Alkyl Glucosides: 2017 “Allergen of the Year”

New trends on personalized sunscreens

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Nowadays, there are emerging trends in customized and personalized photoprotection, focusing on the innovative approaches to enhance sun protection efficacy tailored to individual needs.

METHODS

We conducted an electronic search of the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Skin Register, and TESEO. Specific search terms related to personalized photoprotection and the variables of age, genetic predisposition, skin phototype, photodermatosis, and physiological conditions such as pregnancy, as well as lifestyle habits were used.

RESULTS/CONCLUSION

The article highlights the challenges and opportunities in adopting personalized photoprotection strategies, aiming to promote skin health and prevent the harmful effects of UV radiation in the era of precision medicine.

The European baseline series and recommended additions: 2023

The European baseline series was last updated in 2019. This article discusses the reasoning behind a further iteration of the series for 2023.

Occurrence of Allergens in Cosmetics for Sensitive Skin

Sensitive skin is characterized by symptoms such as stinging and tingling in response to stimuli that usually do not cause unpleasant sensations. Epidemiological studies show that individuals with sensitive skin are more prone to developing skin allergies, although the link between both conditions is unknown. Aiming to evaluate the presence of allergens in facial-skin products for sensitive skin, a pool of 88 cosmetic products from international brands marketed in pharmacies and parapharmacies was analyzed. A list of allergens identified in product labels was compiled and grouped according to their function. Fragrances were the most common allergens, followed by skin-conditioning agents, surfactants, and preservatives. Fragrances presenting the highest use percentages were linalool, benzyl alcohol, geraniol, and citronellol. Overall, the majority of cosmetic formulations were absent of fragrance allergens, being present only in 7% of products. Other allergens were found in most products (95%). This finding should be interpreted with caution, since many of these compounds are rare sensitizers and studies demonstrating their risk for individuals with sensitive skin are lacking. With this study, useful information for health professionals is provided to support their advice and to help consumers choosing cosmetic products.

European patch test results with audit allergens as candidates for inclusion in the European Baseline Series, 2019/20 - Joint results of the ESSCAA and the EBSB working groups of the ESCD, and the GEIDACC

BACKGROUND

In 2019, a number of allergens (haptens), henceforth, 'the audit allergens,' were considered as potential additions to the European baseline series (EBS), namely, sodium metabisulfite, 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol, diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, Compositae mix II (2.5 or 5% pet), linalool hydroperoxides (lin-OOH), limonene hydroperoxides (lim-OOH), benzisothiazolinone (BIT), octylisothiazolinone (OIT), decyl glucoside, lauryl glucoside; Evernia furfuracea (tree moss), was additionally tested by some departments, too.

OBJECTIVES

To collect further data on patch test reactivity and clinical relevance of the audit allergens in consecutive patients across Europe.

METHODS

Patch test data covering the audit allergens in 2019 and 2020 were collected by those departments of the ESSCA testing these, as well as further collaborators from the EBS working group of the ESCD, and the Spanish GEIDAC. As patch test outcome, reactions between day (D) 3 and D5 were considered.

RESULTS

Altogether n=12403 patients were tested with any of the audit allergen. Positive reactions were most common to lin-OOH 1% pet. (8.74 (8.14-9.37)), followed by lin-OOH 0.5% pet., and lim-OOH 0.3% pet (5.41 (4.95-5.89)). Beyond these terpene hydroperoxides, BIT 0.1% pet. was the second most common allergen with 4.72 (4.2-5.28), followed by sodium metabisulfite 1% pet. (3.75 (3.32-4.23)) and Compositae mix 5% pet. (2.31 (1.84-2.87). For some allergens, clinical relevance was frequently difficult to ascertain.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite many positive patch test reactions, it remains controversial whether lin- and lim-OOH should be tested routinely, while at least the two preservatives BIT and sodium metabisulfite appear suitable. The present results are a basis for further discussion among the ESCD members and ultimately decision on their implementation into routine testing. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Pediatric allergic contact dermatitis. Part I: Clinical features and common contact allergens in children

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), a delayed hypersensitivity skin reaction to environmental allergens, has a prevalence that is similar in children and adults. However, diagnostic testing for ACD in pediatric populations accounts for less than one tenth of all patch tests. The relative infrequency of pediatric patch testing may be attributed to the difficulty in testing in this population, which includes a smaller surface area for patch test placement and maintaining cooperation during patch testing, especially in younger children. Diagnosis can be difficult in children because the appearance of ACD can mimic other common pediatric skin conditions, particularly atopic dermatitis and irritant contact dermatitis. Comprehensive history taking, guided by patient presentation, age group, and location of dermatitis, helps build clinical suspicion. Such clinical suspicion is one of the major reasons behind patch testing, with additional indications being recalcitrant dermatitis and dermatitis with atypical distribution. US pediatric data have shown the top allergens to be metals, fragrances, topical antibiotics, preservatives, and emollients. These trends are important to recognize to guide management and accurate diagnosis, because ACD tends to persist if the allergen is not identified and can affect patients' quality of life.

Ultraviolet filters in sunscreen products labeled for use in children and for sensitive skin

BACKGROUND

The active ingredients in sunscreen products are ultraviolet (UV) filters, many of which are known potential allergens. The use of sunscreen in younger children and individuals with sensitive skin requires special attention, since absorption and allergen sensitization are of concern.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the ultraviolet filters in sunscreen products labeled specifically for "kids" or as "sensitive/hypoallergenic" and compare these to general sunscreen products.

METHODS

From December 2017 to March 2018, the ingredient labels on commercially available sunscreen products in Bangkok, Thailand, were analyzed.

RESULTS

Two hundred and forty-six sunscreen products were examined. Of these, twenty products (8.1%) were marketed for "kids." Forty-one products (16.6%) were labeled as "sensitive" or "hypoallergenic." Ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate (EHMC) and benzophenone-3 (BP3) were less prevalent in products for children [(P = .004) and (P = .029), respectively]. Eighty-five percent of sunscreen products labeled for kids contained at least one chemical UV filter. There was no significant difference between BP3, butyl methoxydibenzoylmethane (BMDM), and octocrylene (OCR) in products labeled for sensitive skin compared to products with no specific labels. Moreover, methylene bis-benzotriazolyl tetramethylbutylphenol (MBBT) was more commonly found in products for sensitive skin than in nonsensitive products (P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Common allergenic UV filters were found in sunscreens labeled as sensitive and for children. Regulations for displaying these specific labels should be established for improved benefits and safety to allergy-prone skin.

Prevalence of Surfactant in the Contact Allergen Management Program

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.

Are Injection Site Reactions in Monoclonal Antibody Therapies Caused by Polysorbate Excipient Degradants?

Injection site reactions (ISRs) and other adverse side effects are commonly observed during therapy with biologics. These hypersensitivity-related side effects can vary from simple rash to life-threatening anaphylactic reaction and may be linked to the immunogenicity of the drug including formation of antidrug antibodies. Reactions can also occur as a consequence of excipients in the product. We report the case of a patient who developed erythematous ISRs to both commercial PCSK9i formulations and had to go off therapy even though efficacy was not impacted. Skin testing showed that the patient was reacting to the polysorbates. Polysorbates are added to stabilize the biotherapeutic. Polysorbates can also activate complement and lead to a range of acute hypersensitivity and systemic immunostimulation reactions. Oxidative degradation products can function as haptens by reacting with proteins at the injection site. Reactive degradation products may even form adducts with the biologic itself, creating a potential neoantigen. Further research is needed to understand the fundamental causes of ISRs. It is critical that only the highest quality raw material is used, and proper storage conditions are employed to minimize degradation of polysorbates in the product. Although complete elimination of ISRs is unlikely, all efforts must be made to minimize them.