“When Should A Substance Be Designated As Sensitizing For The Skin (“Sh”) Or For The Airways (“Sa”)"?”

Schnuch, Axel; Lessmann, Holger; Kh, Schulz; Becker, David J.; Diepgen, T.L.; Drexler, Hans; Erdmann, Stephan; Fartasch, Manigé; Greim, Helmut; Kricke-Helling, P; Merget, R.; Merk, H.; Nowak, Dennis; Rothe, Andrea; Stropp, G.; Uter, Wolfgang; Wallenstein, G

doi:10.1055/s-2002-30696

“…10 5 ) have frequent skin exposure, but only a few cases are observed (43, 44). In such cases, the German MAK Commission refrains from designating compounds as ‘SH’ (indicating ‘skin sensitizer’) (45).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is cocamidopropyl betaine a contact allergen? Analysis of network data and short review of the literature

Schnuch

¹

,

Lessmann

²

,

Geier

³

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite already existing limitations of use concentration, substances like oak moss or isoeugenol should be regulated (more) strictly by prohibition, further‐reconsidered concentration limits and/or health warnings (and not only labelling). Substances less noxious, taking high use volume related to rare cases of proven contact allergy into account, like geraniol, could be treated less restrictively (74). Certainly, allergy to fragrances in general will remain a continuous challenge to dermatologists, the regulatory institutions and the cosmetics industry.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contact allergy to fragrances: frequencies of sensitization from 1996 to 2002. Results of the IVDK*

Schnuch

¹

,

Lessmann

²

,

Geier

³

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing frequencies of sensitization to the fragrance mix (FM) have been acknowledged as a serious problem for many years. It is well known that the single compounds (SCs) of the FM contribute differently to the FM patch rest reactions. In this study, we were interested in the time trends of the FM, the SCs, Myroxylon pereirae resin (MP; balsam of Peru) and oil of turpentine (OT) as possible further indicators of perfume allergy and analysed the data collected by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology multicentre project from 1996 to 2002. During the study period (1996-2002), the FM [8% petrolatum (pet.)], MP (25% pet.) and OT (1% pet.) were tested in 59,298, 59,334 and 59,478 patients, respectively. SCs were tested in a selected group of patients, ranging from n = 1083 to n = 1924 per year. A significant increase in the proportions of patients with positive reactions to FM, MP and OT between 1996 and 1998 is noted, and a significant decline from 1999 to 2002 (Cochrane Armitage trend test, P < 0.0001). The highest frequency of sensitization to the FM was 13.1% in 1999, and the lowest 7.8% in 2002. The number of concomitant reactions to OT, a surrogate marker for terpenes, in FM-positive patients was significantly increased between 1997 and 1999. Reactions to SCs in FM-positive patients were observed in 29.9% (oak moss absolute) to 5.9% (geraniol). There was no time trend in reactions to SCs, although the relative share was increased for isoeugenol, cinnamic aldehyde and geraniol in 1999. In summary, we report for the first time, a significant decline in sensitization to the FM, very probably due to a reduced exposure (less potent allergens used in fine fragrances, possibly less use of natural ingredient-based cosmetics and lowered use concentration of important fragrance allergens). The differences in ranking of SCs could stimulate (a) a redefinition of the FM and (b) a differentiated preventive and regulatory approach, with oak moss and isoeugenol being regulated strictly by prohibition, concentration limits further reconsidered and/or health warnings and clearly less noxious substances like geraniol treated less restrictively.

show abstract

“…In order to make the procedure of classification of substances in the List of MAK and BAT Values (i) more rational, (ii) more consistent, (iii) more comprehensible, and also (iv) more transparent for outsiders, criteria for the designation of a substance with 'Sh' and 'Sa' have been elaborated, published, and discussed (110)(111)(112). The working group considered it necessary to differentiate between (1) the quality of the evidence for allergenicity of a substance (resulting in graded levels of evidence sufficient or not sufficient for designation) and (2) the algorithm used to decide whether or not a substance is designated as an allergen.…”

Section: Maximale Arbeitsplatz Konzentration (Mak) Commissionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to make the procedure of classification of substances in the List of MAK and BAT Values (i) more rational, (ii) more consistent, (iii) more comprehensible, and also (iv) more transparent for outsiders, criteria for the designation of a substance with ‘Sh’ and ‘Sa’ have been elaborated, published, and discussed (110–112). The working group considered it necessary to differentiate between…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The critical review of methodologies and approaches to assess the inherent skin sensitization potential (skin allergies) of chemicals Part II

Thyssen

¹

,

Giménez‐Arnau

²

,

Lepoittevin

³

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“When Should A Substance Be Designated As Sensitizing For The Skin (“Sh”) Or For The Airways (“Sa”)"?”

Cited by 9 publications

References 3 publications

Is cocamidopropyl betaine a contact allergen? Analysis of network data and short review of the literature

Is cocamidopropyl betaine a contact allergen? Analysis of network data and short review of the literature

Contact allergy to fragrances: frequencies of sensitization from 1996 to 2002. Results of the IVDK*

The critical review of methodologies and approaches to assess the inherent skin sensitization potential (skin allergies) of chemicals Part II

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About