Methyldibromoglutaronitrile in leave-on products elicits contact allergy at low concentration

British Journal of Dermatology

Volumn 151, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 817-822

  Pedersen, Line Kynemund ^a   Agner, T ^a   Held, E ^a   Johansen, J D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Allergic contact dermatitis; Contact allergy; Leave on products; Methyldibromoglutaronitrile; Moisturizers; Use test

Indexed keywords

2 BROMO 2 BROMOMETHYLGLUTARONITRILE; BIOCIDE; COSMETIC; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONCENTRATION RESPONSE; CONTACT ALLERGY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CREAM; DERMATITIS; EUROPE; FEMALE; HUMAN; LIPID COMPOSITION; LOTION; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ADULT; AGED; COSMETICS; DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC CONTACT; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; EMOLLIENTS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LIPIDS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NITRILES; PATCH TESTS; PRESERVATIVES, PHARMACEUTICAL; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 8344287008     PISSN: 00070963     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2004.06145.x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Wilkinson JD, Shaw S, Andersen KE et al. Monitoring levels of preservative sensitivity in Europe. A 10-year overview (1991-2000). Contact Dermatitis 2002; 46: 207-10.
2. de Groot AC, de Cock PA, Coenraads PJ et al. Methyldibromoglutaronitrile is an important contact allergen in the Netherlands. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 34: 118-20.
3. de Groot AC, van Ginkel CJ, Weijland JW. Methyldibromoglutaronitrile (Euxyl K 400): an important 'new' allergen in cosmetics. J Am Acad Dermatol 1996; 35: 743-7.
4. Tosti A, Guerra L, Bardazzi F et al. Euxyl K 400: a new sensitizer in cosmetics. Contact Dermatitis 1991; 25: 89-93.
5. Tosti A, Vincenzi C, Trevisi P et al. Euxyl K 400: incidence of sensitization, patch test concentration and vehicle. Contact Dermatitis 1995; 33: 193-5.
6. van Ginkel CJ, Rundervoort GJ. Increasing incidence of contact allergy to the new preservative 1,2-dibromo-2,4-dicyanobutane (methyldibromoglutaronitrile). Br J Dermatol 1995; 132: 918-20.
7. European Commission. Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Cosmetic Products and Non-Food Products intended for Consumers. Methyldibromo glutaronitrile. COLIPA No. P77, 2002. http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/ committees/sccp/sccp_opinions_en.htm
8. Zachariae C, Rastogi S, Devantier C et al. Methyldibromo glutaronitrile: clinical experience and exposure-based risk assessment. Contact Dermatitis 2003; 48: 150-4.
9. Wahlberg JE. Patch testing. In: Textbook of Contact Dermatitis (Rycroft RJG, Menné T, Frosch PJ, eds), 2nd edn. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1995: 438-68.
10. Johansen JD, Bruze M, Andersen KE et al. The repeated open application test: suggestions for a scale of evaluation. Contact Dermatitis 1998; 39: 95-6.
11. Robinson MK, Gerberick GF, Ryan CA et al. The importance of exposure estimation in the assessment of skin sensitization risk. Contact Dermatitis 2000; 42: 251-9.
12. Andersen KE, Johansen JD, Bruze M et al. The time-dose-response relationship for elicitation of contact dermatitis in isoeugenol allergic individuals. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2001; 170: 166-71.
13. Johansen JD, Andersen KE, Menné T. Quantitative aspects of isoeugenol contact allergy assessed by use and patch tests. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 34: 414-18.
14. Johansen JD, Andersen KE, Rastogi S, Menné T. Threshold responses in cinnamic aldehyde-sensitive subjects: results and methodological aspects. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 34: 165-71.
15. Wester RC, Maibach HI. Regional variation in percutaneous absorption. In: Percutaneous Absorption: Drugs, Cosmetics, Mechanisms; Methodology (Bronaugh RL, Maibach HI, eds). New York: Marcel Dekker, 1999: 107-16.
16. Flyvholm M, Hall BM, Agner T et al. Threshold for occluded formaldehyde patch test in formaldehyde sensitive patients. Relationship to repeated open application test with a product containing formaldehyde releaser. Contact Dermatitis 1997; 36: 26-33.
17. Farm G. Repeated open application test (ROAT) in patients allergic to colophony-evaluated visually and with bioengineering techniques. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1998; 78: 130-5.
18. Jensen CS, Lisby S, Baadsgaard O et al. Decrease in nickel sensitization in a Danish schoolgirl population with ears pierced after implementation of a nickel-exposure regulation. Br J Dermatol 2002; 146: 636-42.