Clinical Manifestations, Treatment, and Prevention of Acute Irritant Contact Dermatitis Caused by 2,4-Dichloro-5-Methylpyrimidine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are no reported cases of 2,4-dichloro-5-methylpyrimidine (DCP)-induced irritant contact dermatitis (ICD). OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to summarize the clinical features, treatment, and protective measures for DCP-induced ICD. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data from 64 patients with DCP-induced ICD and the protective measures in a DCP manufacturing factory. RESULTS: Disease onset occurred 1 to 10 minutes after DCP single exposure in all 64 patients. The contact site developed edematous erythematous skin lesions with clear boundaries. Other symptoms included a burning sensation (n = 48), pruritus (n = 16), headache (n = 4), nausea/vomiting (n = 3), and syncope (n = 1). Ten patients developed pruritic rash over the whole body 1 to 4 days after contacting DCP. Histopathologic examination of the lesions was performed in 8 patients; all 8 showed manifestations of ICD. A patch test with 1% DCP ethanol solution was performed in 7 patients. One patient withdrew because of pruritus and massive erythema over the whole body. Four patients had a strong reaction, and 2 patients had a very strong reaction. All patients were cured. Positive-pressure inflatable protective clothing protected workers from the outside environment to prevent DCP-induced ICD. CONCLUSIONS: 2,4-Dichloro-5-methylpyrimidine exposure induces acute ICD and a delayed allergic reaction in some patients (15.6%). Positive-pressure inflatable protective clothing prevents DCP-induced ICD.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".