4.5 Article

Contact sensitization to limonene and linalool hydroperoxides in Spain: a GEIDAC* prospective study

Journal

CONTACT DERMATITIS
Volume 76, Issue 2, Pages 74-80

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cod.12714

Keywords

allergic contact dermatitis; fragrance allergy; hydroperoxides; limonene; linalool

Funding

  1. Intendis-Bayer
  2. Uriach Pharma
  3. Novartis
  4. Genentech
  5. Menarini
  6. Glaxo Smith Kline
  7. Merck MSD
  8. Almirall Pharma

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Limonene and linalool are common fragrance terpenes widely used in cosmetic, household and hygiene products. Their primary oxidation products formedafter air exposure, the hydroperoxides, have been recognized as important contact haptens. Objectives. To investigate the prevalence of contact allergy to hydroperoxides of limonene (Lim-OOHs) and hydroperoxides of linalool (Lin-OOHs) in Spain, and to define the optimal concentration for screening in consecutive patients. Methods. Three different concentrations of Lim-OOHs (0.1%, 0.2% and 0.3% pet.) and Lin-OOHs (0.25%, 0.5% and 1.0% pet.) were simultaneously tested in 3639 consecutive patients at 22 departments of dermatology in Spain. Results. Lim-OOHs at 0.1%, 0.2% and 0.3% yielded positive patch test reactions in 1.4%, 3.4% and 5.1% of the tested patients, respectively; and Lin-OOHs at 0.25%, 0.5% and 1.0% yielded positive reactions in 1.3%, 2.9% and 4.9% of the tested patients, respectively. Few irritant (1.5-1.9%) and doubtful reactions (0.4-0.5%) to both terpene hydroperoxides were registered at the highest concentrations tested. Conclusions. Lim-OOHs and Lin-OOHs can be considered as common causes of contact allergy, and their inclusion in an extended baseline patch test series therefore seems to be appropriate. The patch test preparations of Lim-OOHs 0.3% pet. and Lin-OOHs 1.0% pet. are useful tools for screening of contact sensitization.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available