Methyldibromoglutaronitrile is an important contact allergen in The Netherlands

Abstract

From 15 May to 15 December 1994, 2943 patients suspected of having contact dermatitis (1955 women, 988 men) were patch tested with methyldibromoglutaronitrile 0.3%, 0.1% and 0.05% pet. 119 patients (4.0%; women 4.1%), men 3.8%) proved to be allergic. 71% of the reactions were considered to be relevant. In 2/3 of the patients, causative products were cosmetics, in 1/3 moistened toilet tissues. Testing with methyldibromoglutaronitrile at lower concentrations (0.05% and 0.1%) and with commercial allergens (Euxyl® K 400 and methyldibromoglutaronitrile, both containing methyldibromoglutaronitrile 0.1 % >), resulted in a number of false-negative reactions. All preserv atives in the European standard series had lower scores than the 4% positive reactions to methyldi bromoglutaronitrile (formaldehyde 2.0%), MCI/MI (Kathon® CG) 3.2%, parabens 1.0%o, quaternium-15 1.3%). It is concluded that methyldibromoglutaronitrile (present in the commercial pre servative Euxyl® K 400) is an important contact allergen in the Netherlands in cosmetics and moistened toilet tissues. It should be added to cosmetics series and to proctological series. The optimal test concentration is unknow, but may be 0.3% pet. The concentration o f 0.1% methyldi bromoglutaronitrile in the currently available commercial allergens appears to be too low, resulting in a number of false-negative reactions.

Contact allergy epidemics and their controls*

“…Since then, allergic contact dermatitis has been reported from MDBGN in different products such as soap, cleansing milk, shampoos, moisturizers, ultrasonic gel, moistened toilet paper, sunscreen lotion, detergents, and eye gel. de Groot et al showed an increase in the frequency of positive test reactions to MDBGN in the Netherlands from 0.5% in 1991 to 4% in 1994 (79). Similarly, the levels of patch test sensitivity to MDBGN increased from 0.7% in 1991 to 3.5% in 2000 in a European multicentre analysis (57).…”

Contact Allergy to Preservatives—Is the European Commission a Commendable Risk Manager?

“…Later, the local lymph node assay (LLNA) and cumulative contact enhancement test showed that multiple topical applications of methyldibromo glutaronitrile resulted in sensitization [26]. Surveillance data showed in the late 1990s that the prevalence of contact allergy to methyldibromo glutaronitrile increased as its use gradually became more widespread in European cosmetic products and toiletries [5,9,[27][28][29]. The prevalence of contact allergy to methyldibromo glutaronitrile in Europe increased from 0.7% in 1991 to 3.5% in 2000 in consecutive patch-tested patients with contact dermatitis [9].…”

Methyldibromoglutaronitrile: An Increasingly Important Allergen in the UK

“…However, this prevalence increased in 1994 [22] to 4% in a multicentre investigation of 2,943 patients tested with MDBGN 0.05%, 0.1% and 0.3% pet., soy lecithin 5% being added to obtain homogeneous dispersions.…”

“…They had repeatedly used moistened toilet tissue, this habit presumably being the cause of their sensitisation. In 1994, De Groot et al [22] reviewed 2,943 patients suspected of having contact dermatitis and patch tested with MDBGN. Approximately one third (30 patients) of the relevant positive patch tests (84 patients) had moistened toilet tissue as their cause.…”

“…In 1994, the Dutch Contact Dermatitis Group [22] performed a multicentre investigation of 2,943 patients and tested with MDBGN 0.3, 0.1 and 0.05% pet. They concluded that test concentrations equal to and less than 0.1% resulted in false-negative results and proposed that the optimal test concentration for MDBGN may be 0.3-0.5%.…”