Pandemic of sensitivity to acrylate containing nail cosmetic among young Israeli women? Result of patch testing 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate in the European baseline series

BACKGROUND

2-Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) was added into the European baseline series (EBS) in 2019. There is limited data regarding the frequency, relevance, and sources of exposure to HEMA.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the frequency and clinical relevance of positive reactions to HEMA in the EBS in Israel, and explore sources of exposure.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study that included all patients who underwent patch testing with the EBS in a tertiary center in Israel between 2020 and 2023. Positive reactions to HEMA were stratified by sex, six age groups, and year of study. Sources of exposure to HEMA as well as occupational data were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 1671 consecutive patients underwent HEMA patch testing, with 135 (8.1%) showing positive reactions to HEMA (130 females, 5 males). The prevalence in women (11.0%) was significantly higher compared to men (1.0%) (p < 0.001). Stratification by age and sex revealed the highest frequency of HEMA sensitivity of 16.7% among women younger than 30 years of age, with odds ratio of 2.3 (95%CI: 1.6-3.3, p < 0.001) compared to older women. There was an increase in frequency among women between the years 2022 and 2023 when compared to 2020-2021 (OR 1.7, 95%CI: 1.5-2.1, p < 0.01) attributable to COVID-19 pandemic and social restrictions. Among men the frequency fluctuations over the study period and age categories were nonsignificant. 111 (84%) were judged to be of clinical relevance and nail cosmetics was responsible for 95% of them. Of 111 patients with relevant reaction (110 females, 1 males), 20 (18%) had occupational contact dermatitis (18 nails stylists, 2 dentists). Other culprit products included sanitary pads (n = 4), medical adhesives (n = 3), and paints (n = 2).

CONCLUSION

We report the highest frequency of HEMA sensitivity to date of 8.1%, that was most common among young women and in vast majority of cases was attributable to nail cosmetics. Our findings reflect the popularity of nail cosmetics in Israel as well as the global trend of increasing sensitivity to (meth)acrylates.

Artificial nail modelling systems in healthcare workers: An emerging risk of contact sensitization to a well-known occupational allergen in an alternative way

BACKGROUND

Artificial nail modelling systems (ANMS) pose a significant risk for nail stylists and their clients regarding acrylate sensitization, which might jeopardize the use of acrylate-containing medical devices.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the frequency of artificial nail practices among female healthcare workers (HCWs) compared with controls and assess ANMS-related side effects.

METHODS

In this comparative, cross-sectional, single-centre study, a face-to-face interview with 200 female HCWs and 200 age-matched female dermatology patients (controls) was conducted regarding the use of ANMS between March and November 2023.

RESULTS

Among 400 participants (median age: 25), 85 (21.3%) have applied ANMS at least once. The prevalence of ANMS application was significantly higher in HCWs (n = 54/200, 27%) compared with controls (n = 31/200, 15.5%) (p < 0.05). Long-lasting nail polish was the most commonly preferred technique (n = 82/85, 96.5%). ANMS were mainly performed in nail studios by nail stylists (n = 79/85, 92.9%), while three participants were using home kits. Nail brittleness was the most frequently reported side effect (n = 19/85, 22.4%). No case of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

The popularity of ANMS among young female HCWs is growing. This striking trend might further put these individuals not only at risk of medical device-related adverse events but also occupational ACD.

Acrylates and Methacrylates Sensitization in Patients with Orthopedic and Dental Prostheses: Asymptomatic Pre-Implant and Symptomatic Post-Implant Testing

Acrylates and methacrylates are widely used in dental and orthopedic prostheses, false nails, adhesives, glues, and paints, and are strong sensitizers. The aim of our study was to assess the prevalence of acrylate sensitization in patients before the application of dental or orthopedic prostheses or after the application in case of potentially related contact dermatitis. Methods: The subjects were tested according to haptens reported in safety data sheets, including methyl methacrylate (MMA) 5%, methyl acrylate (MA) 1%, ethyl methacrylate (EMA) 2%, ethyl acrylate (EA) 1%, butylacrylate 0.1%, 2 hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) 5%, ethylene glycol dimethacrylate 2% (EGDMA), tetraethylene glycol dimethacrylate 2% (TEGDMA), and dimethyl amino ethyl methacrylate 0.2% (DAEMA). Multivariable logistic regression was used to study the factors associated with (meth)acrylate sensitization. Results: Six hundred sixty-five patients (75.4% of the total sample) without contact dermatitis before the placement of any dental or orthopedic prosthesis and 217 patients (24.6% of the total sample) with contact dermatitis potentially due to already placed prostheses were involved. In total, 37 cases of patch test positivity to at least 1 acrylate (4.2%) were found. In the pre-implant population, previous dermatitis and respiratory allergy were associated with increased sensitization to acrylates in multivariable regression analysis (odds ratio [OR] 2.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-5.39; OR 2.96, 95% CI 1.32-6.64, respectively). The prevalence of sensitization was 3.5% for EGDMA, 2.7% for EA, 1.5% for 2-HEMA, 1.4% for both MA and MMA, 1.28% for DAEMA, and 0.8% for EMA. No statistically significant difference was found in the prevalence of sensitization between the pre- and post-implant groups. Discussion: Our study found a similar profile of sensitization in pre-implant and post-implant patients, suggesting the need to better study the specificity and sensitivity of patch tests to (meth)acrylate and to define relevance considering a detailed history of exposure.

2-Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2-HEMA) sensitization, a global epidemic at its peak in Spain?

BACKGROUND

A global epidemic of allergic contact dermatitis to (meth)acrylates has been described in relation to the widespread use of manicure products.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the frequency of sensitization to 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2-HEMA) among consecutively patch tested patients with eczema in Spain; the percentage of current relevance; the MOAHLFA index; and, the potential sources of exposure to (meth)acrylates.

METHODS

From January 2019 to December 2022, 2-HEMA 2% pet. was prospectively patch tested in 24 REIDAC (Spanish Allergic Contact Dermatitis Registry) centres.

RESULTS

Six thousand one hundred thirty-four patients were consecutively patch tested with 2-HEMA 2% pet. 265/6134 (4.3%) were positive. Positive reactions of current relevance were identified to involve 184/265 (69%). The efficiency (number of patch tests needed to detect relevant positive patch test reactions) was 34 (6134/184). The variable 'occupational' was found to be significantly associated with a higher risk for relevant positive reactions to 2-HEMA (OR: 10.9; 95% CI: 8.1-14.9).

CONCLUSION

(Meth)acrylate sensitization is a prevalent health issue in Spain. 2-HEMA 2% pet. has been identified to be a highly effective (meth)acrylate allergy marker in the GEIDAC baseline series. The responsible authorities should implement policies guaranteeing accurate labelling of industrial, medical, and consumer materials while ensuring the enforcement of said labelling through appropriate legal means.

Nail cosmetology

Nail cosmetics is enjoying growing success due to recent technological advances. Manicures can be responsible for mechanical, infectious or allergic adverse effects. Nail cosmetics (e.g., nail varnishes, acrylic false nails, light-curing gels, and adhesive false nails) incorporate substances that harden after solvent evaporation or after polymerization. Allergic reactions can occur, remotely with conventional varnishes and locally with polymerizing substances. Artificial nails incur a risk of carrying infectious agents which can cause serious infection, and should not be used by caregivers. Recently, there has been a worrisome increase in the frequency of acrylate allergy, due to the appearance of home kits and lack of information in the general public. The infectious, allergic and toxic risks incurred by consumers and professionals regarding manicure or pedicure treatments and the application of nail cosmetics are the subject of recommendations and monitoring measures.

The new Italian SIDAPA Baseline Series for patch testing (2023): an update according to the new regulatory pathway for contact allergens

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is a common inflammatory skin disease caused by delayed hypersensitivity to chemical and biotic contact allergens. ACD significantly affects the patients' quality of life negatively impacting both occupational and non-occupational settings. Patch testing is the gold standard diagnostic in vivo test to precise the ACD etiology and to correctly perform prevention. According to the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) legislative decree no. 178 of 29th May 1991, allergens are defined as medicines and therefore they are subject to strict regulation. In 2017, AIFA (decree no. 2130/2017) started a procedure to regulate contact allergens on the Italian market and actually the contact allergens temporarily authorized are reported in AIFA decree no. 98/2022, valid until November 2023. The availability on the market of contact allergens to diagnose ACD and continuous updating on the basis of new epidemiological trends are mandatory, jointly with the continuous update of the baseline and integrative series for patch testing. For this reason, the scientific community represented in Italy by the Skin Allergies Study Group of SIDeMaST (Italian Society of Dermatology and Venereology) and SIDAPA (Italian Society of Allergological, Occupational and Environmental Dermatology) are constantly working, in close relationship with the European scientific communities with large expertise in this important sector of the modern Dermatology. Herein, we report the setting up of regulatory legislation by AIFA and the new Italian Adult Baseline Series for patch testing.

Acrylates in artificial nails-Results of product analyses and glove penetration studies

BACKGROUND

Artificial nail materials are mixtures that are prone to contain several sensitizing (meth)acrylates. It is not known whether the listing of (meth)acrylates is correct in these products' packages. Protective gloves suited for nail work are needed.

OBJECTIVES

To analyse (meth)acrylates in gel nail and acrylic nail products chemically and to compare the results with the information in the product labels, and to study penetration of artificial nail materials through selected disposable gloves.

METHODS

We analysed 31 gel nail products and 6 acrylic nail products for their (meth)acrylate content by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). We tested the penetration of two nail products through three disposable gloves: nitrile rubber, neoprene rubber and polyvinyl chloride (PVC).

RESULTS

Altogether 32/37 products contained (meth)acrylates. In all of them, there was discrepancy between the listed (meth)acrylates and those discovered in the analysis. The commonest (meth)acrylates were hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA, 20/37 samples) and hydroxypropyl methacrylate (HPMA, 9/37 samples), but many of the product packages failed to declare them. Isobornyl acrylate (IBA) was discovered in nine gel nail products. The neoprene glove could withstand nail gel for 20 min and thin nitrile glove and PVC glove for 5 min. Acrylic nail liquid penetrated through disposable gloves quickly.

CONCLUSIONS

Labelling of artificial nail products was notably incorrect on most products. Requirements for product labelling must be updated so that the risk of sensitization associated with artificial nail products is clearly indicated. Disposable gloves can probably be used short-term in gel nail work, whereas disposable gloves do not protect the user from acrylic nail liquids.

Contact allergy caused by acrylates in nail cosmetics: A pilot study from Greece

BACKGROUND

The growing popularity of nail techniques based on acrylates has led to a higher frequency of sensitization in both nail technicians and users.

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to assess cases of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) caused by acrylates in individuals with occupational or non-occupational exposure to nail techniques.

METHODS

A preliminary study was conducted on 30 patients with ACD caused by acrylates in nail techniques, who were patch tested from September 2022 to March 2023 at the First Department of Dermatology and Venereology of Andreas Syggros Hospital, Athens, Greece.

RESULTS

Thirty female patients with ACD to acrylates were documented (15 users and 15 nail technicians and users). The most common allergens were: 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA), 2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate (HPMA) and ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate (EGDMA), which tested positive in all 30 patients (100.0%). Twenty patients (66.7%) had been exposed to dental procedures involving acrylates, before the onset of ACD. Nail technicians exhibited extensive skin lesions, 40.0% experienced ACD within the first year of work and 13.3% during their professional practice. Three of them (20.0%) had to discontinue their work.

CONCLUSION

Acrylates have been identified as potent allergens, necessitating the implementation of safety measures for the use of these chemicals in nail techniques.

Contact allergy to acrylate-containing nail cosmetics: A retrospective 8-year study

BACKGROUND

Over the last 10 years, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from acrylate-containing nail cosmetics (acrylic nails, gel nails, gel nail polish) has been reported repeatedly.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the frequency and clinical features of ACD in nail cosmetics in a university hospital in Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective study in patients diagnosed with ACD from acrylate-containing nail cosmetics at the Amsterdam University Medical Centers between January 2015 and August 2023.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven patients, all women, were diagnosed with ACD from nail cosmetics, representing 1.6% of all individuals and 2.3% of all women patch tested in this period. Sixty-five of sixty-seven (97%) subjects had a positive patch test to 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA). Forty-nine patients (73%) were consumers and 18 (27%) were professional nail stylists. The sites most frequently affected with dermatitis were the fingers (79%), hands (40%) and the head and/or neck. Avoidance of contact with acrylate-containing products resulted in complete clearing of dermatitis in 80% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

ACD from acrylate-containing nail cosmetics is frequent in women patch tested in Amsterdam. Nearly all were identified by a positive patch test to 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate in the (meth)acrylate series or the European baseline series.

A Survey of Skin Reactions Associated With Acrylic Nail Cosmetics, With a Focus on Home Kits: Is There a Need for Regulation?

Background: Sensitization to (meth)acrylates, the most common nail cosmetic allergens, is rising. In recent years, home acrylic nail kits have become easily available. Objective: To investigate the characteristics of individuals reporting skin reactions associated with acrylic nail cosmetics, particularly home kits. Methods: Cross-sectional survey of Facebook nail allergy support groups. Inclusion criteria were self-reported skin reactions associated with acrylic nails and age ≥18 years. Results: There were 199 respondents, nearly all female (99%), mostly white (83%), and 25-54 years old (83%). Seventy-eight percent reported using home acrylic kits, more than half for the first time during COVID-19. They predominantly learned about kits through social media (68%) and received training through websites/online videos (74%). Most home users (83%) first developed skin reactions after starting to use home kits. Compared with nonhome users, significantly more home users reported skin reaction onset within 1 year of use, as well as nail damage (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Among online nail allergy support group members, home acrylic nail kit use was common and associated with earlier development of skin reactions and more frequent nail damage than professional acrylic manicures. These findings raise important questions about the need to regulate home acrylic nail kits.

2-Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA): A clinical review of contact allergy and allergic contact dermatitis. Part 2. Cross- and co-sensitization, other skin reactions to HEMA, position of HEMA among (meth)acrylates, sensitivity as screening agent, presence of HEMA in commercial products and practical information on patch test procedures

This is the second part of a literature review of the clinical aspects of contact allergy to and allergic contact dermatitis from 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA). Topics include cross- and co-sensitization, atypical manifestations of contact allergy, frequency of positive patch tests to HEMA compared with other (meth)acrylates, sensitivity of HEMA as a screening agent, the presence of HEMA in commercial products, and practical information on patch testing procedures. Primary sensitization to methacrylates including HEMA may result in methacrylate and acrylate cross-sensitization. There is a strong cross-allergy between HEMA, ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (EGDMA), and hydroxypropyl methacrylate; many reactions to EGDMA are cross-reactions to primary HEMA sensitization. Rare atypical manifestations of HEMA-allergy include lichen planus, lymphomatoid papulosis, systemic contact dermatitis, leukoderma after positive patch tests, and systemic side effects such as nausea, diarrhoea, malaise, and palpitations. The occurrence of respiratory disease caused by methacrylates such as asthma is not infrequent. HEMA is the most frequently patch test-positive methacrylate. It is a good screening agent for allergy to other (meth)acrylates. Patch test sensitization to HEMA 2% pet. is extremely rare. There are (some) indications that HEMA is frequently used in dental products and nail cosmetics.

Methacrylate Ester Monomers

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety reviewed newly available studies since their original assessment in 2005, along with updated information regarding product types and concentrations of use, and confirmed that these 22 methacrylate ester monomers are safe as used in nail enhancement products in the practices of use and concentration as described in this report, when skin contact is avoided.

Prognosis and sequelae of meth(acrylate) sensitization in beauticians and consumers of manicure materials

BACKGROUND

Allergic contact dermatitis from (meth)acrylic monomers (ACDMA) in manicure products is increasing.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prognosis, work performance impairment and sequelae of a cohort of beauticians and manicure consumers with ACDMA sensitized from the exposure to manicure products.

METHODS

We conducted a telephone survey with patients diagnosed with ACDMA.

RESULTS

One hundred and six patients were evaluated, including 75 (70.8%) beauticians and 31 (29.2%) consumers. All were women with a mean age of 39 (19-62). Thirty-seven of 75 beauticians (49.3%) continued to work. Twenty-seven of 106 (25.5%) patients continued to use manicure products with (meth)acrylates regularly. Seventeen of 51 (33.3%) patients who discontinued the exposure described ongoing nail/periungual changes. Nine of 58 (15.5%) patients who required dental restoration, orthodontic or occlusal splint materials recalled reactions from them; and, 25 of 96 (26%) who used sanitary napkins recalled intolerance to them starting after the diagnosis of ACDMA. Fifteen of 25 (60%) discontinued the use of sanitary napkins.

CONCLUSION

49.3% beauticians continued to work; most patients stopped wearing acrylic manicure materials; reactions from dental materials were not uncommon, however, removal of dental materials was never required; and, reactions to sanitary napkins developing after the diagnosis of ACDMA were common most leading to discontinuation of use.

2-Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA): A clinical review of contact allergy and allergic contact dermatitis-Part 1. Introduction, epidemiology, case series and case reports

2-Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) has been increasingly recognised as a contact allergen and was added to the European baseline series in 2019. In this article (2 parts), the results of an extensive literature review of the clinical aspects of contact allergy/allergic contact dermatitis to HEMA are presented. In part 1, the epidemiology of HEMA contact allergy is discussed and detailed information on published case series and case reports presented. HEMA is an important cause of contact allergy/allergic contact dermatitis in North America and Europe with recent prevalences of >3% in the USA + Canada and 1.5%-3.7% in Europe. Currently, most cases are caused by nail cosmetics, both in consumers and professional nail stylists. In our literature review, we have found 24 studies presenting case series of patients with allergic contact dermatitis attributed to HEMA and 168 case reports. However, the presence of HEMA in the products causing ACD was established in only a minority. Part 2 will discuss cross- and co-sensitisation, and other skin reactions to HEMA, will assess whether HEMA is the most frequent (meth)acrylate allergen and how sensitive HEMA as a screening agent is, investigate the presence of HEMA in commercial products and provide practical information on patch testing procedures.

N-acetyl cysteine inhibits IL-1α release from murine keratinocytes induced by 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate

The hydrophilic compound 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) is a major component of dental bonding materials, and it enhances the binding of resin-composites to biomolecules. However, HEMA is a well-known contact sensitizer. We reported previously that intradermal injection of HEMA induces the production of IL-1 locally in the skin. Keratinocytes are the first barrier against chemical insults and constitutively express IL-1α. In this study, we analyzed whether HEMA induces the production of inflammatory cytokines from murine keratinocyte cell line Pam212 cells. We demonstrated that HEMA induced the release of 17-kDa mature IL-1α and caused cytotoxicity. The activity of calpain, an IL-1α processing enzyme, was significantly higher in HEMA-treated cells. The thiol-containing antioxidant N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) inhibited HEMA-induced IL-1α release but not cytotoxicity. NAC inhibited intracellular calpain activity and reactive oxygen species (ROS) production induced by HEMA. NAC post-treatment also inhibited IL-1α release and intracellular ROS production induced by HEMA. Furthermore, HEMA-induced in vivo inflammation also inhibited by NAC. NAC inhibited polymerization of HEMA through adduct formation via sulfide bonds between the thiol group of NAC and the reactive double bond of HEMA. HEMA-induced IL-1α release and cytotoxicity were also inhibited if HEMA and NAC were pre-incubated before adding to the cells. These results suggested that NAC inhibited IL-1α release through decreases in intracellular ROS and the adduct formation with HEMA. We concluded that HEMA induces IL-1α release from skin keratinocytes, and NAC may be a promising candidate as a therapeutic agent against inflammation induced by HEMA.

Artificial Nails and Long-lasting Nail Polish in Danish Hairdressers: Self-use, Occupational Exposure and Related Eczema

Artificial nail modelling systems (ANMS), encompassing artificial nails and long-lasting nail polish, are sources of acrylate exposure in beauticians and users of ANMS. Hairdressers' exposure to ANMS from self-use and occupational exposure is currently unknown. In 2020 a questionnaire was sent to all hairdressers graduating during 2008 to 2018 in Denmark (n = 4,830). Self-use of ANMS was reported by 87.6% of respondents (1,251/1,428), and application of ANMS to others was reported by 22.1% (316/1,428). Of these, application to others was performed in a salon by 37.1% (109/294), privately by 51.0% (150/294) and in both settings by 11.9% (35/294). Compliance with glove use was seen in 23.0% (67/291) among those applying ANMS to others. Among hairdressers exposed to ANMS, 4.3% (52/1,218) reported ANMS-related hand eczema. Being a trained beautician (adjusted odds ratio 3.26, 95% confidence interval 1.06-9.99) and having had a positive patch-test to acrylates (adjusted odds ratio 7.70, 95% confidence interval 1.44-41.13) were associated with ANMS-related hand dermatitis. In conclusion, hairdressers have a high prevalence of exposure to ANMS and ANMS-related hand dermatitis. Compliance with glove use when applying ANMS to others is poor. Patch-testing with acrylates is valuable in the diagnostic work-up of hand eczema in hairdressers.

Side effects of gel nail polish: A systematic review

Gel nail polish (GNP) has recently gained worldwide popularity. We have conducted a comprehensive summary of the complications of GNP through a literature search using the PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases to identify eligible contributions. Complications were divided into mechanical and traumatic nail disorders, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), and ultraviolet (UV)-induced lesions. A total of 12 contributions were included, identifying 88 patients, all of whom were women. Six of the reports described ACD (62 cases, 70.5%), 3 concerned mechanical nail damage (23 cases, 26.1%), and 3 reported UV-induced skin lesions (3 cases, 3.4%). ACD developed an average of 30 months after GNP initiation. The most frequent culprit allergens were 2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate. Pterygium inversum unguis was the most frequent mechanical lesion (n = 17). Squamous cell carcinoma was reported in 3 cases. The delay between UV exposure and the diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma ranged from 11 to 15 years. Scant literature and a lack of education among consumers and beauticians have led to the uncontrolled use of GNP. The principle of managing nail cosmetic problems is prevention through education. There is a need for understanding the processes involved and the associated complications to facilitate appropriate treatment and safe use.

Allergic contact dermatitis caused by 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate and ethyl cyanoacrylate contained in cosmetic glues among hairdressers and beauticians who perform nail treatments and eyelash extension as well as hair extension applications: a systematic review

Current cosmetic regulations primarily focus on protecting consumers, not the professional user who is subjected to a partly different, and certainly more intense exposure to hazardous substances. Against this background, the present systematic review aims to compile and appraise evidence regarding skin toxicity of 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA; CAS no. 212-782-2) and ethyl cyanoacrylate (ECA; CAS no. 7085-85-0) contained in cosmetic glues used among hairdressers and beauticians who perform nail treatments and eyelash extension as well as hair extension applications. This systematic review followed the PRISMA 2020 recommendations for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analysis. In total, 6 publications from 6 countries were eligible for this systematic review. Meta-analysis revealed that hairdressers and beauticians have a 9-fold increased risk of developing contact allergy to HEMA compared to controls who are not hairdressers and beauticians. Results for ECA are lacking. The present systematic review clearly shows that - regarding contact allergy to acrylates - it is not appropriate to apply risk assessment for consumers to hairdressers and beauticians who occupationally handle cosmetic glues. The regulations in existence do not adequately address occupational risks for hairdressers and beauticians connected with the use of acrylate-containing cosmetic substances and need reconsideration. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Contact Dermatitis in Nail Cosmetics

Many ingredients found within nail cosmetic products are capable of sensitizing patients’ immune systems and causing contact dermatitis (CD). These include but are not limited to tosylamide, (meth)acrylates, and formaldehyde. A clear temporal relationship between nail cosmetic procedures and an eczematous outbreak on the hands, face, or other ectopic body regions can be a key indicator of CD secondary to nail cosmetic exposure. Once an inciting allergen is identified through patch testing, elimination and avoidance becomes a mainstay of treatment alongside the use of emollients and topical anti-inflammatory therapies. Patients should be counselled to approach future nail cosmetic products and procedures with caution and careful attention to ingredients, regardless of whether or not it has a “hypoallergenic” label.

Acrylates as a significant cause of allergic contact dermatitis: new sources of exposure

Acrylate monomers have a wide range of applications. Since the 1950s, many reports of occupational origin allergic contact dermatitis due to (meth)acrylate monomers have been published. During last decades, (meth)acrylate allergy has undergone an occupational shift from dentistry toward beauty industry and medical devices. The aim of the study was to conduct a literature review on acrylates as a cause of allergic contact dermatitis, current sources of exposure as well as identification of professional groups with an increased risk of this allergy and methods of effective prevention. Database review: Medline search (PubMed), Wiley Online Library and Web of Science base in years 1956–2019 using the following keywords: acrylates, manicurists, dentists, dental technicians, medical devices, occupational exposure, and allergic contact dermatitis. 204 346 articles containing the term ‘acrylates‘ have been found. They include 2 042 articles with the word ‘manicurists’, 169 919 – ‘dentists’, 218 236 – ‘dental technicians’, 2 427 418 – ‘medical devices’. Fifty-nine articles were chosen based on analysis of abstracts and full texts. In the past allergy to acrylates was mainly of occupational origin and dental technicians were the most often affected professional group. Since the long-lasting manicure has become popular, this problem concerns both manicurists and their customers. Moreover, the new significant trend is non-occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by medical devices especially dedicated to diabetes patients.

Ten years of contact allergy from acrylic compounds in an occupational dermatology clinic

BACKGROUND

Contact allergy from acrylic compounds is a "hot topic". Knowledge on the exact chemical composition of acrylic products is superficial.

AIMS

To retrospectively describe patients with allergic reactions to acrylic compounds.

METHODS

We included patients who had been tested with acrylate patch test series and displayed allergic reactions to at least one acrylic compound. Chemical analyses were often performed when safety data sheets of implicated products failed to reveal acrylic compounds to which the patient tested positive.

RESULTS

In 2010-2019 a total of 55 patients met the inclusion criteria. Eight cases of allergic contact dermatitis were due to anaerobic sealants, seven to dental products, three to windscreen glues, seven to eyelash glues and/or nail products in the beauty sector, three to UV-cured printing inks, two to paints/lacquers, and one to polyester resin system. The origin of these contact allergies was occupational with the exception of four beauty sector workers who had developed eyelid symptoms from eyelash extensions glued onto their own eyelashes. We invariably detected methacrylate monomers in 15 chemical analyses of 12 different anaerobic sealants.

CONCLUSIONS

Safety data sheets of anaerobic sealants often lack warnings for skin sensitization, although these products regularly contain sensitizing methacrylates.

Developing a cosmetic series: Results from the ESSCA network, 2009-2018

BACKGROUND

There is considerable variability across European patch test centres as to which allergens are included in local and national cosmetics series.

OBJECTIVES

To propose a standardized, evidence-based cosmetic series for Europe based on up-to-date analysis of relevant contact allergens.

METHODS

We collated data from the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA) from 2009 to 2018 to determine which cosmetic allergens produce a high yield of contact allergy. Contact allergens with a prevalence of >0.3% that were considered relevant were included. Rare contact allergens were excluded if deemed no longer relevant or added to a supplemental cosmetic series for further analysis.

RESULTS

Sensitization prevalences of 39 cosmetic contact allergens were tabulated. Thirty of these allergens yielded >0.3% positive reactions and are therefore included in our proposed European cosmetic series. Six were considered no longer relevant and therefore excluded. Three were included in a supplementary European cosmetic series. An additional nine allergens were included in either the core or supplemental European cosmetic series following literature review.

CONCLUSION

We have derived a potential European cosmetic series based upon the above methods. This will require ongoing investigation based upon the changing exposure profiles of cosmetic allergens as well as new and evolving substances.

Patch test results of the European baseline series among 1309 patients in Turkey between 2013 and 2019

BACKGROUND

Prevalences of sensitivity to contact allergens change over time as a result of variations in allergen exposure.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to describe trends in sensitisation to allergens of the European baseline series in Turkey between 2013 and 2019.

METHODS

The patch test results of 1309 patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) were analysed retrospectively, and the prevalence of contact allergies to European baseline series allergens was compared with previous data (for 1998-2005).

RESULTS

A total of 534 (40.8%) patients exhibited one or more positive patch test reaction. The five most frequent allergens were nickel sulfate (19.6%), potassium dichromate (6.5%), cobalt chloride (6%), Myroxylon pereirae resin (5%), and p-phenylenediamine (PPD; 3.7%). Statistically significant increases in the prevalence of sensitisation to methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI; P < .001), Myroxylon pereirae resin (P < .001), PPD (P = .008), and fragrance mix I (P = .036) were observed in the 2013 to 2019 period compared with the 1998 to 2005 period. Conversely, positive reactions to neomycin sulfate (P = .029), clioquinol (P = .031), and primin (P = .001) decreased significantly.

CONCLUSION

This study provides a comprehensive profile of ACD in Turkey. The remarkable increase in the MI and MCI/MI contact allergy observed underlines the urgent need for regulatory measures to reduce exposure to MI and MCI/MI in Turkey.

Methacrylate perspective in current dental practice

OBJECTIVE

To provide a current perspective concerning dental personnel sensitivity to methacrylate materials.

OVERVIEW

Methacrylate related sensitivity and allergies are currently beyond traditional thoughts concerning denture base resins and methyl methacrylate provisional materials. Methacrylates are now ubiquitous in current dental practice and dental personnel should be aware that dental adhesives contain potent sensitizers that may also cross-sensitize individuals to other methacrylates not experienced. The growing sensitivity to 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) has been described to be epidemic in nature due to the artificial nail industry with dental patients and dental personnel may be more susceptible to dental methacrylate sensitization. While contact dermatitis remains the most prevalent methacrylate-related clinical presentation, respiratory complications and asthma are increasing associated with methacrylate exposure. While additional personal protective equipment (PPE) is thought to be first protective choice, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) considers PPE overall largely ineffective and should be considered only as a last resort.

CONCLUSION

Dental personnel need to be more aware of methacrylate sources and use workplace control measures to limit methacrylate exposures to both dental personnel and patients.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Sensitivity to methacrylate materials is a growing dental workplace major concern and dental personnel should be aware of both the methacrylate content of current materials and the products that contain ingredients with the most sensitization potential.

Contact Allergy-Emerging Allergens and Public Health Impact

Contact allergy (sensitisation) and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) resulting from it have a considerable public health impact. For the present review, all pertinent articles were systematically searched via Medline and Web of Science™; additionally, all available issues of the journals "Contact Dermatitis" and "Dermatitis" were manually searched, covering the years 2018-2019, thereby extending and re-focusing a previous similar review. New allergens, or previously described allergens found in a new exposure context or of other current importance, are described in sections according to substance classes, e.g., metals, preservatives, fragrances. As a common finding in many investigations, a lack of information on product composition has been noted, for instance, regarding a newly described allergen in canvas shoes (dimethylthiocarbamylbenzothiazole sulfide) and, most notably, absence of co-operation from manufacturers of glucose-monitoring devices and insulin pumps, respectively. These latter devices have been shown to cause severe ACD in a considerable number of diabetic patients caused by the liberation of isobornyl acrylate and N,N'-dimethylacrylamide, respectively, as demonstrated by an international collaboration between dermatologists and chemists. Improved and complete ingredient labelling for all types of products, and not just cosmetics, must be put on the legislative agenda.

Nail health in women

Healthy nails are functionally and cosmetically important to the daily work of women. The globally increasing market for nail cosmetics reflects the importance of the appearance of nails. This article details the composition of a healthy nail, diagnosis and treatment of nail disorders, use of nail cosmetics and their risks, the impact of the aging process on nails, and the relative risks to nail salon workers. Knowledge of these issues will prepare health care providers and patients to maintain healthy nails throughout their lives.

Phenotyping Occupational Asthma Caused by Acrylates in a Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

While acrylates are well-known skin sensitizers, they are not classified as respiratory sensitizers although several cases of acrylate-induced occupational asthma (OA) have been reported.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the characteristics of acrylate-induced OA in a large series of cases and compare those with OA induced by other low-molecular-weight (LMW) agents.

METHODS

Jobs and exposures, clinical and functional characteristics, and markers of airway inflammation were analyzed in an international, multicenter, retrospective cohort of subjects with OA ascertained by a positive inhalation challenge to acrylates (n = 55) or other LMW agents (n = 418) including isocyanates (n = 125).

RESULTS

Acrylate-containing glues were the most prevalent products, and industrial manufacturing, dental work, and beauty care were typical occupations causing OA. Work-related rhinitis was more common in acrylate-than in isocyanate-induced asthma (P < .001). The increase in postchallenge fractional exhaled nitric oxide was significantly greater in acrylate-induced OA (26.0; 8.2 to 38.0 parts per billion [ppb]) than in OA induced by other LMW agents (3.0; -1.0 to 10.0 ppb; P < .001) or isocyanates (5.0; 2.0 to 16.0 ppb; P = .010). Multivariable models confirmed that OA induced by acrylates was significantly and independently associated with a postchallenge increase in fractional exhaled nitric oxide (≥17.5 ppb).

CONCLUSIONS

Acrylate-induced OA shows specific characteristics, concomitant work-related rhinitis, and exposure-related increases in fractional exhaled nitric oxide, suggesting that acrylates may induce asthma through different immunologic mechanisms compared with mechanisms through which other LMW agents may induce asthma. Our findings reinforce the need for a reevaluation of the hazard classification of acrylates, and further investigation of the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying their respiratory sensitizing potential.