Deodorants are the leading cause of allergic contact dermatitis to fragrance ingredients

Contact Dermatitis

Volumn 64, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 258-264

  Heisterberg, Maria V ^a   Menné, Torkil ^a   Andersen, Klaus E ^b   Avnstorp, Christian ^c   Kristensen, Berit ^c   Kristensen, Ove ^c   Kaaber, Knud ^d   Laurberg, Grete ^e   Henrik Nielsen, Niels ^f   Sommerlund, Mette ^g   Thormann, Jens ^h   Veien, Niels K ^e   Vissing, Susanne ⁱ   Johansen, Jeanne D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b ODENSE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

^c Dermatology Clinic   (Denmark)

^d Dermatology Clinic   (Denmark)

^e Dermatology Clinic Aalborg   (Denmark)

^f Dermatology Clinic   (Denmark)

^g AARHUS UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

^h Dermatology Clinic   (Denmark)

ⁱ Dermatology Clinic   (Denmark)

Author keywords

allergic contact dermatitis; clinically relevant patch tests; cosmetics; deodorants; fragrance

Indexed keywords

COSMETIC; DEODORANT AGENT; FRAGRANCE; HYDROXYISOHEXYL 3 CYCLOHEXENE CARBOXALDEHYDE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

AGED; ARTICLE; CONTACT DERMATITIS; FEMALE; FRAGRANCE ALLERGY; HUMAN; LOTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SEX DIFFERENCE; SKIN ALLERGY;

ADULT; COSMETICS; DEODORANTS; DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC CONTACT; ECZEMA; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PATCH TESTS; PERFUME; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SEX FACTORS;

EID: 79954533732     PISSN: 01051873     EISSN: 16000536     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2011.01889.x     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. The European Commissions Consolidated version of Cosmetics Directive 76/768/EEC. Approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products, Article 1, 1976. Available at: (last accessed October 2010).
2. Kligman A M., The identification of contact allergens by human assay. II. Factors influencing the induction and measurement of allergic contact dermatitis. J Invest Dermatol 1966: 47: 375-392.
3. Kligman A M., The identification of contact allergens by human assay. 3. The maximization test: a procedure for screening and rating contact sensitizers. J Invest Dermatol 1966: 47: 393-409.
4. Friedmann P S, Moss C, Shuster S, Simpson J M., Quantitative relationships between sensitizing dose of DNCB and reactivity in normal subjects. Clin Exp Immunol 1983: 53: 709-715. (Pubitemid 13042361)
5. EU Council Directive (76/768/EEC) Unit F3. Inventory of cosmetic ingredients, part 2, 2005. Available at:, editors. (last accessed October 2010).
6. European legislation: Consolidated version of Cosmetics Directive 76/768/EEC of July 1976, Cosmetic Restriction III/179. Available at: (last accessed November 2009).
7. de Groot A C, Frosch P J., Adverse reactions to fragrances. A clinical review. Contact Dermatitis 1997: 36: 57-86. (Pubitemid 27095631)
8. Rastogi S C, Menné T, Johansen J D., The composition of fine fragrances is changing. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 130-132. (Pubitemid 36683478)
9. White I R, de Groot A C., Cosmetics and skin care products. In: Contact Dermatitis, 4th edition, Frosch P J, Menné T, Lepoittevin J-P, (eds): Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag, 2006: pp. 493-506.
10. Johansen J D, Skov L, Volund A, Andersen K, Menné T., Allergens in combination have a synergistic effect on the elicitation response: a study of fragrance-sensitized individuals. Br J Dermatol 1998: 139: 264-270. (Pubitemid 28389399)
11. de Groot A C, Weyland J W, Nater J P., In: Unwanted Effects of Cosmetics and Drugs Used in Dermatology, 3rd edition, De Groot A C, Weyland J W, Nater J P, (eds): Amsterdam, Elsevier Science B.V., 1994.
12. Dooms-Goossens A., Cosmetics as causes of allergic contact dermatitis. Cutis 1993: 52: 316-320. (Pubitemid 23335244)
13. Robinson M K, Gerberick G F, Ryan C A, McNamee P, White I R, Basketter D A., The importance of exposure estimation in the assessment of skin sensitization risk. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 251-259. (Pubitemid 30219356)
14. Wahlberg J E., Identification of new allergens and non-irritant patch test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 1998: 39: 155-156. (Pubitemid 28461378)
15. Wilkinson D S, Fregert S, Magnusson B et al., Terminology of contact dermatitis. Acta Derm Venereol 1970: 50: 287-292.
16. Thyssen J P, Linneberg A, Menné T, Nielsen N H, Johansen J D., The prevalence and morbidity of sensitization to fragrance mix I in the general population. Br J Dermatol 2009: 161: 95-101.
17. de Groot A C., Contact allergy to cosmetics: causative ingredients. Contact Dermatitis 1987: 17: 26-34. (Pubitemid 17088661)
18. Heisterberg M V, Andersen K E, Avnstorp C, et al., Fragrance mix II in the baseline series contributes significantly to detection of fragrance allergy. Contact Dermatitis 2010: 63: 270-276.
19. Johansen J D, Andersen T F, Kjöller M, Veien N, Avnstorp C, Andersen K E, Menné T., Identification of risk products for fragrance contact allergy: a case-referent study based on patients' histories. Am J Contact Dermatitis 1998: 9: 80-86. (Pubitemid 28268610)
20. Uter W, Balzer C, Geier J, Frosch P J, Schnuch A., Patch testing with patients' own cosmetics and toiletries-results of the IVDK*, 1998-2002. Contact Dermatitis 2005: 53: 226-233. (Pubitemid 41499699)
21. Fullerton A, Andersen J R, Hoelgaard A, Menné T., Permeation of nickel salts through human skin in vitro. Contact Dermatitis 1986: 15: 173-177. (Pubitemid 17170809)
22. Bruze M, Johansen J D, Andersen K E et al., Deodorants: an experimental provocation study with cinnamic aldehyde. J Am Acad Dermatol 2003: 48: 194-200. (Pubitemid 36232316)
23. Edman B., The influence of shaving method on perfume allergy. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 31: 291-292. (Pubitemid 24361102)
24. Johansen J D, Rastogi S C, Bruze M et al., Deodorants: a clinical provocation study in fragrance-sensitive individuals. Contact Dermatitis 1998: 39: 161-165. (Pubitemid 28490973)
25. Fischer L A, Menné T, Avnstorp C, Kasting G B, Johansen J D., Hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde allergy: relationship between patch test and repeated open application test thresholds. Br J Dermatol 2009: 161: 560-567.
26. McFadden J P, Basketter D A., Contact allergy, irritancy and 'danger'. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 123-127.
27. Magnusson B, Kligman A M., The identification of contact allergens by animal assay. The guinea pig maximization test. J Invest Dermatol 1969: 52: 268-276.
28. Healy J I, Goodnow C C., Positive versus negative signaling by lymphocyte antigen receptors. Annu Rev Immunol 1998: 16: 645-670. (Pubitemid 28183380)
29. Allenby C F, Basketter D A., An arm immersion model of compromised skin (II). Influence on minimal eliciting patch test concentrations of nickel. Contact Dermatitis 1993: 28: 129-133. (Pubitemid 23093357)
30. von Peter C, Hoting E., Anwendungstest mit parfümierten Kosmetika bei Patienten mit positivem Epikutantest auf Duftstoff-Mischung. Dermatosen 1993: 41: 237-241. (Pubitemid 24017469)
31. Rastogi S C, Johansen J D, Frosch P et al., Deodorants on the European market: quantitative chemical analysis of 21 fragrances. Contact Dermatitis 1998: 38: 29-35. (Pubitemid 28059735)
32. Buckley D A., Fragrance ingredient labelling in products on sale in the U.K. Br J Dermatol 2007: 157: 295-300. (Pubitemid 47083858)
33. IFRA (International Fragrance Association). Restrictions on hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde included in the 43rd Amendment, 2008. Available at: (last accessed November 2009).