Contact allergy to cocamide DEA and lauramide DEA in shampoos

Identification of allergens in coconut milk and oil with patients sensitized to coconut milk in Sri Lanka

BACKGROUND

Despite the low prevalence of IgE sensitivity to fresh or boiled coconut milk and coconut oil, those may contain allergens of which the clinical significance remains undetermined. This study aimed to identify and compare allergens in fresh coconut milk (FCM), boiled coconut milk (BCM), unrefined wet-processed coconut oil (WPCO), and dry-processed coconut oil (DPCO) using sera from patients with allergy to coconut milk.

METHODS

The study included 18 patients with immediate hypersensitivity to coconut milk, including five who developed anaphylaxis. Sensitization was assessed by skin prick test and ImmunoCAPs using commercially available coconut extracts. Immunoblotting was performed to identify and compare allergen profiles.

RESULTS

Total sIgE levels and overall IgE reactivity of patients with anaphylaxis were higher compared to patients with allergy. Twelve allergens ranging from 5 to 128 kDa including six novel allergens with 5, 12, 47, 87, 110, and 128 kDa were visualized in immunoblots with FCM. Similarly, nine allergens of 5, 12, 17, 32, 35, 47, 87, 110, and 128 kDa were detected in BCM. One allergen (110 kDa) was discerned in all four extracts. Higher IgE prevalence was detected with three allergens of 55, 87, and 110 kDa.

CONCLUSIONS

Allergens of BCM and unrefined coconut oil (WPCO and DPCO) were determined for the first time. Novel allergens of 87 and 110 kDa and the 55 kDa allergen have the highest potential to be used in Component Resolved Diagnostics. Further, these findings demonstrate that, patients who have an allergy to coconut milk could also react to boiled coconut milk and unrefined coconut oil.

Amended Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Cocamide DEA

Cocamide DEA is a mixture of ethanolamides of Coconut Acid that is used as a surfactant-foam booster and viscosity-increasing agent-aqueous in cosmetic products. Production formulation data submitted to the Food and Drug Administration in 1994 indicated that this ingredient was used in 745 products. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel had previously evaluated the safety of Cocamide DEA, Lauramide DEA, Linoleamide DEA, and Oleamide DEA in cosmetics and concluded that they were safe as cosmetic ingredients at the concentrations that were currently being used (50%). CIR's decision to reevaluate the safety of Cocamide DEA in cosmetics is based on occupational studies indicating that this ingredient may have sensitization potential; however, the Expert Panel has determined that these studies are not relevant to cosmetic use. Furthermore, the Panel agreed that its original conclusion on Cocamide DEA should be clarified relative to use of this ingredient in rinse-off and leave-on products. Clarification of the original conclusion is based on the results of a skin irritation test in which 15 volunteers were tested with a surfactant solution containing 10% Cocamide DEA, the highest concentration tested in predictive patch tests. Additional comments that were made during the Panel's review of other data in the present report include that the severe ocular irritation reactions induced by a chemical (p H 9–10.5) containing >64% Cocamide DEA were likely a result of p H; that the renal effects noted in Fischer 344 rats in the National Toxicology Program (NTP) subchronic dermal toxicity study may be species-related and not test substance-related; and with reference to an ongoing NTP two-year chronic study that was initiated in 1993, that the results will be reviewed when the study is available. On the basis of the animal and clinical data presented in the present report, the Expert Panel concluded that Cocamide DEA is safe as used in rinse-off products and safe at concentrations 10% in leave-on cosmetic products. It was also concluded that Cocamide DEA should not be used as an ingredient in cosmetic products in which N-nitroso compounds are formed.

Adverse reactions to cosmetic ingredients

Numerous cosmetics are used on a daily basis by men, women, and children. Despite a few adverse reactions, cosmetics are a remarkably safe group of products.

Allergic contact dermatitis to cocamidopropylbetaine in hair shampoo

Allergic contact dermatitis to shampoo is rare. Report of a patient with widespread dermatitis caused by contact allergy to Kathon CG and cocamidopropylbetaine in shampoo used is presented.

Contact allergens in registered cleaning agents for industrial and household use

Cleaning work is a common cause of both irritant and allergic contact dermatitis. Cleaning agents for industrial and household use are registered in the Danish Product Register Data Base (PROBAS) according to a special notification rule issued by the Danish Environmental Protection Agency. About 2350 registered washing and cleaning agents containing about 1250 different chemical substances were marketed in Denmark in February 1992. The occurrence of 49 contact allergens in 16 different product types within washing and cleaning agents were listed. Preservatives and surface active agents made up the main part of contact allergens. Isothiazolinones and formaldehyde releasers were the most commonly registered preservatives, and coconut diethanolamide the most commonly registered surface active agent. The major product types registered as containing contact allergens were general cleaners, skin cleaners, hair shampoos, and floor polishes.

Occupational allergic contact dermatitis due to coconut diethanolamide (cocamide DEA)

Coconut diethanolamide (CDEA), manufactured from coconut oil, is widely used as a surface-active agent in hand gels, hand-washing liquids, shampoos and dish-washing liquids. CDEA has rarely caused allergic contact dermatitis. During 1985-1992, we investigated 6 patients with occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by CDEA. 2 became sensitized from a barrier cream, 3 from a hand-washing liquid, and 1 had been exposed both to a hand-washing liquid and to a metalworking fluid containing CDEA. Leave-on products (hand-protection foams) caused sensitization much more rapidly (2-3 months) than rinse-off products (hand-washing liquids; 5-7 years). Due to the extensive use of CDEA and the lack of proper declaration of products, it is difficult to avoid CDEA exposure. No contact allergy to another coconut-oil-derived sensitizer (cocamidopropyl betaine) was found in the patients.