Skin-sensitizing and irritant properties of propylene glycol

Contact Dermatitis

Volumn 53, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 247-259

  Lessmann, Holger ^a   Schnuch, Axel ^a   Geier, Johannes ^a   Uter, Wolfgang ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

1,2 Dihydroxypropane; 1,2 Propanediole; 1,2 Propylene glycol; CAS: 57 55 6; Irritancy; Monopropylene glycol; Sensitizing properties

Indexed keywords

ACICLOVIR; CALCIPOTRIOL; CORTICOSTEROID; DIAZEPAM; FLUOROURACIL; IRRITANT AGENT; KETOCONAZOLE; MICONAZOLE; MINOXIDIL; PROPYLENE GLYCOL; RIFAMYCIN; SULCONAZOLE; WATER;

DATA ANALYSIS; DERMATITIS; ERYTHEMA; HUMAN; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; NONHUMAN; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; PATCH TEST; REVIEW; SKIN ALLERGY; SKIN IRRITATION; SKIN MANIFESTATION; SKIN SENSITIZATION; TIME SERIES ANALYSIS; VULVITIS;

ADULT; ANIMALS; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC CONTACT; DERMATITIS, IRRITANT; DERMATITIS, OCCUPATIONAL; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMANS; MALE; PATCH TESTS; PROPYLENE GLYCOL;

EID: 28344445995     PISSN: 01051873     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0105-1873.2005.00693.x     Document Type: Review

References (98)

1. Ale S I, Maibach H I. Clinical relevance in allergic contact dermatitis. An algorithmic approach. Derm Beruf Umwelt 1995: 43: 119-121.
2. SIDS (Screening Information Data Set). Propylene glycol. SIDS Initial Assessment. Report for 11th SIAM (USA, January 23-26, 2001).
3. CIR (Cosmetic Ingredients Review Expert Panel). Final report on the safety assessment of propylene glycol and polypropylene glycols. J Am Coll Toxicol 1994: 13: 437-491.
4. Wahlberg J E, Nilsson G. Skin irritancy from propylene glycol. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1984: 64: 286-290.
5. Willis C M, Stephens J M, Wilkinson J D. Experimentally induced irritant contact dermatitis: determination of optimum irritant concentrations. Contact Dermatitis 1988: 18: 20-24.
6. Zesch A. Skin irritation by topical drugs. Derm Beruf Umwelt 1983: 31: 74-78.
7. Wahlberg J E. Propylene glycol: search for a proper and nonirritant patch test preparation. Am J Contact Dermal 1994: 5: 156-159.
8. Andersen A E, Storrs F J. Hautreizungen durch Propylenglykol. Hautarzt 1982: 33: 12-14.
9. Nater J P, Baar A J, Hoedemaeker P J. Histological aspects of skin reactions to propylene glycol. Contact Dermatitis 1977: 3: 181-185.
10. Hannuksela M, Salo H. The repeated open application test (ROAT). Contact Dermatitis 1986: 14: 221-227.
11. Hannuksela M, Pirilä V, Salo O P. Skin reactions to propylene glycol. Contact Dermatitis 1975: 1: 112-116.
12. Fan W, Kinnunen T, Niinimäki A, Hannuksela M. Skin reactions to glycols used in dermatological and cosmetic vehicles. Am J Contact Dermal 1991: 2: 181-183.
13. Kinnunen T, Hannuksela M. Skin reactions to hexylene glycol. Contact Dermatitis 1989: 21: 154-158.
14. Frosch P J, Pekar U, Enzmann H. Contact allergy to propylene glycol - do we use the appropriate test concentration. Dermatol Clin 1990: 8: 111-113.
15. Funk J O, Maibach H I. Propylene glycol dermatitis: re-evaluation of an old problem. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 31: 236-241.
16. Aberer W, Fuchs Th, Peters K-P, Frosch P J. Propylenglykol: Kutane Nebenwirkungen und Testmethodik - Literaturübersicht und Ergebnisse einer Multicenterstudie der Deutschen Kontaktallergiegruppe (DKG). Derm Beruf Umwelt 1993: 41: 25-27.
17. Geier J, Uter W, Lessmann H, Schnuch A. The positivity ratio - another parameter to assess the diagnostic quality of a patch test preparation. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 43: 280-282.
18. Brasch J, Henseler T. The reaction index: a parameter to assess the quality of patch test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 1992: 27: 203-204.
19. Hannuksela M, Förström L. Reactions to peroral propylene glycol. Contact Dermatitis 1978: 4: 41-45.
20. Catanzaro J M, Smith J G. Propylene glycol dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol 1991: 24: 90-95.
21. Adams R M, Maibach H I. A five-year study of cosmetic reactions. J Am Acad Dermatol 1985: 13: 1062-1069.
22. Broeckx W, Blondeel A, Dooms Goossens A, Achten G. Cosmetic intolerance. Contact Dermatitis 1987: 16: 189-194.
23. Hammershoy O. Standard patch test results in 3,225 consecutive Danish patient from 1973 to 1977. Contact Dermatitis 1980: 6: 263-268.
24. Shehade S A, Beck M H, Hillier V F. Epidemiological survey of standard series patch test results and observations on day 2 and day 4 readings. Contact Dermatitis 1991: 24: 119-122.
25. Schnuch A, Arnold R, Bahmer F et al. Epikutantestung mit der Salbengrundlagenreihe - Ergebnisse des 'Informationsverbundes Dermatologischer Kliniken' (IVDK). Derm Beruf Umwelt 1993: 41: 176-183.
26. Kligman A M. The identification of contact allergens by human assay. III. The Maximization test: a procedure for screening and rating contact sensitizers. J Invest Dermatol 1966: 47: 393-409.
27. Marzulli F N, Maibach H I. Antimicrobials: experimental contact sensitization in man. J Sos Cosmet Chem 1973: 24: 399-421.
28. Marzulli F N, Maibach H I. The use of graded concentrations in studying skin sensitizers: experimental contact sensitization in man. Food Cosmet Toxicol 1974: 12: 219-227.
29. Trancik R J, Maibach H I. Propylene glycol: irritation or sensitization? Contact Dermatitis 1982: 8: 185-189.
30. Nakamura A, Momma J, Sekiguchi H et al. A new protocol and criteria for quantitative determination of sensitization potencies of chemicals by guinea pig maximization test. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 31: 72-85.
31. Kero M, Hannuksela M. Guinea pig maximization test, open epicutaneous test and chamber test in induction of delayed contact hypersensitivity. Contact Dermatitis 1980: 6: 341-344.
32. Maurer Th. The optimization test. Curr Probl Dermatol 1985: 14: 114-151.
33. Guillot J P, Gonnet J F, Clément C, Faccini J M. Comparative study of methods chosen by the Association Francaise de Normalisation (AFNOR) for evaluating sensitizing potential in the albino guinea-pig. Food Chem Toxicol 1983: 21: 795-805.
34. Guillot J P, Gonnet J F. The epicutaneous maximization test. Curr Probl Dermatol 1985: 14: 220-247.
35. Descotes J. Identification of contact allergens: the mouse ear sensitization assay. J Toxicol Cutaneous Ocul Toxicol 1988: 7: 263-272.
36. Basketter D A, Blaikie L, Dearman R J et al. Use of the local lymph node assay for the estimation of relative contact allergenic potency. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 344-348.
37. Schnuch A, Geier J, Uter W et al. National rates and regional differences in sensitization to allergens of the standard series. Population adjusted frequencies of sensitization (PAFS) in 40,000 patients from a multicenter study (IVDK). Contact Dermatitis 1997: 37: 200-209.
38. Uter W, Schnuch A, Geier J, Frosch P J. Epidemiology of contact dermatitis: the information network of the departments of dermatology (IVDK) in Germany - a surveillance system on contact allergies. Eur J Dermatol 1998: 8: 36-40.
39. Schnuch A, Aberer W, Agathos M, Brasch J, Frosch P J, Richter G. Leitlinien der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft (DDG) zur Durchführung des Epikutantests mit Kontaktallergenen. Hautarzt 2001: 52: 864-866.
40. Fregert S. Manual of contact dermatitis. On behalf of the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group and the North American Contact Dermatitis Group. Copenhagen: Munksgaard Publishers, 2nd edition, 1981.
41. Wahlberg J E. Patch testing. In: Textbook of Contact Dermatitis, 3rd edition, Rycroft RJG, Menné T, Frosch P J (eds): Berlin, Springer, 2001: 435-468.
42. Uter W, Schnuch A, Gefeller O. Guidelines for the descriptive presentation and statistical analysis of contact allergy data. Contact Dermatitis 2004: 51: 47-56.
43. Geier J, Uter W, Pirker C, Frosch P J. Patch testing with the irritant sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) is useful in interpreting weak reactions to contact allergens as allergic or irritant. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 99-107.
44. Allen M H, Wakelin S H, Holloway D, Lisby S, Baadsgaard O, Barker J N W N, Mc Fadden JP. Association of TNFA gene polymorphism at position -308 with susceptibility to irritant contact dermatitis. Immunogenetics 2000: 51: 201-205.
45. Moss C, Friedmann P S, Shuster S, Simpson J M. Susceptibility and amplification of sensitivity in contact dermatitis. Clin Exp Immunol 1985: 61: 232-241.
46. Westphal G A, Schnuch A, Moessner R, König I R, Kränke B, Hallier E, Ziegler A, Reich K. Cytokine gene polymorphisms in allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 93-98.
47. Le Coz C J, Scivener Y, Santinelli F, Heid E. Sensibilisation de contact au cours des ulcères de jambe. Ann Dermatol Venereol 1998: 125: 694-699.
48. Reichert-Pénétrat S, Barbaud A, Weber M, Schmutz J L. Ulcères de jambe - Explorations allergologiques dans 359 cas. Ann Dermatol Venereol 1999: 126: 131-135.
49. Gallenkemper G, Rabe E, Bauer R. Contact sensitization in chronic venous insufficiency: modern wound dressings. Contact Dermatitis 1998: 38: 274-278.
50. Saap L, Fahim S, Arsenault E, Pratt M, Pierscianowski T, Falanga V, Pedvis-Leftick A. Contact sensitivity in patients with leg ulcerations - A North American study. Arch Dermatol 2004: 140: 1241-1246.
51. Tavadia S, Bianchi J, Dawe R S et al. Allergic contact dermatitis in venous leg ulcer patients. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 261-265.
52. Lange-Ionescu S, Pilz B, Geier J, Frosch P J. Kontaktallergien bei Patienten mit Stauungsdermatitis oder Ekzem der Beine. Ergebnisse des Informationsverbunds Dermatologischer Kliniken und der Deutschen Kontaktallergiegruppe. Derm Beruf Umwelt 1996: 44: 14-22.
53. Padoan S M, Petterson A, Svensson A. Olive oil as a cause of contact allergy in patients with venous eczema, and occupationally. Contact Dermatitis 1990: 23: 73-76.
54. Pasche-Koo F, Hauser C, Saurat J-H. Frequent sensitization to emulsifiers in patients with chronic leg ulcers. Dermatology 1992: 185: 223.
55. Pasche-Koo F, Piletta P A, Hunziker N, Hauser C. High sensitization rate to emulsifiers in patients with chronic leg ulcers. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 31: 226-228.
56. Dearman R J, Kimber I. Factors influencing the induction phase of skin sensitization. Am J Contact Dermat 2003: 14: 188-194.
57. Inaba K, Turley S, Iyoda T et al. The formation of immunogenic major histocompatibility complex class II-peptide ligands in lysosomal compartments of dendritic cells is regulated by inflammatory stimuli. J Exp Med 2000: 191: 927-936.
58. McLellan A D, Bröcker E-B, Kämpgen E. Dendritic cell activation by danger and antigen-specific T-cell signalling. Exp Dermatol 2000: 9: 313-322.
59. Cumberbatch M, Scott R C, Basketter D A, Scholes E W, Hilton J, Dearman R J, Kimber I. Influence of sodium lauryl sulphate on 2,4-dinitrobenzene-induced lymph node activation. Toxicology 1993: 77: 181-191.
60. Zhang L, Tinkle S S. Chemical activation of innate and specific immunity in contact dermatitis. J Invest Dermatol 2000: 115: 168-176.
61. McFadden J P, Basketter D A. Contact allergy, irritancy and 'danger'. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 123-127.
62. Smith H R, Holloway D, Armstrong D K, Basketter D A, McFadden J P. Irritant thresholds in subjects with colophony allergy. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 95-97.
63. McLelland J, Shuster S. Contact dermatitis with negative patch tests: the additive effect of allergens in combination. Br J Dermatol 1990: 122: 623-630.
64. Bourezane Y, Girardin P, Aubin F, Vigan M, Adessi B, Humbert P H, Laurent R. Allergic contact dermatitis to Zovirax cream. Allergy 1996: 51: 755-759.
65. Corazza M, Virgili A, Mantovani L, La-Malfa W. Propylene glycol allergy from acyclovir cream with cross-reactivity to hydroxypropyl cellulose in a transdermal estradiol system? Contact Dermatitis 1993: 29: 283-284.
66. Eun H C, Kim Y C. Propylene glycol allergy from ketoconazole cream. Contact Dermatitis 1989: 21: 274-275.
67. Fisher A A. Systemic contact dermatitis due to intravenous Valium in a person sensitive to propylene glycol. Cutis 1995: 55: 327-328.
68. Fisher D A. Allergic contact dermatitis to propylene glycol in calcipotriene ointment. Cutis 1997: 60: 43-44.
69. Fisher A A, Brancaccio R R. Allergic contact sensitivity to propylene glycol in a lubricant jelly. Arch Dermatol 1979: 115: 1451.
70. Fowler J F Jr. Contact allergy to propylene glycol in topical corticosteroids. Am J Contact Dermat 1993: 4: 37-38.
71. Gonzalo M A, de Argila D, Garcia J M, Alvarado M I. Allergic contact dermatitis to propylene glycol. Allergy 1999: 54: 82-83.
72. Kim Y J, Kim J H. Allergic contact dermatitis from propylene glycol in Zovirax cream. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 30: 119-120.
73. Piletta P, Pasche-Koo F, Saurat J-H, Hauser C. Contact dermatitis to propylene glycol in topical Zovirax cream. Am J Contact Dermat 1994: 5: 168-169.
74. Ruas E, Goncalo M, Figueiredo A, Goncalo S. Allergic contact dermatitis from minoxidil. Contact Dermatitis 1992: 26: 57-58.
75. Santucci B, Cannistraci C, Cristaudo A, Picardo M. Contact dermatitis from ketoconazole cream. Contact Dermatitis 1992: 27: 274-275.
76. Uter W, Schwanitz H J. Contact dermatitis from propylene glycol in ECG electrode gel. Contact Dermatitis 1996: 34: 230-231.
77. Warshaw T G, Herrmann F. Studies of skin reactions to propylene glycol. J Invest Dermatol 1952: 19: 423-429.
78. Angelini G, Meneghini C L. Contact allergy from propylene glycol. Contact Dermatitis 1981: 7: 197-198.
79. Blondeel A, Oleffe J, Achten G. Contact allergy in 330 dermatological patients. Contact Dermatitis 1978: 4: 270-276.
80. Calas E, Castelain P Y, Piriou A. Epidemiologie des dermatoses de contact a Marseille. Ann Dermatol Venereol (Paris), 1978: 105: 345-347.
81. Fransway A F. The problem of preservation in the 1990s. III. Agents with preservative function independent of formaldehyde release. Am J Contact Dermat 1991: 2: 145-174.
82. Iden D L, Schroeter A L. The vehicle tray revisited: the use of the vehicle tray in assessing allergic contact dermatitis by a 24-hour application method. Contact Dermatitis 1977: 3: 122-126.
83. Romaguera C, Perez A G, Moran M, Miranda A. Propylene glycol in standard patch tests. Contact Dermatitis 1981: 7: 346.
84. Angelini G, Vena G A, Meneghini C L. Allergic contact dermatitis to some medicaments. Contact Dermatitis 1985: 12: 263-269.
85. George N D, Srinivas C R, Balachandran C, Shenoi S D. Sensitivity to various ingredients of topical preparations following prolonged use. Contact Dermatitis 1990: 23: 367-382.
86. Lammintausta K, Kalimo K, Fagerlund V L. Patch test reactions in atopic patients. Contact Dermatitis 1992: 26: 234-240.
87. Scheuer B, Rüther T, von Bülow V et al. Häufige Kontaktallergene. Akt Dermatol 1992: 18: 44-49.
88. Hannuksela M, Kousa M, Pirilä V. Allergy to ingredients of vehicles. Contact Dermatitis 1976: 2: 105-110.
89. Connolly M, Buckley D A. Contact dermatitis from propylene glycol in ECG electrodes, complicated by medicament allergy. Contact Dermatitis 2004: 50: 42.
90. Eguino P, Sanchez A, Agesta N, Lasa O, Raton J A, Diaz-Perez J L. Allergic contact dermatitis due to propylene glycol and parabens in an ultrasonic gel. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 290.
91. el-Sayed F, Bayle-Lebey P, Marguery M C, Bazex J. Contact dermatitis from propylene glycol in Rifocine. Contact Dermatitis 1995: 33: 127-128.
92. Farrar C W, Bell H K, King C M. Allergic contact dermatitis from propylene glycol in Efudix cream. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 345.
93. Lamb S R, Ardley H C, Wilkinson S M. Contact allergy to propylene glycol in brassiere padding inserts. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 224-225.
94. Marks J G, Belsito D V, DeLeo V A et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group standard tray patch test results (1992 to 1994). Am J Contact Dermat 1995: 6: 160-165.
95. Marks J G, Belsito D V, DeLeo V A et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch-test results, 1992 to 1994. Arch Dermatol 2000: 136: 272-273.
96. Marks J G, Belsito D V, DeLeo V A et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch-test results, 1998-2000. Am J Contact Dermat 2003: 14: 59-62.
97. Pratt M D, Belsito D V, de Leo V A et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch-test results, 2001-2002 study period. Dermatitis 2004: 15: 176-183.
98. Scheman A J, West D P, Hordinksy M K, Osburn A H, West L E. Alternative formulation for patients with contact reactions to topical 2% and 5% minoxidil vehicle ingredients. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 241.