Occupational contact dermatitis caused by <scp>D</scp>‐limonene

Pesonen, Maria; Kuuliala, Outi; Henriks‐Eckerman, Maj‐Len; Aalto‐Korte, Kristiina

doi:10.1111/cod.12287

Cited by 44 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(46 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The increasing use of ‘natural ingredient based cosmetics’ is a further hazard, as these contain essential oils (which may already contain oxidized terpenes when received from a producer, or can subsequently oxidize during storage) . Pesonen et al . reported occupational hand dermatitis because of exposure to cosmetic products scented with limonene.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommendation to test limonene hydroperoxides 0·3% and linalool hydroperoxides 1·0% in the British baseline patch test series

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in Discovery Research Portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from Discovery Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research.• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain.• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal. Accepted ArticleThis article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1111/bjd.15648 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: 'Recommendation to test limonene hydroperoxides 0.3% and linalool hydroperoxides 1.0% in the British Baseline patch test series', British Journal of Dermatology, which has been published in final form at http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjd.15648. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving. Accepted ArticleThis article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. Accepted ArticleThis article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. ABSTRACT Background:There is a significant rate of sensitisation worldwide to the oxidised fragrance terpenes limonene and linalool. Patch testing to oxidised terpenes is not routinely carried out; the ideal patch test concentration is unknown.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommendation to test limonene hydroperoxides 0·3% and linalool hydroperoxides 1·0% in the British baseline patch test series

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From a total of 511 patients which were tested in one clinic with oxidized limonene, 21 patients were patch positive to oxidized limonene. In 14 patients, occupational contact dermatitis caused by limonene was determined [107]. Additionally, Christensson and co-workers [108] summarized clinical data on 2900 patch tested patients with dermatitis in Australia, Denmark, United Kingdom, Singapore, Spain and Sweden.…”

Section: Limonenementioning

confidence: 99%

Essential Oils and Their Single Compounds in Cosmetics—A Critical Review

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Essential oils are widely incorporated in cosmetic products, perfumes and related household products due to the variety of their properties but mainly due to their pleasant odour. The composition of these volatile natural complex mixtures may vary depending on the quality of plant material from which they were obtained and the extraction method by which they were derived. These factors are also important in ensuring the safe use of essential oils in personal care products. As they contain compounds with varied chemical structure and effects, skin sensitivity and irritations as well as other symptoms may arise after their application. Although essential oils are considered as safe and nontoxic when used at low concentrations, available scientific literature indicates that essential oils and their compounds may possess a strong allergy potential. This review focuses on side effects and allergy contact dermatitis caused by selected essential oils and their single compounds in cosmetic products, summarizing data from the most recent scientific literature.

show abstract

“…However, d-limonene is listed in Asturiol et al as a nonsensitizer in humans, although in other publications, e.g. Pesonen et al (2014), it is referred to as a human sensitizer.…”

Section: Data Setmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non‐animal assessment of skin sensitization hazard: Is an integrated testing strategy needed, and if so what should be integrated?

Roberts

Patlewicz

2017

J of Applied Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an expectation that to meet regulatory requirements, and avoid or minimize animal testing, integrated approaches to testing and assessment will be needed that rely on assays representing key events (KEs) in the skin sensitization adverse outcome pathway. Three non-animal assays have been formally validated and regulatory adopted: the direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA), the KeratinoSens™ assay and the human cell line activation test (h-CLAT). There have been many efforts to develop integrated approaches to testing and assessment with the "two out of three" approach attracting much attention. Here a set of 271 chemicals with mouse, human and non-animal sensitization test data was evaluated to compare the predictive performances of the three individual non-animal assays, their binary combinations and the "two out of three" approach in predicting skin sensitization potential. The most predictive approach was to use both the DPRA and h-CLAT as follows: (1) perform DPRA -if positive, classify as sensitizing, and (2) if negative, perform h-CLAT -a positive outcome denotes a sensitizer, a negative, a non-sensitizer. With this approach, 85% (local lymph node assay) and 93% (human) of non-sensitizer predictions were correct, whereas the "two out of three" approach had 69% (local lymph node assay) and 79% (human) of non-sensitizer predictions correct. The findings are consistent with the argument, supported by published quantitative mechanistic models that only the first KE needs to be modeled. All three assays model this KE to an extent. The value of using more than one assay depends on how the different assays compensate for each other's technical limitations.

show abstract

Occupational contact dermatitis caused by D‐limonene

Abstract: Limonene is a frequent occupational sensitizer in hand cleansers and cleaning products. Occupational limonene contact allergy may also be caused by exposure to cosmetic products scented with limonene.

Cited by 44 publications

References 38 publications

Recommendation to test limonene hydroperoxides 0·3% and linalool hydroperoxides 1·0% in the British baseline patch test series

Recommendation to test limonene hydroperoxides 0·3% and linalool hydroperoxides 1·0% in the British baseline patch test series

Essential Oils and Their Single Compounds in Cosmetics—A Critical Review

Non‐animal assessment of skin sensitization hazard: Is an integrated testing strategy needed, and if so what should be integrated?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About