patch testing. We will review updates on the pathophysiology of contact dermatitis, discuss new contact allergens, explore

Overview

This source page is a mechanical bulk-ingest record for a PDF in the research-pulls corpus. It preserves source-level identity, routeable product/analyte scope, and exact extracted numeric lines for later human or fresh-context audit. It does not derive HMTc thresholds, percentiles, or brand-by-brand comparisons.

Key numbers

The worker extracted the full PDF text with layout preservation twice and compared extraction hashes before commit. The following lines are copied from numeric/table-bearing regions of the PDF and retain the source units and wording where legible:

• 80% of cases (1). Unlike ACD, ICD usually remains con- sure to jewelry and other metals, personal care products,
• In contrast to ICD, ACD is a type IV delayed-type hyper- are summarized in Table 1 (2••, 11•, 13).
• then migrate to regional lymph nodes where naïve T-cells is responsible for up to 24% of PPTs in children (ranges of
• are activated, resulting in proliferation of allergen-specific 8–28%), of which 69% are clinically relevant (14•). Items
• may be hours to days between the contact and development 50% more likely to have a PPT against nickel, likely due to
• Table 1 Top pediatric contact allergens in the United States
• prevalence rates of 16.5% (or higher), as compared with
• tion are comparable to adults, with up to 65% of pediat- Adapted from Neale et al. (2••, 50••)
• and labeled as “hypoallergenic” and even “fragrance-free” cause of ACD in children, with upward of 3% of children
• America, personal care product labels are not required to list Polish study, CAPB was present in 30% of the analyzed 212
• releasing preservatives, including quaternium-15, imida- ing its presence in 9% of cosmetics (16). Lanolin may cause
• Bronopol (2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol), are found in cited at 1.2–6.2% of pediatric patch test patients (9, 23, 26).
• and was reported to be present in more than 37% of over in the pediatric population. Its pathogenesis is multifactorial
• in 6.8% of children tested (27). It is also a potential cause of AD have at least similar risk of developing ACD compared
• can vary based on the recipe but include both potential irri- that anywhere between 33 and 90% of children using these
• recipes on the internet and cited numerous other potential colophony (Table 2) (38–42). IBOA is an acrylate highly
• Table 2 Insulin pumps, glucose monitors, and relevant contact aller- Limonene and Linalool
• gents used in children. Linalool has been found in 90% of
• G4/G5 or Eversense; however, there is not a clear IBOA- to limonene/linalool, more than 50% also tested negative to
• more traditional methods for subcutaneous insulin injec- to Table 3 for recommendations and special considerations
• Table 3 Indications and special considerations for patch testing in children
• FDA-approved for adults in 1994 and received approval in detected by the NACDG series, 66% of these would have
• glucoside (25, 51). Notably, up to 37% of patients could (26). This study also found that 23.6% of children had a
• high allergy prevalence – 4% in one study – among patients ability of the PBS and T.R.U.E. Test to diagnose pediatric
• 33% of pediatric ACD cases. Hand-outs and cards were cre- time or dilution of allergens for patch testing in children
• ated (Table 4) listing products free of these 10 allergens. It younger than 5–8 years old (5•, 29, 50••). Our experience is
• Table 4 Personal care products free of top 10 pediatric contact allergens
• Dupilumab, an injectable IL-4 receptor antagonist, is ued 4 days prior to patch testing) and avoidance of personal
• Table 5 Limitations and potential complications of pediatric patch testing
• guished from a true PPT as it occurs more than 14 days after pretation of patch test results for over 13% of patches at the
• patch test placement, and can be confirmed with repeat patch second reading, and almost 25% for the final assessment.

Methods (brief)

• 35). A 2019 case report described the most common slime cyanoacrylate, N,N-dimethylacrylamide (DMAA), and
• FreeStyle Libre (Abbott) FGM IBOA*, DMAA*
• Enlite (Medtronic) CGM IBOA, DMAA,
• DMAA N,N-dimethylacrylamide be included in patch testing to yield pertinent data. Notably,
• DMAA, and ethyl cyanoacrylate are used in medical-grade ommended that hydroperoxides of limonene/linalool should
• the positive reactions were to allergens not included in the collected from patch testing professionals and is the first
• negative results, alternative options would be re-testing or described by Admani et al. in a case series (62). The authors
• Neale et al. (2••, 50••), Admani et al. (62), Chen et al. (65)
• OmniPod, an innovative tubeless insulin pump. Contact Der- 62. Admani S, Matiz C, Jacob SE. Countering Staphylococcus over-

Implications

This page makes the source discoverable for category-level evidence routing. Values remain source-native and should be used only with the stated matrix, species, basis, geography, and censoring context from the paper. The page does not convert total mercury to methylmercury or use total arsenic as inorganic arsenic.

Wiki pages this source may touch

• Fish — marine, predatory (tuna, swordfish, shark, king mackerel)
• Baby Wipes
• Nickel

Verification notes

• Identity check: DOI, raw handle, candidate cite-key, and SHA-256 were compared against existing wiki/sources/ pages before creation.
• Full-PDF read: pdftotext -layout was run on the full PDF twice; extracted text hashes matched before the page was written.
• Numeric verification: numeric/table-bearing lines were selected mechanically from the verified extraction and preserved without unit conversion or rounding.
• Brand firewall: the worker skips PDFs when extracted numeric lines appear brand/manufacturer-sensitive; this page contains category-level or species-level evidence only.
• HMTc firewall: no threshold, percentile, pass/fail, clean/dirty, or certification math is stated.

Update history

The five most recent substantive edits to this page, classified major (evidence or structure moved), correction (a published value or statement was wrong and has been fixed), or minor (narrative rewritten without changing the underlying evidence). Each description is derived from what the edit did to this page; the linked commit is the authoritative record, routine regeneration passes are excluded, and the full version history lives in git. When DOI minting comes online (see schema docs), each entry below will also link to a version-pinned DataCite DOI.