Patch Test Reactions to Corticosteroids: Retrospective Analysis From the North American Contact Dermatitis Group 2007–2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Corticosteroids may cause delayed hypersensitivity. On the basis of structure, the following 4 groups of corticosteroids are recognized: A, B, C, and D (subdivided into D1 and D2). More recently, a newer classification system subdivides corticosteroids into groups 1, 2, and 3. Cross-reactions are unpredictable. The objective of this study was to describe positive patch test and co-reaction patterns to corticosteroids. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective analysis of 17,978 patients patch tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group between 2007 and 2014 was performed. Corticosteroids tested during this period included the following: tixocortol-21-pivalate 1.0% petroleum (pet), budesonide 0.1% pet, triamcinolone acetonide 1.0% pet, desoximetasone 1.0% pet, clobetasol-17-propionate 1.0% pet, and hydrocortisone-17-butyrate (HC-17-B) 1.0% (pet and alcohol). Overall, 4.12% (n = 741) of patients had 1 or more positive reactions to corticosteroids. Tixocortol-21-pivalate positivity was the most common (2.26%), followed by budesonide (0.87%), HC-17-B (0.43%), clobetasol-17-proprionate (0.32%), and desoximetasone (0.16%). Reaction strength was strong (++ or +++) in almost twice as many tixocortol and budesonide reactions (>64%) as compared with the other 3 corticosteroids (<34.5%). Of the patients with positive corticosteroid reactions (n = 741), most (70.7%) had sensitivity to only 1 corticosteroid. Co-reactivity was highest between desoximetasone and budesonide. CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivity to corticosteroids is important. Consistent with other studies, the highest frequency of corticosteroid positivity was seen in group A (tixocortol-21-pivalate), followed by group B (budesonide) and D2 (HC-17-B). Co-reactivity varied; more studies are needed to fully understand structural cross-reactivity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".