ABSTRACT
Contact dermatitis linked to cosmetic products is a very common reason for visits to the dermatologist, and in more than half the cases, it is due to an allergic reaction. Fragrances are most often the culprit. The aim of the study was to describe the common fragrance allergens in different categories of cosmetic products available on the European market. We wanted to assess the influence of cosmetic type and distribution channel on the presence of fragrance allergens. There are the allergens whose concentration exceeds 0.001% in leave-on products and 0.01% in rinse-off products. A total of 2044 commercial hygiene, care, and makeup cosmetic products were analyzed to specifically study regulated fragrance allergens. The influence that the product category and its distribution channel (retail stores and specialized stores such as beauty institutes or hairdressers and pharmacy) have on the prevalence of these allergens was evaluated. The Kruskal-Wallis test has been used for statistical data analysis. There is a wide range of fragrance allergens, the most common being limonene (found in about 30% of products tested), linalool (just over a quarter of the products tested), and benzyl alcohol (approximately 16% of the products tested). The average number of allergens found and their nature varies depending on the type of product in question (maximum number for shampoos and oral care with about 70 allergens and minimum number for nail polish and makeup for eyes with fewer than 10 allergens). In the area of hygiene, deodorants and oral hygiene products are particularly noteworthy, the former for their significantly high number of allergens and the latter for their low number. There is also a significant difference between the number of allergens found in eye makeup and foundations. Our results indicate that the number of regulated fragrance allergens is particularly influenced by the type of products.
Subject(s)
Allergens/analysis , Cosmetics/chemistry , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/immunology , Perfume/chemistry , Acyclic Monoterpenes/analysis , Acyclic Monoterpenes/immunology , Animals , Benzyl Alcohol/analysis , Benzyl Alcohol/immunology , Female , Humans , Limonene/analysis , Limonene/immunology , Male , OdorantsSubject(s)
Acyclic Monoterpenes/immunology , Allergens/immunology , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Limonene/immunology , Perfume/adverse effects , Peroxides/immunology , Acyclic Monoterpenes/chemistry , Adolescent , Allergens/chemistry , Child , Child, Preschool , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/immunology , Female , Humans , Infant , Limonene/chemistry , Male , Patch Tests/methods , Perfume/chemistry , Peroxides/chemistry , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Allergic contact dermatitis is regarded as the most frequent expression of immunotoxicity in humans. Many odorant terpenes commonly used in fragrance compositions are considered as weak skin sensitizers, whereas some of their autoxidation products, allylic hydroperoxides, are classified as strong sensitizers according to the local lymph node assay. However, the mechanism of their effects on the immune system remains unclear. Since dendritic cells play a key role in allergic contact dermatitis, we studied their activation by the frequently used linalool (LINA) and limonene (LIMO), and their respective sensitizing allylic hydroperoxides (LINA-OOH, LIMO-OOH). The THP-1 cell-line was used as a surrogate for dendritic cells, the model currently employed in the validated h-CLAT in vitro test. Our data showed that allylic hydroperoxides behave differently. Both LINA-OOH and LIMO-OOH oxidized cell surface thiols 30 min after stimulation. However, the oxidative stress induced by LINA-OOH was stronger, with a higher decreased GSH/GSSG ratio and a stronger reactive species production. Moreover, LINA-OOH induced a stronger Nrf2 accumulation in correlation with nqo1 and ho-1 gene expression, 2 Nrf2 target genes. Regarding signaling pathways involved in these effects, P38 mitogen-activated protein kinase and P-ERK were activated in response to LINA-OOH but not with LIMO-OOH. CD54 and CD86 were induced 24-h postexposure. In contrast, LINA and LIMO did not modify THP-1 phenotype. This work underlies that autoxidation forming allylic hydroperoxide (ROOH) does not lead to equal chemical reactivity since LINA-OOH appears to be a stronger activator than LIMO-OOH, in regard to oxidative stress and Nrf2 pathway activation.
