Search

With the reduction or elimination of animal testing, manufacturers are left with limited options, as few robust in vitro tests are available and human studies are costly. Recently, concerns have been raised regarding potential adverse health effects associated with use of WEN by Chaz Dean (WCD) cleansing conditioners. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the immunogenic potential of a WCD hair cleansing conditioner by utilizing a novel in vitro human skin explant test. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and human skin biopsies were obtained from healthy volunteers. Monocyte derived dendritic cells (MoDCs) were generated, primed by 0.01% WCD cleansing conditioner exposure for 24 h, co-cultured with autologous lymphocytes for 4 days, and then cultured with skin biopsies for 3 days. The skin biopsies then underwent histopathological evaluation, and T cell proliferation and IFNγ levels were determined. Overall, this study showed that treatment with 0.01% WCD cleansing conditioner resulted in a negative prediction for in vivo immune response. Further, this analysis shows that the skin explant test is a viable alternative to animal testing for complex mixtures or commercially available products.

Concerns regarding the use of potential skin sensitisers in personal care and cosmetic products continue to grow. The goal of this study was to develop a proof-of-concept tier-based screening strategy for the assessment of skin sensitisation potential by using non-animal methodologies. As a case example, this screening framework was applied to three WEN® by Chaz Dean cleansing conditioners. The first tier of testing utilised the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Quantitative Structure Activity Relationship Toolbox profiler to evaluate the skin sensitisation potential of individual ingredients within the formulation; a literature review was performed on the substances that generated in silico alerts. Tier 2 testing utilised the OECD in chemico Test Guideline (TG) 442C to evaluate these substances. Tier 3 testing adapted OECD TG442C to evaluate the formulated product. The literature review on the four substances that generated in silico alerts revealed that they were not sensitising at the concentrations reported in the formulated products. Tier 2 testing demonstrated that these substances were not sensitising at the concentrations tested. Finally, Tier 3 testing revealed that the evaluated cleansing conditioners had low mean percentage peptide depletion at the concentrations tested. Together, the results obtained suggest that the products tested are unlikely to induce skin sensitisation under the given experimental conditions. These findings are in agreement with other in vitro and clinical studies. The proposed tier-based testing approach may be used as a conceptual framework for the prospective safety screening of other personal care and cosmetic products. However, to establish the validity of the proposed testing strategy, further studies must be performed, including comparisons with established models.

Background: Many chemicals used for fragrance purposes in a diversity of products have allergenic potential. Based on such concerns, industry groups developed concentration limits for use of fragrance chemicals in personal care and cosmetic products., Objective: The aim of this study was to use a quantitative risk assessment to evaluate the potential for skin sensitization induction resulting from daily exposure to fragrance chemicals present in personal care and cosmetic products., Methods: Product-specific dermal consumer exposure levels were calculated based on product use data in US adult females and benchmarked against acceptable exposure levels based on reported no expected sensitization induction levels to determine a margin of safety for each fragrance under evaluation., Conclusions: The results demonstrate an increased risk of skin sensitization induction for several leave-on products (lipstick, solid antiperspirant, eye shadow, face cream) for most of the evaluated fragrance chemicals, particularly under high-use exposure scenarios. In contrast, rinse-off products (shampoo, conditioner, facial cleanser) were not associated with risk of skin sensitization induction. Because the approach was based on maximum use limits for fragrance chemicals with skin sensitization concerns, the results suggest these limits may not be protective, particularly in the United States.

Lead (Pb) content in lipstick and other consumer products has become an increasing concern. In 2010, the United States Food and Drug Administration tested 400 lipstick samples and found a maximum Pb concentration of 7.19 ppm. To assess the safety of lipstick in adults that chronically apply lipstick as well as instances where children might incidentally ingest lipstick products, the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (US EPA) Adult Lead Model and Integrated Exposure Uptake Biokinetic Model for Lead in Children were used to determine the blood Pb concentrations of adults and children ingesting varying amounts of lipstick of different Pb concentrations. Modeled blood Pb concentrations were compared with oral ingestion guidelines and to the Centers for Disease Control and the US EPA's actionable blood Pb levels of 5 and 10 µg/dL. Background Pb exposure was the primary contributor to estimated blood Pb levels (BLLs) in children and adults, and Pb exposure from lipstick did not significantly increase estimated BLLs. These results suggest that the safety of consumer products and cosmetics should be assessed not only by the presence and amounts of hazardous contents, but also in conjunction with an assessment of estimated background exposures and comparison to health-based standards., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The FDA maintains the Adverse Event Reporting System (CAERS) database, which contains product complaint reports for foods, dietary supplements, and cosmetics. Product line perception and subsequent adverse event reporting may be impacted by negative media attention. Methods: The purpose of this analysis was to use the CAERS database to analyze temporal trends in adverse event reporting before and after media coverage of alleged health effects, using WEN by Chaz Dean (WCD) cleansing conditioners as a case study. WCD cleansing conditioner adverse event reports from January 2005 to December 2018 were abstracted from the CAERS database. Zero‐inflated negative binomial regression models were used to analyze the rate of adverse events (WCD events/10,000 WCD cleansing conditioner units sold/month), adjusted for temporal trends in CAERS. Results: There was a statistically significant higher rate of adverse event reporting after negative media coverage in December 2015 (IRR 16.71 [95% CI: 7.89–35.39]) when compared to the rate of adverse event reporting before December 2015. Conclusions: This analysis highlights the importance of assessing potential external factors, such as negative news media coverage, that may alter reporting behaviors due to societal shifts in product‐specific risk perception. Consideration of these factors in post‐market surveillance programs would result in more comprehensive safety evaluations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose/Aim: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not require specific testing to demonstrate the safety of personal care and cosmetic products or their ingredients. Recently, there have been reports of skin irritation associated with the use of commercially available cleansing conditioners. The goal of this study was to implement a tier-based safety assessment to evaluate the skin irritation potential of six commercially available cleansing conditioners and their ingredients. Materials and Methods: The first tier of testing utilized the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) QSAR Toolbox to perform an in silico evaluation of the skin irritation potential of the product ingredients, and the second tier of testing utilized an OECD in vitro guideline test to evaluate the skin irritation potential of each product. Results: Thirty-two ingredients were evaluated using the OECD QSAR Toolbox profiler for the tier one analysis; nine ingredients received a structural alert for skin irritation/corrosion. In the tier two in vitro analysis, the evaluated cleansing conditioner products were all classified as non-irritants. Conclusions: These results provide evidence that use of the evaluated commercially available cleansing conditioners would not be expected to cause skin irritation among consumers. Additionally, this study demonstrates that the presence of structural alerts does not always accurately predict the safety of a product, as focused tier-based testing is necessary to comprehensively evaluate a product. This study illustrates a tier-based safety assessment approach, applicable to a wide variety of health endpoints, which efficiently and adequately evaluates the safety of personal care and cosmetic products and their ingredients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]