Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Luz Fonacier is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Luz Fonacier.


The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology | 2010

Allergic skin diseases

Luz Fonacier; Stephen C. Dreskin; Donald Y.M. Leung

The skin is one of the largest immunologic organs and is affected by both external and internal factors, as well as innate and adaptive immune responses. Many skin disorders, such as atopic dermatitis, contact dermatitis, urticaria, angioedema, psoriasis, and autoimmune blistering disorders, are immune mediated. Most of these diseases are chronic, inflammatory, and proliferative, in which both genetic and environmental factors play important roles. These immunologic mechanisms might have implications for potential targets of future therapeutic interventions.


Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology | 2006

Contact dermatitis: a practice parameter

Vincent S. Beltrani; I. Leonard Bernstein; David E. Cohen; Luz Fonacier

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Preface S1 II. Glossary S2 III. Classification of Recommendations and Evidence Category S3 IV. Executive Summary S3 V. Collation of Summary Statements S5 VI. Algorithm and Annotations S7 VII. Clinical Background S9 VIII. Pathophysiology of CD S9 IX. Susceptibility and Genetics of CD S10 X. Clinical Diagnosis of ACD S11 XI. Patch Tests S13 XII. Differential Diagnosis of CD S17 XIII. Special Exposures Associated With CD S17 XIV. ACD in Children S24 XV. Management and Prognosis of ACD S24 XVI. Appendix S27 XVII. Acknowledgments S30 XVIII. References S30


Immunology and Allergy Clinics of North America | 2010

The role of contact allergy in atopic dermatitis.

Luz Fonacier; Marcella Aquino

Although allergic contact dermatitis (CD) was previously thought to occur less frequently in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD), more recent studies show that it is at least as common in patients with AD as in the general population, if not more so. Thus, patients with AD should be considered for patch testing (PT). Although conflicting data exist, the severity of the AD may impact the PT results. Furthermore, younger patients may yield more positive PT results. Hand eczema and compositae allergy are more common in atopic patients. Reassuringly, PT is positive for topical antiseptic and corticosteroids in only a small subset of patients. When personal products are patch tested, emollients should be included in the series.


Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology | 2016

Treatment of Eczema: Corticosteroids and Beyond.

Melanie Chong; Luz Fonacier

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that requires a manifold approach to therapy. The goal of therapy is to restore the function of the epidermal barrier and to reduce skin inflammation. This can be achieved with skin moisturization and topical anti-inflammatory agents, such as topical corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors. Furthermore, proactive therapy with twice weekly use of both topical corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors in previously affected areas has been found to reduce the time to the next eczematous flare. Adjunctive treatment options include wet wrap therapy, anti-histamines, and vitamin D supplementation. Bacterial colonization, in particular Staphylococcus aureus, can contribute to eczematous flares and overt infection. Use of systemic antibiotics in infected lesions is warranted; however, empiric antibiotics use in uninfected lesions is controversial. Local antiseptic measures (i.e., bleach baths) and topical antimicrobial therapies can be considered in patients with high bacterial colonization. Difficult-to-treat AD is a complex clinical problem that may require re-evaluation of the initial diagnosis of AD, especially if the onset of disease occurs in adulthood. It may also necessitate evaluation for contact, food, and inhaled allergens that may exacerbate the underlying AD. There are a host of systemic therapies that have been successful in patients with difficult-to-treat AD, however, these agents are limited by their side effect profiles. Lastly, with further insight into the pathophysiology of AD, new biological agents have been investigated with promising results.


The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice | 2014

The Role of Contact Dermatitis in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis

Marcella Aquino; Luz Fonacier

Because both atopic dermatitis (AD) and contact dermatitis (CD) are characterized by a similar morphologic appearance and similar distribution of skin involvement, the diagnosis of CD in AD has been difficult. Historically, it was thought that patients with AD were unable or less likely to develop CD due to various studies in which patients with AD stimulated with strong allergens failed to develop sensitization at rates similar to patients without AD. However, more recent evidence from the United States and Europe has shown that patients with AD have similar if not higher rates of positive patch test results to common contact allergens, including metals and fragrance, than those patients without AD. In this review, we highlight evidence for and against the role of contact allergy in patients with AD and seek to give clinically relevant management recommendations for the evaluation of CD in the patient with AD.


Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology | 2011

A multi-center, retrospective review of patch testing for contact dermatitis in allergy practices

Marie Camacho-Halili; Sara Axelrod; M. Michelis; Sebastian Lighvani; Farah Khan; Scherly Leon; Marcella Aquino; Mark Davis-Lorton; Luz Fonacier

BACKGROUND Studies assessing patch testing (PT) in allergy practices are limited. OBJECTIVES To determine whether PT results using a limited panel of allergens such as in the Thin-Layer Rapid-Use Epicutaneous Test (TT) as compared with an expanded panel, such as the addition of supplemental allergens (North American Contact Dermatitis [NACD] Panel, Dormer Cosmetics, hairdressing series, corticosteroid series, and personal products) will miss a significant number of positive PTs. To compare our PT results with published data from dermatology practices. METHODS This is a 5-year multicenter retrospective chart review of PT at 3 separate allergy practices. RESULTS Four hundred twenty-seven patients (mean age, 49.8 years) were patch tested. Eighty-two percent were female; 54% reported an atopic history. Of the standardized allergens, the 5 most common positives were nickel sulfate, fragrance mix I, p-phenylenediamine (PPD), thimerosal, and cobalt chloride. Two hundred eighteen (56.9%; 95% CI = 51.9-61.8%) patients were positive to at least 1 TT allergen. Ninety-eight (25.6%; 95% CI = 21.5-30.2%) patients were positive to both a TT and a supplemental allergen. Forty-eight (12.5%; 95% CI = 9.6-16.2%) patients were negative to a TT allergen but positive to a supplemental allergen. CONCLUSION Positive allergens would have been missed in 12.5% of patients when evaluating with TT allergens alone, whereas 25.6% would be partially evaluated. Patch test performance characteristics for these allergy practices appear to parallel that seen for dermatology. The TT remains an adequate screening tool in an allergy practice, but a more comprehensive panel may be needed to fully evaluate contact dermatitis.


Dermatitis | 2016

Pediatric Contact Dermatitis Registry Inaugural Case Data

Alina Goldenberg; Nico Mousdicas; Nanette B. Silverberg; Douglas L. Powell; Janice L. Pelletier; Jonathan I. Silverberg; Jonathan H. Zippin; Luz Fonacier; Antonella Tosti; Leslie P. Lawley; Mary Wu Chang; Andrew Scheman; Gary Kleiner; Judith Williams; Kalman L. Watsky; Cory A. Dunnick; Rachel Frederickson; Catalina Matiz; Keri Chaney; Tracy S. Estes; Nina Botto; Michelle Draper; Leon Kircik; Aida Lugo-Somolinos; Brian C. Machler; Sharon E. Jacob

BackgroundLittle is known about the epidemiology of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in US children. More widespread diagnostic confirmation through epicutaneous patch testing is needed. ObjectiveThe aim was to quantify patch test results from providers evaluating US children. MethodsThe study is a retrospective analysis of deidentified patch test results of children aged 18 years or younger, entered by participating providers in the Pediatric Contact Dermatitis Registry, during the first year of data collection (2015–2016). ResultsOne thousand one hundred forty-two cases from 34 US states, entered by 84 providers, were analyzed. Sixty-five percent of cases had one or more positive patch test (PPT), with 48% of cases having 1 or more relevant positive patch test (RPPT). The most common PPT allergens were nickel (22%), fragrance mix I (11%), cobalt (9.1%), balsam of Peru (8.4%), neomycin (7.2%), propylene glycol (6.8%), cocamidopropyl betaine (6.4%), bacitracin (6.2%), formaldehyde (5.7%), and gold (5.7%). ConclusionsThis US database provides multidisciplinary information on pediatric ACD, rates of PPT, and relevant RPPT reactions, validating the high rates of pediatric ACD previously reported in the literature. The registry database is the largest comprehensive collection of US-only pediatric patch test cases on which future research can be built. Continued collaboration between patients, health care providers, manufacturers, and policy makers is needed to decrease the most common allergens in pediatric consumer products.


JAMA Dermatology | 2017

Pediatric Contact Dermatitis Registry Data on Contact Allergy in Children With Atopic Dermatitis

Sharon E. Jacob; Maria A. McGowan; Nanette B. Silverberg; Janice L. Pelletier; Luz Fonacier; Nico Mousdicas; Doug Powell; Andrew Scheman; Alina Goldenberg

Importance Atopic dermatitis (AD) and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) have a dynamic relationship not yet fully understood. Investigation has been limited thus far by a paucity of data on the overlap of these disorders in pediatric patients. Objective To use data from the Pediatric Contact Dermatitis Registry to elucidate the associations and sensitizations among patients with concomitant AD and ACD. Design, Setting, and Participants This retrospective case review examined 1142 patch test cases of children younger than 18 years, who were registered between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015, by 84 health care providers (physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants) from across the United States. Data were gathered electronically from multidisciplinary providers within outpatient clinics throughout the United States on pediatric patients (ages 0-18 years). Exposures All participants were patch-tested to assess sensitizations to various allergens; history of AD was noted by the patch-testing providers. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcomes were sensitization rates to various patch-tested allergens. Results A total of 1142 patients were evaluated: 189 boys (34.2%) and 363 girls (65.8%) in the AD group and 198 boys (36.1%) and 350 girls (63.9%) in the non-AD group (data on gender identification were missing for 17 patients). Compared with those without AD, patch-tested patients with AD were 1.3 years younger (10.5 vs 11.8 years; P < .001) and had longer history of dermatitis (3.5 vs 1.8 years; P < .001). Patch-tested patients designated as Asian or African American were more likely to have concurrent AD (odds ratio [OR], 1.92; 95% CI, 1.20-3.10; P = .008; and OR, 4.09; 95% CI, 2.70-6.20; P <.001, respectively). Patients with AD with generalized distribution were the most likely to be patch tested (OR, 4.68; 95% CI, 3.50-6.30; P < .001). Patients with AD had different reaction profiles than those without AD, with increased frequency of reactions to cocamidopropyl betaine, wool alcohol, lanolin, tixocortol pivalate, and parthenolide. Patients with AD were also noted to have lower frequency of reaction to methylisothiazolinone, cobalt, and potassium dichromate. Conclusions and Relevance Children with AD showed significant reaction patterns to allergens notable for their use in skin care preparations. This study adds to the current understanding of AD in ACD, and the continued need to investigate the interplay between these disease processes to optimize care for pediatric patients with these conditions.


Dermatitis | 2015

Flexural eczema versus atopic dermatitis.

Sharon E. Jacob; Alina Goldenberg; Susan Nedorost; Jacob P. Thyssen; Luz Fonacier; Radoslaw Spiewak

Flexural eczema and atopic dermatitis are frequently synonymized. As respiratory atopy is rarely tested for and found in these patients, systematically equating a flexural distribution of dermatitis with atopic dermatitis may too frequently result in misclassified diagnoses and potentially missed opportunity for intervention toward improving patients’ symptoms and quality of life. We present a critical review of the available evidence for the atopic dermatitis diagnosis and discuss the similarities between atopic dermatitis and allergic contact dermatitis. Because neither flexural predilection nor atopy is specific for atopic dermatitis, we conclude that the term atopic dermatitis is a misnomer and propose an etymologic reclassification of atopic dermatitis to “atopy-related” dermatitis. Allergic contact dermatitis can induce an atopic dermatitis–like phenotype, and thus, flexural dermatitis cannot be assumed as atopic without further testing. Patch testing should at least be considered in cases of chronic or recurrent eczema regardless of the working diagnosis.


Current Allergy and Asthma Reports | 2012

Current Strategies in Treating Severe Contact Dermatitis in Pediatric Patients

Luz Fonacier; Marcella Aquino; Tania Mucci

Allergic contact dermatitis in children is underdiagnosed and undertreated, and its incidence is increasing. Appropriate history taking and the suspicion for allergic contact dermatitis is essential, and patch testing remains the gold standard in diagnosis. Avoidance of the offending allergen, once identified, is the first goal of treatment. Medical therapies include topical corticosteroid and topical immunomodulators. In severe cases, oral corticosteroids or immunomodulators are utilized, although prospective randomized trials for the treatment of this disease in children are lacking. A PubMed literature search was performed to identify publications on allergic contact dermatitis in the pediatric population with the keywords: dermatitis, children, allergic contact dermatitis, pediatrics, contact hypersensitivity, contact allergy, treatment, and management. This review will address the major principles behind the diagnosis and management of this disease in the pediatric population, and highlight useful strategies that may result in improved treatment of this condition.

Collaboration


Dive into the Luz Fonacier's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Marcella Aquino

Winthrop-University Hospital

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Mark Davis-Lorton

Winthrop-University Hospital

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Mark Boguniewicz

University of Colorado Denver

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Peck Y. Ong

Children's Hospital Los Angeles

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David J. Margolis

University of Pennsylvania

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Joel M. Gelfand

University of Pennsylvania

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Mitchell H. Grayson

Washington University in St. Louis

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Stephanie L. Mawhirt

Winthrop-University Hospital

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge