Pilot study of the prevalence of contact sensitization to preservatives as cosmetic ingredients in occupational and educational exposures
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2478/AMB-2023-0027Keywords:
contact sensitization, preservatives, cosmetics, occupational exposure, educational exposureAbstract
Aim: To evaluate the prevalence of contact sensitization to selected preservatives as cosmetic ingredients among cosmeticians and cosmetology students and to identify the most common allergens in occupational and non-occupational exposures.
Materials and methods: Skin patch testing with formaldehyde, quaternium-15, DMDM hydantoin, imidazolidinyl urea, methylisothiazolinone + methylchloro-isothiazolinone, iodopropynyl butylcarbamate, methyldibromoglutaronitrile, polyaminopropyl biguanide and paraben mix was performed among 109 participants – 37 cosmetology students, 26 cosmeticians, and 46 individuals – controls, occupationally unexposed to cosmetics. Fisher Exact Test and multiple binary logistic regression analysis were used.
Results: Formaldehyde was the main contact sensitizer, with signifi cantly higher prevalence of sensitization among the occupationally exposed cosmeticians and cosmetology students if compared to the controls (p = 0.005) [OR = 0.290 (95% CI: 0.092-0.916]). The positivity prevalence to DMDM hydantoin was 11%, with equal rates of sensitization to quaternium-15, methylisothiazolinone + methylchloroisothiazolinone and methyldibromo-glutaronitrile (9.2%). A signifi cantly higher prevalence of co-sensitization to DMDM hydantoin and imidazolidinyl urea was revealed. The positivity rate to quaternium-15 was highest among cosmetology students – 13.5%. The frequency of positive reactions to imidazolidinyl urea was 2.7% for students and 11.5% for cosmeticians. Cosmetology students and cosmeticians were at risk of sensitization to DMDM hydantoin, and the cosmeticians – to methylisothiazolinone/methylchloro-isothiazolinone and methyldibromo glutaronitrile and parabens.
Conclusions: This study established comparative high prevalence and risk of contact sensitization to the selected preservatives. Proper occupational risk information, developing and disseminating of practical tools for workplace risk assessment and management, with complex programs for prevention of occupational skin diseases should be provided.
References
Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on cosmetic products.
https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/cosmetics-us-law
Goossens A. Cosmetic Contact Allergens. Cosmetics, 2016, 3(1):5.
Kanokrungsee S, Chaweekulrat P, Chaiyabutr C, et al. A 30-year Patch Testing Experience at Siriraj Dermatology. Siriraj Med J, 2023, 75(2):62-9.
Uter 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.
Jovanović M. Contact Sensitivity and Allergens in Cosmetic Products. Med Pregl, 2021, 74(5-6):159-66.
Uter 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.
Pontén A, Bruze M. Formaldehyde. Dermatitis, 2015, 26(1):3-6.
Bergh 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.
Commission 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. Off J Eur Union, 2019, 23(5):30-31.
Goossens 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.
Sanz-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.
Bizjak 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.
Atwater 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.
Aerts O, Goossens A. Contact Allergy to Preservatives. In: Contact Dermatitis. Johansen JD, Mahler V, Lepoittevin J, et al. (Ed.). Springer, Cha, 2021, 835-76.
https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/cosing/pdf/COSING_Annex%20V_v2.pdf
Amsler 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.
Aerts O, Goossens A, Lambert J, et al. Contact allergy caused by isothiazolinone derivatives: an overview of noncosmetic and unusual cosmetic sources. Eur J Dermatol, 2017, 27(2):115-22.
Mercader-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 crosssectional study. Contact Dermatitis, 2021, 85:572-77.
Warshaw 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.
Luis-Gronau C, Cruzval-O’Reilly E, Lugo-Somolinos A. Methyldibromo- glutaronitrile: Increased incidence, but lacks clinical relevance. Dermatitis, 2021, 32(6):e135-e36.
Andernord 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.
Vanhoutte C, Goossens A, Gilissen L, et al. Concomitant contact-allergic reactions to iodopropynyl butylcarbamate and iodine. Contact Dermatitis, 2019, 81(1):17-23.
Giménez-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.
Johnson 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.
Sukakul T, Dahlin J, Pontén A, et al. Contact allergy to polyhexamethylene biguanide (polyaminopropyl biguanide). Contact Dermatitis, 2021, 84:326–31.
Scientifi c 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/fi les/scientifi c_committees/consumer_safety/docs/sccs_o_204.pdf.
Goh CF, Ming LC, Wong LC. Dermatologic reactions to disinfectant use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clin Dermatol, 2021, 39(2):314-22.
Rembe 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.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX: 02009R1223-20200501&from=EN
Pastor-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.
Leysen J, Goossens A, Lambert J, et al. Polyhexamethylene biguanide is a relevant sensitizer in wet wipes. Contact Dermatitis, 2014, 70(5):316-28.
Jaque A, DeKoven J. Polyhexamethylene biguanide and alkyl glucosides: unexpected allergens in an antimicrobial foam dressing. Contact Dermatitis, 2017, 77(1):421-22.
Pummi K, Kemppi E, Lammintausta K. Occupational sensitization to polyhexamethylene guanidine hydrochloride in a non-alcoholic hand rub. Contact Dermatitis, 2012, 66:348-349.
Kolodziej 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.
Reeder M, Atwater AR. Parabens: The 2019 Nonallergen of the Year. Cutis, 2019, 103(04):192-93.
Giácaman-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.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
You are free to share, copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format under these terms.
Journal Acta Medica Bulgarica 
