Cosmetic allergy from stearic acid and glyceryl stearate

Diagnostic Value of Oral Provocation Tests in Drug Hypersensitivity Reactions Induced by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and Paracetamol

Oral drug provocation tests (DPT) are the basic diagnostic tool for the detection of hypersensitivity to non-opioid analgesics and for selecting a safe alternative for a patient. They are of great practical importance due to their common use, but the data on the follow-up of patients after negative DPT are still very scarce. We examined the further fate of 164 such adult patients after negative NSAID or paracetamol tests and analyzed which excipients in the studied drugs they could be exposed to after the diagnostic workup. A structured medical interview was performed 32.9 months (mean) after the provocation tests. Of the 164 patients, 131 (79.9%) retook the tested drug and 12 developed another hypersensitivity reaction, giving the estimated negative predictive value of 90.8%. These reactions were induced by acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, meloxicam, and diclofenac, and were clinically similar to the initial ones (most commonly urticaria and angioedema). There are 93 generics of these drugs on the local market, containing a total of 33 excipients for which hypersensitivity reactions have been reported. All available generics contain such excipients. Thirty-one patients (20.1%) did not take the previously tested drug again, most often because it was not needed or because they were afraid of another reaction. DPT with analgesics has a high diagnostic performance. A minority of patients had relapsed after reexposure. One of the underestimated reasons for this may be drug excipients provoking a reaction, so it is advisable to use exactly the same medical product that has been negatively tested. Many patients avoid reexposure to a given drug, despite negative tests, therefore very reliable patient education in connection with DPT is highly needed.

Safety Assessment of Monoglyceryl Monoesters as Used in Cosmetics

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 44 monoglyceryl monoesters that are structurally constituted as the esterification products of glycerin and carboxylic acids (the majority of which are fatty acids); 36 of these monoesters were previously reviewed by the Panel, and 8 are reviewed herein for the first time. Most of the monoglyceryl monoesters have several reported functions in cosmetics, but the most common function among the ingredients is skin conditioning agent; a few are reported to function only as surfactant-emulsifying agents. The Panel reviewed relevant new data, including frequency and concentration of use and considered the data from previous Cosmetic Ingredient Review reports. The Panel concluded that these ingredients are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

Angioneurotic oedema secondary to oral thiamine

Although allergic side effects due to parenteral thiamine are well-documented, they are extremely rare when thiamine is used orally. We report a case of a 47-year-old woman who developed angioneurotic oedema secondary to oral ingestion of thiamine at a therapeutic dose. The incident occurred twice with a clear temporal relationship to the initiation on thiamine.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Cosmetics

Cosmetics are used to enhance one's appearance and are used by women worldwide. This article reviews the epidemiology, clinical features, and management of cosmetic allergic contact dermatitis. Additionally, several important cosmetic-related allergens are discussed.

Acute eosinophilic pneumonia caused by calcium stearate, an additive agent for an oral antihistaminic medication

A 70-year-old man was admitted to our hospital because of dyspnea after taking an antihistaminic agent (homochlorcyclizine hydrochloride) for itching. Chest roentgenogram showed infiltration in the left lung field, and laboratory data revealed eosinophilia. Examination of the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid revealed an increased eosinophil count. A drug lymphocyte stimulation test was positive only for calcium stearate, an additive contained in the homochlorcyclizine hydrochloride tablet. The pulmonary infiltration and clinical symptoms subsided after withdrawal of all drugs and initiation of glucocorticoid therapy. Therefore, we concluded that this patient's pulmonary disease was caused by calcium stearate, an additive for an antihistaminic drug. An allergic reaction to a drug's additive material should be considered as a rare cause of drug-induced acute eosinophilic pneumonia.