The sesquiterpene lactone mix: A review of past, present and future aspects

The sesquiterpene lactones (SLs) are secondary plant metabolites, which are widespread in the Compositae/Asteraceae plant family. The first SLs were detected more than 100 years ago, and allergic contact dermatitis from Compositae has been reported since the beginning of the 1900s, but it was not until the late 1960s and early 1970s that a collaboration between dermatologists, chemists and botanists led to the detection of SLs as the main allergens of Compositae plants. In the 1980s, the SL mix, consisting of equimolar amounts of alantolactone, costunolide and dehydrocostus lactone, was developed as a screening agent for Compositae sensitisation. Today, after inclusion of SL mix in the baseline series, the mean prevalence of reactions in Europe is around 1%, and in North America 0.8%. In countries outside Europe and North America, the prevalence ranges between 0% and 10.7%. The detection rate of SL mix is lower than that of some plant extracts, and ideally, SL mix should be supplemented with a mix of SLs from locally prevalent allergenic plants. The prevalence of positive reactions to SL mix suggests continued baseline testing in most European countries, North America, New Zealand, Australia and probably some Chinese centres.

Systematic review on skin adverse effects of important hazardous hair cosmetic ingredients with a focus on hairdressers

BACKGROUND

The burden of occupational hand eczema in hairdressers is high, and (partly strong) allergens abound in the hair cosmetic products they use.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review published evidence concerning contact allergy to an indicative list of active ingredients of hair cosmetics, namely, p-phenylenediamine (PPD), toluene-2,5-diamine (PTD), persulfates, mostly ammonium persulfate (APS), glyceryl thioglycolate (GMTG), and ammonium thioglycolate (ATG), concerning the prevalence of sensitization, particularly in terms of a comparison (relative risk; RR) between hairdressers and non-hairdressers.

METHODS

Following a PROSPERO-registered and published protocol, eligible literature published from 2000 to February 2021 was identified, yielding 322 publications, and extracted in standardized publication record forms, also considering risk of bias.

RESULTS

Based on 141 publications, the contact allergy prevalence to PPD was 4.3% (95% CI: 3.8-4.9%) in consecutively patch tested patients. Other ingredients were mostly tested in an aimed fashion, yielding variable, and partly high contact allergy prevalences. Where possible, the RR was calculated, yielding an average increased sensitization risk in hairdressers of between 5.4 (PPD) and 3.4 (ATG). Additional evidence related to immediate-type hypersensitivity, experimental results, exposures, and information from case reports was qualitatively synthesized.

CONCLUSIONS

An excess risk of contact allergy is clearly evident from the pooled published evidence from the last 20 years. This should prompt an improvement in working conditions and product safety.

A perspective on the safety of parabens as preservatives in wound care products

Antimicrobial and/or preservative ingredients incorporated in wound care products are subjected to certain safety restrictions. However, several of those agents, and paraben preservatives in particular, have been criticised. Conflicting reports on the potential of parabens to induce allergic contact dermatitis, and their assumed oestrogen‐like activity, raised public health concerns about their overall safety. Here, we seek to provide a balanced perspective on the most significant purported adverse health effects, and thereby allay the many misconceptions regarding the safety of parabens. Extensive and long‐term monitoring of paraben allergy frequencies illustrate that allergic reactions are quite uncommon, especially when compared with other antimicrobial and preservative agents. The estrogenic potential of parabens was illustrated to be far less potent than that of natural oestrogen receptor ligands, and the etiological significance of their presence in human tissue has not been established. The general consensus based on investigations by both the scientific community and regulatory agencies indicates that, with current safety regulations regarding their use in place, this effective and well‐documented group of preservatives should not warrant drastic measures to replace them. As such, despite the ongoing concern, it is indicated that, when used at typical concentrations, parabens are unlikely to affect human health.

Utilization, cost, and provider trends in patch testing among Medicare beneficiaries in the United States from 2012 to 2017

BACKGROUND

Patch testing is the best diagnostic test for allergic contact dermatitis. However, there is presently a lack of data on the test's geographic availability and the characteristics of the providers offering this test across the United States.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the geographic variation in the availability of patch testing for the Medicare population and to characterize the temporal trends of patch testing cost, use, and provider specialty from 2012 to 2017.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of the Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data from 2012 to 2017.

RESULTS

As of 2017, patch testing was available in 20.3% of metropolitan counties and in 1.1% of nonmetropolitan counties. From 2012 to 2017 in metropolitan regions, the number of beneficiaries tested by dermatologists grew by an average annual growth rate of 1.84%, whereas those tested by allergists grew by an average annual growth rate of 20.31%. Most providers that averaged use of 80 or more patches per beneficiary were dermatologists (76.3%).

LIMITATIONS

Analysis was restricted to Medicare Part B claims; data were unavailable on individuals with commercial insurance.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the increase in patch testing utilization from 2012 to 2017 has been in metropolitan regions. Although growth was especially prominent among allergists in metropolitan counties, the majority of providers performing comprehensive patch testing were dermatologists.