Dauerbrenner Konservierungsmittelallergie: Was geht, was kommt, was bleibt?

High prevalence but no current clinical relevance of methyldibromo glutaronitrile since its ban in Turkey in 2015

BACKGROUND

Regulatory actions significantly reduced methyldibromo glutaronitrile (MDBGN)-induced allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from cosmetics in Europe. Turkey banned MDBGN in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To assess sensitization and ACD rates to MDBGN before and after its ban in Turkey.

METHODS

Data from 2653 consecutively patch tested patients between 1996 and 2023 with MDBGN 0.1% pet. (n = 573) or 0.2%-0.3% pet. (n = 1310) or 0.5% pet. (n = 770) were analysed. MDBGN was tested as MDBGN/phenoxyethanol (PE) in 1434 patients.

RESULTS

The sensitization prevalence was 1.7% (45/2653), peaking at 5.3% in 2018 and 2023 with MDBGN 0.3% pet. There was a two-fold male predominance, with patients exclusively ≥20 years old. None of the patients reacted to PE. ACD occurred in 0.7% (19/2653), mainly affecting hands and linked to non-occupational exposure (78.9%), particularly from rinse-off/leave-on cosmetics. The pattern of 'middle-aged men with hand eczema and fragrance allergy' was particularly notable. Occupational ACD was rare (21.1%), occurring mainly in hairdressers from hair gel. Positive reactions with current clinical relevance dropped from 48.3% (1996-2014) to zero after 2015 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The ban effectively reduced MDBGN-induced ACD in Turkey, yet the prevalence of positive patch test reactions remains high, likely due to past exposures or other undisclosed sources. We suggest continued testing of MDBGN in the EBS in Turkey.

Decision making in next generation risk assessment for skin allergy: Using historical clinical experience to benchmark risk

Our aim is to develop and apply next generation approaches to skin allergy risk assessment that do not require new animal test data and better quantify uncertainties. Quantitative risk assessment for skin sensitisation uses safety assessment factors to extrapolate from the point-of-departure to an acceptable human exposure level. It is currently unclear whether these safety assessment factors are appropriate when using non-animal test data to derive a point-of departure. Our skin allergy risk assessment model Defined Approach uses Bayesian statistics to infer a human-relevant metric of sensitiser potency with explicit quantification of uncertainty, using any combination of human repeat insult patch test, local lymph node assay, direct peptide reactivity assay, KeratinoSens™, h-CLAT or U-SENS™ data. Here we describe the incorporation of benchmark exposures pertaining to use of consumer products with clinical data supporting a high/low risk categorisation for skin sensitisation. Margins-of-exposure (potency estimate to consumer exposure level ratio) are regressed against the benchmark risk classifications, enabling derivation of a risk metric defined as the probability that an exposure is low risk. This approach circumvents the use of safety assessment factors and provides a simple and transparent mechanism whereby clinical experience can directly feed-back into risk assessment decisions.

Is benzyl alcohol a significant contact sensitizer?

BACKGROUND

Benzyl alcohol is a widely used preservative, solvent, and fragrance material. According to published data, it is a rare sensitizer in humans.

OBJECTIVES

To identify characteristics and sensitization patterns of patients with positive patch test reactions to benzyl alcohol and to check the reliability of the patch test preparation benzyl alcohol 1% pet.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of data from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), 2010-2019.

RESULTS

Of 70,867 patients patch tested with benzyl alcohol 1% pet., 146 (0.21%) showed a positive reaction, most of them (89%) only weak positive. The number of doubtful and irritant reactions significantly exceeded the number of positive reactions. Reproducibility of positive test reactions was low. Among benzyl alcohol-positive patients, compared to benzyl alcohol negative patients, there were significantly more patients with leg dermatitis (17.8% vs. 8.6%), more patients aged 40 years or more (81.5% vs. 70.5%), and more patients who were tested because of a suspected intolerance reaction to topical medications (34.9% vs. 16.6%). Concomitant positive reactions were mainly seen to fragrances, preservatives, and ointment bases.

CONCLUSIONS

Sensitization to benzyl alcohol occurs very rarely, mainly in patients with stasis dermatitis. In view of our results, benzyl alcohol cannot be regarded as a significant contact allergen, and therefore marking it as skin sensitizer 1B and labelling it with H 317 is not helpful.

Barrier defect in atopic dermatitis - possibilities and limits of basic skin therapy

The increased permeability of the skin barrier towards environmental factors such as allergens is considered a key factor in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis (AD). Strengthening the skin barrier through basic skin therapy represents the basis of any therapy for AD. It is well known that genetic factors as well as the skin inflammation itself contribute to the weakening of the barrier; here, recent studies have led to a deeper understanding of the complex structures of the epidermis. The possibility of counteracting the disease preventively by the use of basic skin therapy from birth on has been studied intensively in recent years. This article summarizes recent findings on the effects of basic skin therapy as a primary and secondary preventive measure.

Contact allergy and allergic contact dermatitis from benzalkonium chloride in a tertiary dermatology center in Melbourne, Australia

BACKGROUND

Benzalkonium chloride (BAK) is a quaternary ammonium compound that is used widely as an antiseptic and preservative. It is a strong irritant and considered a weak sensitizer.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the temporal trend of BAK sensitization and the demographics of sensitized patients.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center retrospective study of 7390 patients who were patch tested with BAK between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2019.

RESULTS

Of the 7390 patients who were patch tested to BAK, 108 (1.5%) had a positive reaction, with 21 reactions deemed clinically relevant (0.3% of total patch tested) and a further 5 doubtful reactions deemed clinically relevant, resulting in a total of 26 relevant reactions (0.4% of total patch tested). Common sources of exposure were ophthalmic drops (30.8%), topical antiseptic preparations (26.9%), cosmetics (15.4%), disinfectant solutions (11.5%), hand sanitizers (11.5%), and hand washes (7.7%). One fifth of patients with relevant reactions were health care workers. There has been a dramatic increase in the number of positive reactions since 2017, for reasons not totally clear.

CONCLUSION

Contact allergy (CA) and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in response to BAK are now increasing at our center. Awareness of this trend is important, given that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is likely to further expose people to BAK.

Formaldehyde 2% is not a useful means of detecting allergy to formaldehyde releasers- results of the ESSCA network, 2015-2018

BACKGROUND

Studies suggest that patch testing with formaldehyde releasers (FRs) gives significant additional information to formaldehyde 1% aq. and should be considered for addition to the European baseline series (EBS). It is not known if this is also true for formaldehyde 2% aq.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the frequency of sensitization to formaldehyde 2% aq. and co-reactivity with FRs. To establish whether there is justification for including FRs in the EBS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 4-year, multi-center retrospective analysis of patients with positive patch test reactions to formaldehyde 2% aq. and five FRs.

RESULTS

A maximum of 15 067 patients were tested to formaldehyde 2% aq. and at least one FR. The percentage of isolated reactions to FR, without co-reactivity to, formaldehyde 2% aq. for each FR were: 46.8% for quarternium-15 1% pet.; 67.4% imidazolidinyl urea 2% pet.; 64% diazolidinyl urea 2% pet.; 83.3% 1,3-dimethylol-5, 5-dimethyl hydantoin (DMDM) hydantoin 2% pet. and 96.3% 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol 0.5% pet. This demonstrates that co-reactivity varies between FRs and formaldehyde, from being virtually non-existent in 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol 0.5% pet. (Cohen's kappa: 0, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.02 to 0.02)], to only weak concordance for quaternium-15 [Cohen's kappa: 0.22, 95%CI 0.16 to 0.28)], where Cohen's kappa value of 1 would indicate full concordance.

CONCLUSIONS

Formaldehyde 2% aq. is an inadequate screen for contact allergy to the formaldehyde releasers, which should be considered for inclusion in any series dependant on the frequency of reactions to and relevance of each individual allergen.