Advertisement
Research Article| Volume 19, ISSUE 4, P502-515, July 2001

Contact dermatitis to cosmetics

      Cosmetics and skin care products have been used since the beginning of time to enhance the physical, mental, and spiritual well-being of mankind. While cosmetics were originally developed to add color, impart a fragrance, create a mood, or make a fashion statement, modern products also aim to repair damaged skin, reverse visual signs of aging, provide ultraviolet protection, enhance barrier function, and afford many other therapeutic advantages. Cosmetics are generally safe and well tolerated. Because all reputable cosmetic companies test their products on a large number of volunteer subjects before releasing the products on the market, most cosmetics do not cause adverse reactions in most people.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Clinics in Dermatology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Eiermann H
        • Larsen W
        • Maibach H
        • Taylor J
        Prospective study of cosmetic reactions.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1982; 6: 909-917
        • Adams R
        • Maibach H
        A five-year study of cosmetic reactions.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1985; 13: 1062-1069
        • De Groot A
        Contact allergy to cosmetics.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1987; 17: 26-34
        • De Groot A
        • De Nater J
        • Van der Lende T
        • et al.
        Adverse effects of cosmetics and toiletries.
        Int J Cosm Sci. 1987; 9: 255-259
        • De Groot A
        • Beverdam E
        • Ayong C
        • et al.
        The role of contact allergy in the spectrum of adverse effects caused by cosmetics and toiletries.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1988; 19: 195-201
        • Shah M
        • Lewis F
        • Gawkrodger D
        Facial dermatitis and eyelid dermatitis.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1996; 34: 140-141
        • De Groot A
        • Bruynzeel D
        • Bos J
        • et al.
        The allergens in cosmetics.
        Arch Dermatol. 1988; 124: 1525-1529
        • Broeckx W
        • Blondeel A
        • Dooms-Goossens A
        • Achten G
        Cosmetic intolerance.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1987; 16: 189-194
        • Berne B
        • Bostrom A
        • Grahnen A
        • Tammela M
        Adverse effects of cosmetics and toiletries reported to the Swedish Medical Products Agency 1989–1994.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1996; 34: 359-362
        • Skog E
        Incidence of cosmetic dermatitis.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1980; 6: 449-451
        • Romaguera C
        • Camarasa J
        • Alomar A
        • Grimalt F
        Patch test with allergens related to cosmetics.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1983; 9: 167-168
        • Dooms-Goossens A
        • Kerre S
        • Drieghe J
        • et al.
        Cosmetic products and their allergens.
        Eur J Dermatol. 1992; 2: 465-468
        • Dooms-Goossens A
        • Beck M
        • Haneke E
        • et al.
        Adverse cutaneous reactions to cosmetic allergens.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1999; 40: 112-113
        • Guin J
        • Berry V
        Perfume sensitivity in adult females. A study of contact sensitivity to a perfume mix in two groups of student nurses.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1980; 3: 299-302
        • Nielsen N
        • Menne T
        Allergic contact sensitization in an unselected Danish population.
        Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh). 1992; 72: 456-460
        • Larsen W
        Perfume dermatitis.
        Arch Dermatol. 1977; 113: 623-626
        • Malanin G
        • Ohela K
        Allergic reactions to fragrance mix and its components.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1989; 21: 62-63
        • Frosch P
        • Pilz B
        • Andersen K
        • et al.
        Patch testing with fragrances.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1995; 33: 333-342
        • Frosch P
        • Pilz B
        • Burrows D
        • et al.
        Testing with fragrance mix—is the addition of sorbitan sesquileate to the constituents useful?.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1995; 32: 266-272
        • Larsen W
        • Maibach H
        Fragrance contact allergy.
        Semin Dermatol. 1982; 1: 85-90
        • De Groot A
        • Van der Kley A
        • Bruynzeel D
        • et al.
        Frequency of false-negative reactions to the fragrance mix.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1993; 28: 139-140
        • De Groot A
        • Liem D
        • Nater J
        • Van Ketel W
        Patch tests with fragrance materials and preservatives.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1985; 12: 87-92
        • Calnan C
        • Cronin E
        • Rycroft R
        Allergy to perfume ingredients.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1980; 6: 580-581
        • Marks J
        • Belsito D
        • DeLeo V
        • et al.
        North American Contact Dermatitis Group standard tray patch test results (1992 to 1994).
        Am J Contact Dermatitis. 1995; 6: 160-165
        • Johansen J
        • Rastogi S
        • Menne T
        Exposure to selected fragrance materials. A case study of fragrance-mix-positive eczema patients.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1996; 34: 106-110
        • Johansen J
        • Rastogi S
        • Andersen K
        • Menne T
        Content and reactivity to product perfumes in fragrance mix positive and negative eczema patients.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1997; 36: 291-296
        • Johansen J
        • Andersen T
        • Veien N
        • et al.
        Patch testing with markers of fragrance contact allergy. Do clinical tests correspond to patients’ self-reported problems?.
        Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh). 1997; 77: 149-153
        • Held E
        • Johansen J
        • Agner T
        • Menne T
        Contact allergy to cosmetics.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1999; 40: 305-310
        • Larsen W
        • Nakayama H
        • Fischer T
        • et al.
        A study of new fragrance mixtures.
        Am J Contact Dermat. 1998; 9: 202-206
        • Johansen J
        • Rastogi S
        • Menne T
        Contact allergy to popular perfumes; Assessed by patch test, use test and chemical analysis.
        Br J Dermatol. 1996; 135: 419-422
        • Larsen W
        • Nakayama H
        • Lindberg M
        • et al.
        Fragrance contact dermatitis.
        Am J Contact Dermatitis. 1996; 7: 77-83
        • Safford R
        • Basketter D
        • Allenby C
        • Goodwin B
        Immediate contact reactions to chemicals in the fragrance mix and a study of the quenching action of eugenol.
        Br J Dermatol. 1990; 123: 595-606
        • Gimenez Camarasa J
        The quenching phenomenon or antigenic extinction.
        Med Cutan Ibero Lat Am. 1985; 13: 377-380
        • Guin J
        • Meyer B
        • Drake R
        • Haffley P
        The effect of quenching agents on contact urticaria caused by cinnamic aldehyde.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1984; 10: 45-51
        • Basketter D
        • Allenby C
        Studies of the quenching phenomenon in delayed contact hypersensitivity reactions.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1991; 25: 160-171
        • Johansen J
        • Menne T
        Fregrance mix and its constituents.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1995; 32: 18-23
        • Lim J
        • Goh C
        • Ng S
        • Wong W
        Changing trends in the epidemiology of contact dermatitis in Singapore.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1992; 26: 321-326
        • Becker K
        • Temesvari E
        • Nemeth I
        Patch testing with fragrance mix and its constituents in a Hungarian population.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1994; 30: 185-186
        • Sharma V
        • Chakrabarti A
        Common contact sensitizers in Chandiagarh, India.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1998; 35: 127-131
        • Lee T
        • Lam T
        Patch testing of 490 patients in Hong Kong.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1996; 35: 23-26
        • El Rab M
        • Al-Sheikh O
        Is the European Standard suitable for patch testing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia?.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1995; 33: 310-314
        • Marks J
        • Belsito D
        • DeLeo V
        • et al.
        North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch test results for the detection of delayed-type hypersensitivity to topical allergens.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1998; 38: 911-918
        • Marks Jr, J
        • Belsito D
        • DeLeo V
        • et al.
        North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch-test results, 1996–1998.
        Arch Dermatol. 2000; 136: 272-273
        • Buckley D
        • Wakelin S
        • Seed P
        • et al.
        The frequency of fragrance allergy in a patch-test population over a 17-year period.
        Br J Dermatol. 2000; 142: 279-283
        • Schnuch A
        • Uter W
        • Lehmacher W
        • et al.
        Epikutantestung mit der Standardserie. Erste Ergebnisse des Projektes “Informations-verbund Dermatologischer Kliniken” (IVDK).
        Dermatosen. 1993; 41: 60-70
        • Scheinman P
        Allergic contact dermatitis.
        Am J Contact Dermatitis. 1996; 7: 65-76
        • Scheinman P
        The foul side of fragrance-free products.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999; 41: 1020-1024
        • Decker Jr, R
        Frequency of preservative use in cosmetic formulas as disclosed to FDA—1984.
        Cosmetics Toiletries. 1985; 100: 65-68
        • Gruvberger B
        • Bruze M
        • Tammela M
        Preservatives in moisturizers on the Swedish market.
        Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh). 1998; 78: 52-56
        • Rastogi S
        • Schouten A
        • De Kruijf N
        • Weijland J
        Contents of methyl-, ethyl-, propyl-, butyl- and benzylparaben in cosmetic products.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1995; 32: 28-30
        • Fisher A
        The paraben paradoxes.
        Cutis. 1973; 12: 177-181
        • Fisher A
        A “current contact news” follow-up.
        Cutis. 1993; 52: 254-256
        • Wolf R
        • Brenner S
        Another “paraben paradox”.
        J Dermatol. 1995; 34: 21-22
        • Perrenoud D
        • Bircher A
        • Hunziker T
        • et al.
        Frequency of sensitization to 13 common preservatives in Switzerland. Swiss Contact Dermatitis Research Group.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1994; 30: 276-279
        • De Groot A
        • Weyland J
        • Bos J
        • Jagtman B
        Contact allergy to preservatives (I).
        Contact Dermatitis. 1986; 14: 120-124
        • De Groot A
        • Bos J
        Preservatives in the European standard series for epicutaneous testing.
        Br J Dermatol. 1987; 116: 289-292
        • Sertoli A
        • Gola M
        • Martinelli C
        • et al.
        Epidemiology of contact dermatitis.
        Semin Dermatol. 1989; 8: 120-126
        • Sertoli A
        • Francalanci S
        • Acciai M
        • Gola M
        Epidemiological survey of contact dermatitis in Italy (1984–1993) by GIRDCA (Gruppo Italiano Ricerca Dermatiti da Contatto e Ambientali).
        Am J Contact Dermat. 1999; 10: 18-30
        • Ziegler V
        • Ziegler B
        • Kipping D
        Dose-response sensitization experiments with imidazolidinyl urea.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1988; 19: 236-237
        • De Groot A
        • Weyland J
        Kathon CG. A review.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1988; 18: 350-358
        • Rastogi S
        Kathon CG and cosmetic products.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1990; 22: 155-160
        • Foussereau J
        • Braendle I
        • Boujnah-Khouadja A
        Allertishes Kontaktekzem durch Isothiazolin-3-on-Derivate.
        Dermatosen. 1984; 32: 208-211
        • De Groot A
        • Liem D
        • Weyland J
        Kathon CG.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1985; 12: 76-80
        • Bjorkner B
        • Bruze M
        • Dahlquist L
        • et al.
        Contact allergy to the preservative Kathon CG.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1986; 14: 85-90
        • Pasche F
        • Hunziker N
        Sensitization to Kathon CG in Geneva and Switzerland.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1989; 20: 115-119
        • De Groot A
        • Herxheimer A
        Isothiazolinone preservative.
        Lancet. 1989; 1: 314-316
        • Hasson A
        • Guimaraens D
        • Conde-Salazar L
        Patch test sensitivity to the preservative Kathon CG in Spain.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1990; 22: 257-261
        • Ledieu G
        • Martin P
        • Thomas P
        Contact hypersensitivity to Kathon CG. Apropos of 35 cases among 977 tested subjects.
        Ann Dermatol Venereol. 1991; 118: 181-189
        • Lucker G
        • Hulsmans R
        • Van der Kley A
        • Van de Staak W
        Evaluation of the frequency of contact allergic reactions to Kathon CG in the Maastricht area—1987–1990.
        Dermatology. 1992; 184: 90-93
      1. Hunziker N, Pasche F, Bircher A, et al. Sensitization to the isothiazolinone biocide. Report of the Swiss Contact Dermatitis Research Group 1988–1990. Dermatology 1992;184:94–7.

        • Valsecchi R
        • Imberti G
        • Martino D
        • Cainelli T
        Eyelid dermatitis.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1992; 27: 143-147
        • Castiglioni G
        • Carosso A
        • Manzoni S
        • et al.
        Results of routine patch testing of 834 patinets in Turin.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1992; 27: 182-185
        • Rietschel R
        • Nethercott J
        • Emmett E
        • et al.
        Methylchloroisothiazolinone–methylisothiazolinone reactions in patients screened for vehicle and preservative hypersensitivity.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1990; 22: 734-738
        • Chan P
        • Baldwin R
        • Parsons R
        • et al.
        Kathon biocide.
        J Invest Dermatol. 1983; 81: 409-411
        • Cardin C
        • Weaver J
        • Bailey P
        Dose response assessments of Kathon biocide. (I). Threshold prophetic patch testing.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1986; 15: 10-16
        • Weaver J
        • Cardin C
        • Maibach H
        Dose-response assessments of Kathon biocide. (I). Diagnostic use and diagnostic threshold patch testing with sensitized humans.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1985; 12: 141-145
        • Marks J
        • Moss J
        • Parno J
        • et al.
        Methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (Kathon CG) biocide.
        Am J Contact Dermatitis. 1993; 4: 87-89
        • Bruze M
        • Gruvberger B
        • Agrup G
        Sensitization studies in the guinea pig with the active ingredients of Euxyl K400.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1988; 18: 37-39
        • Sneff H
        • Exner M
        • Goertz J
        • et al.
        Kontaktallergie auf einen neuen Konservierungsstoff.
        Dermatosen. 1989; 37: 45-47
        • De Groot A
        • Weyland J
        Contact allergy to methyldibromoglutaronitrile in the cosmetics preservative Euxyl K400.
        Am J Contact Dermatitis. 1991; 2: 31-32
        • Pigatto P
        • Bigardi A
        • Logori A
        • et al.
        Allergic contact dermatitis from Tektamer 38 (dibromodicyanobutane).
        Contact Dermatitis. 1991; 25: 138-139
        • Ross J
        • Cronin E
        • White I
        • et al.
        Contact dermatitis from Euxyl K400 in cucumber eye gel.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1992; 26: 60
        • Torres V
        • Soares A
        Contact allergy to dibromodicyanobutane in a cosmetic cream.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1992; 27: 114-115
        • Gebhart M
        • Stuhlert A
        • Knopf B
        Allergic contact dermatitis due to Euxyl K400 in an ultrasonic gel.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1993; 29: 272
        • Fernandez E
        • Navarro J
        • Del Pozo L
        • et al.
        Allergic contact dermatitis due to dibromodicyanobutane in cosmetics.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1995; 32: 109-110
        • O’Donnell B
        • Fould I
        Contact dermatitis due to dibromodicysnobutane in cucmber eye gel.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1993; 29: 99-100
        • Hulsmans R
        • Lucker G
        • Van der Kley A
        • et al.
        Kathon CG and methyldibromoglutaronitrile.
        Aktuelle Koloproktologie. 1992; 9: 275-286
        • Keilig W
        Kontaktallergie auf einen neuen Konservierungsstof (Euxy1 K400).
        Parfumerie Kosmetic. 1991; 72: 167-168
        • De Groot A
        • De Cock P
        • Coenraads P
        Methyldibromoglutaronitrile is an important contact allergen in The Netherlands.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1996; 34: 118-120
        • Tosti A
        • Vincenzi C
        • Trevisi P
        • Guerra L
        Euxyl K400.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1995; 33: 193-195
        • Schuch A
        • Geier J
        Die haufigsten Kontaktallergene im zweiten Halbjahr 1993.
        Dermatosen. 1994; 42: 210-211
        • Jacobs M
        • White I
        • Rycroft R
        • Taub N
        Patch testing with preservatives at St John’s from 1982 to 1993.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1995; 33: 247-254
        • Van Ginkel C
        • Rundervoort G
        Increasing incidence of contact allergy to the new preservative 1,2-dibromo-2,4-dicyanobutane (methyldibromoglutaronitrile).
        Br J Dermatol. 1995; 132: 918-920
        • Corazza M
        • Mantovani L
        • Roveggio C
        • et al.
        Frequency of sensitization to Euxyl K400 in 889 cases.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1993; 28: 298-299
        • Motolese A
        • Seidenari S
        • Truzzi M
        • et al.
        Frequency of contact sensitization in Euxyl K400.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1991; 25: 128
        • Okkerse A
        • Geursen-Reitsma A
        • Van Joost Th
        Contact allergy to methyldibromoglutaronitrile and certain other preservatives.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1996; 34: 151-152
      2. Vigan M, Brechat N, Girardin P. Un nouvel allergene: Le dobromodicyuanobutane. Compte rendu d’une etude portant sur 310 malades de janvier a decembre 1994. Ann Dermatol Venereol 1996;123:322–4.

        • Sober A
        • Fitzpatrick T
        Statistics of interest to the dermatologist.
        in: Sober A Fitzpatrick T Year book of dermatology. Year Book Medical Publishers, Chicago1988: 9-54
        • Wolf R
        The lanolin paradox.
        Dermatology. 1996; 192: 198-202
        • Malten K
        • Kuiper J
        • Van der Staak W
        Contact allergic investigations in 100 patients with ulcus cruris.
        Dermatologica. 1973; 147: 241-254
        • Wilson C
        • Cameron J
        • Powell S
        • Cherry G
        • Ryan R
        High incidence of contact dermatitis in leg-ulcer patients—implications for management.
        Clin Exp Dermatol. 1991; 16: 250-253
        • Bandmann H
        • Calnan C
        • Cronin E
        • et al.
        Dermatitis from applied medicaments.
        Arch Dermatol. 1972; 106: 335-337
        • Breit R
        Medicamentoese Kontaktallergie beim Exzem und Geschwur des Unterschenkels.
        Munch Med Wochenschr. 1972; 114: 22-25
        • Wilkinson J
        • Hambly E
        • Wilkinson D
        Comparison of patch test results in two adjacent areas of England. II. Medicaments.
        Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh). 1980; 60: 245-249
        • Bandmann H
        • Reichenberger M
        Beobachtungen und Untersuchungen zur Frage der eucerinbedingten seltenen Allergie.
        Hautarzt. 1957; 8: 11-13
        • Mortensen T
        Allergy to lanolin.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1979; 5: 137-139
        • Edman B
        • Moller H
        Testing a purified lanolin preparation by a randomized procedure.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1989; 20: 287-290
        • Carmichael A
        • Foulds I
        • Bransbury D
        Loss of lanolin patch-test positivity.
        Br J Dermatol. 1991; 125: 573-576
        • Barsch J
        • Henseler T
        • Aberer W
        • et al.
        Reproducibility of patch tests.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1994; 31: 584-591
        • Funk J
        • Maibach H
        Propylene glycol dermatitis.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1994; 31: 236-241
        • Catazaro J
        • Smith J.J
        Propylene glycol dermatitis.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1991; 24: 90-95
        • Frosch P
        • Pekar U
        • Enzmann H
        Contact allergy to propylene glycol. Do we use the appropriate test concentration?.
        Dermatol Clin. 1990; 8: 111-113
        • Fransway A
        The problem of preservation in the 1990s.
        Am Contact Dermat. 1991; 2: 145
      3. Agner T. Noninvasive measuring methods for the investigation of irritant patch test reactions. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1992;suppl. 173:1–26.

        • Basketter D
        • Reynolds F
        • Rowson M
        • et al.
        Visual assessment of human skin irritation.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1997; 37: 218-220
        • Robinson M
        • Perkins M
        • Basketter D
        Application of a 4-h patch test method for comparative investigative assessment of skin irritation.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1998; 38: 194-202
        • De Boer E
        • Bruynzeel D
        Patch tests.
        Clin Dermatol. 1996; 14: 41-50
        • Tupker R
        • Coenraads P
        Wash tests.
        Clin Dermatol. 1996; 14: 51-55
        • Basketter D
        • Gilpin G
        • Kuhn M
        • et al.
        Patch tests versus use tests in skin irritation risk assessment.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1998; 39: 252-256
        • Agner T
        • Serup J
        Skin reactions to irritants assessed by non-invasive, bioengineering methods.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1989; 20: 352-359
        • Agner T
        Basal transepidermal water loss, skin thickness, skin blood flow and skin colour in relation to sodium-lauryl-sulphate-induced irritation in normal skin.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1991; 25: 108-114
      4. Calvin G. New approaches to the assessment of eye and skin irritation. Toxicol Lett 1992;64–5:157–64.

        • Pape W
        • Hoppe U
        In vitro methods for the assessment of primary local effects of topically applied preparations.
        Skin Pharmacol. 1991; 4: 205-212
        • Benassi L
        • Bertazzoni G
        • Seidenari S
        In vitro testing of tensides employing monolayer cultures.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1999; 40: 38-44
        • Roguet R
        Use of skin cell cultures for in vitro assessment of corrosion and cutaneous irritancy.
        Cell Biol Toxicol. 1999; 15: 63-75
        • Perkins M
        • Osborne R
        • Rana F
        • et al.
        Comparison of in vitro and in vivo human skin responses to consumer products and ingredients with a range of irritancy potential.
        Toxicol Sci. 1999; 48: 218-229
        • Damour O
        • Augustin C
        • Black A
        Applications of reconstructed skin models in pharmaco-toxicological trials.
        Med Biol Eng Comput. 1998; 36: 825-832
        • Farkas J
        Oil acne from mineral oil among workers making prefabricated concrete panels.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1982; 8: 141
        • Zugerman C
        Chloracne, chloracnegens, and other forms of environmental acne.
        in: Adams R Occupational skin disease. 2nd ed. WB Saunders, Philadelphia1990: 127-135
        • Das M
        • Misra M
        Acne and follitulitis due to diesel oil.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1988; 18: 120-121
        • Kaidbey K
        • Kligman A
        A human model of coal tar acne.
        Arch Dermatol. 1974; 109: 31-36
        • Crow K
        Chloracne. A critical review including a comparison of two series of cases of acne from chlornaphthalene and pitch fumes.
        Trans St John’s Hosp Dermatol Soc. 1970; 56: 79-99
        • Crow K
        Chloracne and its potential clinical implications.
        Clin Exp Dermatol. 1981; 6: 243-257
        • Tindall J
        Chloracne and chloracnegens.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1985; 13: 539-558
      5. Weirich E. Die Kontaktakne: Beispiel einer Zivilisationsdermatose: Dermatosen 1978;26:7–21.

        • Kligman A
        • Mills O
        Acne cosmetica.
        Arch Dermatol. 1972; 106: 843-850
        • Plewig G
        • Fulton J
        • Kligman A
        Pomade acne.
        Arch Dermatol. 1970; 101: 580-584
        • Bhutani L
        • Malhotra Y
        • Kandhari K
        Vegetable oils and acneform lesions.
        Ind J Dermatol-Venereol. 1970; 1970: 119-121
        • Crocker H
        Infantile acne.
        Lancet. 1884; 1: 704
        • Garnier G
        Les comedons, d’hiule et coutons d’huile du visage par brillantine.
        Presse Med. 1946; 54: 146-148
        • Berlin C
        Acne comedo in children due to paraffin oil applied on the head.
        Arch Dermatol. 1954; 69: 683-687
        • Adams E
        • Irish D
        • Spencer H
        • Rowe V
        The response of rabbit skin to compounds reported to have caused acneform dermatitis.
        Ind Med. 1941; 10: 1-4
        • Zatulove A
        • Konnerth N
        Comedogenicity testing of cosmetics.
        Cutis. 1987; 39: 521
        • Fulton J
        • Pay S
        • Fulton III, J
        Comedogenicity of current therapeutic products, cosmetics, and ingredients in the rabbit ear.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1984; 10: 96-105
        • Osmundsen P
        Contact dermatitis due to an optical whitener in washing powders.
        Br J Dermatol. 1969; 81: 799-803
        • Osmundsen P
        Pigmented contact dermatitis.
        Br J Dermatol. 1970; 83: 296-301
        • Ancona-Alayon A
        • Escobar-Marques R
        • Gonzalez-Mendoza A
        • et al.
        Occupational pigmented contact dermatitis from Naphthol AS.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1976; 2: 129-134
        • Hayakawa R
        • Matsunaga K
        • Kojima S
        • et al.
        Naphthol AS as a cause of pigmented contact dermatitis.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1985; 13: 20-25
        • Ebihara T
        • Nakayama H
        Pigmented contact dermatitis.
        Clin Dermatol. 1997; 15: 593-599
        • Nakayama H
        • Matsuo S
        • Hayakawa K
        • et al.
        Pigmented cosmetic dermatitis.
        In J Dermatol. 1984; 23: 299-305
        • Nakayama H
        • Harada R
        • Toda M
        Pigmented cosmetic dermatitis.
        In J Dermatol. 1976; 15: 673-675
        • Riehl G
        Ueber eine eigenartige Melanose.
        Wien Klin Wochenschr. 1917; 30: 780-781
        • Ninomiya F
        • Nakayama H
        Effects of allergen controlled cosmetics on hyperpigmented dermatitis.
        Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1982; 6: 211-215
        • Nakayama H
        • Nogi N
        • Kasahara N
        • Matsuo S
        Allergen control. An indispensable treatment for allergic contact dermatitis.
        Dermatol Clin. 1990; 8: 197-204
        • Imokawa G
        • Yada Y
        • Okuda M
        Allergic contact dermatitis releases soluble factors that stimulate melanogenesis through activation of protein kinase C-related signal-transduction.
        J Invest Dermatol. 1992; 99: 482-488
        • Imokawa G
        • Yada Y
        • Morisaki N
        • Kimura M
        Biological characterization of human fibroblast-derived mitogenic factors for human melanocytes.
        Biochem J. 1998; 330: 1235-1239
        • Imokawa G
        • Higuchi K
        • Yada Y
        Purification and characterization of an allergy-induced melanogenic stimulating factor in brownish guinea pig skin.
        J Biol Chem. 1998; 273: 1605-1612
        • Trattner A
        • Hodak E
        • David M
        Screening patch tests for pigmented contact dermatitis in Israel.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1999; 40: 155-157
        • Epstein J
        Phototoxicity and photoallergy in man.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1983; 8: 141-147
        • Epstein J
        Photoallergy—a review.
        Arch Dermatol. 1972; 106: 741-748
        • Takigawa M
        • Miyachi Y
        Mechanisms of contact photosensitivity to tetrachlorosalicylanilide under genetic restrictions of the major histocompatability complex.
        J Invest Dermatol. 1982; 78: 108-115
        • DeLeo V
        Photoallergy.
        in: Lim H Soter N Clinical photomedicine. Marcel Dekker, New York1993: 227-239
        • Maguire H.J
        • Kaidbey K
        Experimental photoallergic contact dermatitis.
        J Invest Dermatol. 1982; 79: 147-152
        • Wilkinson D
        Photodermatitis due to tetrachlorsalicylanilide.
        Br J Dermatol. 1961; 73: 213-219
        • Calnan C
        Photo-contact dermatitis from soaps.
        J Soc Cosmet Chem. 1962; 13: 187-192
        • Burry J
        The hazard of modern soaps.
        Med J Aust. 1968; 35: 1114-1115
        • Sams W
        Soap photoallergy.
        Mayo Clin Proc. 1968; 43: 783-794
        • Epstein J
        • Wuepper K
        • Maibach H
        Photocontact dermatitis to halogenated salicylanilides and related compounds.
        Arch Dermatol. 1968; 97: 236-244
        • O’Quinn S
        • Kennedy D
        • Isbell K
        Contact photodermatitis due to bithiol and related compounds.
        JAMA. 1967; 199: 89-92
        • Burry J
        Photoallergies to fenticlor and multifungin.
        Arch Dermatol. 1967; 95: 287-291
        • Holzle E
        • Neumann N
        • Hausen B
        • et al.
        Photopatch testing.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1991; 25: 59-68
        • Thune P
        • Jansen C
        • Wennersten G
        • et al.
        The Scandinavian multicenter photopatch test study 1980–1985.
        Photodermatology. 1988; 5: 261-269
        • Guarrera M
        Photopatch testing.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1989; 21 ([Letter]): 261-269
        • Menz J
        • Muller S
        • Connolly S
        Photopatch testing.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1988; 18: 1044-1047
        • Gritiyarangsan P
        A three-year photopatch study in Thailand.
        J Dermatol Sci. 1991; 2: 371-375
        • Neumann N
        • Holzle E
        • Lehmann P
        • et al.
        Pattern analysis of photopatch test reactions.
        Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed. 1994; 10: 65-73
        • Burry J
        Cross sensitivity between fenticlor and bithinol.
        Arch Dermatol. 1968; 97: 497-502
        • Freeman R
        • Knox J
        The action spectrum of photo and related compounds.
        Arch Dermatol. 1968; 97: 130-136
        • Pevnyl L
        Pestizid-Allergie Allergisches Kontaktekzem bei einer Winzerin.
        Derm Beruf Umwelt. 1980; 28: 186-189
        • Raugi G
        • Storrs F
        • Larsen W
        Photoallergic contact dermatitis to men’s perfumes.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1979; 5: 251-260
        • Raugi G
        • Storrs F
        Photosensitivity from men’s colognes.
        Arch Dermatol. 1979; 115 ([Letter]): 106
        • Kroon S
        Musk ambrette, a new cosmetic sensitizer and photosensitizer.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1979; 5: 337-338
        • Cronin E
        Photosensitivity to musk ambrette.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1984; 11: 88-92
        • Meltzer L
        • Baer R
        Sensitization to monoglycerol para-aminobenzoate.
        J Invest Dermatol. 1949; 12: 31-39
        • Horio T
        • Higuchi T
        Photocontact dermatitis from p-aminobenzoic acid.
        Dermatologica. 1978; 156: 124-128
        • Mathias C
        • Maibach H
        • Epstein J
        Allergic contact dermatitis to para amino benzoic acid.
        Arch Dermatol. 1978; 114: 1665-1666
        • Mackie B
        • Mackie L
        The PABA story.
        Australas J Dermatol. 1999; 40: 51-53
        • Schauder S
        • Ippen H
        Contact and photocontact sensitivity to sunscreens. Review of a 15-year experience and of the literature.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1997; 37: 221-232
        • English J
        • White I
        • Cronin E
        Sensitivity of sunscreens.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1987; 17: 159-162
        • Collins P
        • Ferguson J
        Photoallergic contact dermatitis to oxybenzone.
        Br J Dermatol. 1994; 131: 124-129
        • Szczurko C
        • Dompmartin A
        • Michel M
        • et al.
        Photocontact allergy to oxybenzone.
        Photodermatology. 1994; 10: 144-147
        • Nixon R
        Allergy to oxybenzone and mexenone.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1990; 23: 273
        • Michel M
        • Castel B
        • Dompmartin A
        • et al.
        Increasing frequency of photoallergies to benzophenones. Studies of 190 photobiological explorations between 1986–1990.
        Nouv Dermatol. 1992; 11: 375
        • Bilsland D
        • Ferguson J
        Contact allergy to sunscreen chemicals in photosensitivity dermatitis/actinic reticuloid syndrome (PD/AR) and polymorphic light eruption (PLE).
        Contact Dermatitis. 1993; 29: 70-73
        • Dromgoole S
        • Maibach H
        Sunscreening agent intolerance.
        J Am Acad Dermatol. 1990; 22: 1068-1078
        • English J
        • White I
        Allergic contact dermatitis from isopropyl dibenzoylmethane.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1986; 15: 94
        • L’onard F
        • Kalis B
        • Journe F
        La batterie standard des photopatch-tests en France. Etude prospective de la Societe Francais de Photodermatologie.
        Nouv Dermatol. 1994; 3: 305-310
        • Murphy G
        • White I
        Photoallergic contact dermatitis to 2-ethoxy-p-methoxycinnamate.
        Contact Dermatitis. 1987; 16: 296
        • Fisher A
        Sunscreen dermatitis.
        Cutis. 1992; 50: 253-254
        • Kimura K
        • Katoh T
        Photoallergic contact dermatitis from the sunscreen ethylhexyl-p-methoxycinnamate (Parsol MCX).
        Contact Dermatitis. 1995; 32: 304-305
        • Ricci C
        • Vaccari S
        • Cavalli M
        • Vincenzi C
        Contact sensitization to sunscreens.
        Am J Contact Dermatitis. 1997; 8: 165-166
        • Fisher A
        Cosmetic actions and reactions.
        Cutis. 1980; 26: 22-29
        • Maibach H
        • Engasser P
        Management of cosmetic intolerance syndrome.
        Clin Dermatol. 1988; 6: 102-107
        • Cotterill J
        Dermatological non-disease.
        Br J Dermatol. 1981; 104: 611-619
        • Cotterill J
        Dermatological non-diesase.
        Dermatol Nurs. 1991; 3: 315-317
        • Cotterill J
        • Cunliffe W
        Suicide in dermatological patients.
        Br J Dermatol. 1997; 137: 246-250
        • Fisher A
        Part I.
        Cutis. 1990; 46: 109-110
      6. Fisher A. Part II: The management of eyelid dermatitis in patients with status cosmeticus: The cosmetic intolerance syndrome. Cutis 1990;46:199–01.

        • Fisher A
        Part III.
        Cutis. 1990; 46: 291-293