MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4386704627 · doi:10.1111/cod.14415

Occupational contact allergy to benzyl alcohol in epoxy hardeners

2023· article· en· W4386704627 sur OpenAlex
Maria Pesonen, Katriina Ylinen, Sari Suomela, Katri Suuronen

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueContact Dermatitis · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueContact Dermatitis and Allergies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésEpoxyAllergic contact dermatitisMedicineBenzyl alcoholAllergyDiglycidyl etherContact dermatitisContact allergyDermatologyAlcoholBisphenol AOrganic chemistryChemistry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Benzyl alcohol (phenylmethanol, CAS 100-51-6, INCI: Benzyl Alcohol) is an aromatic alcohol commonly used as a fragrance component, preservative, solvent, food additive (E1519) and excipient in medicinal products.1-4 Despite its widespread use, contact allergy to benzyl alcohol is considered rare.5 We describe a case where occupational exposure to epoxy hardeners was the probable source of exposure and sensitization to benzyl alcohol. The patient is a 24-year-old painter who in her work is involved in the repair and coating of concrete floors and handles 2-component epoxy and polyurethane coatings. She has no history of atopic dermatitis or of dermatitis associated with use of cosmetic or topical medicinal products. For treatment of recalcitrant chronic spontaneous urticaria she currently uses cyclosporine at a daily dose of 200 mg. After 2 years in her present work, she developed eczema on her fingers, wrists, eyelids and anterior thighs where coatings were spilled. The eczema healed on holidays and recurred when at work. The patient was first patch tested at a regional central hospital and found strongly positive to diglycidyl ether of bisphenol A (DGEBA) and F (DGEBF) epoxy resins and 1,4-butanediol diglycidyl ether (BDDGE) and referred for further examinations at FIOH. At FIOH, the patient presented with mild hand and wrist eczema that had recurred at work and healed by the end of the patch tests. Instead, she developed a mild acute facial eczema during patch testing. Patch testing was performed with Finn Chambers (SmartPractice, Calgary, Canada) in accordance with ESCD guidelines6 with baseline series and a selection of FIOH patch test series including epoxy, isocyanate, acrylate, glues and plastics and rubber series. We routinely patch test benzyl alcohol along with the epoxy patch test series. The already diagnosed occupational contact allergens DGEBA and DGEBF were excluded. In addition, some of the patient's current worksite products were patch tested. Of note is that the cyclosporine treatment might have had a suppressing effect on the patch test reactions. The positive patch test results at day 4 are presented in Table 1. 1%, 0.32%, 0.1% ++, Neg, Neg 1%, 0.32%, 0.1% ++, +, Neg Contains benzyl alcohol and MXDA 1%, 0.32%, 0.1% ++, Neg, Neg Contains benzyl alcohol and MXDA 1%, 0.32%, 0.1% ++, +, Neg Contains benzyl alcohol and IPDA The patient had a strong allergic test reaction to benzyl alcohol. According to the safety data sheets, benzyl alcohol was present in seven of the patient's eight epoxy hardeners (concentration ≥25%–50% in each hardener) and in one epoxy resin part (≥10%), and it was present in all the patch test positive epoxy hardeners. As the epoxy hardeners 2 and 3 also contained m-xylylene diamine (MXDA) and epoxy hardener 4 contained isophorone diamine (IPDA), the patient's weak contact allergies to MXDA and IPDA might have contributed to patch test reactions to these hardeners. Benzyl alcohol was also present in a face cream the patient had taken into use shortly before the examinations at FIOH and continued to use it until the end of the patch tests. The use of a face cream that contained benzyl alcohol probably explains the patient's facial eczema that appeared during patch testing. Several of the patient's other cosmetic products were perfumed, but benzyl alcohol was not mentioned in their INCI lists. In this patient case, the regular occupational exposure to epoxy products that contained benzyl alcohol was considered the probable cause of sensitization to benzyl alcohol. The patient's work-related eczema was not only explained by contact allergy to benzyl alcohol but also by contact allergies to several epoxy compounds. Her contact allergies to diglycidyl ethers and MXDA and IPDA as well as the previously diagnosed contact allergies to DGEBA and DGEBF were attributed to regular skin exposure to epoxy coatings used at work. Patch test reaction to diaminodiphenyl methane (MDA) may indicate contact allergy to diphenylmethane diisocyanate (MDI) which was present in one of the patient's polyurethane coating products. Alternatively, it might be attributed to previous exposure to epoxy hardeners that may contain chemicals that structurally resemble MDA such as hydrogenated formaldehyde-benzenamine polymer (FBAP).7 Benzyl alcohol is common in epoxy products. According to the National Chemical Products Register,8 there are currently about 600 benzyl alcohol-containing products on the Finnish market. Most of them are epoxy products such as hardeners, coatings and adhesives. In conclusion, contact allergy to benzyl alcohol may be caused by occupational exposure to epoxy products that contain benzyl alcohol. Maria Pesonen: Data curation; writing – review and editing; writing – original draft; investigation; methodology; conceptualization. Katriina Ylinen: Investigation; methodology; writing – review and editing. Sari Suomela: Conceptualization; writing – review and editing; methodology. Katri Suuronen: Methodology; conceptualization; investigation; data curation; writing – review and editing. No exterior funding. Maria Pesonen has been a speaker of Leo Pharma. Other authors have no conflicts of interests to be declared.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,433
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,030
Tête enseignante GPT0,302
Écart entre enseignants0,271 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle