scholarly journals Contact Allergy to Fragrances: In Vitro Opportunities for Safety Assessment

Cosmetics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuela Corsini ◽  
Valentina Galbiati
Keyword(s):  
Safety Assessment ◽  
Contact Allergy ◽  
Hazard Identification ◽  
Quantitative Risk Assessment ◽  
Cosmetic Products ◽  
Animal Testing ◽  
Cosmetic Ingredients ◽  
Substantial Progress ◽  
Allergic Contact

The majority of cosmetic products contain fragrances to make products more pleasant to the consumer, as we all like goods that smell nice. Unfortunately, contact allergy to fragrance compounds is among the most frequent findings in patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis. In order to revert this and to reduce contact allergy to cosmetics, it is imperative to improve safety assessment of cosmetic products for skin sensitization. In the era of animal ban for cosmetic ingredients, this represents a challenge. Luckily, in the last decades, substantial progress has been made in the understanding of the mechanism of chemical-induced contact allergy and several in vitro methods are available for hazard identification. The purpose of this manuscript is to explore the possibility of non-animal testing for quantitative risk assessment of fragrance-induced contact allergy, essential for cosmetic products, which cannot be tested on animals.

5 Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Propylene Glycol Stearate and Propylene Glycol Stearate Self-Emulsifying

1983 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
pp. 101-124 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Propylene Glycol ◽  
Safety Assessment ◽  
Animal Studies ◽  
Skin Irritation ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Cosmetic Products ◽  
Dermal Toxicity ◽  
Cosmetic Ingredients ◽  
Available Information

Propylene Glycol Stearates (PGS) are a mixture of the mono- and diesters of triple-pressed stearic acid and propylene glycol and are used in a wide variety of cosmetic products. Studies with 14C-labeled PGS show that it is readily metabolized following ingestion. In rats, the acute oral LD50 has been shown to be approximately 25.8 g/kg. The raw ingredient produced no significant dermal toxicity, skin irritation, or eye irritation in acute tests with rabbits. Subchronic animal studies produced no evidence of oral or dermal toxicity. Propylene glycol monostea-rate was negative in in vitro microbial assays for mutagenicity. In clinical studies, PGS produced no significant skin irritation at concentrations up to 55% nor skin sensitization on formulations containing 2.5%. Photo-contact allergenicity tests on product formulations containing 1.5% PGS were negative. From the available information, it is concluded that Propylene Glycol Stearates are safe as cosmetic ingredients in the present practices of use.

scholarly journals Safety Assessment of Fatty Acid Amidopropyl Dimethylamines as Used in Cosmetics

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 39S-69S ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina L. Burnett ◽  
Ivan Boyer ◽  
Wilma F. Bergfeld ◽  
Donald V. Belsito ◽  
Ronald A. Hill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Fatty Acid ◽  
Safety Assessment ◽  
Expert Panel ◽  
Quantitative Risk Assessment ◽  
Cosmetic Products ◽  
Human Data ◽  
Cosmetic Ingredients

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel (Panel) reviewed the safety of fatty acid amidopropyl dimethylamines, which function primarily as antistatic agents in cosmetic products. The relevant animal and human data reviewed for these ingredients indicate that they are potential dermal sensitizers that may be due in part by the sensitizing impurity, 3,3-dimethylaminopropylamine. The Panel concluded that fatty acid amidopropyl dimethylamines were safe as cosmetic ingredients when they are formulated to be nonsensitizing, which may be based on a quantitative risk assessment.

2: Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Retinyl Palmitate and Retinol

1987 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 279-320 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Vitamin A ◽  
Safety Assessment ◽  
Retinyl Palmitate ◽  
In Vitro Tests ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Cosmetic Products ◽  
High Intake ◽  
Naturally Occurring ◽  
Cosmetic Ingredients

Retinol is the naturally occurring form of vitamin A; Retinyl Palmitate is the ester of Retinol and Palmitic Acid. In acute oral studies, Retinol was slightly toxic to mice, and Retinyl Palmitate was practically nontoxic in mice and rats. Large single doses can be lethal. It is recognized that Retinol is essential for reproduction; however, high intake of Retinol has produced adverse effects on several reproductive functions. Vitamin A was nonmutagenic in several in vitro tests. There is no evidence that vitamin A is carcinogenic. However, the vitamin has both enhanced and inhibited responses to viral or chemical carcinogens. Cosmetic products containing 0.1-1% Retinyl Palmitate were, at most, slightly irritating and nonsensitizing when tested on a total of 607 subjects. Results of cumulative irritation tests of two products containing 0.1% Retinyl Palmitate indicated that the products were nonirritating and non-sensitizing. On the basis of the available animal and clinical data presented in this report, it is concluded that Retinyl Palmitate and Retinol are safe as cosmetic ingredients in the present practices of use and concentration.

Reduction, Refinement and Replacement: Putting the Immune System to Work

2002 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 571-578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Kimber
Keyword(s):  
Safety Assessment ◽  
Hazard Identification ◽  
Contact Allergens ◽  
Toxicological Evaluation ◽  
Local Lymph Node Assay ◽  
Skin Sensitisation ◽  
Local Lymph Node ◽  
Allergic Contact ◽  
Made In

Many chemicals are known to be, or have been implicated as, contact allergens, and allergic contact dermatitis is an important occupational and environmental health issue. It is the responsibility of toxicologists to identify those chemicals that have the potential to induce skin sensitisation, and to assess the conditions under which there will exist a risk to human health. This article describes progress that has been made in the development of new approaches to the toxicological evaluation of skin sensitisation, and the benefits to animal welfare that such developments have already produced, and are likely to produce in the future. In this context, the local lymph node assay is described with regard to hazard identification and risk assessment, and possible strategies for the development of in vitro approaches to safety assessment are discussed.

3: Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Diisopropanolamine, Triisopropanolamine, Isopropanolamine, and Mixed Isopropanolamine

1987 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-76 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Contact Dermatitis ◽  
Oral Administration ◽  
Safety Assessment ◽  
Animal Studies ◽  
Water Soluble ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Cosmetic Products ◽  
Cosmetic Ingredients ◽  
Allergic Contact ◽  
Skin Irritants

Diisopropanolamine, Triisopropanolamine, Isopropanolamine, and Mixed Isopropanolamine are used as water-soluble emulsifiers and neutralizers in cosmetic products at concentrations up to 1%. In animal studies these ingredients were slightly toxic to practically nontoxic to rats and guinea pigs via acute oral administration. Triisopropanolamine was relatively nontoxic to rats in the two subchronic oral studies. These ingredients were moderate skin irritants for rabbits. All four ingredients, when tested at 100% concentrations, were severe ocular irritants in rabbits. Products containing small amounts (-1%) of Diisopropanolamine or Triisopropanolamine were not ocular irritants in rabbits. The Triisopropanolamine salt was not mutagenic in Aspergillus nidulans. Diisopropanolamine and Isopropanolamine at concentrations of 2% did not induce allergic contact dermatitis or photoallergic dermatitis in humans. Clinical studies on cosmetic products containing no more than 1% Diisopropanolamine or 1.1% Triisopropanolamine were minimal skin irritant and contact sensitizers. It is concluded that Diisopropanolamine, Triisopropanolamine, Isopropanolamine, and Mixed Isopropanolamine are safe as cosmetic ingredients in the present practices of use and concentration. The Isopropanolamines should not be used in products containing N-nitrosating agents.

Amended Safety Assessment of Methylchloroisothiazolinone and Methylisothiazolinone as Used in Cosmetics

2021 ◽  
Vol 40 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 20S-33S
Author(s):  
Christina L. Burnett ◽  
Wilma F. Bergfeld ◽  
Donald V. Belsito ◽  
Curtis D. Klaassen ◽  
Daniel C. Liebler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Safety Assessment ◽  
Expert Panel ◽  
Quantitative Risk Assessment ◽  
Cosmetic Products ◽  
Human Data

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reassessed the safety of the mixture Methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI)/Methylisothiazolinone (MI), which functions as a preservative in cosmetic products. The Panel reviewed relevant animal and human data provided in this safety assessment, and data from the previously published safety assessment of this mixture, and concluded that MCI/MI is safe in cosmetics when formulated to be nonsensitizing, based on the results of a quantitative risk assessment or similar methodology; however, at no point should concentrations exceed 7.5 ppm in leave-on products or 15 ppm in rinse-off products.

scholarly journals Final Amended Report on Safety Assessment on Aminomethyl Propanol and Aminomethyl Propanediol

2009 ◽  
Vol 28 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 141S-161S ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina L. Burnett ◽  
Wilma F. Bergfeld ◽  
Donald V. Belsito ◽  
Curtis D. Klaassen ◽  
James G. Marks ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Safety Assessment ◽  
Secondary Amines ◽  
Primary Amines ◽  
Inhalation Toxicity ◽  
Toxicity Data ◽  
Oral Toxicity ◽  
Dermal Irritation ◽  
Cosmetic Ingredients ◽  
Cosmetic Formulations ◽  
Allergic Contact

Aminomethyl propanol and aminomethyl propanediol are substituted aliphatic alcohols that function as pH adjusters in cosmetic products at concentrations less than 10%; additionally, aminomethyl propanediol is a fragrance. Extensive oral toxicity data are reviewed, with fewer inhalation toxicity data. Dermal toxicity data are presented that demonstrate, for example, that a mascara with 1.92% aminomethyl propanediol does not cause dermal irritation or allergic contact sensitization, suggesting that the maximum reported use concentration of 2% in mascara would be safe. Although these ingredients are primary amines that are not substrates for N-nitrosation, they may contain secondary amines as impurities in finished products that may undergo N-nitrosation. These ingredients should not be included in cosmetic formulations containing N-nitrosating agents. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel concludes that aminomethyl propanol and aminomethyl propanediol are safe as cosmetic ingredients in the practices of use and concentrations as described in this safety assessment.

4 Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Butyl Stearate, Cetyl Stearate, Isobutyl Stearate, Isocetyl Stearate, Isopropyl Stearate, Myristyl Stearate, and Octyl Stearate

1985 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 107-146 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Safety Assessment ◽  
Animal Studies ◽  
Health Effect ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Cosmetic Products ◽  
Oral Toxicity ◽  
Potential Health ◽  
Rabbit Skin ◽  
Cosmetic Ingredients ◽  
Cosmetic Formulations

The 7 Stearates described in this report are either oily liquids or waxy solids that are primarily used in cosmetics as skin emollients at concentrations up to 25 percent. The toxicology of the Stearates has been assessed in a number of animal studies. They have low acute oral toxicity and are essentially nonirritating to the rabbit eye when tested at and above use concentration. At cosmetic use concentrations the Stearates are, at most, minimally irritating to rabbit skin. In clinical studies the Stearates and cosmetic products containing them were at most minimally to mildly irritating to the human skin, essentially nonsensitizing, nonphototoxic and nonphotosensitizing. Comedogenicity is a potential health effect that should be considered when the Stearate ingredients are used in cosmetic formulations. On the basis of the information in this report, it is concluded that Butyl, Cetyl, Isobutyl, Isocetyl, Isopropyl, Myristyl, and Octyl Stearate are safe as cosmetic ingredients in the present practices of use.

Safety Assessment of Polyaminopropyl Biguanide (Polyhexamethylene Biguanide Hydrochloride) as Used in Cosmetics

2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 26S-73S
Author(s):  
Wilbur Johnson ◽  
Ivan Boyer ◽  
Jinqiu Zhu ◽  
Wilma F. Bergfeld ◽  
Donald V. Belsito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Safety Assessment ◽  
Expert Panel ◽  
Quantitative Risk Assessment ◽  
Cosmetic Products ◽  
Polyhexamethylene Biguanide

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of Polyaminopropyl Biguanide (polyhexamethylene biguanide hydrochloride), which functions as a preservative in cosmetic products. The Panel reviewed relevant data relating to the safety of this ingredient and concluded that Polyaminopropyl Biguanide is safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in the safety assessment, when formulated to be nonirritating and nonsensitizing, which may be based on a quantitative risk assessment or other accepted methodologies. The Panel also concluded that the data are insufficient to determine the safety of Polyaminopropyl Biguanide in products that may be incidentally inhaled.

Final Report of the Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel on the Safety Assessment of Cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB)

2012 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 77S-111S ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina L. Burnett ◽  
Wilma F. Bergfeld ◽  
Donald V. Belsito ◽  
Ronald A. Hill ◽  
Curtis D. Klaassen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Fatty Acid ◽  
Safety Assessment ◽  
Expert Panel ◽  
Quantitative Risk Assessment ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Significant Toxicity ◽  
Cosmetic Ingredients ◽  
Cocamidopropyl Betaine

Cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) and related amidopropyl betaines are zwitterions used mainly as surfactants in cosmetics. These cosmetic ingredients are similar in their chemistry, in particular with respect to the presence of 3,3-dimethylamino-propylamine (DMAPA) and fatty acid amidopropyl dimethylamine (amidoamine) impurities, which are known as sensitizers. The CIR Expert Panel concluded that because these ingredients present no other significant toxicity, when formulated to be nonsensitizing (which may be based on a quantitative risk assessment), these ingredients are safe for use as cosmetic ingredients in the practices of use and concentration of this safety assessment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document