Review Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2835-785X/042
Skin Sensitization Caused by Exposure to Cosmetic Products
- Nida Tabassum Khan *
- Rabia Abbas
Department of Biotechnology, Faculty of Life Sciences & Informatics, Balochistan University of Information Technology, Engineering and Management Sciences, Takatu Campus, Airport Road, Quetta, Balochistan, Pakistan.
*Corresponding Author: Nida Tabassum Khan, Department of Biotechnology, Faculty of Life Sciences & Informatics, Balochistan University of Information Technology, Engineering and Management Sciences, Takatu Campus, Airport Road, Quetta, Balochistan, Pakistan.
Citation: Nida T. Khan, and Rabia Abbas (2024), Skin Sensitization Caused by Exposure to Cosmetic Products, International Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. 3(3); DOI:10.31579/2835-785X/042
Copyright: © 2024, Nida Tabassum Khan. This is an open-access artic le distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 05 March 2024 | Accepted: 05 April 2024 | Published: 16 April 2024
Keywords: sensitizer; hypersensitive; allergies; safety evaluations; additives
Abstract
Hypersensitive/allergic skin responses, alluded to as skin sensitization, the clinical indication of which is called unfavorably susceptible contact dermatitis. The skin sensitization testing and risk evaluation is one of the basic evaluation processes aimed to improve the existing cosmetic/skin care products or explore new ones with less side effects. A fundamental component of the skin sensitization risk evaluation process is the assessment and comprehension of the connection between skin sensitization hazard, i.e.., the innate capability of an ingredient to cause unfavorably susceptible skin allergies. Beauty care products are substances used to upgrade the appearance of human face/body. They are for the most part combinations of diverse compounds, some being gotten from regular sources, many being synthetic including skin creams/lotions, lipsticks, nail paints, eye/face make-up, scents etc. Synthetic additives and fragrances are the fundamental fixings in beauty care products. Aromas are the most widely recognized reason for skin issues and additives in beauty care products are the second most normal reason for skin related allergies i.e. sensitization.
Introduction
Previously, hypersensitive responses to synthetics were frequently viewed as all-or-none reactions that lack dose–response relationships and threshold [1]. This can most likely be credited to the way that the primary contact (and frequently rehashed contacts) even with somewhat high percentage of a sensitizer slip through the cracks in light of the fact that no signs or side effects of sensitivity happen [2]. In any case, this contact can prompt sensitization of skin, which frequently happens without observable clinical signs and side effects [3]. Whenever sensitization happens resulting contact with a similar sensitizer — at times even at fixations a few significant degrees lower — will prompt side effects of hypersensitive contact dermatitis [4]. This shows the ordinary 'working way' of the particular immune system, the principal errand of which is to battle microbial contaminations [5]. The resistant reaction is described by a 'learning stage' without side effects trailed by the insusceptible reaction effector stage [6]. It is assessed that 1-5% of the populace is affected by skin sensitization to a cosmetic ingredient [7]. Around 80% of responses happen in patients matured 20-60 years and are seen all the more every now and again in women [8]. An epidemiologic study in the UK uncovered that 23% of women and 18.8% of men experience an unfavorable response to a personal care product [9]. Commonly utilized beauty care products like creams, foundations, sunscreens can cause hypersensitive contact dermatitis [10]. The desire to improve one's own body and look delightful has been a desire in humanity since the ancestral days. As a customer, we are continually drawn to utilizing magnificence and personal/beauty care items. Be that as it may, these items, which should cause us to feel great and look lovely, have a most unimaginable side. Different harmful fixings/ingredients and dangerous synthetic substances are utilized in beauty care products [11]. These synthetic substances might cause serious allergic impacts on skin and may likewise enter the skin and different organs causing carcinogenicity [12]. Beauty care products and skin care items, including sunscreens, often cause unfavorable responses, and are commonest single justification behind medical clinic references with hypersensitive contact dermatitis. It is assessed that 1-3% of the populace are susceptible to cosmetic induced allergies [13]. According to a study, 700 adverse responses happened during 1-year time span in 30,000 consumers [14]. Sunscreen is broadly recognized to safeguard against burn from the sun. In any case, there is some proof that sunscreen use can cause negative impact on skin because these products incorporate ingredients that causes hypersensitive responses, chemical disturbance, and senescence and might be carcinogenic [15]. The utilization of beauty care products among everyone these days is omnipresent, with an ever-increasing number of items being delivered and introduced at the market, along with their upgraded media openness. The greater part of these items contains entities that triggers skin sensitization [16]. Unfavorably susceptible contact dermatitis is a typical unfriendly response brought about by beauty care products and is progressively being noticed in 25%, of the patients [17]. Most creams sold in the market are a hazardous mixture of steroids, hydroquinone, and tretinoin, long-term usage may result in pigmentation, skin malignant growth, liver damage, mercury poisoning etc [18]. The worldwide beauty care products market was $460 billion out of 2014 and is supposed to reach $675 billion by 2020 at an expected development pace of 6.4?ch year [19]. This rising business sector requires ceaseless complex control, specifically, to screen harmful ingredients and microbial tainting (i.e., compound and organic pollution) [20]. Hazardous cosmetics pose a risk to consumers due to the presence of prohibited or restricted substances under the present in-force cosmetic laws. In addition, the contamination of cosmetic products is another risk for consumer’s health [21]. Cosmetics left on the skin are substantially more liable to cause unfavorably susceptible responses than wash off ingredients. Normal allergens incorporate aromas (e.g., hydroxyisohexyl-3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde, isoeugenol, and so on), additives (e.g., formaldehyde and formaldehyde-releasers, paraben esters, hair color synthetic compounds (e.g., p-phenylenediamine), and less regular allergens like lanolin and propylene glycol [22,23]. Formaldehyde is a universal synthetic in dental materials and is a well-known skin irritant and sensitizer causing contact dermatitis and prompt, anaphylactic responses in numerous users [24].
Discussion
Hazard Chemicals used in Formulation of Cosmetics
- BHA AND BHT: BHA (butylated hydroxyl anisole) and BHT (butylated hydroxyl toluene) are firmly related manufactured synthetic compounds utilized as additives in creams and lipsticks, among other Corrective BHA and BHT can cause unfavorably susceptible responses in the skin [25].
- Coal Tar Dyes: Coal tar is a comprised of numerous synthetic compounds from petrol. Colors derived from coal tar are utilized for the most part in beauty care products [26].
- DEA (Cocamide DEA and Laramide DEA): DEA containing products are utilized to make beauty care products smooth or foamy, or as a pH agent to reduce the sharpness of different agents. These synthetics may likewise cause gentle to direct skin /eye allergies [27].
- Parabens: For shielding beauty care products from microbial pollution, additives are utilized. The most normally involved additive in beauty care products are parabens. Around 75 to 90 percent of beauty care products contain parabens (commonly at exceptionally low levels). Parabens effectively pervade the skin and are associated with impeding chemical capability (endocrine disturbance) [28,29].
- Polyethylene Glycols (PEGs): Polyethylene glycols are generally utilized in creams as thickeners, solvents, conditioners etc. and is susceptible to contamination from 1, 4-dioxane which can cause irritation and systematic toxicity in damaged skin [30].
Photoallergic and susceptible contact dermatitis are instances of type hypersensitivity reactions IV responses that include White blood cell interceded insusceptible reactions against haptens that come into contact with the skin [31]. Dermatologists frequently see patients with contact dermatitis caused or deteriorated by superficial skin items [32]. Sufficient determination, treatment, and counsel are conceivable provided that the offending ingredients can be identified [33]. Beauty care products makers to list all fixings on their items; somewhere around 30 classes of synthetic compounds should be proclaimed on the mark [34]. Specialists, accordingly, frequently need to contact the makers of the beauty care products utilized by their patients, which typically takes time and now and again brings about bothersome defers in determination or no finding by any means [35]. After the allergens liable for the dermatitis have been recognized patients need exhortation on which items to stay away from and on those that can be utilized.
Cosmetic Regulatory Measures
All ingredients of beauty care products and toiletries should be recorded on the items or the bundle marks, or both [36]. Marking would then permit the patient to pick beauty care products that wouldn't incite repeats of hypersensitive dermatitis [37]. Marking could likewise help patients giving grievances irrelevant to beauty care products yet who were viewed as sensitive to synthetics that are utilized in skin items [38]. Moreover, it would permit the dermatological local area to recognize immediately new elements of beauty care products that cause issues [39]. The absence of information on the elements of beauty care products might defer the acknowledgment of possible allergens for a considerable length of time [40].
Safety requirements for cosmetic ingredients are listed in the “Notes of Guidance for the Testing of Cosmetic Ingredients and their Safety Evaluation” (SCCP, 2006) [41]. General safety requirement for a regulated cosmetic ingredient includes the following:
• Acute toxicity
• Dermal absorption/penetration
• Dermal irritation
• Genetic toxicity
• Human data
• Mucous membrane irritation
• Photo toxicity and photo genotoxicity
• Skin sensitization
• Sub-chronic toxicity
• Use and physical/chemical data [42-44].
A beauty company ought to showcase beauty items solely after guaranteeing that each ingredient and completed item has been validated for safety [45]. The decision that an ingredient has been substantiated for safety may be based on a finding by the Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel that such ingredient is safe for use [46]. Although adverse events that are both serious and unexpected are extremely rare for cosmetic products, a company should notify the Food and Drug Administration of any known serious and unexpected adverse event as a result of the use of any of its cosmetic products marketed [47]. Notwithstanding, the utilization of numerous substances is permitted inside specific limits, because of their harmfulness at higher concentrations [48]. Other significant perspectives ought to be considered as, for example, the chance of long-lasting impacts. Then again, different substances might prompt a few intense unfriendly incidental effects, for example contact dermatitis and hypersensitive responses [49]. Besides, the regular use and constant work of people to an extensive variety of individual consideration items and to various types of synthetic compounds, got from a few sources, may cause the purported "mixed impact" because of the synergistic communication of various substances and, likewise, the "added substance impact" due to the presence of similar ingredients or agents in numerous cosmetic items [50,51].
Conclusion
Skin sensitization bringing about unfavorably susceptible contact dermatitis addresses the most widely recognized appearance of immunotoxicity in people and is likewise viewed as one the most continuous occupational diseases influencing roughly 15-20% of everybody. A large number of synthetic substances have been embroiled in skin sensitization, which are comprehensively tracked down in the climate and in numerous family items, for instance, cleansers, cleansers and restorative items. Hence, the developing information on the physio pathological events prompted by skin sensitizers and associated with the advancement of ACD and other skin inflammatory illnesses is urgent, not just for the improvement of new remedial methodologies, yet additionally to lay out biomarkers that permit the separation among sensitizers and irritants.
References
- Martins, M. S., Ferreira, M. S., Almeida, I. F., & Sousa, E. (2022). Occurrence of allergens in cosmetics for sensitive skin. Cosmetics, 9(2), 32.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Dinkloh, A., Worm, M., Geier, J., Schnuch, A., & Wollenberg, A. (2015). Contact sensitization in patients with suspected cosmetic intolerance: results of the IVDK 2006–2011. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 29(6), 1071-1081.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Willis, C. M., Shaw, S., De Lacharriere, O., Baverel, M., Reiche, L., Jourdain, R., ... & Wilkinson, J. D. (2001). Sensitive skin: an epidemiological study. British Journal of Dermatology, 145(2), 258-263.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Drechsel, D. A., Towle, K. M., Fung, E. S., Novick, R. M., Paustenbach, D. J., & Monnot, A. D. (2018). Skin sensitization induction potential from daily exposure to fragrances in personal care products. Dermatitis, 29(6), 324-331.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Towle, K. M., Drechsel, D. A., Warshaw, E. M., Fung, E. S., Novick, R. M., Paustenbach, D. J., & Monnot, A. D. (2018). Risk assessment of the skin sensitization induction potential of Kathon CG in rinse-off and leave-on personal care and cosmetic products. Dermatitis, 29(3), 132-138.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Bialas, I., Zelent-Kraciuk, S., & Jurowski, K. (2023). The Skin Sensitisation of Cosmetic Ingredients: Review of Actual Regulatory Status. Toxics, 11(4), 392.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Gilmour, N., Kern, P. S., Alépée, N., Boislève, F., Bury, D., Clouet, E., ... & Klaric, M. (2020). Development of a next generation risk assessment framework for the evaluation of skin sensitisation of cosmetic ingredients. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 116, 104721.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Robinson, M. K., Gerberick, G. F., Ryan, C. A., McNamee, P., White, I. R., & Basketter, D. A. (2000). The importance of exposure estimation in the assessment of skin sensitization risk. Contact Dermatitis, 42(5), 251-259.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Bergal, M., Puginier, M., Gerbeix, C., Groux, H., Roso, A., Cottrez, F., & Milius, A. (2020). In vitro testing strategy for assessing the skin sensitizing potential of “difficult to test” cosmetic ingredients. Toxicology in Vitro, 65, 104781.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Strickland, J., Daniel, A. B., Allen, D., Aguila, C., Ahir, S., Bancos, S., ... & Kleinstreuer, N. (2019). Skin sensitization testing needs and data uses by US regulatory and research agencies. Archives of toxicology, 93, 273-291.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Berardesca, E., Farage, M., & Maibach, H. (2013). Sensitive skin: an overview. International journal of cosmetic science, 35(1), 2-8.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Cottrez, F., Boitel, E., Berrada-Gomez, M. P., Dalhuchyts, H., Bidan, C., Rattier, S., ... & Groux, H. (2020). In vitro measurement of skin sensitization hazard of mixtures and finished products: Results obtained with the SENS-IS assays. Toxicology in Vitro, 62, 104644.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Uter, W., Geier, J., Bauer, A., & Schnuch, A. (2013). Risk factors associated with methylisothiazolinone contact sensitization. Contact Dermatitis, 69(4), 231-238.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Roberts, D. W., & Aptula, A. O. (2008). Determinants of skin sensitisation potential. Journal of Applied Toxicology: An International Journal, 28(3), 377-387.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Del Bufalo, A., Pauloin, T., Alepee, N., Clouzeau, J., Detroyer, A., Eilstein, J., ... & Martinozzi Teissier, S. (2018). Alternative integrated testing for skin sensitization: assuring consumer safety. Applied In Vitro Toxicology, 4(1), 30-43.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Panico, A., Serio, F., Bagordo, F., Grassi, T., Idolo, A., De Giorgi, M., ... & De Donno, A. (2019). Skin safety and health prevention: an overview of chemicals in cosmetic products. Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene, 60(1), E50.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - González-Muñoz, P., Conde-Salazar, L., & Vañó-Galván, S. (2014). Allergic contact dermatitis caused by cosmetic products. Actas Dermo-Sifiliográficas (English Edition), 105(9), 822-832.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Engasser, P., Long, T., McNamee, P., Schlatter, H., & Gray, J. (2007). Safety of cosmetic products. Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 6, 23-31.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Vukmanović, S., & Sadrieh, N. (2017). Skin sensitizers in cosmetics and beyond: potential multiple mechanisms of action and importance of T-cell assays for in vitro screening. Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 47(5), 422-439.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Ozceker, D., Haslak, F., Dilek, F., Sipahi, S., Yucel, E., Guler, N., & Tamay, Z. (2019). Contact sensitization in children with atopic dermatitis. Allergologia et immunopathologia, 47(1), 47-51.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Thyssen, J. P., Linneberg, A., Menné, T., Nielsen, N. H., & Johansen, J. D. (2009). The prevalence and morbidity of sensitization to fragrance mix I in the general population. British Journal of Dermatology, 161(1), 95-101.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Basketter, D., & Safford, B. (2016). Skin sensitization quantitative risk assessment: a review of underlying assumptions. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 74, 105-116.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Botham, P. A., Basketter, D. A., Maurer, T., Mueller, D., Potokar, M., & Bontinck, W. J. (1991). Skin sensitization—a critical review of predictive test methods in animals and man. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 29(4), 275-286.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Jovanović, M. (2021). Contact sensitization and Allergens in the composition of cosmetic products: Current Knowledge. Medicinski pregled, 74(5-6), 159-166.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Reynolds, G., Reynolds, J., Gilmour, N., Cubberley, R., Spriggs, S., Aptula, A., ... & Baltazar, M. T. (2021). A hypothetical skin sensitisation next generation risk assessment for coumarin in cosmetic products. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 127, 105075.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Misery, L. (2013). Sensitive skin. Expert Review of Dermatology, 8(6), 631-637.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Goossens, A. (2016). Cosmetic contact allergens. Cosmetics, 3(1), 5.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Api, A. M., Basketter, D. A., Cadby, P. A., Cano, M. F., Ellis, G., Gerberick, G. F., ... & Safford, R. (2008). Dermal sensitization quantitative risk assessment (QRA) for fragrance ingredients. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 52(1), 3-23.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Dornic, N., Ficheux, A. S., & Roudot, A. C. (2017). Consumption of cosmetic products by the French population. Third part: Product exposure amount. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 106, 209-222.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Marzulli, F. N., & Maibach, H. I. (1974). The use of graded concentrations in studying skin sensitizers: experimental contact sensitization in man. Food and Cosmetics Toxicology, 12(2), 219-227.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Kerr, A., & Ferguson, J. (2010). Photoallergic contact dermatitis. Photodermatology, Photoimmunology & Photomedicine, 26(2), 56-65.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Gonçalo, M. (2020). Phototoxic and photoallergic reactions. Contact dermatitis, 1-25.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Mang, R., Stege, H., & Krutmann, J. (2011). Mechanisms of phototoxic and photoallergic reactions. Contact dermatitis, 155-163.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Epstein, J. H. (1999, December). Phototoxicity and photoallergy. In Seminars in cutaneous medicine and surgery (Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 274-284).
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Darvay, A., White, I. R., Rycroft, R. J. G., Jones, A. B., Hawk, J. L. M., & McFadden, J. P. (2001). Photoallergic contact dermatitis is uncommon. British Journal of Dermatology, 145(4), 597-601.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Pistollato, F., Madia, F., Corvi, R., Munn, S., Grignard, E., Paini, A., ... & Zuang, V. (2021). Current EU regulatory requirements for the assessment of chemicals and cosmetic products: challenges and opportunities for introducing new approach methodologies. Archives of toxicology, 95, 1867-1897.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Ferreira, M., Matos, A., Couras, A., Marto, J., & Ribeiro, H. (2022). Overview of cosmetic regulatory frameworks around the world. Cosmetics, 9(4), 72.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Engasser, P., Long, T., McNamee, P., Schlatter, H., & Gray, J. (2007). Safety of cosmetic products. Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 6, 23-31.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Gagliardi, L., & Dorato, S. (2007). General concepts and cosmetic legislation. Analysis of Cosmetic Products; Amparo, S., Alberto, C., Eds, 3-28.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Blaschke, J. W. (2005). Globalization of cosmetic regulations. Food and Drug Law Journal, 60(3), 413-419.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Singh, B. M., Jain, A., & Mishra, A. (2018). Cosmetic regulations in India vs. globally and challenges in harmonization. Int. J. Pharm. Sci. Drug Res, 10(3), 150-157.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Cornell, E. M., Janetos, T. M., & Xu, S. (2019). Time for a makeover‐cosmetics regulation in the United States. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 18(6), 2041-2047.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Terminin, R. B., & Tressler, L. (2008). American beauty: An analytical view of the past and current effectiveness of cosmetic safety regulations and future direction. Food & Drug LJ, 63, 257.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Janetos, T. M., Kwa, M., & Xu, S. (2018). Regulation of cosmetics. JAMA internal medicine, 178(7), 1000-1001.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Eiermann, H. J. (1978). Cosmetic regulatory activities in the United States: past, present and future. Contact Dermatitis, 4(3), 157-164.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Kislalioglu, M. S. (1996). Cosmetic Regulations of the United States, European Union, and Japan. Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs, 13(3-4), 211-229.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Shaw Núñez, N. (2015). The international cosmetic regulatory framework.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Butschke, A., Droß, A., Dünnebier, K., Laube, I., & Weiler, A. (2016). Experiences and statistical evaluation of serious undesirable effects of cosmetic products in the EU. Cosmetics, 3(3), 25.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Barthe, M., Bavoux, C., Finot, F., Mouche, I., Cuceu-Petrenci, C., Forreryd, A., ... & Osman-Ponchet, H. (2021). Safety testing of cosmetic products: overview of established methods and new approach methodologies (NAMs). Cosmetics, 8(2), 50.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Lionetti, N., & Rigano, L. (2018). Labeling of cosmetic products. Cosmetics, 5(1), 22.
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar - Califf, R. M., McCall, J., & Mark, D. B. (2017). Cosmetics, regulations, and the public health: understanding the safety of medical and other products. JAMA internal medicine, 177(8), 1080-1082
View at Publisher | View at Google Scholar