Current frequency of contact allergy to isothiazolinones (methyl-, benz- and octylisothiazolinone) across Europe.
CAS nr. 2634‐33‐5
CAS nr. 26530‐20‐1
CAS nr. 2682‐20‐4
RRID:SCR_001905
benzisothiazolinone
clinical epidemiology
contact allergy
exposure
methylisothiazolinone
octylisothiazolinone
surveillance
Journal
Contact dermatitis
ISSN: 1600-0536
Titre abrégé: Contact Dermatitis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7604950
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Jul 2024
17 Jul 2024
Historique:
revised:
24
06
2024
received:
01
03
2024
accepted:
01
07
2024
medline:
18
7
2024
pubmed:
18
7
2024
entrez:
18
7
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The use of methylisothiazolinone (MI) as a preservative in cosmetic products caused an alarming increase in MI contact allergy across Europe in the 2010s. This was followed by regulations of use with a total ban on leave-on (implemented in 2017) and reduced use concentrations in rinse-off cosmetics (2018). To follow-up on the prevalence of contact allergy to MI and the related benzisothiazolinone (BIT) and octylisothiazolinone (OIT) in consecutively patch-tested patients in Europe. A cross-sectional audit following the design of two previous audits on MI contact allergy from 1 May 2022 to 31 October 2022 included all patients patch tested with the European baseline series, including or supplemented with MI, BIT and OIT across 10 departments in eight European countries. A total of 2554 patients were consecutively patch tested with the three isothiazolinones during the study period. The prevalence of MI and BIT contact allergy was 2.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.3%-3.7%; range 1.1%-5.8%) and 3.1% (95% CI: 2.4%-3.9%; range 0.0%-6.6%), respectively; that of OIT was 0.7% (95% CI: 0.4%-1.1%; range 0%-3.2%). Rinse-off cosmetic (73.3%) and leave-on cosmetic products (13.3%) were still associated with eliciting allergic contact dermatitis to MI. We confirmed a positive impact of regulatory measures on the prevalence of MI contact allergy in Europe, which halved compared to 2015. However, our data suggest that consumers may still be exposed to older cosmetic products containing MI. BIT has superseded MI in causing contact allergy, despite not being allowed for use in cosmetic products.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The use of methylisothiazolinone (MI) as a preservative in cosmetic products caused an alarming increase in MI contact allergy across Europe in the 2010s. This was followed by regulations of use with a total ban on leave-on (implemented in 2017) and reduced use concentrations in rinse-off cosmetics (2018).
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To follow-up on the prevalence of contact allergy to MI and the related benzisothiazolinone (BIT) and octylisothiazolinone (OIT) in consecutively patch-tested patients in Europe.
METHODS
METHODS
A cross-sectional audit following the design of two previous audits on MI contact allergy from 1 May 2022 to 31 October 2022 included all patients patch tested with the European baseline series, including or supplemented with MI, BIT and OIT across 10 departments in eight European countries.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 2554 patients were consecutively patch tested with the three isothiazolinones during the study period. The prevalence of MI and BIT contact allergy was 2.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.3%-3.7%; range 1.1%-5.8%) and 3.1% (95% CI: 2.4%-3.9%; range 0.0%-6.6%), respectively; that of OIT was 0.7% (95% CI: 0.4%-1.1%; range 0%-3.2%). Rinse-off cosmetic (73.3%) and leave-on cosmetic products (13.3%) were still associated with eliciting allergic contact dermatitis to MI.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
We confirmed a positive impact of regulatory measures on the prevalence of MI contact allergy in Europe, which halved compared to 2015. However, our data suggest that consumers may still be exposed to older cosmetic products containing MI. BIT has superseded MI in causing contact allergy, despite not being allowed for use in cosmetic products.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : EADV
ID : 2015-015
Informations de copyright
© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Regulation (EC) no. 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on Cosmetic Products. Accessed November 6, 2023. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32009R1223&from=EN
The European Commission. Commission Decision of 7.8. 2015 on Establishing Scientific Committees in the Field of Public Health, Consumer Safety and the Environment. Accessed November 6, 2023. http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/docs/call_2015_5383_decision_with_annexes_en.pdf
Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS). Scientific Commitees. Accessed November 6, 2023. http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/consumer_safety/index_en.htm
Dillarstone A. Cosmetic preservatives. Contact Dermatitis. 1997;37:190.
Gonçalo M, Goossens A. Whilst Rome burns: the epidemic of contact allergy to methylisothiazolinone. Contact Dermatitis. 2013;68:257‐258.
Geier J, Lessmann H, Schnich A, Uter W. Recent increase in allergic reactions to methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone: is methylisothiazolinone the culprit? Contact Dermatitis. 2012;67:334‐341.
Schwensen JF, Uter W, Bruze M, et al. The epidemic of methylisothiazolinone: a European prospective study. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;76:272‐279.
Reeder MJ, Warshaw E, Aravamuthan S, et al. Trends in the prevalence of methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone contact allergy in North America and Europe. JAMA Dermatol. 2023;159:267‐274.
Uter W, Aalto‐Korte K, Agner T, et al. The epidemic of methylisothiazolinone contact allergy in Europe: follow‐up on changing exposures. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:333‐339.
Johansen JD, Aalto‐Korte K, Agner T, et al. European Society of Contact Dermatitis guideline for diagnostic patch testing recommendations on best practice. Contact Dermatitis. 2015;73:195‐221.
Flury U, Palmer A, Nixon R. The methylisothiazolinone contact allergy epidemic in Australia. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;79:189‐191.
Uter W, Wilkinson SM, Aerts O, et al. ESSCA and EBS ESCD working groups, and the GEIDAC. patch test results with the European baseline series, 2019/20‐joint European results of the ESSCA and the EBS working groups of the ESCD, and the GEIDAC. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;87:343‐355.
Uter W, Bauer A, Belloni Fortina A, et al. Patch test results with the European baseline series and additions thereof in the ESSCA network, 2015‐2018. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;84:109‐120.
Cosmetics Europe. Recommendation on MIT. Accessed November 6, 2023. https://cosmeticseurope.eu/files/3614/7634/5470/Recommendation_on_MIT.pdf
Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS). Opinion on Methylisothiazolinone (P94)—Submission II (Sensitisation Only); SCCS/1521/13. Revision of 27 March 2014. Accessed November 7, 2023. http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/consumer_safety/docs/sccs_o_145.pdf
Schwensen JF, White IR, Thyssen JP, Menné T, Johansen JD. Failures in risk assessment and risk management for cosmetic preservatives in Europe and the impact on public health. Contact Dermatitis. 2015;73(3):133‐141. doi:10.1111/cod.12446
Burnett CL, Bergfeld WF, Belsito DV, et al. Amended safety assessment of methylisothiazolinone as used in cosmetics. Int J Toxicol. 2021;40(1_suppl):5S‐19S.
Yazar K, Lundov MD, Faurschou A, et al. Methylisothiazolinone in rinse‐off products causes allergic contact dermatitis: a repeated open‐application study. Br J Dermatol. 2015;173:115‐122.
Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS). Opinion on Methylisothiazolinone (MI) (P94)—Submission III (Sensitisation Only), SCCS/1557/15. Final Opinion on 15 December 2015. Accessed November 7, 2023. http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/consumer_safety/docs/sccs_o_178.pdf
Soriano LF, Chowdhury MMU, Cooper SM, et al. Current prevalence and relevance of positive patch test reactions to cosmetic and non‐cosmetic isothiazolinones in the UK. Br J Dermatol. 2021;185:223‐225.
King N, Latheef F, Wilkinson M. Trends in preservative allergy: benzisothiazolinone emerges from the pack. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85(6):637‐642.
Hernández‐Fernández CP, Mercader‐García P, Silvestre Salvador JF, et al. Candidate allergens for inclusion in the Spanish standard series based on data from the Spanish contact dermatitis registry. Actas Dermo‐Sifiliogr. 2021;112(9):798‐805.
Geier J, Brans R, Weisshaar E, et al. Contact sensitization to benzisothiazolinone: IVDK‐data of the years 2002 to 2021. Contact Dermatitis. 2023;88(6):446‐455.
Herman A, Aerts O, Jacobs MC, et al. Evolution of methylisothiazolinone sensitization: a Belgian multicentric study from 2014 to 2019. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85(6):643‐649.
Garcia‐Hidalgo E, Sottas V, von Goetz N, Hauri U, Bogdal C, Hungerbühler K. Occurrence and concentrations of isothiazolinones in detergents and cosmetics in Switzerland. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;76:96‐106.
DeKoven JG, Silverberg JI, Warshaw EM, et al. North American contact dermatitis group patch test results: 2017‐2018. Dermatitis. 2021;32:111‐123.
Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS). Opinion on Benzisothiazolinone Colipa no P96. SCCS/1482/12. Opinion on 26–27 June 2012. Accessed November 8, 2023. https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/consumer_safety/docs/sccs_o_099.pdf
Meysman T, Goossens A. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by benzisothiazolinone in printing ink and soap. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;76:51‐53.
Tehrany YA, André R, Bugey A, Santimaria D, Edder P, Piletta P. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by octylisothiazolinone in a leather car seat: case report and emergence of octylisothiazolinones in leather goods in Switzerland. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;87(5):455‐457. doi:10.1111/cod.14188
Soriano LF, Buckley DA. Unrecognized leather sofa dermatitis complicating chronic plaque psoriasis. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85(1):115‐117. doi:10.1111/cod.13810
Hunt WTN, Dunnill MG, Sansom JE. Sofa dermatitis again? A case report of allergic contact dermatitis to octylisothiazolinone from a leather reclining chair. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;82(3):161‐162. doi:10.1111/cod.13380
Wilkinson SM, Gonçalo M, Aerts O, et al. The European baseline series and recommended additions: 2023. Contact Dermatitis. 2023;88:87‐92.
Thyssen JP, Menné T, Schnuch A, et al. Acceptable risk of contact allergy in the general population assessed by CE‐DUR – a method to detect and categorize contact allergy epidemics based on patient data. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2009;54:183‐187.
National Allergy Research Centre. Socioeconomic Consequences of Fragrance Allergy. COWI A/S and National Allergy Research Centre. 2019. Accessed November 13, 2023. https://www.videncenterforallergi.dk/wp‐content/uploads/files/nyheder/COWI_Socioeconomic_consequence_of_fragrance_allergy_Final_2019.pdf
Lidén C, White IR. Increasing non‐cosmetic exposure and sensitization to isothiazolinones require action for prevention: review. Contact Dermatitis. 2024;90(5):445‐457. doi:10.1111/cod.14523