To study the frequency of sensitization to 26 fragrances to be labelled according to current European regulation. During 4 periods of 6 months, from 1 January 2003 to 31 December 2004, 26 fragrances were patch tested additionally to the standard series in a total of 21 325 patients; the number of patients tested with each of the fragrances ranged from 1658 to 4238. Hydroxymethylpentylcyclohexene carboxaldehyde (HMPCC) was tested throughout all periods. The following frequencies of sensitization (rates in %, standardized for sex and age) were observed: tree moss (2.4%), HMPCC (2.3), oak moss (2.0), hydroxycitronellal (1.3), isoeugenol (1.1), cinnamic aldehyde (1.0), farnesol (0.9), cinnamic alcohol (0.6), citral (0.6), citronellol (0.5), geraniol (0.4), eugenol (0.4), coumarin (0.4), lilial (0.3), amyl‐cinnamic alcohol (0.3), benzyl cinnamate (0.3), benzyl alcohol (0.3), linalool (0.2), methylheptin carbonate (0.2), amyl‐cinnamic aldehyde (0.1), hexyl‐cinnamic aldehyde (0.1), limonene (0.1), benzyl salicylate (0.1), γ‐methylionon (0.1), benzyl benzoate (0.0), anisyl alcohol (0.0). 1) Substances with higher sensitization frequencies were characterized by a considerable number of ‘++/+++’ reactions. 2) Substances with low sensitization frequencies were characterized by a high number of doubtful/irritant and a low number of stronger (++/+++) reactions. 3) There are obviously fragrances among the 26 which are, with regard to contact allergy, of great, others of minor, and some of no importance at all.

Contact allergies are complex diseases, and one of the important challenges for public health and immunology. The German ‘Federal Institute for Risk Assessment’ hosted an ‘International Workshop on Contact Dermatitis’. The scope of the workshop was to discuss new discoveries and developments in the field of contact dermatitis. This included the epidemiology and molecular biology of contact allergy, as well as the development of new in vitro methods. Furthermore, it considered regulatory aspects aiming to reduce exposure to contact sensitisers. An estimated 15–20% of the general population suffers from contact allergy. Workplace exposure, age, sex, use of consumer products and genetic predispositions were identified as the most important risk factors. Research highlights included: advances in understanding of immune responses to contact sensitisers, the importance of autoxidation or enzyme-mediated oxidation for the activation of chemicals, the mechanisms through which hapten-protein conjugates are formed and the development of novel in vitro strategies for the identification of skin-sensitising chemicals. Dendritic cell cultures and structure-activity relationships are being developed to identify potential contact allergens. However, the local lymph node assay (LLNA) presently remains the validated method of choice for hazard identification and characterisation. At the workshop the use of the LLNA for regulatory purposes and for quantitative risk assessment was also discussed.

On behalf of the ESCD working group: European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA)The present guidelines aim to support clinical researchers in adequately presenting data on contact allergy, and to use statistical tests appropriate for their data. A description of the mode of selection of patients, and of their relevant demographic details, is an essential prerequisite for the correct interpretation of study results. Proportions and rates, if regarded as estimate of these parameters of a target populations, should normally be supplemented with confidence intervals to address precision. Concordance, i.e., agreement between two ratings in a dependent sample, must be quantified with a chance-corrected measure such as Cohen's kappa coefficient. If the diagnostic quality of an outcome is being assessed, standard measures like sensitivity and specificity, as well as the prevalence-dependent positive and negative predictive values should be calculated. Often, contact allergy to a certain substance depends on several factors. In this situation, depending on the research question, techniques like stratification, standardization or multifactorial analysis should be employed. With increasing complexity of statistical description and analysis, consulting with a biostatistician is often mandatory. Adequate design and performance of experiments and collection of standardized, valid clinical data are well-recognized prerequisites of high-quality studies. However, only if the statistical analysis and the presentation of its results is also of a sufficiently high standard will authors fully exploit the potential of their study and will readers fully be able to evaluate and appreciate its results. The present review aims at providing clinical researchers in the field of contact allergy (CA) with guidelines on selecting those descriptive measures and statistical methods which are most appropriate for their problem. Research questions regarding CA typically comprise the profile of a certain allergen (e.g. pattern of reactions, probably under different test conditions, demographic variables of sensitized patients, spectrum of cosensitization) or address certain subpopulations with their spectrum of allergens. Owing to the complexity of some research questions, however, the instruments included in this 'toolbox' might not suffice. Direct consultation and liasing with biostatisticians is always advisable. Outcomes and FactorsVisual evaluation of type, extent and severity of clinical dermatitis and patch test reactions is still the mainstay of patient management and of clinical CA research. This, combined with the patient's history, including information on occupation, possible sources of allergen exposure and, if possible, the relevance of positive patch test reactions, can be subject to statistical analysis. Hence, the present guidance focuses on such categorical outcomes. Instrument-based measurements, such as those for transepidermal water loss and other non-invasive techniques, microdialysates, (immuno-)histological sl...

Contact allergy (CA) surveillance networks provide information to a multitude of stakeholders, which is indispensable for evidence-based decision-making in the field of prevention. Methods and results of the German surveillance system on CA are reviewed and discussed with reference to other systems. The German network structure comprises 56 departments of dermatology and includes all patients who are patch-tested for suspected CA. Data analysis considers the results of patch testing and further pertinent information for each patient. Following aspects are addressed: (i) the description of the clinical population, (ii) evaluation of patch test reactions, (iii) relationship between patch test results and population characteristics. Trend analyses on chromate (decreasing), epoxy resin (increasing) and nickel (heterogeneous) served as examples for surveillance system analyses, with the identification of sentinel events, as well as proof of success or failure of prevention. In addition, external data sources can be used such as sales data of patch test preparations to estimate frequencies of sensitization on a population level. National prescription data of drugs and statistics of labelling of preservatives on cosmetics can be included, the latter two approaches allowing for risk estimates conferred by specific allergens.

In the planning and implementation of measures aimed at preventing occupational contact dermatitis, the focus should be on the identified high-risk occupational groups and the most common occupational allergies.