Skip Navigation


Annals of Occupational Hygiene Advance Access originally published online on November 28, 2006
Annals of Occupational Hygiene 2007 51(2):219-226; doi:10.1093/annhyg/mel076
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
51/2/219    most recent
mel076v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by UTER, W.
Right arrow Articles by LESSMANN, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by UTER, W.
Right arrow Articles by LESSMANN, H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


©The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Occupational Hygiene Society

Aniline—A ‘Historical’ Contact Allergen? Current Data from the IVDK and Review of the Literature

WOLFGANG UTER1,*, GISELA STROPP2, AXEL SCHNUCH3 and HOLGER LESSMANN3

1 Department of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg Erlangen, Germany
2 Bayer HealthCare AG, Toxicology Wuppertal, Germany
3 Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) at the Georg August University Göttingen, Germany

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: wolfgang.uter{at}rzmail.uni-erlangen.de

Objectives: To assess whether aniline should be regarded as potential cause of contact allergy (CA). Methods: Retrospective analysis of clinical data collected in a CA surveillance network (IVDK, www.ivdk.org) between 01/1992 and 06/2004 and review of pertinent literature. Results: In the above period, 25 of the 1119 patients patch tested with aniline had positive (allergic) reactions; in 24 of these 25 patients, CA to p-phenylenediamine, p-aminoazobenzene or (in one case) another para-amino compound was additionally diagnosed. Exposure to aniline could not be ascertained in any of the cases, based on the available data. Discussion: Previous clinical results, which have been summarized and tabulated, are partly difficult to evaluate, as they may lack detail, or test concentrations are higher than those currently recommended, possibly yielding false-positive reactions. In none of the studies had previous exposures to aniline been unequivocally identified. Conclusion: Based on clinical data it is unlikely that aniline is an independent sensitizer of current importance. However, it may elicit allergic reactions in subjects pre-sensitized to para-substituted amino compounds. In summary, supported by recent experimental evidence employing the local lymph node assay as a validated animal test system, it appears probable that aniline is a weak allergen.

Keywords: allergic contact • aniline • CAS 62-53-3 • clinical epidemiology • dermatitis


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.