screened 93% of our 66 patients; each of the remaining 5 patients reacted to different acrylic monomer(s).
-
occupational allergic contact dermatitis from 2 hydroxyethyl methacrylate and ethylene glycol dimethacrylate in a modified acrylic structural adhesive
Contact Dermatitis, 1995Co-Authors: Lasse Kanerva, Riitta Jolanki, Timo Leino, Tuula EstlanderAbstract:Acrylates have a broad area of application in various products including glues, sealants and adhesives. Whereas anaerobic acrylic sealants arc well-known sensitizers, acrylate glues that cure in air have only seldom been reported as allergens. Here a patient sensitized to such a glue, and developing hand dermatitis that spread to the lower arms, chest, neck and face, is presented. Her glue was analyzed by gas chroma tography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) and contained 24,6% 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2-HEMA) and 0.4% ethylene glyol dimethacrylate (EGDMA). These 2 acrylate compounds, as well as her glue, provoked an allergic patch test reaction. Also many other acrylate compounds, e.g., tetrahydrofurfuryl methacrylate, gave an allergic reaction indicating Cross-Allergy. The patient could not continue in her previous workplace because of severely-relapsing skin symptoms.
Tuula Estlander - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
occupational allergic contact dermatitis from 2 hydroxyethyl methacrylate and ethylene glycol dimethacrylate in a modified acrylic structural adhesive
Contact Dermatitis, 1995Co-Authors: Lasse Kanerva, Riitta Jolanki, Timo Leino, Tuula EstlanderAbstract:Acrylates have a broad area of application in various products including glues, sealants and adhesives. Whereas anaerobic acrylic sealants arc well-known sensitizers, acrylate glues that cure in air have only seldom been reported as allergens. Here a patient sensitized to such a glue, and developing hand dermatitis that spread to the lower arms, chest, neck and face, is presented. Her glue was analyzed by gas chroma tography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) and contained 24,6% 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2-HEMA) and 0.4% ethylene glyol dimethacrylate (EGDMA). These 2 acrylate compounds, as well as her glue, provoked an allergic patch test reaction. Also many other acrylate compounds, e.g., tetrahydrofurfuryl methacrylate, gave an allergic reaction indicating Cross-Allergy. The patient could not continue in her previous workplace because of severely-relapsing skin symptoms.
Lasse Kanerva - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
occupational allergic contact dermatitis from 2 hydroxyethyl methacrylate and ethylene glycol dimethacrylate in a modified acrylic structural adhesive
Contact Dermatitis, 1995Co-Authors: Lasse Kanerva, Riitta Jolanki, Timo Leino, Tuula EstlanderAbstract:Acrylates have a broad area of application in various products including glues, sealants and adhesives. Whereas anaerobic acrylic sealants arc well-known sensitizers, acrylate glues that cure in air have only seldom been reported as allergens. Here a patient sensitized to such a glue, and developing hand dermatitis that spread to the lower arms, chest, neck and face, is presented. Her glue was analyzed by gas chroma tography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) and contained 24,6% 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2-HEMA) and 0.4% ethylene glyol dimethacrylate (EGDMA). These 2 acrylate compounds, as well as her glue, provoked an allergic patch test reaction. Also many other acrylate compounds, e.g., tetrahydrofurfuryl methacrylate, gave an allergic reaction indicating Cross-Allergy. The patient could not continue in her previous workplace because of severely-relapsing skin symptoms.
Martine Morisset - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Cross allergenicity of peanut and lupine the risk of lupine Allergy in patients allergic to peanuts
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1999Co-Authors: D A Moneretvautrin, L Guerin, G Kanny, Jenny Flabbee, Sophie Fremont, Martine MorissetAbstract:Abstract Background: Peanut Allergy is common, but Cross-Allergy between legumes is rare. Proteins from Lupinus albus are increasingly eaten in the form of seeds or additives to wheat flour. The risk of Cross-allergenicity is still insufficiently known. Objective: We sought to study the risk of Cross-Allergy to lupine in patients allergic to peanut and to study lupine allergenicity. Methods: Twenty-four patients allergic to peanuts were studied by means of skin prick tests with native lupine flour from Lupinus albus. Double-blind oral challenge tests were performed with lupine flour and peanut in 8 of these patients. Specific IgEs were assayed for peanut, lupine flour, and pollen in 6 sera. RAST inhibition tests for lupine pollen by peanut were performed on 4 of these sera. Peanut and lupine flour immunoblots were carried out for 6 sera, and Crossed immunoblot inhibitions for peanut by lupine flour and lupine flour by peanut were carried out for 2 sera. Results: The skin prick test responses with lupine flour were positive in 11 (44%) subjects. The challenge test responses were positive in 7 of 8 subjects at the same doses as with peanut. The major lupine flour allergen (molecular mass, 43 kd) is present in peanuts. The RAST inhibition and immunoblot tests indicated Cross-reactivity of peanut with the lupine flour and pollen. Conclusions: The risk of Crossed peanut-lupine Allergy is high, contrary to the risk with other legumes. The inclusion of 10% lupine flour in wheat flour without mandatory labeling makes lupine a hidden allergen, presenting a major risk of Cross-reaction in subjects already allergic to peanut products. A high sensitizing potential can also be postulated for this legume. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 1999;104:883-8.)
Christine Sauvage - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
phenotypical characterization of peanut allergic children with differences in Cross Allergy to tree nuts and other legumes
Pediatric Allergy and Immunology, 2017Co-Authors: Mathias Cousin, Stephane Verdun, Maxime Seynave, Annechristine Vilain, Amelie Lansiaux, Anne Decoster, Christine SauvageAbstract:Background Peanut Allergy in children is often associated with allergies to tree nuts and/or legumes. The aim of the present study was to analyze in cluster a cohort of children allergic to peanuts and assessed for Cross-reactivity to nuts and legumes and to identify different phenotypes. Methods We included retrospectively 317 children with peanut Allergy evaluated at the Allergy Unit of the Saint Vincent Hospital of Lille in the last 12 years. A complete work-up for peanut Allergy and nuts and legumes was carried out for each patient. A hierarchical agglomerative clustering method was used to search for clusters of individuals in the evaluated cohort. Results Cross-Allergy to TN and/or other legumes was identified in 137 patients (43.2%), atopic dermatitis being a major risk factor (adjusted OR = 16 [95%CI: 7.4-37]; p<0.001). Three phenotypes emerged from cluster analysis. Cluster 1 (72 patients) is characterized by high level of rAra h 2, low threshold reactive doses for peanut and high proportion of asthma; Cluster 2 (93 patients) is characterized by high threshold reactive doses for peanut and the lowest proportion of Cross-Allergy to TN and/or legumes; Cluster 3 (152 patients) has a high risk of Cross-Allergy to TN and/or legumes and most patients suffer from eczema. Conclusions The three phenotypes highlighted by the present study could be useful to identify children with high risk of Cross-allergic reaction to TNs and legumes early after PA diagnosis. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.