Amended Final Report of the Safety Assessment of Cocamidopropylamine Oxide1

2008 ◽  
Vol 27 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 55-62 ◽  

Cocamidopropylamine Oxide is a tertiary amine oxide which functions as a hair-conditioning agent and as a surfactant, currently used in 60 cosmetic formulations at concentrations between 0.07% and 4.0%. In an earlier safety assessment, the Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel had determined that the available data were insufficient to support the safety of this ingredient in cosmetic products. Additional data have now been provided and reviewed. Cocamidopropylamine Oxide was determined to have an acute oral LD50 between 500 and 1000 mg/kg day-1 using rats. The acute dermal LD50 in rats was >2174 mg/kg day-1 . A 28-day repeated oral dose toxicity study in rats found hemolytic anemia at 150 and 1000 mg/kg day-1, with a no observed effect level (NOEL) of 15 mg/kg day-1 . At 5%, Cocamidopropylamine Oxide solution was not a primary dermal irritant. Application of 81.5% Cocamidopropylamine Oxide to rabbit skin caused moderate irritation under Draize classification scale, but 81.5% Cocamidopropylamine Oxide in rabbit eyes caused severe irritation. A maximization study classified Cocamidopropylamine Oxide as a nonsensitizer to guinea pig skin. Cocamidopropylamine Oxide was not mutagenic in an Ames test, with and without metabolic activation. No evidence of increased chromosomal aberrations were noted in human lymphocytes treated with 81.5% Cocamidopropylamine Oxide. In a clinical study, 7.5% Cocamidopropylamine Oxide was not a sensitizer, although it did produce some reactions typical of mild irritation. Although the impurities, amidoamine and dimethylaminopropylamine, have been implicated in contact allergy reactions to products containing cocamidopropylamine betaine, clinical testing of a product with cocamidopropylamine betaine containing these impurities, at levels comparable to those found in Cocamidopropylamine Oxide, failed to produce a reaction in 10 individuals known to be sensitive to cocamidopropylamine betaine. Two repeat-insult patch tests using a facial wash with 1% raw material containing 35% to 36.5% Cocamidopropylamine Oxide did not find evidence of dermal sensitization. Tests for dermal phototoxicity and photoallergenicity with the same facial wash product also did not produce evidence of effect. The CIR Expert Panel recognizes that there are data gaps regarding the use and concentration of this ingredient. However, the overall information available on types of products in which this ingredient is used and at what concentration indicate a pattern of use, which was considered by the Expert Panel in assessing safety. Overall, these data demonstrate that Cocamidopropylamine Oxide has low toxicity in animal and in vitro tests. Although there are no available carcinogenicity data, the available genotoxicity data, combined with the absence of any structural alerts, suggest no carcinogenic potential. The Panel noted the absence of reproductive and developmental toxicity data. Because this ingredient has a highly polarized molecular structure, the Panel considered that it would be, at most, slowly absorbed. Given that most of the uses and the highest use concentration of 4% is found in rinse-off products, the Panel determined that the available data suggest that Cocamidopropylamine Oxide is safe as used in rinse-off products. Although dermal penetration may be slow, data on the extent of dermal penetration of Cocamidopropylamine Oxide are needed to support the safety of leave-on uses. If there is significant dermal absorption, dermal reproductive and developmental toxicity data may be needed.

2015 ◽  
Vol 34 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 70S-83S
Author(s):  
Wilbur Johnson ◽  
Bart Heldreth ◽  
Wilma F. Bergfeld ◽  
Donald V. Belsito ◽  
Ronald A. Hill ◽  
...  

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel (Panel) reviewed the safety of alkyl polyethylene glycol (PEG) sulfosuccinates, which function in cosmetics mostly as surfactants/cleansing agents. Although these ingredients may cause ocular and skin irritation, dermal penetration is unlikely because of the substantial polarity and molecular size of these ingredients. The Panel considered the negative oral carcinogenicity and reproductive and developmental toxicity data on chemically related laureths (PEG lauryl ethers) and negative repeated dose toxicity and skin sensitization data on disodium laureth sulfosuccinate supported the safety of these alkyl PEG sulfosuccinates in cosmetic products, but. The CIR Expert Panel concluded that the alkyl PEG sulfosuccinates are safe in the present practices of use and concentration when formulated to be nonirritating.


2010 ◽  
Vol 29 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 288S-305S ◽  
Author(s):  
Lillian C. Becker ◽  
Wilma F. Bergfeld ◽  
Donald V. Belsito ◽  
Ronald A. Hill ◽  
Curtis D. Klaassen ◽  
...  

Sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate is one of a group of salts of alkylbenzene sulfonates used in cosmetics as surfactant-cleansing agents. Sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate is soluble in water and partially soluble in alcohol, with dermal absorption dependent on pH. Dodecylbenzenesulfonate salts are not toxic in single-dose oral and dermal animal tests, and no systemic toxicities were observed in repeat-dose dermal animal studies. In dermal animal studies, no evidence of reproductive or developmental toxicity was reported. At 15% concentrations, sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate was severely irritating to rabbit skin. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel concluded that the irritant properties of these ingredients are similar to those of other detergents, with severity dependent on concentration and pH. Products containing these ingredients should be formulated to ensure that the irritancy potential is minimized.


2007 ◽  
Vol 26 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 79-88 ◽  

Hexamidine Diisethionate functions as a biocide in cosmetics at concentrations of 0.03% to 0.1% in 38 cosmetic products. Hexamidine functions as a biocide and preservative in cosmetics, but is not in current use in cosmetics, but it is used in over-the-counter (OTC) drug products. Hexamidine was poorly absorbed by human cadaver skin when in water-oil formulations or in a gel that simulated a cosmetic product formulation. Hexamidine Diisethionate was poorly absorbed by the skin of live rats and was not stored in any tissue type. Hexamidine Diisethionate given to rats intravenously was rapidly metabolized to Hexamidine. Excretion was primarily via the feces, with a small amount excreted in the urine. Acute oral LD50 values of Hexamidine Diisethionate were 0.71 to 2.5 g/kg in mice and 0.75 g/kg in rats. Dermal exposure to 4 g/kg Hexamidine Diisethionate in rats or up to 9.4 ml/kg of a 0.1% Hexamidine Diisethionate solution under occlusion in rabbits produced no mortality or other signs of toxicity. The no-observed-effect level (NOEL) for oral subchronic toxicity of Hexamidine Diisethionate in rats was 50 mg/kg/day. No signs of toxicity were observed with 2% Hexamidine Diisethionate in subchronic studies using rabbits. Application of 0.1 ml of 0.11% Hexamidine Diisethionate in aqueous solution to the eyes of rabbits produced transient reactions; 0.05% produced no reactions. Slight erythema was observed with 0.10% Hexamidine Diisethionate applied to the abraded skin of 1/11 albino rabbits. A 40% solution of Hexamidine Diisethionate applied to 10% of the body surface of rats produced slight erythema, slight edema, and scabbing in some animals at varying times after treatment. Hexamidine Diisethionate was not a sensitizer in the guinea pig maximization test or in an intracutaneous guinea pig sensitization test. Hexamidine Diisethionate was not a photosensitizer in albino rabbits. Hexamidine Diisethionate was not mutagenic in a bacterial reverse mutagenicity assay or clastogenic in mammalian cells. Hexamidine Diisethionate at 0.10% did not provoke primary irritation, inflammation, or sensitization in a clinical test of 200 human subjects. One case report of photosensitivity to Hexamidine and one of contact sensitivity to Hexamidine were reported. There were nine case reports of contact sensitivity to Hexamidine Diisethionate. A European safety assessment recommended a limit of 0.1% Hexamidine Diisethionate in leave-on and rinse-off cosmetic products. In considering the available data, the Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel acknowledged the lack of carcinogenicity and reproductive/developmental toxicity data. Because genotoxicity studies were negative, and there were no structural alerts, the Panel concluded that it was unlikely that these ingredientswould be carcinogenic. Because the rate of absorption of Hexamidine and Hexamidine Diisethionate is slow, there is no tissue accumulation, and excretion is rapid and complete, and there was no toxicity in a subchronic study, the Panel concluded that dermal exposures would not likely present a risk of reproductive/ developmental toxicity. The Panel noted that a guinea pig maximization study using Hexamidine Diisethionate produced no dermal reactions and that a clinical test at 0.1% produced no irritation or sensitization. The Panel also expressed concern regarding the possible presence of 1,4-dioxane as an impurity, and stressed that the cosmetic industry should continue to use the necessary purification procedures to remove these impurities from the ingredient before blending into cosmetic formulations. The Panel noted that there are no data for concentration of use for eye makeup and baby products, and was concerned that there should not be unrestricted concentration levels in these product categories. Although there are gaps in knowledge about product use, the overall information available on the types of products in which these ingredients are used and at what concentration indicate a pattern of use. Within this overall pattern of use, the Expert Panel considers all ingredients in this group to be safe at concentrations up to and including 0.1%.


2010 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 187S-213S ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina L. Burnett ◽  
Wilma F. Bergfeld ◽  
Donald V. Belsito ◽  
Curtis D. Klaassen ◽  
James G. Marks ◽  
...  

Methylisothiazolinone (MIT) is a heterocyclic organic compound used as a preservative in cosmetics and personal care products in concentrations up to 0.01%. MIT is a colorless, clear liquid with a mild odor that is completely soluble in water; mostly soluble in acetonitrile, methanol, and hexane; and slightly soluble in xylene. Consistent with its solubility, dermal penetration is low. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel noted the in vitro evidence of neurotoxicity but concluded that the absence of any neurotoxicity findings in the many in vivo studies, including subchronic, chronic, and reproductive and developmental animal studies, suggests that MIT would not be neurotoxic as used in cosmetics. Although recognizing that MIT was a sensitizer in both animal and human studies, the panel concluded that there is a threshold dose response and that cosmetic products formulated to contain concentrations of MIT at 100 ppm (0.01%) or less would not be expected to pose a sensitization risk. Accordingly, MIT may be safely used as a preservative in cosmetics up to that concentration.


2010 ◽  
Vol 29 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 221S-243S ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Alan Andersen ◽  
Wilma F. Bergfeld ◽  
Donald V. Belsito ◽  
Ronald A. Hill ◽  
Curtis D. Klaassen ◽  
...  

Calendula officinalis extract, C officinalis flower, C officinalis flower extract, C officinalis flower oil, and C officinalis seed oil are cosmetic ingredients derived from C officinalis. These ingredients may contain minerals, carbohydrates, lipids, phenolic acids, flavonoids, tannins, coumarins, sterols and steroids, monoterpenes, sesquiterpenes, triterpenes, tocopherols, quinones, amino acids, and resins. These ingredients were not significantly toxic in single-dose oral studies using animals. The absence of reproductive/developmental toxicity was inferred from repeat-dose studies of coriander oil, with a similar composition. Overall, these ingredients were not genotoxic. They also were not irritating, sensitizing, or photosensitizing in animal or clinical tests but may be mild ocular irritants. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel concluded that these ingredients are safe for use in cosmetics in the practices of use and concentration given in this amended safety assessment.


2010 ◽  
Vol 29 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 244S-273S ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina L. Burnett ◽  
Wilma F. Bergfeld ◽  
Donald V. Belsito ◽  
Ronald A. Hill ◽  
Curtis D. Klaassen ◽  
...  

Kojic acid functions as an antioxidant in cosmetic products. Kojic acid was not a toxicant in acute, chronic, reproductive, and genotoxicity studies. While some animal data suggested tumor promotion and weak carcinogenicity, kojic acid is slowly absorbed into the circulation from human skin and likely would not reach the threshold at which these effects were seen. The available human sensitization data supported the safety of kojic acid at a use concentration of 2% in leave-on cosmetics. Kojic acid depigmented black guinea pig skin at a concentration of 4%, but this effect was not seen at 1%. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel concluded that the 2 end points of concern, dermal sensitization and skin lightening, would not be seen at use concentrations below 1%; therefore, this ingredient is safe for use in cosmetic products up to that level.


2003 ◽  
Vol 22 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1-10

Triacetin, also known as Glyceryl Triacetate, is reported to function as a cosmetic biocide, plasticizer, and solvent in cosmetic formulations, at concentrations ranging from 0.8% to 4.0%. It is a commonly used carrier for flavors and fragrances. Triacetin was affirmed as a generally recognized as safe (GRAS) human food ingredient by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Triacetin was not toxic to animals in acute oral or dermal exposures, nor was it toxic in short-term inhalation or parenteral studies, and subchronic feeding and inhalation studies. Triacetin was, at most, slightly irritating to guinea pig skin. However, in one study, it caused erythema, slight edema, alopecia, and desquamation, and did cause some irritation in rabbit eyes. Triacetin was not sensitizing in guinea pigs. Triacetin was not an irritant or a sensitizer in a clinical maximization study, and only very mild reactions were seen in a Duhring-chamber test using a 50% dilution. In humans, Triacetin reportedly has caused ocular irritation but no injury. Triacetin was not mutagenic. Although there were no available reproductive and developmental toxicity data, Triacetin was quickly metabolized to glycerol and acetic acid and these chemicals were not developmental toxins. Reports of 1,2-glyceryl diesters, which may be present in Triacetin, affecting cell growth and proliferation raised the possibility of hyperplasia and/or tumor promotion. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel concluded, however, that the effects of 1,2-glyceryl diesters on cell growth and proliferation require longer ester chains on the glycerin backbone than are present when acetic acid is esterified with glycerin, as in Triacetin. On the basis of the available information, the CIR Expert Panel concluded that Triacetin is safe as used in cosmetic formulations.


2003 ◽  
Vol 22 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10-35

Dimethicone is a fluid mixture of fully methylated linear siloxane polymers end-blocked with trimethylsiloxy units. Methicone is a linear monomethyl polysiloxane. The other dimethicones and methicones covered in this review are siloxane polymers of Dimethicone and Methicone. Most of these ingredients function as conditioning agents in cosmetic formulations at current concentrations of use of ≤ 15%. Clinical and animal absorption studies reported that Dimethicone was not absorbed following oral or dermal exposure. Dimethicone, Methicone, and Vinyldimethicone were not acutely toxic following oral exposure. No adverse reactions were found in rabbits following short-term dermal dosing with 6% to 79% Dimethicone, yet adverse effects were noted with a hand cream formulation containing 1% Dimethicone, suggesting something else in the preparation was toxic. Mice and rats were dosed for 90 days with up to 10% Dimethicone without adverse effect. Dimethicone did not produce adverse effects in acute and short-term inhalation-route studies, Methicone and Vinyldimethicone were negative in acute exposure studies using rats, but Hexyl Methicone was toxic to rats at 5 mg/L delivered in small particle (mean diameter of 0.29 μ) aerosols. Most dermal irritation studies using rabbits classified Dimethicone as a minimal irritant. Dimethicone (tested undiluted and at 79%) was not a sensitizer in four assays using mice and guinea pigs. It was not a sensitizer at 5.0% in a clinical repeated insult patch test using 83 panelists. Most ocular irritation studies using rabbits classified Dimethicone as a mild to minimal irritant. Dimethicone was tested in numerous oral-dose (using rats) and dermal-dose (using rats, rabbits, and monkeys) reproductive and developmental toxicity studies. In a few studies, treated males had significantly decreased body weight and/or decreased testes or seminal vesicles weights. No treatment-related adverse findings were noted in dosed pregnant females or fetuses. Dimethicone was negative in all genotoxicity assays. It was negative in both an oral (tested at 91%) and dermal (tested at an unknown concentration) dose carcinogenicity assay using mice. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel considered it unlikely that any of these polymers would be significantly absorbed into the skin due to their large molecular weight. Although adverse effects were noted in one inhalation study with small aerosol particles, the expected particle sizes for cosmetic products would primarily be in the range of 60 to 80 μ, and less than 1% would be under 10 μ, which is an upper limit for respirable particles. Overall, the safety test data support the safety of these ingredients at the concentrations they are known to be used in cosmetic formulations. Accordingly, the CIR Expert Panel was of the opinion that Stearoxy Dimethicone, Dimethicone, Methicone, Amino Bis-propyl Dimethicone, Aminopropyl Dimethicone, Amodimethicone, Amodimethicone Hydroxystearate, Behenoxy Dimethicone, C24–28 Alkyl Methicone, C30–45 Alkyl Methicone, C30–45 Alkyl Dimethicone, Cetearyl Methicone, Cetyl Dimethicone, Dimethoxysilyl Ethylenediaminopropyl Dimethicone, Hexyl Methicone, Hydroxypropyldimethicone, Stearamidopropyl Dimethicone, Stearyl Dimethicone, Stearyl Methicone, and Vinyldimethicone are safe as used in cosmetic formulations.


2001 ◽  
Vol 20 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 99-102 ◽  

Cetethyl Morpholinium Ethosulfate is a quaternary salt used as an antistatic agent and as a surfactant in several hair care products. The concentration at which this ingredient is used is unknown, although data reported in 1984 indicated a maximum concentration of 1%. In an inhalation toxicity study, the approximate lethal concentration of Cetethyl Morpholinium Ethosulfate was 0.403 mg/mm3. This ingredient was shown to be a severe ocular irritant in an animal study. No other safety test data on this ingredient were available. These data were clearly insufficient to support the safety of Cetethyl Morpholinium Ethosulfate in cosmetics. Data available on Morpholine were summarized, but these data themselves were insufficient to support safety. The data needed in order to complete the safety assessment of Cetethyl Morpholinium Ethosulfate include: methods of manufacture and impurities, especially nitrosamines; current concentration of use; skin penetration; if there is significant skin penetration, then both a 28-day dermal toxicity study to assess general skin and systemic toxicity and a reproductive and developmental toxicity study are needed; two genotoxicity studies, at least one in a mammalian system, if positive, then a 2-year dermal carcinogenisis study using National Toxicology Program (NTP) methods may be needed; ultraviolet (UV) absorption data, if significantly absorbed, then photosensitization data are needed; dermal irritation and sensitization; and ocular toxicity, if available.


2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 47S-53S ◽  
Author(s):  
Wilbur Johnson ◽  
Bart Heldreth ◽  
Wilma F. Bergfeld ◽  
Donald V. Belsito ◽  
Ronald A. Hill ◽  
...  

Polyquaternium-22 and polyquaternium-39 are polymers that function as antistatic agents, film formers, and hair fixatives in cosmetic products. These ingredients are being used at concentrations up to 2% (polyquaternium-22, in a rinse-off product) and up to 3% (polyquaternium-39, in rinse-off and leave-on products). The unreacted monomer content of these ingredients was considered low and of no toxicological concern. Limited data showed no skin irritation/sensitization. Although these ingredients were nongenotoxic in bacterial assays, mammalian genotoxicity, carcinogenicity, and reproductive and developmental toxicity data were not available. These polymers, however, are large, highly polar molecules that would likely not be absorbed, and neither local effects in the respiratory tract nor systemic toxicity are expected following product application/exposure. The Expert Panel concluded that polyquaternium-22 and polyquaternium-39 are safe in the present practices of use and concentration in cosmetic formulations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document