| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Foti, Caterina, et al.
(author)
-
Isobornyl acrylate : An impurity in alkyl glucosides
- 2016
-
In: Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1556-9527 .- 1556-9535. ; 35:2, s. 115-119
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Context: Alkyl glucosides and alkyl poly-glucosides are widely used as wetting agents, surfactants and emulsifiers in several industrial and cosmetic products. They are known as well-tolerated and are usually added to the primary surfactants in order to reduce the irritating potential of the main foaming agents.Objective: Recently, some authors suggested that allergic contact dermatitis to alkyl glucosides might be more frequent than suspected. On the other hand, the chemical structures of glucosides do not show potentially allergenic chemical groups or strongly polarized structures. The aim of our study is to investigate alkyl glucosides carrying out a detailed chemical analysis on samples of raw materials to identify potentially allergenic impurities or by-products contained in commercial samples of alkyl glucosides.Materials and methods: We chemically analyzed samples of cocoyl glucoside, decyl glucoside and lauryl glucoside by three different analytical methods, in order to identify any undesired or polluting substances.Result: In each of the three samples, we detected the presence of isobornyl acrylate. Its approximate content in the tested samples is 500 ng/g of the product.Discussion: Isobornyl acrylate is not used in the synthesis of alkyl glucosides, but as a plasticizer in many plastic materials. It can be easily released to materials flowing over these surfaces when they have high extraction power, as glucosides.Conclusion: Isobornyl acrylate may play a role as hidden allergen, in the form of an impurity collected during the industrial process, explaining some cases of allergic reaction to alkyl glucosides.
|
|
| 5. |
- Gonçalo, Margarida, et al.
(author)
-
Allergic contact dermatitis caused by nail acrylates in Europe. An EECDRG study
- 2018
-
In: Contact Dermatitis. - : Wiley. - 0105-1873. ; 78:4, s. 254-260
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) caused by nail acrylates, also including methacrylates and cyanoacrylates here, is being increasingly reported. Methods: A retrospective study in 11 European Environmental Contact Dermatitis Research Group (EECDRG) clinics collected information on cases of ACD caused by nail acrylates diagnosed by aimed testing between 2013 and 2015. Results: Among 18 228 studied patients, 136 had ACD caused by nail acrylates (0.75%; 95%CI: 0.60–0.90), representing 67.3% (95%CI: 60.4–73.7) of ACD cases caused by acrylates. There were 135 females and 1 male, with a mean age ± standard deviation of 36.7 ± 12.2 years; 59 (43.4%) were exposed as consumers, and 77 (56.6%) were occupationally exposed. Occupational cases were more frequent in southern Europe (83.7%), and were younger (mean age of 33.4 ± 8.9 years); most developed ACD during the first year at work (65.0%), and at least 11.7% had to leave their jobs. Skin lesions involved the hands in 121 patients (88.9%) and the face in 50 (36.8%), with the face being the only affected site in 14 (10.3%). Most patients reacted to two or more acrylates on patch testing, mainly to 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) (92.5%), 2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate (88.6%), ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (69.2%), and ethyl cyanoacrylate (9.9%). Conclusions: Nail cosmetics were responsible for the majority of ACD cases caused by acrylates, affecting nail beauticians and consumers, and therefore calling for stricter regulation and preventive measures. As HEMA detects most cases, and isolated facial lesions may be overlooked, inclusion of this allergen in the baseline series may be warranted.
|
|
| 6. |
- Morgardt-Ryberg, Kristina, et al.
(author)
-
Patch testing with a textile dye mix - a multicentre study.
- 2014
-
In: Contact Dermatitis. - : Wiley. - 0105-1873. ; 71:4, s. 215-223
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Disperse dyes are well-known contact sensitizers. However, they are not included in the majority of commercially available baseline patch test series.
|
|
| 7. |
- Muris, Joris, et al.
(author)
-
Sensitization to palladium in Europe
- 2015
-
In: Contact Dermatitis. - : Wiley. - 0105-1873. ; 72:1, s. 11-19
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BackgroundRecently, sodium tetrachloropalladate (Na2PdCl4) was found to be a more sensitive palladium patch test allergen than palladium dichloride (PdCl2). ObjectivesTo determine the optimal test concentration of Na2PdCl4, to evaluate the prevalence of palladium sensitization with Na2PdCl4 and PdCl2, and to compare the results with nickel sensitization in a European multicentre study. Materials and methodsIn addition to the European or national baseline series including NiSO(4)6H(2)0 5% pet., consecutive patients were tested with PdCl2 and Na2PdCl4 2%, 3% and 4% pet. in eight European dermatology clinics. The age and sex distributions were also evaluated in patients sensitized to nickel and palladium. ResultsIn total, 1651 patients were tested. Relative to 3% Na2PdCl4, 4% Na2PdCl4 did not add any information. Two per cent Na2PdCl4 resulted in more doubtful reactions and showed suboptimal reactivity. The prevalence of palladium sensitization doubled with Na2PdCl4 and was similar to that of nickel. Interestingly, in contrast to nickel sensitization, palladium sensitization was not related to female sex. ConclusionsThree per cent Na2PdCl4 pet. is the most suitable patch test concentration. Sensitization to palladium is almost as prevalent as sensitization to nickel. The sex distribution is different between nickel-sensitized and palladium-sensitized patients, suggesting different sources of exposure.
|
|
| 8. |
- Ofenloch, Robert F., et al.
(author)
-
Allergic reactivity for different dilutions of eugenol in repeated open application test and patch testing
- 2023
-
In: Contact Dermatitis. - 0105-1873. ; 89:2, s. 95-102
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Eugenol is a known contact sensitiser included in fragrance mix I. Objective: To assess the allergic reactivity to eugenol in different concentrations using patch test as well as repeated open application test (ROAT). Methods: Overall 67 subjects from 6 European dermatology clinics participated in the study. The ROAT was performed for 21 days twice a day, applying 3 dilutions of eugenol (2.7%–0.5%) and a control. Before and after the ROAT, patch testing with 17 dilutions of eugenol (2.0%–0.00006%) and controls was performed. Results: Out of the 34 subjects with contact allergy to eugenol, 21 (61.8%) showed a positive patch test before ROAT was performed, the lowest positive concentration was 0.031%. The ROAT was positive in 19 (55.9%) of the 34 subjects, the time until a positive reaction occurred was negatively associated with the concentration of the ROAT solution, as well as with the allergic reactivity of the subjects as defined by patch testing. In the patch test after ROAT, 20 of the 34 test subjects (58.8%) showed a positive reaction. In 13 (38.2%) of the 34 test subjects, the patch test result was not reproduceable, still 4 (31.0%) of these 13 subjects developed a positive ROAT. Conclusion: Eugenol can provoke a positive patch test reaction in a very low dose; besides, this hypersensitivity may persist even if a former positive patch test is not reproduceable.
|
|
| 9. |
- Schwensen, Jakob F., et al.
(author)
-
The epidemic of methylisothiazolinone : A European prospective study
- 2017
-
In: Contact Dermatitis. - : Wiley. - 0105-1873. ; 76:5, s. 272-279
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The use of methylisothiazolinone (MI) in cosmetic products has caused an unprecedented epidemic of MI contact allergy. Current data concerning exposures at a European level are required. Objectives: To describe demographics and MI exposures for European patients with MI contact allergy. Methods: Eleven European dermatology departments from eight European countries prospectively collected data between 1 May and 31 October 2015 among consecutive patients who had positive patch test reactions to MI (2000ppm aq.). Results: A total of 6.0% (205/3434; range 2.6-13.0%) of patients had positive patch test reactions to MI. Dermatitis most frequently affected the hands (43.4%), face (32.7%), arms (14.6%), and eyelids (11.7%); 12.7% had widespread dermatitis. For 72.7% (149/205), MI contact allergy was currently relevant mainly because of exposure to cosmetic products (83.2%; 124/149). Of these 124 patients, 19.5% were exposed to leave-on and rinse-off cosmetic products, 24.8% only to leave-on cosmetic products and 38.9% only to rinse-off cosmetic products containing MI or methylchloroisothiazolinone/MI. The majority of these (79%) noted onset of their dermatitis between 2013 and 2015. Fifteen patients (7.3%) had previously experienced allergic reactions when they were in newly painted rooms. Conclusion: Clinically relevant MI contact allergy remains prevalent across European countries, mainly because of exposure to rinse-off and leave-on cosmetic products.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
