Pilot Study of the Prevalence of Contact Sensitization to Preservatives as Cosmetic Ingredients in Occupational and Educational Exposures

1Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on cosmetic products.Search in Google Scholar

2https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/cosmetics-us-lawSearch in Google Scholar

3Goossens A. Cosmetic Contact Allergens. Cosmetics, 2016, 3(1):5. Search in Google Scholar

4Kanokrungsee S, Chaweekulrat P, Chaiyabutr C, et al. A 30-year Patch Testing Experience at Siriraj Dermatology. Siriraj Med J, 2023, 75(2):62-9.Search in Google Scholar

5Uter W, Werfel T, White IR, et al. Contact Allergy: A Review of Current Problems from a Clinical Perspective. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2018, 15(6):1108. Search in Google Scholar

6Jovanović M. Contact Sensitivity and Allergens in Cosmetic Products. Med Pregl, 2021, 74(5-6):159-66.Search in Google Scholar

7Uter W, Wilkinson SM, Aerts O, et al. Patch test results with the European baseline series, 2019/20-Joint European results of the ESSCA and the EBS working groups of the ESCD, and the GEIDAC. Contact Dermatitis, 2022, 87(4):343-355.Search in Google Scholar

8Pontén A, Bruze M. Formaldehyde. Dermatitis, 2015, 26(1):3-6.Search in Google Scholar

9Bergh M, Magnusson K, Nilsson JL, et al. Formation of formaldehyde and peroxides by air oxidation of high purity polyoxyethylene surfactants. Contact Dermatitis, 1998, 39(1):14-20.Search in Google Scholar

10Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/83. Amending annexes II, III and V to regulation (EC) no 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the council on cosmetic products. OffJ Eur Union, 2019, 23(5):30-31.Search in Google Scholar

11Goossens A, Aerts O. Contact allergy to and allergic contact dermatitis from formaldehyde and formaldehyde releasers: A clinical review and update. Contact Dermatitis, 2022, 87(1):20-27.Search in Google Scholar

12Sanz-Sánchez T, Mercader García P, Silvestre Salvador JF, et al. Patch testing with formaldehyde 2% aq. – a multicenter study in Spain. Contact Dermatitis, 2019, 81(6):458-59.Search in Google Scholar

13Bizjak M, Adamič K, Bajrovič N, et al. Patch testing with the European baseline series and 10 added allergens: Single-centre study of 748 patients. Contact Dermatitis, 2022, 87(5):439-46. Search in Google Scholar

14Atwater AR, Petty AJ, Liu B, et al. Contact dermatitis associated with preservatives: retrospective analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data, 1994 through 2016. J Am Acad Dermatol, 2021, 84(4):965-976.Search in Google Scholar

15Aerts O, Goossens A. Contact Allergy to Preservatives. In: Contact Dermatitis. Johansen JD, Mahler V, Lepoittevin J, et al. (Ed.). Springer, Cha, 2021, 835-76.Search in Google Scholar

16https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/cosing/pdf/COSING_Annex%20V_v2.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

17Amsler E, Aerts O, Raison-Peyron N, et al. Airborne allergic contact dermatitis caused by isothiazolinones in water-based paints: A retrospective study of 44 cases. Contact Dermatitis, 2017, 77(3):163-70. Search in Google Scholar

18Aerts O, Goossens A, Lambert J, et al. Contact allergy caused by isothiazolinone derivatives: an overview of non-cosmetic and unusual cosmetic sources. Eur J Dermatol, 2017, 27(2):115-22. Search in Google Scholar

19Mercader-García P, Pastor-Nieto MA, Gonzalez-Perez R, et al. Should methyldibromo glutaronitrile continue to be used in the European baseline Series? A REIDAC national cross-sectional study. Contact Dermatitis, 2021, 85:572-77.Search in Google Scholar

20Warshaw EM, Buonomo M, DeKoven JG, et al. Patch testing to Methyldibromoglutaronitrile/Phenoxyethanol: North American Contact Dermatitis Group experience, 1994–2018. Dermatitis, 2021, 32(4):256-66.Search in Google Scholar

21Luis-Gronau C, Cruzval-O’Reilly E, Lugo-Somolinos A. Methyldibromo-glutaronitrile: Increased incidence, but lacks clinical relevance. Dermatitis, 2021, 32(6):e135-e36.Search in Google Scholar

22Andernord D, Bruze M, Bryngelsson IL, et al. Contact allergy to haptens in the Swedish baseline series: Results from the Swedish Patch Test Register (2010 to 2017). Contact Dermatitis, 2022, 86(3):175-88.Search in Google Scholar

23Vanhoutte C, Goossens A, Gilissen L, et al. Concomitant contact-allergic reactions to iodopropynyl butylcarbamate and iodine. Contact Dermatitis, 2019, 81(1):17-23. Search in Google Scholar

24Giménez-Arnau AM, Deza G, Bauer A, et al. Contact allergy to preservatives: ESSCA* results with the baseline series, 2009-2012. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol, 2017, 31(4): 664-71. Search in Google Scholar

25Johnson WJr, Boyer I, Zhu J, et al. Safety assessment of polyaminopropyl biguanide (Polyhexamethylene Biguanide Hydrochloride) as used in cosmetics. Int J Toxicol, 2020, 39(3_suppl):26S-73S.Search in Google Scholar

26Sukakul T, Dahlin J, Pontén A, et al. Contact allergy to polyhexamethylene biguanide (polyaminopropyl biguanide). Contact Dermatitis, 2021, 84:326–31.Search in Google Scholar

27Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety. Opinion on Polyaminopropyl Biguanide (PHMB) – Submission III. In: Commission E, ed. SCCS/1581/16. Luxembourg, 2017 https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/scientific_committees/ consumer_safety/docs/sccs_o_204.pdf. Search in Google Scholar

28Goh CF, Ming LC, Wong LC. Dermatologic reactions to disinfectant use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clin Dermatol, 2021, 39(2):314-22.Search in Google Scholar

29Rembe JD, Fromm-Dornieden C, Schafer N, et al. Comparing two polymeric biguanides: chemical distinction, antiseptic efficacy and cytotoxicity of polyaminopropyl biguanide and polyhexamethylene biguanide. J Med Microbiol, 2016, 65(8):867-76.Search in Google Scholar

30https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02009R1223-20200501&from=ENSearch in Google Scholar

31Pastor-Nieto MA, Gonzalez-Munoz P, Perez-Mesonero R, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by poly(hexamethylene) biguanide hydrochloride in contact lens care solutions. Contact Dermatitis, 2017, 76(6):357-81.Search in Google Scholar

32Leysen J, Goossens A, Lambert J, et al. Polyhexamethylene biguanide is a relevant sensitizer in wet wipes. Contact Dermatitis, 2014, 70(5):316-28.Search in Google Scholar

33Jaque A, DeKoven J. Polyhexamethylene biguanide and alkyl glucosides: unexpected allergens in an antimicrobial foam dressing. Contact Dermatitis, 2017, 77(1):421-22.Search in Google Scholar

34Pummi K, Kemppi E, Lammintausta K. Occupational sensitization to polyhexamethylene guanidine hydrochloride in a non-alcoholic hand rub. Contact Dermatitis, 2012, 66:348-349.Search in Google Scholar

35Kolodziej M, Kiewert A, Skudlik C, Brans R. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by polyhexamethylene biguanide may contribute to work-related hand eczema. Contact Dermatitis, 2021, 85:97–98.Search in Google Scholar

36Reeder M, Atwater AR. Parabens: The 2019 Nonallergen of the Year. Cutis, 2019, 103(04):192-93.Search in Google Scholar

37Giácaman-von der Weth MM, Ferrer-Guillén B, María Ortiz-Salvador J, et al. Is time to remove parabens from standard patch test batteries? Retrospective study of 10 461 patients. Allergy, 2020, 75(11):2997-99.Search in Google Scholar