Contact dermatitis · 2014
Reaction profile in patch testing with allergens formed during vulcanization of rubber.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hansson Christer, Pontén Ann, Svedman Cecilia, Bergendorff Ola
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Vulcanization of rubber changes its allergen pattern.
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the contact allergic reactivity profile of users of finished rubber products.
METHODS: Twenty-four patients with known contact allergy to rubber accelerators were patch tested with 21 compounds found in chemical analyses of vulcanized rubber products. No diphenylguanidine, p-phenylenediamine antioxidants or thioureas were included in the study.
RESULTS: Thiuram monosulfides formed during vulcanization showed generally stronger test reactions than the corresponding thiuram disulfides. We also obtained more positive thiuram reactions to the monosulfides than to the disulfides. A positive reaction to a dithiocarbamate was accompanied by a positive reaction to the corresponding thiuram, except for 1 patient. The nitrogen substituents showed only minor differences between the methyl, ethyl and pentamethylene groups, but the butyl derivatives gave, in most cases, a negative response. Dialkylthiocarbamyl benzothiazole sulfides, formed between thiurams and mercaptobenzothiazoles during vulcanization, showed strong test reactions in almost all patients who were sensitive to dithiocarbamates, thiurams, or mercaptobenzothiazoles.
CONCLUSIONS: We found thiuram monosulfides to be better markers of thiuram sensitivity than the corresponding disulfides or dithiocarbamates. Surprisingly, the dialkylthiocarbamyl benzothiazole sulfides were good markers of both thiuram and mercaptobenzothiazole sensitivity. This is an unexpected finding that needs to be confirmed in a larger study.
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the contact allergic reactivity profile of users of finished rubber products.
METHODS: Twenty-four patients with known contact allergy to rubber accelerators were patch tested with 21 compounds found in chemical analyses of vulcanized rubber products. No diphenylguanidine, p-phenylenediamine antioxidants or thioureas were included in the study.
RESULTS: Thiuram monosulfides formed during vulcanization showed generally stronger test reactions than the corresponding thiuram disulfides. We also obtained more positive thiuram reactions to the monosulfides than to the disulfides. A positive reaction to a dithiocarbamate was accompanied by a positive reaction to the corresponding thiuram, except for 1 patient. The nitrogen substituents showed only minor differences between the methyl, ethyl and pentamethylene groups, but the butyl derivatives gave, in most cases, a negative response. Dialkylthiocarbamyl benzothiazole sulfides, formed between thiurams and mercaptobenzothiazoles during vulcanization, showed strong test reactions in almost all patients who were sensitive to dithiocarbamates, thiurams, or mercaptobenzothiazoles.
CONCLUSIONS: We found thiuram monosulfides to be better markers of thiuram sensitivity than the corresponding disulfides or dithiocarbamates. Surprisingly, the dialkylthiocarbamyl benzothiazole sulfides were good markers of both thiuram and mercaptobenzothiazole sensitivity. This is an unexpected finding that needs to be confirmed in a larger study.