Patch Test Results With the European Baseline Series, 2021/2022-Joint European Results of the ESSCAA and the EBSB Working Groups of the ESCD, and the GEIDACC
- PMID: 41819607
- DOI: 10.1111/cod.70134
Patch Test Results With the European Baseline Series, 2021/2022-Joint European Results of the ESSCAA and the EBSB Working Groups of the ESCD, and the GEIDACC
Abstract
Background: Patch test results obtained with the European Baseline Series (EBS) in its current version serve both contact allergy surveillance and (re-)assessing the diagnostic value of EBS allergens.
Objectives: To present results of current EBS patch testing, obtained in 59 departments in 14 European countries during 2021 and 2022.
Methods: Anonymised or pseudonymised individual data, and partly aggregated results, on demographic/clinical characteristics and patch test results with the EBS were prospectively collected, centrally pooled, and retrospectively analysed.
Results: In 2021 and 2022, 18 832 patients were patch tested with the EBS. Sensitization to nickel remained most common (18.85 (18.29-19.43)% positivity (95% confidence interval)). Fragrance mix I and Myroxylon pereirae resin yielded very similar results with 6.39 (6.04-6.76)% and 6.5 (6.15-6.87)% positivity, respectively. Concerning preservatives, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI) 0.02% aq. yielded 5.52 (5.11-5.96)% and MI 0.2% aq. yielded 5.28 (4.94-5.64)% positives. Testing formaldehyde 2% aq. identified almost one percentage point more positive reactions than 1% aq. (2.05 (1.81-2.32)% vs. 1.22 (0.99-1.48)). Positive reactions to the recently added allergens were most frequently seen to propolis (5.47 (5.12-5.84)%) and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (3.63 (3.32-3.96)%).
Conclusions: Compared to the previous reporting period, surveillance results with the EBS were mostly stable. The results regarding Quaternium 15 (0.4 (0.29-0.53)% positives) justified its exclusion from the 2023 EBS version.
Keywords: RRID:SCR_001905; baseline series; clinical epidemiology; contact allergy; patch testing; surveillance.
© 2026 The Author(s). Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
References
-
- M. Bruze, L. Condé‐Salazar, A. Goossens, L. Kanerva, and I. R. White, “Thoughts on Sensitizers in a Standard Patch Test Series. The European Society of Contact Dermatitis,” Contact Dermatitis 41, no. 5 (1999): 241–250.
-
- S. M. Wilkinson, S. Badulici, A. Giménez‐Arnau, et al., “The European Baseline Series: Criteria for Allergen Inclusion (With Reference to Formaldehyde Releasers),” Contact Dermatitis 85 (2021): 125–128, https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.13836.
-
- S. M. John, A. Bonertz, J. Zimmer, et al., “Severely Compromised Supply of Patch Test Allergens in Europe Hampers Adequate Diagnosis of Occupational and Non‐Occupational Contact Allergy. A European Society of Contact Dermatitis (ESCD), European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Forces ‘Contact Dermatitis’ and ‘Occupational Skin Disease’ Position Paper,” Contact Dermatitis 91, no. 2 (2024): 91–103, https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.14580.
-
- C. P. Hernández‐Fernández, P. Mercader‐García, J. F. Silvestre Salvador, et al., “Candidate Allergens for Inclusion in the Spanish Standard Series Based on Data From the Spanish Contact Dermatitis Registry,” Actas Dermo‐Sifiliográficas (English Edition) 112, no. 9 (2021): 798–805, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adengl.2021.07.013.
-
- M. Wilkinson, M. Gonçalo, O. Aerts, et al., “The European Baseline Series and Recommended Additions: 2019,” Contact Dermatitis 80, no. 1 (2019): 1–4, https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.13155.