Tin Sensitization in Belgium and the Netherlands: Complementary Findings From Two Independent Retrospective Studies
- 1Department of Dermatology Amsterdam UMC Amsterdam the Netherlands
- 2Department of Dermatology University Hospital Antwerp (UZA) and Research Group Immunology, INFLA‐MED Centre of Excellence, University of Antwerp Antwerp Belgium
Abstract
Background: Tin is a known but traditionally considered infrequent contact allergen. In recent years, several case reports have reported clinically relevant reactions to tin‐containing oral hygiene products, particularly toothpastes.
Objectives: To assess the prevalence and clinical relevance of tin sensitization in consecutive patch‐tested patients, as well as in a selected cohort of patients referred because of suspected metal allergy or (peri)oral complaints.
Materials/Methods: Two independent retrospective cohorts were analyzed: 1919 consecutive patch‐tested patients from the University Hospital Antwerp, tested with different tin preparations and 536 selected patients from Amsterdam UMC, referred because of suspected metal allergy or (peri)oral complaints and patch tested with tin chloride.
Results: In the consecutive cohort, 128/1919 patients (6.7%) tested positive to at least one tin preparation, of whom 35 (27.3%) had clinically relevant sensitization. In the selected cohort, 61/536 patients (11.4%) were sensitized to tin, with 16/50 assessed patients (32.0%) considered clinically relevant. Amongst clinically relevant cases, (peri)oral involvement was the most common presentation in both cohorts, followed by periorbital dermatitis in the consecutive cohort.
Conclusions: Tin sensitization appears to be more common than previously recognized. Although (peri)oral involvement was the predominant clinical presentation, periorbital dermatitis was also frequently observed amongst patients with clinically relevant sensitization.
Related
- Cell-Type-Specific Transcriptomic Alterations in the Epileptic Prefrontal Cortex and Complementary Neuroimaging Findings in an Independent Cohort.
- Admission blood glucose and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio provide independent and complementary prognostic value for in-hospital mortality in acute type A aortic dissection
- Higher general practice-reported health condition rates among adolescent and young adult (18−39 years) cancer survivors up to 22 years after diagnosis in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort study
- Gestational age references and trajectory of fetal haemoglobin in relation to outcome in neonates born before 30 weeks of gestation: a single-centre retrospective cohort study in The Netherlands
- Prevalence of Contact Sensitization in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis: A Retrospective Study from China
BibTeX
@article{franken2026sensitization,
title = {{Tin Sensitization in Belgium and the Netherlands: Complementary Findings From Two Independent Retrospective Studies}},
author = {Sylvie M. Franken and Hannelore George and Isha C. Anwar and Ella Dendooven and Olivier Aerts and Thomas Rustemeyer},
journal = {Contact Dermatitis},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.1111/cod.70252},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.70252},
note = {CC BY-NC 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Tin Sensitization in Belgium and the Netherlands: Complementary Findings From Two Independent Retrospective Studies
AU - Sylvie M. Franken
AU - Hannelore George
AU - Isha C. Anwar
AU - Ella Dendooven
AU - Olivier Aerts
AU - Thomas Rustemeyer
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/23
JO - Contact Dermatitis
DO - 10.1111/cod.70252
UR - https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.70252
AB - Background: Tin is a known but traditionally considered infrequent contact allergen. In recent years, several case reports have reported clinically relevant reactions to tin‐containing oral hygiene products, particularly toothpastes. Objectives: To assess the prevalence and clinical relevance of tin sensitization in consecutive patch‐tested patients, as well as in a selected cohort of patients referred because of suspected metal allergy or (peri)oral complaints. Materials/Methods: Two independent retrospective cohorts were analyzed: 1919 consecutive patch‐tested patients from the University Hospital Antwerp, tested with different tin preparations and 536 selected patients from Amsterdam UMC, referred because of suspected metal allergy or (peri)oral complaints and patch tested with tin chloride. Results: In the consecutive cohort, 128/1919 patients (6.7%) tested positive to at least one tin preparation, of whom 35 (27.3%) had clinically relevant sensitization. In the selected cohort, 61/536 patients (11.4%) were sensitized to tin, with 16/50 assessed patients (32.0%) considered clinically relevant. Amongst clinically relevant cases, (peri)oral involvement was the most common presentation in both cohorts, followed by periorbital dermatitis in the consecutive cohort. Conclusions: Tin sensitization appears to be more common than previously recognized. Although (peri)oral involvement was the predominant clinical presentation, periorbital dermatitis was also frequently observed amongst patients with clinically relevant sensitization.
SN - 0105-1873
SN - 1600-0536
ER -