Contact Allergy: Alternatives for the 2007 North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) Standard Screening Tray

Scheman, Andrew; Jacob, Sharon E.; Zirwas, Matt; Warshaw, Erin M.; Nedorost, Susan T.; Katta, Rajani; Cook, Jeremy W.; Castanedo-Tardan, Mari Paz

doi:10.1016/j.disamonth.2007.10.002

Cited by 61 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 198 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…67 FRPs include: quaternium-15, imidazolidinyl urea (Germall), diazolidinyl urea (Germall II), 3 0 -demethoxy-3o-demethylmatairesinol (DMDM) hydantoin (Glydant), 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1, 3-diol (Bronopol), and tris nitromethane (Tris Nitro). 68 (Tris Nitro is an industrial biocide and is not usually found in cosmetic products.)…”

Section: Formaldehyde Releasing Preservativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Cosmetic Contact Allergy

Castanedo-Tardan

Zug

2009

Dermatologic Clinics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Formaldehyde Releasing Preservativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Cosmetic Contact Allergy

Castanedo-Tardan

Zug

2009

Dermatologic Clinics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Formaldehyde also occurs naturally in certain foods such as coffee (especially instant coffee), dried bean curd, cod fish, caviar, maple syrup, shiitake mushrooms and smoked ham. It is an irritant as well as an allergen and a potential respiratory carcinogen (15). It can be formed by breaking, conversion and oxidization of ingested aspartame (an artificial sweetener) and possibly causes migraines in formaldehyde allergic individuals (30).…”

Section: Formaldehydementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some authors have suggested that for formaldehyde-sensitive patients, it is sufficient to avoid only those formaldehyde-releasers that, in addition to formaldehyde, also elicited a positive patch test reaction (14). Others, however, think that it is prudent for formaldehyde-sensitive subjects to recommend avoidance of products containing any releaser (15)(16)(17).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Formaldehyde‐releasers: relationship to formaldehyde contact allergy. Contact allergy to formaldehyde and inventory of formaldehyde‐releasers

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is one of series of review articles on formaldehyde and formaldehyde-releasers (others: formaldehyde in cosmetics, in clothes and in metalworking fluids and miscellaneous). Thirty-five chemicals were identified as being formaldehyde-releasers. Although a further seven are listed in the literature as formaldehyde-releasers, data are inadequate to consider them as such beyond doubt. Several (nomenclature) mistakes and outdated information are discussed. Formaldehyde and formaldehyde allergy are reviewed: applications, exposure scenarios, legislation, patch testing problems, frequency of sensitization, relevance of positive patch test reactions, clinical pattern of allergic contact dermatitis from formaldehyde, prognosis, threshold for elicitation of allergic contact dermatitis, analytical tests to determine formaldehyde in products and frequency of exposure to formaldehyde and releasers. The frequency of contact allergy to formaldehyde is consistently higher in the USA (8-9%) than in Europe (2-3%). Patch testing with formaldehyde is problematic; the currently used 1% solution may result in both false-positive and false-negative (up to 40%) reactions. Determining the relevance of patch test reactions is often challenging. What concentration of formaldehyde is safe for sensitive patients remains unknown. Levels of 200-300 p.p.m. free formaldehyde in cosmetic products have been shown to induce dermatitis from short-term use on normal skin. Formaldehyde is a common cause of contact allergy. In Europe, 2-3% of patients suspected of contact dermatitis have positive patch test reactions, and in the USA prevalence rates of sensitization of 8-9% are reported in this selected group of patients. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by formaldehyde is often chronic, presumably because it is difficult to avoid exposure to the allergen completely. Indeed, formaldehyde may be found in many cosmetics, toiletries, household products such as washing and cleaning agents and in a great number of industrial applications including adhesives, paints, lacquers and metalworking fluids. Often, the products are not preserved with formaldehyde itself, but with agents that release formaldehyde under usage conditions, the so-called formaldehydereleasers (or formaldehyde donors). Well-known examples are quaternium-15, imidazolidinyl urea, diazolidinyl urea, DMDM hydantoin and 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol, preservatives frequently used in cosmetic products. Industrial products such as metalworking fluids frequently contain formaldehyde donors, such as the Bioban ® product range of biocides and tris(N-hydroxyethyl) hexahydrotriazine (better known by its trade name Grotan ® BK).Other products containing and releasing formaldehyde are the formaldehyde resins including urea formaldehyde and melamine formaldehyde resins. These were formerly used extensively as textile

show abstract

“…While there have been no studies to date linking these specific dyes or fragrance to ocular allergy, in a 2009 study of 179 different shampoos commercially available at Walgreens Ò (Walgreen Co., Deerfield, IL, USA), fragrance was the most commonly encountered allergen (95 %), followed by CAPB (53 %) [10]. It is estimated that between 1 and 4 % of the general population will have a positive patch-test reaction to fragrances, while nearly one in ten of those actually tested will have a positive result [11,12]. This raises the question of whether fragrance-free and dye-free products may be better suited to the treatment of MGD.…”

Section: Warm Compresses and Lid Hygienementioning

confidence: 97%

Current and Emerging Therapeutic Strategies for the Treatment of Meibomian Gland Dysfunction (MGD)

Thode

Latkany

2015

Drugs

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Meibomian gland (MG) dysfunction (MGD) is a multifactorial, chronic condition of the eyelids, leading to eye irritation, inflammation and ocular surface disease. Initial conservative therapy often includes a combination of warm compresses in addition to baby shampoo or eyelid wipes. The practice of lid hygiene dates back to the 1950s, when selenium sulfide-based shampoo was first used to treat seborrhoeic dermatitis of the eyelids. Today, tear-free baby shampoo has replaced dandruff shampoo for MGD treatment and offers symptom relief in selected patients. However, many will not achieve significant improvement on this therapy alone; some may even develop an allergy to the added dyes and fragrances in these products. Other manual and mechanical techniques to treat MGD include MG expression and massage, MG probing and LipiFlow(®). While potentially effective in patients with moderate MGD, these procedures are more invasive and may be cost prohibitive. Pharmacological treatments are another course of action. Supplements rich in omega-3 fatty acids have been shown to improve both MGD and dry eye symptoms. Tea tree oil, specifically the terpenin-4-ol component, is especially effective in treating MGD associated with Demodex mites. Topical antibiotics, such as azithromycin, or systemic antibiotics, such as doxycycline or azithromycin, can improve MGD symptoms both by altering the ocular flora and through anti-inflammatory mechanisms. Addressing and treating concurrent ocular allergy is integral to symptom management. Topical N-acetylcysteine and topical cyclosporine can both be effective therapeutic adjuncts in patients with concurrent dry eye. A short course of topical steroid may be used in some severe cases, with monitoring for steroid-induced glaucoma and cataracts. While the standard method to treat MGD is simply warm compresses and baby shampoo, a more tailored approach to address the multiple aetiologies of the disease is suggested.

show abstract

Contact Allergy: Alternatives for the 2007 North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) Standard Screening Tray

Cited by 61 publications

References 198 publications

Patterns of Cosmetic Contact Allergy

Patterns of Cosmetic Contact Allergy

Formaldehyde‐releasers: relationship to formaldehyde contact allergy. Contact allergy to formaldehyde and inventory of formaldehyde‐releasers

Current and Emerging Therapeutic Strategies for the Treatment of Meibomian Gland Dysfunction (MGD)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About