Photopatch testing: Clinical characteristics, test results, and final diagnoses from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 2009-2020.

BACKGROUND: Photoallergic contact dermatitis (PACD) is a delayed hypersensitivity reaction to allergens only in the presence of ultraviolet radiation in sunlight. Photopatch testing (PhotoPT) is necessary to confirm the diagnosis of PACD. There are few published studies of PhotoPT in North America. OBJECTIVE: To summarise the results of patients photopatch tested by members of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG), 2009-2020. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patient characteristics and PhotoPT results to 32 allergens on the NACDG Photopatch Test Series. RESULTS: Most of the 454 tested patients were female (70.3%), 21-60 years old (66.7%) and White (66.7%). There were a total of 119 positive photopatch tests. Sunscreen agents comprised 88.2% of those, with benzophenones responsible for over half of them. Final diagnoses included PACD in 17.2%, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in 44.5%, polymorphous light eruption (PMLE) in 18.9% and chronic actinic dermatitis (CAD) in 9.0% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In 454 patients with suspected photosensitivity referred for photopatch testing in North America, approximately one-fifth had PACD. Sunscreen agents, especially benzophenones, were the most common photoallergens. Other common diagnoses included ACD, PMLE and CAD. Photopatch testing is an important tool for differentiating these conditions.

Patch Testing to Mentha piperita (Peppermint) Oil: The North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience (2009-2020).

Background: Mentha piperita (MP; peppermint) oil has many commercial uses. Objective: To characterize the epidemiology of contact allergy to MP oil 2% petrolatum. Methods: Retrospective analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data (2009-2020). Results: Of 28,128 patients tested to MP, 161 (0.6%) had an allergic reaction. Most allergic patients were female (77.0%) and/or over 40 years of age (71.4%). The most common anatomical sites of dermatitis included face (31.7%; of these, one-third specified lips), hands (17.4%), and scattered/generalized (18.6%). Nearly one-third (30.4%) of reactions were strong (++)/extreme (+++), and 80.1% were considered currently relevant. Common sources included oral hygiene preparations, foods, and lip products. Co-reaction with at least 1 of the other 19 fragrance/plant-related screening test preparations occurred in 82.6% (133/161) of MP-allergic patients, most commonly Cananga odorata oil (42.9%), fragrance mix I (41.0%), hydroperoxides of linalool (35.7%), Compositae mix (35.4%), Jasminum officinale oil (31.9%), Myroxylon pereirae (31.7%), and propolis (28.1%). Co-reaction with at least 1 of the 3 most commonly used fragrance screening allergens (fragrance mix I, fragrance mix II, and/or Myroxylon pereirae) was 59.6%. Conclusions: Twelve-year prevalence of MP allergy was 0.6%. Approximately 40% of cases would have been missed if only fragrance screening allergens were tested.

Safety Assessment of Alkanoyl Lactyl Lactate Salts as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of 10 alkanoyl lactyl lactate salts. These ingredients have the surfactant function in cosmetics in common. The Panel reviewed data relevant to the safety of these ingredients, and concluded that these 10 ingredients are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in the safety assessment when formulated to be nonirritating and nonsensitizing, which may be based on a quantitative risk assessment (QRA) or other accepted methodologies.

Safety Assessment of Vinylpyrrolidone Polymers as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of 30 vinylpyrrolidone polymers as used in cosmetic products; most of these ingredients have the reported cosmetic function of film former in common. The Panel reviewed data relevant to the safety of these ingredients, and determined that 27 vinylpyrrolidone polymers are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in the safety assessment. The Panel also concluded that the available data are insufficient to make a determination that 3 vinylpyrrolidone polymers (all urethanes) are safe under the intended conditions of use in cosmetic formulations.

Safety Assessment of Polyol Phosphates as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of 10 polyol phosphates. Some of the possible functions in cosmetics that are reported for this ingredient group are chelating agents, oral care agents, and skin conditioning agents. The Panel reviewed relevant data relating to the safety of these ingredients under the intended conditions of use in cosmetic formulations, and concluded that Sodium Phytate, Phytic Acid, Phytin, and Trisodium Inositol Triphosphate are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in the safety assessment. The Panel also concluded that the data are insufficient to determine the safety of the following 6 ingredients as used in cosmetics: Disodium Glucose Phosphate, Manganese Fructose Diphosphate, Sodium Mannose Phosphate, Trisodium Fructose Diphosphate, Xylityl Phosphate, and Zinc Fructose Diphosphate.

Safety Assessment of Methylxanthines as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of three methylxanthines, Caffeine, Theobromine, and Theophylline, as used in cosmetics. All of these ingredients are reported to function as skin-conditioning agents in cosmetic products. The Panel reviewed the data relevant to the safety of these ingredients and concluded that Caffeine, Theobromine, and Theophylline are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

Sodium Dehydroacetate and Dehydroacetic Acid.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) first published a safety assessment of Sodium Dehydroacetate and Dehydroacetic Acid in 1985. The Panel previously concluded that Sodium Dehydroacetate and Dehydroacetic Acid are safe as used in the present practices of use and concentration, as stated in that report. Upon re-review in 2003, the Panel reaffirmed the original conclusion, as published in 2006. The Panel reviewed updated frequency and concentration of use data again in 2023, in addition to any newly available, relevant safety data. Considering this information, as well as the information provided in the original safety assessment and the prior re-review document, the Panel reaffirmed the 1985 conclusion.

Occupational Contact Dermatitis in Construction Workers: A Retrospective Analysis of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group Data, 2001-2020.

Background: Construction workers (CWs) are at risk for occupational contact dermatitis (CD) owing to workplace exposures. Objective: Determine the prevalence of occupational allergic CD and characterize common occupational allergens in CWs referred for patch testing in the United States and Canada. Methods: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of patients patch tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group from 2001 to 2020. Results: Of 47,843 patch-tested patients, 681 (1.4%) were CWs. Compared with non-CWs, CWs were more likely to be male (91.0% vs 30.9%) have occupational skin disease (36.9% vs 11.4%) and have hand involvement (37.2% vs 22.5%) (all P < 0.0001). Of 681 CWs, 60.1% (411) had clinically relevant positive patch test reactions, and nearly 1/3 of CWs (128) had occupationally relevant reactions. Most common occupationally relevant allergens were potassium dichromate 0.25% pet. (30.5%, 39/128), bisphenol A epoxy resin 1% pet. (28.1%, 36/128), carba mix 3% pet. (14.8%, 19/128), cobalt (ii) chloride hexahydrate 1% pet. (14.1%, 18/128), and thiuram mix 1% pet. (14.1%, 18/128). Top sources of occupationally relevant allergens were cement/concrete/mortar (20.4%, 46/225), gloves (15.1%, 34/225), and coatings (paint/lacquer/shellac/varnish/stains) (9.8%, 22/225). Conclusions: Occupational CD in North American CWs is common. In this group, frequently identified etiological sources of occupational allergic CD included metals, epoxy resin, and rubber.

Isobutane, Isopentane, Butane, and Propane.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) first published the Final Report of the safety of Isobutane, Isopentane, Butane, and Propane in 1982. The Panel previously concluded that these ingredients are considered safe as cosmetic ingredients under the present conditions of concentration and use, as described in that safety assessment. Upon re-review in 2002, the Panel reaffirmed the original conclusion, as published in 2005. The Panel reviewed update frequency and concentration of use data again in 2023, in addition to newly available, relevant safety data. Considering this information, as well as the information provided in the original safety assessment and the prior re-review document, the Panel reaffirmed the 1982 conclusion for Isobutane, Isopentane, Butane, and Propane.

Safety Assessment of Triphenyl Phosphate as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of Triphenyl Phosphate, which is reported to function as a plasticizer in manicuring products. The Panel reviewed the available data to determine the safety of this ingredient. The Panel concluded that Triphenyl Phosphate is safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

Laneth Acetates.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety reviewed newly available studies since their original assessment in 1982 and a previous re-review in 2002, along with updated information regarding product types and concentrations of use. Considering this information, the Panel confirmed that Laneth-9 Acetate and Laneth-10 Acetate are safe for topical application to humans in the present practices of use and concentration as described in this report.

Zinc Phenolsulfonate.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety reviewed newly available studies since their original assessment in 1986 and a previous re-review in 2004, along with updated information regarding product types and concentrations of use. Considering this information, the Panel confirmed that Zinc Phenolsulfonate is safe as a cosmetic ingredient in the present practices of use and concentration as described in this report.

Safety Assessment of Polysilicone-11 as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of Polysilicone-11 as used in cosmetic formulations. This ingredient is reported to function as a film former. The Panel considered the available data and concluded that Polysilicone-11 is safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

Safety Assessment of Hydrogen Peroxide as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of Hydrogen Peroxide for use in cosmetics. This ingredient is reported to function in cosmetics as an antimicrobial agent, cosmetic biocide, oral health care agent, and oxidizing agent. The Panel reviewed the data relevant to the safety of this ingredient and concluded that Hydrogen Peroxide is safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

Safety Assessment of Palm-Derived Ingredients as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of 8 palm tree (Euterpe edulis (juçara) and Euterpe oleracea (açaí))-derived ingredients as used in cosmetic products; these ingredients are reported to function mostly as skin conditioning agents. The Panel reviewed relevant data relating to the safety of these ingredients in cosmetic formulations. Industry should continue to use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities. The Panel concluded that palm tree (açaí and juçara)-derived ingredients are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

Safety Assessment of Capryloyl Salicylic Acid as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reassessed the safety of Capryloyl Salicylic Acid in cosmetic products; this ingredient is reported to function as a skin conditioning agent. The Panel reviewed relevant data relating to the safety of this ingredient in cosmetic formulations, and concluded that the available data are insufficient to make a determination that Capryloyl Salicylic Acid is safe under the intended conditions of use in cosmetic formulations.

Safety Assessment of Hydroxyethyl Urea as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of Hydroxyethyl Urea, which is reported to function as a humectant and a hair and skin conditioning agent. The Panel reviewed the available data to determine the safety of this ingredient. The Panel concluded that Hydroxyethyl Urea is safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in the safety assessment when formulated to be non-irritating.

Safety Assessment of Basic Red 76 as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of Basic Red 76, which is reported to function in cosmetics as a hair colorant and hair-conditioning agent. The Panel reviewed the available data to determine the safety of this ingredient. The Panel concluded that Basic Red 76 is safe for use as a hair dye ingredient in the present practices of use and concentration described in the safety assessment.

Safety Assessment of Soy-Derived Ingredients as Used in Cosmetics.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of 28 soy-derived ingredients as used in cosmetic products. These ingredients are reported to primarily function as antioxidants, skin protectants, skin-conditioning agents, and hair-conditioning agents. The Panel considered the available data relating to the safety of these ingredients in cosmetic formulations, and concluded that 24 of the 28 soy-derived ingredients are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment. The Panel also concluded that the available data are insufficient to make a determination that Glycine Max (Soybean) Callus Culture, Glycine Max (Soybean) Callus Culture Extract, Glycine Max (Soybean) Callus Extract, and Glycine Max (Soybean) Phytoplacenta Conditioned Media are safe under the intended conditions of use in cosmetic formulations.