Prevalence, concomitant reactions, and factors associated with fragrance allergy in Thailand.
Adult
Age Factors
Allergens
/ adverse effects
Asteraceae
/ adverse effects
Case-Control Studies
Cosmetics
/ adverse effects
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact
/ epidemiology
Epoxy Resins
/ adverse effects
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Odorants
Patch Tests
Prevalence
Retrospective Studies
Thailand
/ epidemiology
Young Adult
Compositae mix II
Myroxylon pereirae resin (balsam of Peru)
clinical relevance
concomitant patch-test reactions
fragrance allergy
fragrance mix I
fragrance mix II
hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde
prevalence
Journal
Contact dermatitis
ISSN: 1600-0536
Titre abrégé: Contact Dermatitis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7604950
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2021
Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
03
09
2020
revised:
09
10
2020
accepted:
10
10
2020
pubmed:
20
10
2020
medline:
27
10
2021
entrez:
19
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Fragrances are the most common cause of cosmetic contact allergy. Up-to-date information on contact allergy frequencies and relevance aids primary and secondary preventive measures. To determine the prevalence, associated factors, and concomitant reactions in fragrance allergy among Thais. This retrospective study collected data from 2012 to 2019. The patient characteristics of fragrance and nonfragrance allergy groups were compared. Concurrent positive reactions to fragrance allergens (fragrance mix [FM] I, FM II, Myroxylon pereirae resin and hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde) and other baseline-series allergens were analysed. Of 1032 patients, 175 (17.0%) had fragrance allergy, with 57.7% of clinical relevance. FM I showed the highest prevalence (9.4%). The associated factors were being elderly, lesions on the extremities, metal allergy history, and long dermatitis duration. Contact allergies to epoxy resin and Compositae plants were significantly associated with fragrance allergy with an odds ratio of 5.95 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.21-6.80) and an odds ratio of 4.42 (95% CI: 1.58-12.36), respectively. No significant associations between colophonium (previously proposed as a fragrance marker) and fragrance allergens were found. The prevalence of fragrance contact allergy remains high and should be considered in old patients presenting with long-standing eczema on the extremities. Unlike reports from other countries, varied, significant, concomitant reactions were observed.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Fragrances are the most common cause of cosmetic contact allergy. Up-to-date information on contact allergy frequencies and relevance aids primary and secondary preventive measures.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
To determine the prevalence, associated factors, and concomitant reactions in fragrance allergy among Thais.
METHODS
METHODS
This retrospective study collected data from 2012 to 2019. The patient characteristics of fragrance and nonfragrance allergy groups were compared. Concurrent positive reactions to fragrance allergens (fragrance mix [FM] I, FM II, Myroxylon pereirae resin and hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde) and other baseline-series allergens were analysed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of 1032 patients, 175 (17.0%) had fragrance allergy, with 57.7% of clinical relevance. FM I showed the highest prevalence (9.4%). The associated factors were being elderly, lesions on the extremities, metal allergy history, and long dermatitis duration. Contact allergies to epoxy resin and Compositae plants were significantly associated with fragrance allergy with an odds ratio of 5.95 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.21-6.80) and an odds ratio of 4.42 (95% CI: 1.58-12.36), respectively. No significant associations between colophonium (previously proposed as a fragrance marker) and fragrance allergens were found.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of fragrance contact allergy remains high and should be considered in old patients presenting with long-standing eczema on the extremities. Unlike reports from other countries, varied, significant, concomitant reactions were observed.
Substances chimiques
Allergens
0
Cosmetics
0
Epoxy Resins
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
175-182Informations de copyright
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Marks JG, Anderson BE, DeLeo VA. Contact & Occupational Dermatology. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers, Medical Publishers Pvt. Limited; 2016.
Cuesta L, Silvestre JF, Toledo F, Lucas A, Perez-Crespo M, Ballester I. Fragrance contact allergy: a 4-year retrospective study. Contact Dermatitis. 2010;63(2):77-84.
Silvestre JF, Mercader P, Gonzalez-Perez R, et al. Sensitization to fragrances in Spain: a 5-year multicentre study (2011-2015). Contact Dermatitis. 2019;80(2):94-100.
Oosten E, Schuttelaar M-L, Coenraads P-J. Clinical relevance of positive patch test reactions to the 26 EU-labelled fragrances. Contact Dermatitis. 2009;61(4):217-223.
Heisterberg MV, Menné T, Johansen JD. Contact allergy to the 26 specific fragrance ingredients to be declared on cosmetic products in accordance with the EU cosmetics directive. Contact Dermatitis. 2011;65(5):266-275.
Cheng J, Zug KA. Fragrance allergic contact dermatitis. Dermatitis. 2014;25(5):232-245.
Turcic P, Lipozencić J, Milavec-Puretić V, Kulisić S. Contact allergy caused by fragrance mix and Myroxylon pereirae (balsam of Peru)-A retrospective study. Coll Antropol. 2011;35(1):83-87.
Uter W, Schnuch A, Geier J, Pfahlberg A, Gefeller O. Association between occupation and contact allergy to the fragrance mix: a multifactorial analysis of national surveillance data. Occup Environ Med. 2001;58(6):392-398.
Bennike NH, Zachariae C, Johansen JD. Non-mix fragrances are top sensitizers in consecutive dermatitis patients - a cross-sectional study of the 26 EU-labelled fragrance allergens. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;77(5):270-279.
Antelmi A, Sukakul T, Mowitz M, Svedman C. Occupational contact dermatitis due to “bath bombs”. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;83(3):247-249.
Paulsen E, Andersen KE. Colophonium and compositae mix as markers of fragrance allergy: cross-reactivity between fragrance terpenes, colophonium and compositae plant extracts. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;53(5):285-291.
Pontén A, Björk J, Carstensen O, et al. Associations between contact allergy to epoxy resin and fragrance mix. Acta Derm Venereol. 2004;84(2):151-152.
Hanifin JM, Rajka G. Diagnostic features of atopic dermatitis. Acta Derm Venereol. 1980;92(Suppl):44-47.
EurWORK. Coding and classification standards: eurofound. 2010. https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/.
Sukakul T, Chaweekulrat P, Limphoka P, Boonchai W. Changing trends of contact allergens in Thailand: a 12-year retrospective study. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81(2):124-129.
Fregert S. Manual of Contact Dermatitis. 2nd ed. Copenhagen: Year Book Medical Publishers; 1981.
Buckley DA, Rycroft RJ, White IR, McFadden JP. The frequency of fragrance allergy in patch-tested patients increases with their age. Br J Dermatol. 2003;149(5):986-989.
Couteau C, Morin T, Diarra H, Coiffard L. Influence of cosmetic type and distribution channel on the presence of regulated fragrance allergens: study of 2044 commercial products. Clin Rev Allerg Immunol. 2020;59(1):101-108.
Kasemsarn P, Iamphonrat T, Boonchai W. Risk factors and common contact allergens in facial allergic contact dermatitis patients. Int J Dermatol. 2016;55(4):417-424.
Burkemper NM. Contact dermatitis, patch testing, and allergen avoidance. Mo Med. 2015;112(4):296-300.
Winayanuwattikun W, Boonchai W. Factors associated with multiple contact allergies in Thai dermatitis patients: a 10-year retrospective study. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;80(5):279-285.
Uter W, Geier J, Schnuch A, Gefeller O. Risk factors associated with sensitization to hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde. Contact Dermatitis. 2013;69(2):72-77.
Bruze M, Ale I, Andersen KE, et al. A retrospective study on contact allergy to fragrance mix II and hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde by the international Contact Dermatitis research group. Dermatitis. 2020;31(4):268-271.
Engfeldt M, Hagvall L, Isaksson M, et al. Patch testing with hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde (HICC) - a multicentre study of the Swedish Contact Dermatitis research group. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;76(1):34-39.
Andersen KE, Christensen LP, Vølund A, Johansen JD, Paulsen E. Association between positive patch tests to epoxy resin and fragrance mix I ingredients. Contact Dermatitis. 2009;60(3):155-157.
Vejanurug P, Tresukosol P, Sajjachareonpong P, Puangpet P. Fragrance allergy could be missed without patch testing with 26 individual fragrance allergens. Contact Dermatitis. 2016;74(4):230-235.
Paulsen E, Chistensen LP, Andersen KE. Cosmetics and herbal remedies with Compositae plant extracts - are they tolerated by Compositae-allergic patients? Contact Dermatitis. 2008;58(1):15-23.
Bauer A, Geier J, Schreiber S, Schubert S, IVDK. Contact sensitization to plants of the Compositae family: data of the information network of departments of dermatology (IVDK) from 2007 to 2016. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;80(4):222-227.
Paulsen E. Systemic allergic dermatitis caused by sesquiterpene lactones. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;76(1):1-10.
Bråred Christensson J, Hagvall L, Karlberg A-T. Fragrance allergens, overview with a focus on recent developments and understanding of abiotic and biotic activation. Cosmetics. 2016;3(2):19-37.
Shi Y, Nedorost S, Scheman L, Propolis SA. Colophony, and fragrance cross-reactivity and allergic Contact Dermatitis. Dermatitis. 2016;27(3):123-126.
de Groot AC. Myroxylon pereirae resin (balsam of Peru) - a critical review of the literature and assessment of the significance of positive patch test reactions and the usefulness of restrictive diets. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;80(6):335-353.
Api AM. Only Peru balsam extracts or distillates are used in perfumery. Contact Dermatitis. 2006;54(3):179.
Avalos-Peralta P, García-Bravo B, Camacho FM. Sensitivity to Myroxylon pereirae resin (balsam of Peru). A study of 50 cases. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;52(6):304-306.