Prevalence of botanical extract allergy in patients with contact dermatitis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Botanical extracts are used widely in over-the-counter products. They are primarily added for fragrance and their purported healing properties. Numerous case reports of allergic contact allergy to botanical extracts have been published; however, little is known regarding the prevalence of allergic reactions to botanical extracts. Objective: To determine the prevalence of allergic patch-test reactions to a collection of botanical extracts in patients referred for patch testing. Methods: A total of 140 patients were patch-tested to a study tray containing 47 botanical extracts. Patients were divided into two groups: (1) a high-risk group consisting of 21 patients with a clinical diagnosis of contact allergy who were using botanical products and whose contact dermatitis was not fully explained by testing to standard allergens and (2) a control group consisting of 119 patients with no history of botanical extract use and who were being evaluated in a contact dermatitis clinic. Results: Ten of 21 patients (47.6%) in the high-risk group had at least one relevant botanical extract positive reaction. Only 4 patients (3.4%) in the control group had a relevant positive reaction. Four patients in the high-risk group had more than one relevant botanical reaction. Tea tree oil caused the most common relevant positive reaction. Conclusions: Contact allergy to botanicals was common in this highly selected group of patients. Contact dermatitis patients who use botanical products and whose reactions are not fully explained by standard patch testing may benefit from more extensive patch testing to botanical extracts.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)67-72
Number of pages6
JournalDermatitis
Volume15
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jun 2004

Fingerprint

Contact Dermatitis
Hypersensitivity
Tea Tree Oil
Control Groups
Patch Tests
Allergens

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dermatology

Cite this

Prevalence of botanical extract allergy in patients with contact dermatitis. / Simpson, Eric; Law, Sandra V.; Storrs, Frances.

In: Dermatitis, Vol. 15, No. 2, 06.2004, p. 67-72.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{11afdd8896d446eb8a731ae7535cdd5f,
title = "Prevalence of botanical extract allergy in patients with contact dermatitis",
abstract = "Background: Botanical extracts are used widely in over-the-counter products. They are primarily added for fragrance and their purported healing properties. Numerous case reports of allergic contact allergy to botanical extracts have been published; however, little is known regarding the prevalence of allergic reactions to botanical extracts. Objective: To determine the prevalence of allergic patch-test reactions to a collection of botanical extracts in patients referred for patch testing. Methods: A total of 140 patients were patch-tested to a study tray containing 47 botanical extracts. Patients were divided into two groups: (1) a high-risk group consisting of 21 patients with a clinical diagnosis of contact allergy who were using botanical products and whose contact dermatitis was not fully explained by testing to standard allergens and (2) a control group consisting of 119 patients with no history of botanical extract use and who were being evaluated in a contact dermatitis clinic. Results: Ten of 21 patients (47.6{\%}) in the high-risk group had at least one relevant botanical extract positive reaction. Only 4 patients (3.4{\%}) in the control group had a relevant positive reaction. Four patients in the high-risk group had more than one relevant botanical reaction. Tea tree oil caused the most common relevant positive reaction. Conclusions: Contact allergy to botanicals was common in this highly selected group of patients. Contact dermatitis patients who use botanical products and whose reactions are not fully explained by standard patch testing may benefit from more extensive patch testing to botanical extracts.",
author = "Eric Simpson and Law, {Sandra V.} and Frances Storrs",
year = "2004",
month = "6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "15",
pages = "67--72",
journal = "Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug",
issn = "1710-3568",
publisher = "Decker Publishing",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prevalence of botanical extract allergy in patients with contact dermatitis

AU - Simpson, Eric

AU - Law, Sandra V.

AU - Storrs, Frances

PY - 2004/6

Y1 - 2004/6

N2 - Background: Botanical extracts are used widely in over-the-counter products. They are primarily added for fragrance and their purported healing properties. Numerous case reports of allergic contact allergy to botanical extracts have been published; however, little is known regarding the prevalence of allergic reactions to botanical extracts. Objective: To determine the prevalence of allergic patch-test reactions to a collection of botanical extracts in patients referred for patch testing. Methods: A total of 140 patients were patch-tested to a study tray containing 47 botanical extracts. Patients were divided into two groups: (1) a high-risk group consisting of 21 patients with a clinical diagnosis of contact allergy who were using botanical products and whose contact dermatitis was not fully explained by testing to standard allergens and (2) a control group consisting of 119 patients with no history of botanical extract use and who were being evaluated in a contact dermatitis clinic. Results: Ten of 21 patients (47.6%) in the high-risk group had at least one relevant botanical extract positive reaction. Only 4 patients (3.4%) in the control group had a relevant positive reaction. Four patients in the high-risk group had more than one relevant botanical reaction. Tea tree oil caused the most common relevant positive reaction. Conclusions: Contact allergy to botanicals was common in this highly selected group of patients. Contact dermatitis patients who use botanical products and whose reactions are not fully explained by standard patch testing may benefit from more extensive patch testing to botanical extracts.

AB - Background: Botanical extracts are used widely in over-the-counter products. They are primarily added for fragrance and their purported healing properties. Numerous case reports of allergic contact allergy to botanical extracts have been published; however, little is known regarding the prevalence of allergic reactions to botanical extracts. Objective: To determine the prevalence of allergic patch-test reactions to a collection of botanical extracts in patients referred for patch testing. Methods: A total of 140 patients were patch-tested to a study tray containing 47 botanical extracts. Patients were divided into two groups: (1) a high-risk group consisting of 21 patients with a clinical diagnosis of contact allergy who were using botanical products and whose contact dermatitis was not fully explained by testing to standard allergens and (2) a control group consisting of 119 patients with no history of botanical extract use and who were being evaluated in a contact dermatitis clinic. Results: Ten of 21 patients (47.6%) in the high-risk group had at least one relevant botanical extract positive reaction. Only 4 patients (3.4%) in the control group had a relevant positive reaction. Four patients in the high-risk group had more than one relevant botanical reaction. Tea tree oil caused the most common relevant positive reaction. Conclusions: Contact allergy to botanicals was common in this highly selected group of patients. Contact dermatitis patients who use botanical products and whose reactions are not fully explained by standard patch testing may benefit from more extensive patch testing to botanical extracts.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4143136341&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=4143136341&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 15473331

AN - SCOPUS:4143136341

VL - 15

SP - 67

EP - 72

JO - Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug

JF - Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug

SN - 1710-3568

IS - 2

ER -