Search

Background: Chemical hair relaxers are widely utilized by black women, yet little research exists on the allergens present in these products., Objective: This study aims to investigate allergen prevalence in the most popular chemical hair relaxers., Methods: We analysed 41 products from five major retailers, identifying allergens through ingredient lists and comparing them to the 2020 American Contact Dermatitis Group Core allergen series., Results: The most common contact allergens in chemical relaxers include propylene glycol, cetyl steryl alcohol, fragrance, D/L-a-tocopherol, tea tree oil and cocamidopropyl betaine., Conclusion: Understanding allergen exposure in products used by individuals with textured hair is needed for managing contact dermatitis in diverse populations. This analysis underscores the presence of potential allergens in hair relaxers, emphasizing the importance of dermatologists' awareness and patient scrutiny of ingredient lists., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Rinse-off cosmetic products, primarily shampoos, are frequently implicated in the onset of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) caused by alkyl glucosides (AGs). AGs are increasingly popular surfactants and known contact allergens. Glucoside-induced ACD was most frequently observed with shampoos and skin-cleansing products in both consumer and occupational settings. Thereby, studies have shown that atopic individuals are the most susceptible to ACD. Also, several investigations have indicated that individuals with sensitive skin might be more prone to skin allergies. This is why the presence of AGs was investigated in shampoos and body cleansers marketed as hypoallergenic or for sensitive skin. For this purpose, the website of Amazon.com was surveyed. Four groups of cosmetics were obtained by using the following keywords: "hypoallergenic shampoo for adults," "sensitive skin shampoo for adults," "hypoallergenic body cleanser for adults," and "sensitive skin body cleanser for adults." The first 30 best-selling cosmetics in each group were investigated for the presence of AGs, by analyzing the product information pages. The results showed that as much as 56.7% of hypoallergenic shampoos contained AGs, as ingredients, whereas the percentage was somewhat lower for other product categories. Even though decyl and lauryl glucoside were nearly ubiquitously used AGs in cosmetics over the past decade, the most commonly present AG in our analysis was coco-glucoside. The results of this study indicated a necessity to include coco-glucoside in the baseline series of patch testing allergens. Industry , regulators, and healthcare providers should be made aware of the frequent presence of AGs in rinse-off cosmetic products marketed as hypoallergenic or for sensitive skin to ensure the safety and well-being of consumers and patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: The burden of occupational hand eczema in hairdressers is high, and (partly strong) allergens abound in the hair cosmetic products they use., Objectives: To systematically review published evidence concerning contact allergy to an indicative list of active ingredients of hair cosmetics, namely, p-phenylenediamine (PPD), toluene-2,5-diamine (PTD), persulfates, mostly ammonium persulfate (APS), glyceryl thioglycolate (GMTG), and ammonium thioglycolate (ATG), concerning the prevalence of sensitization, particularly in terms of a comparison (relative risk; RR) between hairdressers and non-hairdressers., Methods: Following a PROSPERO-registered and published protocol, eligible literature published from 2000 to February 2021 was identified, yielding 322 publications, and extracted in standardized publication record forms, also considering risk of bias., Results: Based on 141 publications, the contact allergy prevalence to PPD was 4.3% (95% CI: 3.8-4.9%) in consecutively patch tested patients. Other ingredients were mostly tested in an aimed fashion, yielding variable, and partly high contact allergy prevalences. Where possible, the RR was calculated, yielding an average increased sensitization risk in hairdressers of between 5.4 (PPD) and 3.4 (ATG). Additional evidence related to immediate-type hypersensitivity, experimental results, exposures, and information from case reports was qualitatively synthesized., Conclusions: An excess risk of contact allergy is clearly evident from the pooled published evidence from the last 20 years. This should prompt an improvement in working conditions and product safety., (© 2022 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Hair products are a potential cause of allergic contact dermatitis. There are limited data on the allergen content of ethnic hair products., Objective: To identify allergens unique to ethnic hair products (shampoos, conditioners, styling products) and provide a resource for low allergen hair care products for patients with ethnic hair types., Methods: The top 100 best-selling shampoos, conditioners, and styling products for ethnic and nonethnic hair products were determined from 3 major online retailers (Walmart, Target, Walgreens). Allergen was defined as presence on the 2017 American Contact Dermatitis Society Core 80 allergen list., Results: The 2017 American Contact Dermatitis Society Core 80 allergens were tabulated for ethnic and nonethnic shampoos, conditioners, and styling products. A list of low-allergen shampoos, conditioners, and styling products was identified. Fragrance was the most common allergen for ethnic shampoos, conditioners, and styling products. Other notable allergens included methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, formaldehyde releasers, cetyl steryl alcohol, tocopherol, decyl glucoside, sodium benzoate, and phenoxyethanol., Conclusions: This study identifies important differences in allergens found in products marketed for ethnic hair compared with those marketed for nonethnic hair., Competing Interests: A.R.A. received a Pfizer Independent Grant for Learning and Change. The other authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2020 American Contact Dermatitis Society. All Rights Reserved.)

Background: Surfactants are common ingredients in topical products, which can cause both irritant and allergic contact dermatitis., Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of 12 common groups of surfactants and 12 common individual surfactants among products in each category in the American Contact Dermatitis Society Contact Allergen Management Program (CAMP)., Methods: The American Contact Dermatitis Society CAMP was queried for the 12 surfactant groups and the 12 individual surfactants., Results: The laureth/pareth sulfate group was the most prevalent surfactant group in CAMP products (17.9%). Laureth/pareth sulfates were the most common surfactant group in all product categories, except household and eye care products. The betaine/sultaine group (13.5%) and glucosides (10.0%) were also found in a significant proportion of CAMP products. Oleamidopropyl dimethylamine has the highest positive reaction rate (3.5%) but was tied for the lowest prevalence (0.20%) of the 12 individual surfactants studied. In contrast, cocamidopropyl betaine has a lower positive reaction rate (1.6%) with a higher prevalence (10.4%)., Conclusions: Surfactants were commonly found across all product types in CAMP. This study provides important information on allergen and irritant exposures in care products.

Background: Personal care products marketed for babies and children are often regarded as "safe" or "gentle." However, little is known about the prevalence of contact allergens in these types of products., Objective: This study assessed the prevalence of important sensitizers in personal care products marketed for babies and children. A secondary objective of this study was to determine whether a product's cost correlates with content of sensitizing ingredients., Methods: The ingredient lists of 533 unique personal care products were analyzed for presence of fragrance, betaines, propylene glycol, methylchloroisothiazolinone, methylisothiazolinone, formaldehyde, lanolin, and neomycin. Price per ounce was determined for each product as well., Conclusions: Most personal care products for babies and children contain 1 or more sensitizers. Products containing more sensitizers tend to cost less than those without any sensitizing ingredients.

Background: More than 25% of the adult European population suffers from contact allergy, with fragrance substances recognized as one of the main causes. Since 2005, 26 fragrance contact allergens have been mandatory to label in cosmetic products within the EU if present at 10 ppm or above in leave-on and 100 ppm or above in wash-off cosmetics., Objective: To examine exposure, based on ingredient labelling, to the 26 fragrances in a sample of 5588 fragranced cosmetic products., Methods: The investigated products were identified through a novel, non-profit smartphone application (app), designed to provide information to consumers about chemical substances in cosmetic products. Products registered through the app between December 2015 and October 2016 were label checked according to International Nomenclature of Cosmetic Ingredients (INCI) for the presence of the 26 fragrance substances or the wording 'fragrance/parfum/aroma'., Results: The largest product categories investigated were 'cream, lotion and oil' (n = 1192), 'shampoo and conditioner' (n = 968) and 'deodorants' (n = 632). Among cosmetic products labelled to contain at least one of the 26 fragrances, 85.5% and 73.9% contained at least two and at least three of the 26 fragrances, respectively. Linalool (49.5%) and limonene (48.5%) were labelled most often among all investigated products. Hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde (HICC/Lyral ® ) was found in 13.5% of deodorants. Six of the 26 fragrance substances were labelled on less than one per cent of all products, including the natural extracts Evernia furfuracea (tree moss) and Evernia prunastri (oak moss). A total of 329 (5.9%) products had one or more of the 26 fragrance substances labelled but did not have 'parfum/fragrance/aroma' listed on the label., Conclusions: Consumers are widely exposed to, often multiple, well-established fragrance contact allergens through various cosmetic products intended for daily use. Several fragrance substances that are common causes of contact allergy were rarely labelled in this large sample of cosmetic products., (© 2017 European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.)

Eccrine spiradenoma (ES) typically presents as a solitary tender lesion. Multiple ES is a rare variant of ES and can present in a segmental, linear, blaschkoid, or zosteriform pattern. The etiology of multiple ES is unknown, but several theories have been suggested including a multipotent stem cell origin. We report the case of a 30-year-old woman with multiple painful ES in a zosteriform pattern on the mid-back and abdomen. Skin biopsy of a representative lesion demonstrated a circumscribed tumor nodule encapsulated by a fibrous capsule with diffuse dense basophilic proliferation located in the dermis. The lesions were then excised on two separate sessions without recurrence.

Many key ingredients of hair cosmetics (in particular, dyes, bleaches, and hair-styling agents) are potent (strong to extreme) contact allergens. Some heterogeneity is apparent from published results concerning the range of allergens for which patch testing is important. The objective of the present review was to collect information on the current practice of using 'hair cosmetic series', and discuss this against the background of evidence concerning consumer/professional exposure and regulatory aspects to finally derive a recommendation for a 'European hair cosmetic series'. The methods involved (i) a survey targeting all members of the COST action 'StanDerm' (TD1206) consortium, (ii) analysis of data in the database of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA), and (iii) literature review. Information from 19 European countries was available, partly from national networks, and partly from one or several departments of dermatology or, occasionally, occupational medicine. Apart from some substances being tested only in single departments, a broad overlap regarding 'important' allergens was evident. Some of the substances are no longer permitted for use in cosmetics (Annex II of the Cosmetics Regulation). An up-to-date 'European hair cosmetics series', as recommended in the present article, should (i) include broadly used and/or potent contact allergens, (ii) eliminate substances of only historical concern, and (iii) be continually updated as new evidence emerges., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)