Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Preservatives and Fragrances in Cosmetics. Tatyana Hamilton, MD, Ph. D and Gillian C. Fragrances and preservatives are the two most clinically relevant allergens found in cosmetic products. Patch testing remains the gold standard for identification of causative allergens. Common cosmetic allergens are reviewed.
Practical methods of allergen avoidance are also discussed. However, it has a much broader definition and includes personal care products, hair care, nail products, and sunscreens. The number of new products continues to increase and the rates of adverse cutaneous reactions are expected to rise.
Googled it to see what’s so harmful about it and here found the.
Baseline series of patch tests. Authoritative facts about the skin from DermNet New Zealand. When first starting out in the world of e-cigarettes, many vapers get confused about the two most popular types of e-liquid - propylene glycol and vegetable. Introducing glycol into lubricating oils exposes your machines to a powerful and poisonous mixture of chemicals. Unlike other harmful contaminants such as water and dirt, the destructive potential of glycol can progress to.
Therefore, given the widespread use of cosmetics, it is important to monitor their side- effects. It is estimated that the average woman uses 1. The average man uses six personal care products each day with 8. Skin care products have been found to account for the majority of cases of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to cosmetics, followed by hair care and nail cosmetics. The most common responsible cosmetic allergens are fragrances and preservatives. Epidemiology. The prevalence of cosmetic allergy is estimated at less than 1% in the general population.
However, since most people do not seek medical consultation for mild adverse reactions, the actual rates are likely much higher. Pooled data of seven different studies involving 3. A recent Danish study showed that the prevalence of ACD to cosmetic allergens has doubled between 1.
Propylene Glycol: An Often Unrecognized Cause of Allergic Contact Dermatitis in Patients Using Topical Corticosteroids. Mohammed Al Jasser, MD, Nino Mebuke, Gillian de Gannes, MD, FRCPC Department of Dermatology and Skin. Art and science of patch testing An Goossens Department of Dermatology, University Hospital St.-Rapha The safety of electronic cigarettes is uncertain. There is little data about their safety, and considerable variability among e-cigarettes and in their liquid ingredients and thus the contents of the aerosol delivered to the. Authoritative facts about the skin from DermNet New Zealand. Terms beginning with: # A: B: C: D: E: F: G: H: I: J: K: L: M: N: O: P: Q: R: S: T: U: V: W: X: Y: Z: Resource Links. Schlumberger Oilfield Services; Oilfield Review; Curve Mnemonic Dictionary.
The majority of patients affected with ACD to cosmetic products are women between the ages of 2. In addition, a study of 7. NACDG (North American Contact Dermatitis Group) screening series of 6. A European analysis of 5.
Thus, while the optimal number of allergens for patch testing to cosmetics is not firmly established, testing for additional allergens using a specialized cosmetic series and the patient. Acutely, it presents with pruritic papules, vesicles, and bullae. Chronic forms are more common and present with pruritic, scaly papules and plaques distributed in areas of most contact with the offending allergen. The distribution provides very useful clinical clues about the possible causative agent. Occasionally, ACD may produce autoeczematization resulting in a widespread or generalized cutaneous eruption. Allergens may also be transferred from other persons or even pets, resulting in . The antimicrobial.
Formaldehyde- releasing preservatives (FRP). DMDM hydantoin. Individuals allergic. FRPs. It is evident that many of the.
Available tools to assess for fragrance. I (FMI), fragrance mix II (FMII), and balsam of Peru. The components of these screening allergens. Quaternium- 1. 5 2%. Myroxylon pereirae (balsam of Peru) 2. Fragrance mix 8%. Phenylenediamine 1%.
Methyldibromoglutaronitrile/phenoxyethanol 2%. Formaldehyde 1%. Tosylamide formaldehyde resin 1. Cocamidopropyl betaine 1%. Glyceryl thioglycolate 1%. Diazolidinyl urea 1%. Diazolidinyl urea 1%.
DMDM hydantoin 1%. Lanolin alcohol 3. Imidazolidinyl urea 2%. Methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone 1.
Methyl methacrylate 2%. Amidoamine 0. 1%. Propylene glycol 3.
DMDM hydantoin 1%. Imidazolidinyl urea 2%. Table 1: Top 2. 0 NACDG screening allergens associated with cosmetics in females* Not in petrolatum; all others are. Fragrance Mix I (8. Amyl cinnamic alcohol 1.
Cinnamic alcohol 1. Eugenol 1. 0%Cinnamic aldehyde 1. Hydroxycitronellal 1.
Geraniol 1. 0%Isoeugenol 1. Oak moss absolute 1. Sorbitan sesquioleate (emulsifier) 5.
Fragrance Mix II (1. Hydroxyisohexyl 3- cyclohexene carboxaldehyde (2. Citral 1. 0%Farnesol 2. Coumarin 2. 5%Citronellol 0.
Hexyl cinnamal 5. Many of the specific fragrance ingredients are protected by the. Fair Packaging and Labeling Act as they are considered trade.
It is important to keep in mind that many products. In the past. FMI and BOP were able to detect approximately 9. However, with the increasing number of fragrances and. Thus, FMII and a number of botanical extracts. NACDG screening series that comprise.
Often, additional cosmetic and botanical series are. Patients with contact. BOP may also react to a number of substances that are. BOP (Table 3). Thus, patients.
Patch testing may need to be expanded beyond the NACDG screening series to include, for example, a cosmetic/botanical supplemental series. This series may be indicated in patients using a variety of make- up products or for those who use 'all natural' botanical products. Testing to personal care products may lead to identification of additional relevant allergens, as well as facilitate discovery of new and emerging allergens, as new compounds are being introduced at an escalating pace.
Have a good working knowledge of common allergens and their sources: this is critical for choosing the correct allergens to test as well as for counseling patients on allergen avoidance. Have access to available resources: an excellent review of the main concepts of ACD is found in Contact Allergy: Alternatives for the 2. NACDG Standard Screening Tray. Allergen information sheets are available to the members of the American Contact Dermatitis Society (ACDS) and can be found at www. Identification of allergen- free products can be accomplished by generating a customized product list with the use of the Contact Allergen Management Program (CAMP) available to the members of the ACDS. Multiple allergens can be entered to generate a 'shopping list' of products that are safe to use in a patient with allergic contact dermatitis to their cosmetics.
Conclusion. Allergic contact dermatitis to cosmetics is an important cause of ACD overall. The main causes of cosmetic allergy are fragrances and preservatives. It is rewarding for both the patient and the physician if the responsible agent can be identified and subsequently removed from the patent. Patient satisfaction and compliance will also improve if meaningful counseling is provided, including detailed information on safe to use personal care products. Available at: http: //www.
Last accessed: March 1, 2. Eiermann HJ, Larsen W, Maibach HI, et al. Prospective study of cosmetic reactions: 1. North American Contact Dermatitis Group. J Am Acad Dermatol 6(5): 9. May). Adams RM, Maibach HI. A five- year study of cosmetic reactions.
J Am Acad Dermatol 1. Dec). de Groot AC. Contact allergy to cosmetics: causative ingredients. Contact Dermatitis 1. Jul). de Groot AC, Bruynzeel DP, Bos JD, et al.
The allergens in cosmetics. Arch Dermatol 1. 24(1. Oct). Wetter DA, Yiannias JA, Prakash AV, et al. Results of patch testing to personal care product allergens in a standard series and a supplemental cosmetic series: an analysis of 9. Mayo Clinic Contact Dermatitis Group, 2. J Am Acad Dermatol 6. Nov). Romaguera C, Camarasa JM, Alomar A, et al.
Patch tests with allergens related to cosmetics. Contact Dermatitis 9(2): 1.
Mar). Adams RM, Maibach HI. A five- year study of cosmetic reactions.
J Am Acad Dermatol 1. Dec). Kohl L, Blondeel A, Song M. Allergic contact dermatitis from cosmetics.
Retrospective analysis of 8. Dermatology 2. 04(4): 3. Biebl KA, Warshaw EM. Allergic contact dermatitis to cosmetics. Dermatol Clin 2. 4(2): 2. Apr). Nielsen NH, Linneberg A, Menne T, et al.
Allergic contact sensitization in an adult Danish population: two cross- sectional surveys eight years apart (the Copenhagen Allergy Study). Acta Derm Venereol 8. Jan- Feb). Cohen DE, Rao S, Brancaccio RR. Use of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group Standard 6. Dermatitis 1. 9(3): 1. May- Jun). Uter W, Balzer C, Geier J, et al.
Patch testing with patients' own cosmetics and toiletries- -results of the IVDK*, 1. Contact Dermatitis 5. Oct). Wilkinson DS.
Connubial photodermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1: 5. Fisher AA. Consort contact dermatitis. Cutis 2. 4(6): 5. Dec). Morren MA, Rodrigues R, Dooms- Goossens A, et al. Connubial contact dermatitis: a review.
Eur J Dermatol 2: 2. Warshaw EM, Buchholz HJ, Belsito DV, et al. Allergic patch test reactions associated with cosmetics: retrospective analysis of cross- sectional data from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 2.
J Am Acad Dermatol 6. Jan). Laguna C, de la Cuadra J, Martin- Gonzalez B, et al. Actas Dermosifiliogr 1. Jan- Feb). Scheman A, Jacob S, Zirwas M, et al. Contact Allergy: alternatives for the 2. North American contact dermatitis group (NACDG) Standard Screening Tray.
Dis Mon 5. 4(1- 2): 7- 1. Jan- Feb). Devos SA, Constandt L, Tupker RA, et al. Relevance of positive patch- test reactions to fragrance mix. Dermatitis 1. 9(1): 4.
Jan- Feb). In this issue: Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Preservatives and Fragrances in Cosmetics. Alcohol and Skin Disorders: With a Focus on Psoriasis. Update on Drugs and Drug News - April 2.