W. Uter, G. Stropp, A. Schnuch
Mar 1, 2007
Citations
0
Influential Citations
9
Citations
Quality indicators
Journal
The Annals of occupational hygiene
Abstract
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.