Allergic contact dermatitis caused by nail acrylates in Europe. An EECDRG study

Abstract

Nail cosmetics were responsible for the majority of ACD cases caused by acrylates, affecting nail beauticians and consumers, and therefore calling for stricter regulation and preventive measures. As HEMA detects most cases, and isolated facial lesions may be overlooked, inclusion of this allergen in the baseline series may be warranted.

Contact allergy to 2‐hydroxyethyl methacrylate in Denmark

“…The majority of cases were (a) attributed to artificial nail modeling systems, (b) nonoccupational, and (c) affecting primarily beauticians when occupational. The proportion of occupational cases (45%) was slightly lower compared with previous studies of methacrylate allergy . As HEMA is detected in 81.2‐92.5% of cases, this discrepancy could be explained by excluding other sensitizing acrylates in our study …”

The European baseline series and recommended additions: 2019

“…Specifically, despite some cross‐reactions, for example, to Myroxylon pereirae , it was the general opinion that propolis was a useful addition, especially where “natural” products were popular. Continuing reports emphasize the increasing relevance of contact allergy to 2‐HEMA . When testing with acrylates is performed, it is important to load the chamber at the time of application, owing to the volatile nature of the hapten .…”

Recommendation to include hydroxyethyl (meth)acrylate in the British baseline patch test series

“…A similar pattern has been observed internationally. In Portugal, from 2006 to 2013, nail (meth)acrylates were responsible for 76% of (meth)acrylate‐related ACD, and this pattern has been replicated in international studies . (Meth)acrylates were named Contact Allergen of the Year by the American Contact Dermatitis Society in 2012 and were included in their baseline series in 2017 .…”