These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

174 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3884673)

  • 41. Patch testing with a new fragrance mix - reactivity to the individual constituents and chemical detection in relevant cosmetic products.
    Frosch PJ; Rastogi SC; Pirker C; Brinkmeier T; Andersen KE; Bruze M; Svedman C; Goossens A; White IR; Uter W; Arnau EG; Lepoittevin JP; Johansen JD; Menne T
    Contact Dermatitis; 2005 Apr; 52(4):216-25. PubMed ID: 15859994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Allergic contact dermatitis from the synthetic fragrances Lyral and acetyl cedrene in separate underarm deodorant preparations.
    Handley J; Burrows D
    Contact Dermatitis; 1994 Nov; 31(5):288-90. PubMed ID: 7867324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Contact urticaria from Tilia (lime).
    Picardo M; Rovina R; Cristaudo A; Cannistraci C; Santucci B
    Contact Dermatitis; 1988 Jul; 19(1):72-3. PubMed ID: 3180773
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Patch tests with fragrance materials and preservatives.
    de Groot AC; Liem DH; Nater JP; van Ketel WG
    Contact Dermatitis; 1985 Feb; 12(2):87-92. PubMed ID: 3987262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Perfume dermatitis in children sensitized to balsam of Peru in topical agents.
    Fisher AA
    Cutis; 1990 Jan; 45(1):21-3. PubMed ID: 2298039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Pigmented contact dermatitis due to musk moskene.
    Hayakawa R; Hirose O; Arima Y
    J Dermatol; 1991 Jul; 18(7):420-4. PubMed ID: 1791247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. The Prosser-White oration 1980. Skin reactions to balsams and perfumes.
    Hjorth N
    Clin Exp Dermatol; 1982 Jan; 7(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 7094397
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Musk ambrette and chronic actinic dermatitis.
    Cirne de Castro JL; Pereira MA; Prates Nunes F; Pereira dos Santos A
    Contact Dermatitis; 1985 Nov; 13(5):302-6. PubMed ID: 4092452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. The use test for contact hypersensitivity.
    Epstein WL
    Arch Dermatol Res; 1982; 272(3-4):279-81. PubMed ID: 7165337
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. The frequency of fragrance allergy in a patch-test population over a 17-year period.
    Buckley DA; Wakelin SH; Seed PT; Holloway D; Rycroft RJ; White IR; McFadden JP
    Br J Dermatol; 2000 Feb; 142(2):279-83. PubMed ID: 10730761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Quantitative risk assessment of contact sensitization: clinical data to assess utility of the model.
    Marie Api A; Belsito D; Bickers D; Bruze M; Calow P; Greim H; Hanifin JM; McNamee PM; Rogers AE; Saurat JH; Sipes IG; Tagami H
    Dermatitis; 2010; 21(4):207-13. PubMed ID: 20646672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. A study of new fragrance mixtures.
    Larsen W; Nakayama H; Fischer T; Elsner P; Frosch P; Burrows D; Jordan W; Shaw S; Wilkinson J; Marks J; Sugawara M; Nethercott M; Nethercottdagger J
    Am J Contact Dermat; 1998 Dec; 9(4):202-6. PubMed ID: 9810019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Patch testing with fine fragrances: comparison with fragrance mix, balsam of Peru and a fragrance series.
    Trattner A; David M
    Contact Dermatitis; 2003 Dec; 49(6):287-9. PubMed ID: 15025700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Propolis, Colophony, and Fragrance Cross-Reactivity and Allergic Contact Dermatitis.
    Shi Y; Nedorost S; Scheman L; Scheman A
    Dermatitis; 2016; 27(3):123-6. PubMed ID: 27172306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Immediate contact reactions to fragrance mix constituents and Myroxylon pereirae resin.
    Tanaka S; Matsumoto Y; Dlova N; Ostlere LS; Goldsmith PC; Rycroft RJ; Basketter DA; White IR; Banerjee P; McFadden JP
    Contact Dermatitis; 2004 Jul; 51(1):20-1. PubMed ID: 15291827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Contact allergy to fragrances: frequencies of sensitization from 1996 to 2002. Results of the IVDK*.
    Schnuch A; Lessmann H; Geier J; Frosch PJ; Uter W;
    Contact Dermatitis; 2004 Feb; 50(2):65-76. PubMed ID: 15128316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. The significance of fragrance mix, balsam of Peru, colophony and propolis as screening tools in the detection of fragrance allergy.
    Wöhrl S; Hemmer W; Focke M; Götz M; Jarisch R
    Br J Dermatol; 2001 Aug; 145(2):268-73. PubMed ID: 11531790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Is it really fragrance-free?
    Scheinman PL
    Am J Contact Dermat; 1997 Dec; 8(4):239-42. PubMed ID: 9358119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Allergic contact dermatitis to fragrance: a review.
    Scheinman PL
    Am J Contact Dermat; 1996 Jun; 7(2):65-76. PubMed ID: 8796745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Fragrance allergy in patients with hand eczema - a clinical study.
    Heydorn S; Johansen JD; Andersen KE; Bruze M; Svedman C; White IR; Basketter DA; Menné T
    Contact Dermatitis; 2003 Jun; 48(6):317-23. PubMed ID: 14531870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.