Translate this page into:
The outcome of delayed patch test readings on day 7 in Thai population: A prospective analytic study
*Corresponding author: Thanradee Ngeywijit, Department of Medical Services, The Institute of Dermatology, Ministry of Public Health, Bangkok, Thailand. thanradee.nn@gmail.com
-
Received: ,
Accepted: ,
How to cite this article: Ngeywijit T, Tresukosol P, Puangphet P, Sajjachareonpong P, Powanusorn N, Ongthawekiat R. The outcome of delayed patch test readings on day 7 in Thai population: A prospective analytic study. Indian J Skin Allergy. 2025;4:154-61. doi: 10.25259/IJSA_29_2025
Abstract
Objectives:
This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of delayed patch test readings on day 7 compared to the commonly used day 4 protocol and to identify patient characteristics and allergens associated with new positive reactions observed on day 7. Ideally, patch test readings should be performed on three occasions: at 48 hours (day 2), at 72–96 hours (day 3 or 4), and at day 7. This schedule maximizes the detection of both early and late reactions, ensuring the highest diagnostic accuracy. However, in real-life clinical practice, three readings are often impractical. Most centers conduct two readings at 48 and 96 hours, which capture the majority of contact allergies. Many studies suggest that an additional reading around day 7 may detect 7–30% more contact allergies. To date, no study has evaluated this extended schedule in Thai population.
Material and Methods:
A total of 239 participants with suspected allergic contact dermatitis who underwent patch tests between June 2023 and September 2024 were enrolled in this study. Patch testing was performed using the Institute of Dermatology’s 32-allergen baseline standard series, supplemented by additional series tailored to the patient’s history and rash characteristics. The tested allergens were occluded for 48 hours, and readings were conducted on day 2 (48 hours), day 4 (96 hours), and day 7 (168 hours) after the application. Results were interpreted following the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group criteria.
Results:
Of the 239 participants, 28 (11.72%) demonstrated new positive patch test reactions on day 7 reading. The allergens with the highest proportions of the new positive reactions on day 7, in order, were potassium dichromate (60%), cobalt (57.14%), and p-phenylenediamine (42.86%). All delayed reactions exhibited a reaction strength of 1+. No significant associations were found between age, sex, underlying diseases, occupation, rash characteristics, and the positive patch test results on day 7.
Conclusion:
Our study showed that 11.72% of participants developed new positive patch test results on day 7 reading, consistent with findings from the previous literature. Delayed patch test readings are valuable for identifying additional positive reactions to certain allergens, such as metals. Limitations of this study include its single-center design and relatively small sample size.
Keywords
Allergic contact dermatitis
Delayed patch test reading
Late patch test reactions
INTRODUCTION
Patch testing is the gold standard for diagnosing allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). According to the European Society of Contact Dermatitis guidelines, at least two patch test readings are recommended ‒ at 48 hours (day 2), 72– 96 hours (day 3 or 4), and around day 7 to maximize the detection of both early and late reactions, ensuring the highest diagnostic accuracy.[1] However, in real-life clinical practice, performing three readings is often impractical. Most centers conduct two readings at 48 and 96 hours, which capture the majority of contact allergies.[1,2] Nevertheless, multiple studies suggest that an additional reading around day 7 may detect 7–30% more contact allergies.[1,2] A delayed reading on day 7 has been reported to identify late positive reactions, particularly to certain allergens such as metals (cobalt and chromate), topical antibiotics, and corticosteroids.[3-6] Factors associated with delayed positive reactions include age, sex, duration of contact with the allergen, underlying diseases, occupation, and rash characteristics.[4,6-8]
To date, no study has evaluated this extended reading schedule in the Thai population. This study aims to compare the results of delayed patch test readings on day 7 with the standard day 4 protocol and to identify patient characteristics associated with positive reactions on day 7. These findings are crucial for preventing false-negative results and improving diagnostic accuracy, which may influence patient treatment guidelines.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Study design
This was a prospective analytic study conducted at the Institute of Dermatology, Ministry of Public Health, Bangkok, Thailand. The study period was from June 2023 to September 2024. The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Institute of Dermatology (IRB/IEC 014/2566) and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of delayed patch test readings on day 7 compared to the commonly used day 4 protocol and to identify patient characteristics and allergens associated with new positive reactions observed on day 7. Information on the study procedures, benefits, and potential side effects was given to all participants, and written informed consent was obtained before enrollment.
Subject
A total of 239 participants with suspected ACD who underwent patch tests during the study period, in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, were enrolled in this study.
Inclusion criteria
Male and female patients aged 18–70 years with a history of localized or generalized eczema
Able to read and understand the Thai language and voluntarily sign informed consent documents.
Exclusion criteria
Patients who were unable to attend patch test readings as scheduled
Pregnant or breastfeeding individuals
History of severe allergic reactions (anaphylaxis) to patch-test substances
Inability to avoid contact with water in the area where the patch test was applied
Presence of widespread eczema or active dermatitis
Exposure to intense sunlight or radiotherapy within the past 4 weeks
Use of immunosuppressive drugs in the past 2–4 weeks
Application of topical steroids to the test area within the past 7 days.
Study protocol
Patch testing was performed using the Institute of Dermatology’s 32-allergen baseline standard series, supplemented by additional allergens (Chemotechnique Diagnostics, Sweden) tailored to the patient’s history and rash characteristics. Allergens were applied to the upper back using Finn Chamber® on Scanpor® tape. The allergens were occluded for 48 hours, with readings conducted on day 2 (48 hours), day 4 (96 hours), and day 7 (168 hours) after the application. Results were interpreted by dermatologists practicing in the contact dermatitis clinic, according to the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group criteria. A negative reaction (–) indicates no reaction. A doubtful reaction (+/‒) is characterized by faint erythema only, without infiltration, and possibly with an isolated papule. A weak positive reaction (+) involves erythema, infiltration, and possibly papules. A strong positive reaction (++) is defined by erythema, infiltration, papules, and vesicles. An extreme positive reaction (+++) is defined by intense erythema, infiltration, and coalescing vesicles. Irritant reactions include pustular, purpuric reactions, and large blisters or bullae that are not caused by the aggregation of small blisters, erythematous reactions limited to the edge of the chamber, and discrete scaly reactions.[1,3]
Positive patch test results were the final patch test reaction that remained positive on day 4. A delayed positive reaction was defined as a change from a negative result (‒ or +/‒) on day 4 to a positive result (+, ++, or +++) on day 7. Demographic data, including age, sex, occupation, underlying disorders, and rash characteristics, were collected for further analysis in our study.
Statistical analysis
Descriptive data were presented as numbers with percentages, means, and standard deviations. For each allergen, the percentage of positive patch test reactions on day 4 was compared with that on day 7 using the McNemar test for correlated proportions, with P < 0.05 considered statistically significant. Univariable logistic regression was performed to analyze the correlation between patient characteristics and allergens associated with new positive day 7 reactions, expressed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical analyses were performed using International Business Machines Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 23 and Microsoft Excel 2016.
RESULTS
A total of 239 participants (77.15% female, 22.59% male, mean age 43.76 ± 15.16 years) were sequentially patch tested with the Institute of Dermatology’s 32-allergen baseline standard series, supplemented with additional allergens as needed. The demographic data of the participants who had at least one positive reaction are shown in Table 1. Of the 239 participants, 140 (58.58%) showed at least one positive reaction on day 4 and/or day 7, while 28 (11.72%) demonstrated new positive patch test results on day 7 reading. Participants with new positive reactions on day 7 had a mean age of 43.71 ± 16.23 years. Most of them had no associated underlying disease, including atopy, and no occupation related conditions. The head and neck were the most affected areas of the rash. A list of positive patch test allergens with the prevalences of positive reactions on day 4 and/or day 7 is shown in Table 2. A total of 23 allergens were associated with positive patch test reactions in our cohort, with nickel being the most frequently positive allergen. The allergens with the highest proportions of new positive day 7 reactions relative to the total positive reactions were, in order of frequency, potassium dichromate (60%, 3/5 patients), cobalt chloride hexahydrate (57.14%, 4/7 patients), and 4-phenylenediamine (PPD) (42.86%, 3/7 patients). All delayed reactions showed a weak positive (+) result.
| Variables | Total (n=239) |
Pos D4, Pos/Neg D7 (n=140) |
Neg D4, Pos D7 (n=28) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender, n(%) | |||
| Male | 54 (22.59) | 32 (22.86) | 7 (25.00) |
| Female | 185 (77.41) | 108 (77.14) | 21 (75.00) |
| Age, n(%), Mean±SD | 43.76±15.16 | 43.39±14.40 | 43.71±16.23 |
| ≤20 years | 12 (5.02) | 4 (2.86) | 1 (3.57) |
| 21–40 years | 92 (38.49) | 58 (41.43) | 10 (35.71) |
| 41–60 years | 94 (39.33) | 57 (40.72) | 12 (42.86) |
| >60 years | 41 (17.15) | 21 (15.00) | 5 (17.86) |
| Underlying diseases, n(%) | |||
| No | 146 (61.09) | 99 (70.71) | 21 (75.00) |
| Allergic rhinitis | 50 (20.92) | 23 (16.43) | 2 (7.14) |
| Asthma | 3 (1.26) | 2 (1.43) | 0 |
| Atopic dermatitis | 2 (0.84) | 1 (0.71) | 0 |
| Others | 38 (15.90) | 15 (10.71) | 5 (17.86) |
| Current medications, n(%) | |||
| No | 208 (87.03) | 126 (90.00) | 26 (92.86) |
| Yes | 31 (12.97) | 14 (10.00) | 2 (7.14) |
| Occupation, n(%) | |||
| Government officer | 62 (25.94) | 40 (28.57) | 7 (25.00) |
| Business carrier | 37 (15.48) | 24 (17.14) | 4 (14.29) |
| Housemaids | 25 (10.46) | 13 (9.29) | 3 (10.71) |
| Employee | 69 (28.87) | 39 (27.86) | 8 (28.57) |
| Freelances | 11 (4.60) | 8 (5.71) | 3 (10.71) |
| Others | 35 (14.64) | 16 (11.43) | 3 (10.71) |
| Location of rash, n(%) | |||
| Head/neck | 79 (33.05) | 52 (37.14) | 12 (42.86) |
| Arm/leg | 28 (11.72) | 14 (10.00) | 2 (7.14) |
| Trunk | 40 (16.74) | 17 (12.14) | 3 (10.71) |
| Hand/feet | 56 (23.43) | 35 (25.00) | 7 (25.00) |
| Others | 36 (15.06) | 22 (15.71) | 4 (14.29) |
| Occupational-related, n(%) | |||
| No | 167 (69.87) | 93 (66.43) | 19 (67.86) |
| Yes | 19 (7.95) | 12 (8.57) | 2 (7.14) |
| Uncertain | 53 (22.18) | 35 (25.00) | 7 (25.00) |
SD: Standard deviation, Pos: Positive, Neg: Negative, D: Day
| Allergens | Concentration (µg/cm2) | Total patch-tested patients (n) | Total positive reaction D4 and/or D7 | Total D4 negative, D7 positive | D4 reactions | D7 reactions | Proportion of total positive reaction | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | − | +/- | IR | + | ++ | +++ | ||||
| Potassium dichromate | 0.5% pet. | 239 | 5 | 2.09 | 3 | 1.26 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 60.00 |
| Paraben mix | 16.0% pet. | 239 | 3 | 1.26 | 1 | 0.42 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 33.33 |
| MCI/MI | 0.02% aq. | 239 | 24 | 10.04 | 2 | 0.84 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 8.33 |
| Cobalt chloride hexahydrate | 1.0% pet. | 239 | 7 | 2.93 | 4 | 1.67 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 57.14 |
| PPD | 1.0% pet. | 239 | 7 | 2.93 | 3 | 1.26 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 42.86 |
| BIT | 0.15% pet. | 239 | 12 | 5.02 | 1 | 0.42 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 8.33 |
| Lanolin alcohol | 30.0% pet. | 239 | 4 | 1.67 | 1 | 0.42 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 25.00 |
| Propolis | 10.0% pet. | 239 | 6 | 2.51 | 1 | 0.42 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 16.67 |
| Textile dye mix | 6.6% pet | 239 | 5 | 2.09 | 1 | 0.42 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 20.00 |
| Thiuram mix | 1.0% pet. | 239 | 15 | 6.28 | 1 | 0.42 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6.67 |
| Neomycin sulfate | 20.0% pet | 239 | 4 | 1.67 | 1 | 0.42 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 25.00 |
| Compositae mix II | 5.0% pet | 239 | 1 | 0.42 | 1 | 0.42 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.00 |
| Nickel sulfate hexahydrate | 2.5% pet. | 239 | 45 | 18.83 | 3 | 1.26 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 6.67 |
| Hydroperoxide of linalool | 1.0% pet. | 9 | 1 | 11.11 | 1 | 11.11 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.00 |
| Mercury (II) chloride | 0.1% pet. | 22 | 1 | 4.55 | 1 | 4.55 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.00 |
| Methyl methacrylate | 2.0% pet. | 22 | 1 | 4.55 | 1 | 4.55 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.00 |
| DPPD | 1.0% pet. | 8 | 1 | 12.50 | 1 | 12.50 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.00 |
| Cocamidopropyl betaine | 1.0% aq. | 12 | 1 | 8.33 | 1 | 8.33 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.00 |
| Hydrogen peroxide | 3.0% aq. | 10 | 1 | 10.00 | 1 | 10.00 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.00 |
| Mercuric chloride | 0.1% pet. | 4 | 1 | 25.00 | 1 | 25.00 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.00 |
| Ammonium persulfate | 2.5% pet | 6 | 1 | 16.67 | 1 | 16.67 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.00 |
| Cinnamal | 1.0% pet. | 18 | 1 | 5.56 | 1 | 5.56 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.00 |
| Mercury (II) amidochloride | 1.0% pet. | 20 | 1 | 5.00 | 1 | 5.00 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.00 |
D: Day, MCI/MI: Methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, DPPD: N, N-Diphenyl-4-Phenylene diamine, IR: Irritant reaction, PPD: 4-phenylenediamine, BIT: Benzisothiazolinone
Logistic regression analysis
A univariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the correlation between patient characteristics and allergens associated with new positive reactions on day 7. In our study, no significant associations were found between age, sex, underlying diseases, occupation, rash characteristics, and positive patch test results on day 7. The detailed results are shown in Table 3. When considering allergens involved in late-positive reactions, significant associations were found for potassium dichromate (OR = 16.02, 95% CI = 2.96–55.9), methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI) (OR = 9.96, 95% CI = 1.11–42.13), cobalt chloride hexahydrate (OR = 22.97, 95% CI = 5.5–71.48), PPD (OR = 16.02, 95% CI = 2.96–55.9), and nickel sulfate hexahydrate (OR = 6.02, 95% CI = 2.96–55.9), as shown in Table 4.
| Variablesa | Neg day 4, Pos day 7 | Binary logistic regression | |
|---|---|---|---|
| n(%) | OR (95% CI) | P-value | |
| Sex, n(%) | |||
| Female | 21 (11.35) | reference | |
| Male | 7 (13.00) | 1.16 (0.47–2.90) | 0.746 |
| Age, n(%) | |||
| ≤20 years | 1 (8.33) | reference | |
| 21–40 years | 10 (10.87) | 1.34 (0.16–11.51) | 0.789 |
| 41–60 years | 12 (12.77) | 1.61 (0.19–13.61) | 0.662 |
| >60 years | 5 (12.20) | 1.53 (0.16–14.51) | 0.712 |
| Underlying diseases, n(%) | |||
| No | 21 (14.38) | reference. | |
| Allergic rhinitis | 2 (4.00) | 0.25 (0.06–1.10) | 0.066 |
| Asthma | 0 | 0.999 | |
| Atopic dermatitis | 0 | 0.999 | |
| Others | 5 (13.16) | 0.90 (0.32–2.57) | 0.847 |
| Current medications, n(%) | |||
| No | 26 (12.50) | reference | |
| Yes | 2 (6.45) | 0.48 (0.11–2.14) | 0.338 |
| Occupation, n(%) | |||
| Government officer | 7 (11.29) | reference | |
| Business carrier | 4 (10.81) | 0.95 (0.26–3.50) | 0.941 |
| Housemaids | 3 (12.00) | 1.07 (0.25–4.52) | 0.925 |
| Employee | 8 (11.59) | 1.03 (0.35–3.03) | 0.957 |
| Freelances | 3 (27.27) | 2.95 (0.63–13.78) | 0.170 |
| Others | 3 (8.57) | 0.74 (0.18–3.05) | 0.673 |
| Location of rash, n(%) | |||
| Head/neck | 12 (15.19) | reference | |
| Arm/leg | 2 (7.14) | 0.43 (0.09–2.05) | 0.290 |
| Trunk | 3 (7.50) | 0.45 (0.12–1.71) | 0.242 |
| Hand/feet | 7 (12.50) | 0.80 (0.29–2.17) | 0.658 |
| Others | 4 (11.11) | 0.70 (0.21–2.33) | 0.559 |
| Occupational-related, n(%) | |||
| No | 19 (11.38) | reference | |
| Yes | 2 (10.53) | 0.92 (0.20–4.28) | 0.912 |
| Uncertain | 7 (13.21) | 1.19 (0.47–3.00) | 0.719 |
P<0.05, CI: Confidence interval, OR: Odds ratio, Pos: Positive, Neg: Negative, aUnivariable
| Variables | Neg day 4, Pos day 7 | Binary logistic regression | |
|---|---|---|---|
| n(%) | OR (95% CI) | P-value | |
| Allergensb | n=33 | ||
| Potassium dichromate (other=ref.) | 3 (9.09) | 16.02 (2.96–55.9) | <0.001* |
| Paraben mix (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| MCI/MI (other=ref.) | 2 (6.06) | 9.96 (1.11–42.13) | <0.001* |
| Cobalt chloride hexahydrate (other=ref.) | 4 (12.12) | 22.97 (5.5–71.48) | <0.001* |
| PPD (other=ref.) | 3 (9.09) | 16.02 (2.96–55.9) | <0.001* |
| BIT (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Lanolin alcohol (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Propolis (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Textile dye mix (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Thiuram mix (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Neomycin sulfate (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Compositae mix II (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Nickel sulfate hexahydrate (other=ref.) | 3 (9.09) | 16.02 (2.96–55.9) | <0.001* |
| Hydroperoxide of linalool (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Mercury (II) chloride (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Methyl methacrylate (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| DPPD (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Cocamidopropyl betaine (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Hydrogen peroxide (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Mercuric chloride (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Ammonium persulfate (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Cinnamal (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
| Mercury (II) amidochloride (other=ref.) | 1 (3.03) | 4.65 (0.11–29.69) | 0.101 |
MCI/MI: Methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, DPPD: N, N-diphenyl-4-phenylene diamine, *P<0.05, CI: Confidence interval, OR: Odds ratio, PPD: 4-phenylenediamine, BIT: Benzisothiazolinone, Pos: Positive, Neg: Negative. bUnivariable regression analysis controlled for age and sex, ref.: reference
DISCUSSION
Previous studies indicated that 6.3–15% of reactions would be missed without delayed patch test readings, and some have shown that an additional reading around day 7 may detect 7–30% more contact allergies.[1,2,4,7] Many experts suggest extending patch test readings to certain groups of allergens, including metals (e.g., nickel, cobalt, and chromate), topical antibiotics (e.g., neomycin and bacitracin), and corticosteroids.[3-6] Neomycin sulfate has been the most frequently reported allergen associated with delayed positive reactions.[4,6,8] Nevertheless, the results from our study show only one case of a new positive patch test on day 7 to neomycin sulfate, and we did not observe late positive reactions to corticosteroids. This may be due to the small sample size of our cohort, resulting from the limited study duration.
Our findings demonstrated that the delayed patch test readings were useful for detecting reactions to metals, aligning with previous literature. The highest proportions of new positive day 7 reactions were observed for potassium dichromate (60%), followed by cobalt chloride hexahydrate (57.14%). Both allergens were considered statistically significant in late positive reactions. Other metals associated with late positive reactions in our study were nickel and mercury. Macfarlane et al. noted a 7.2% incidence of newly positive reactions after day 4. The allergens that most commonly produced late positive reactions were neomycin (26%), potassium dichromate (18%), and cobalt (6%).[8] A study by Higgins and Collins found that 26 out of 203 patients (12.8%) had new positive reactions on day 7. Mercury and cobalt were the metals involved in these reactions. One patient with a late positive reaction to mercury had a history of an oral lichenoid reaction, while two patients were referred from the oral medicine department for patch testing with the dental series.[9] A study from Malmö, Sweden, supported the importance of late patch test readings, especially on day 7, in patients with oral lichenoid lesions to detect contact allergies to dental materials. In this study, mercury, nickel, gold, and cobalt were the allergens with the highest frequency of late positive reactions.[10] Thomas et al. discovered that patch test readings on day 6 were particularly helpful in identifying new positive reactions to nickel, cobalt, chromium, and bone cement components in patients with a history of arthroplasty and suspected implant allergy.[11]
PPD had the third-highest proportion and was significantly associated with late positive reactions in our study. It is a well-known strong sensitizer commonly found in permanent hair dyes and a contaminant in temporary henna tattoos.[3,12,13] Our study found that 1.26% of individuals exhibited late positive reactions to PPD 1% in petrolatum, which is similar to the 1.5% reported by Hillen et al.[13] However, we used a 48 hour occlusion time compared to the 24 hour occlusion time in the study by Manaskiatti W et al., which potentially enhanced penetration and allowed more time for delayed reactions to develop.[14] Another study by Geier et al.[15] using PPD at the same concentration and a 48 hour occlusion time, found late positive reactions on day 6 in 2% of participants, which was higher than in our study. Although PPD is a strong allergen, delayed weak reactions in patch testing can still be expected. These may be due to differences in individual immunological reactivity. Some individuals have a less vigorous T-cell-mediated response, which can manifest as a slower reaction.[16] Moreover, age-related differences in immune function might also affect the timing of these reactions. In elderly individuals, decreased lymphocyte proliferation can slow the development of allergic contact reactions, leading to weaker responses.[17,18] Other methodological factors – such as patch test concentration, duration of occlusion, skin barrier integrity, and timing of readings – can also influence the occurrence of late reactions and the intensity of responses.[13] However, in our study, the patch test concentration, occlusion duration, and reading times were consistent across all participants. Therefore, late positive reactions to PPD may be attributed to individual reaction patterns and variations in skin barrier integrity.
MCI/MI was another allergen that showed a significant association with late positive reactions in our study. However, it is not a well-known sensitizer that produces late positive results. A study by Madsen and Andersen revealed that the most common preservative associated with delayed reactions was imidazolidinyl urea (28%), followed by thimerosal, diazolidinyl urea, and MCI/MI, with the frequency of delayed positive reactions ranging from 11% to 19%.[6] Jonker and Bruynzeel reported an incidence of new positive reactions to MCI/MI on days 6/7 at 0.7%, with five reactions observed in 760 patients.[19]
Contact allergies can be associated with various patient characteristics, such as age, sex, atopic dermatitis, and occupational dermatitis.[4,6,7,8] Elderly people and women generally have a higher prevalence of ACD than younger people and men. This is likely because they are more frequently exposed to different kinds of allergens in the environment throughout their lives. Other factors, including occupations, social habits, and culture, can also elicit ACD.[3,20,21] A recent study by van Amerongen et al. reported that new positive reactions were mainly seen in the 18–30-year age group but were not significantly associated with sex, atopic disease, and occupational dermatitis.[4] Another study by Madsen and Andersen found more new positive reactions in women and patients aged over 40.[6] Alterations in skin barrier function, whether genetic or acquired, such as in atopic dermatitis, can lead to increased exposure to chemicals and induce contact sensitization, especially to allergens contained in topical products.[20,21] Nevertheless, a systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that no significant correlation was identified between atopic dermatitis and contact sensitization.[22] In our study, no significant associations were found between age, sex, underlying diseases, occupation, rash characteristics, and positive patch test results on day 7.
Limitations
The limitations of this study include its single-center design and relatively small sample size, which may not detect the variety of contact allergens that frequently show delayed positive reactions and may potentially impact the outcomes of the regression analysis.
CONCLUSION
Patch test readings at 48 and 96 h are sufficient to identify the majority of positive reactions. Our study showed that 11.72% of Thai participants developed new positive patch test reactions on day 7 reading, consistent with findings from previous literature in other countries. Delayed patch test readings are useful and valuable for identifying additional positive reactions to certain groups of allergens, particularly metals, and in specific conditions.
Ethical approval:
The research/study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at The Ethics Committee of the Institute of Dermatology, approval number IRB/IEC 014/2566, dated 10th May 2023.
Declaration of patient consent:
The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent.
Conflicts of interest:
There are no conflicts of interest.
Use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for manuscript preparation:
The authors confirm that there was no use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for assisting in the writing or editing of the manuscript and no images were manipulated using AI.
Financial support and sponsorship: Nil.
References
- European Society of Contact Dermatitis guideline for diagnostic patch testing-recommendations on best practice. Contact Dermatitis. 2015;73:195-221.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Patch test technique In: Common contact allergens: A practical guide to detecting contact dermatitis (1st ed). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2020. p. :5-13.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Allergic contact dermatitis In: Fitzpatrick's dermatology (9th ed). New York: McGraw-Hill; 2019. p. :395-413.
- [Google Scholar]
- New positive patch test reactions on day 7-the additional value of the day 7 patch test reading. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81:280-7.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Delayed patch test reading after 5 days: The Mayo Clinic experience. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008;59:225-33.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Outcome of a second patch test reading of TRUE Tests® on D6/7. Contact Dermatitis. 2013;68:94-7.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- The benefit of late readings in patch testing depends both on allergen and patient characteristics. Allergy. 2022;77:1477-85.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Delayed patch test reactions at days 7 and 9. Contact Dermatitis. 1989;20:127-32.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- The relevance of 7-day patch test reading. Dermatitis. 2013;24:237-40.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- The necessity of a test reading after 1 week to detect late positive patch test reactions in patients with oral lichen lesions. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18:1525-31.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- High frequency of contact allergy to implant and bone cement components, in particular gentamicin, in cemented arthroplasty with complications: Usefulness of late patch test reading. Contact Dermatitis. 2015;73:343-9.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Late reactions to the patch-test preparations para-phenylenediamine and epoxy resin: A prospective multicentre investigation of the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group. Br J Dermatol. 2006;154:665-70.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Late reactions to patch test preparations with reduced concentrations of p-phenylenediamine: A multicentre investigation of the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group. Contact Dermatitis. 2011;64:196-202.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 1-versus 2-and 3-day diagnostic patch testing. Contact Dermatitis. 1996;35:197-200.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Patch test reactions at D4, D5 and D6. Contact Dermatitis. 1999;40:119-26.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- The T cell response to the contact sensitizer paraphenylenediamine is characterized by a polyclonal diverse repertoire of antigen-specific receptors. Front Immunol. 2017;8:162.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Causes, consequences, and reversal of immune system aging. J Clin Invest. 2013;123:958-65.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Predictive factors for Day 7 positive patch test readings at a secondary referral centre. Skin Health Dis. 2021;2:e79.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- The outcome of an additional patch-test reading on days 6 or 7. Contact Dermatitis. 2000;42:330-5.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- The multiple factors affecting the association between atopic dermatitis and contact sensitization. Allergy. 2014;69:28-36.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Effect of age and sex on the induction and elicitation of allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1995;33:289-98.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Association between atopic dermatitis and contact sensitization: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;77:70-8.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
