Fentichlor Photocontact Dermatitis: A Persistent Enigma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fentichlor elicits high rates of positive photopatch test reactions despite its currently unknown clinical relevance. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to provide a comprehensive review of fentichlor, to investigate the characteristics of patients with photosensitivity to fentichlor, and to explore the current uses of fentichlor. METHODS: A review of photopatch test studies involving fentichlor was performed. A retrospective chart review was conducted in patients with positive photopatch test reactions to fentichlor at our institution. Product inquiries were placed to manufacturers of fentichlor to elicit the current uses of fentichlor. RESULTS: In selected photopatch test studies, positive reactions to fentichlor occurred in 0.0% to 11.8% of subjects. We found that 25 companies distribute or manufacture fentichlor worldwide, which includes 2 companies that sell 25-kg drums of fentichlor. The most common current uses of fentichlor are in research, in high throughput screening, and in antibacterial and antifungal creams. CONCLUSIONS: Our review of selected photopatch test studies demonstrates that fentichlor remains a potent photosensitizing allergen worldwide. The bulk quantities of fentichlor available for sale and the current uses of fentichlor suggest that fentichlor may be currently incorporated into consumer products. We recommend that fentichlor remain in the standard series of photopatch test allergens.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".