Patch test reactivity to DMDM hydantoins

@article{Groot1988PatchTR,
  title={Patch test reactivity to DMDM hydantoins},
  author={Anton C. Groot and Th. van Joost and Jan D. Bos and Hahrie L. M. Meeren and J. W. Weyland},
  journal={Contact Dermatitis},
  year={1988},
  volume={18}
}
The relationship between contact allergy to formaldehyde and positive patch test reactions to DMDM hydantoin was investigated– 35 formaldehyde‐allergic patients were patch tested with serial dilutions of formaldehyde (0.1% 0.3% 1.0% aq.) and DM hydantoin (the non‐formaldehyde‐containing parent compound of DMDM hydantoin), 21 were also patch tested with MDM hydantoin (1 molecule formaldehyde) in serial dilutions: 7 (33%) reacted to 1 or more concentrations. The other 14 were also tested with… 
5 Citations

GDME-based methodology for the determination of free formaldehyde in cosmetics and hygiene products containing formaldehyde releasers

GDME proved to be an economical, simple, and robust alternative for the extraction of free formaldehyde in personal hygiene and cosmetic samples and was used for the spectrophotometric determination of formaldehyde.

Single- and repeated-dose 28-day oral toxicity study of MDM hydantoin in Sprague-Dawley rats.

In the repeated-dose oral toxicity study, the adverse effects caused by MDM hydantoin were not detected in terms of body weight, clinical signs, food and water intake, hematology, organ weights, gross pathology, and histopathology, and the no-observed-adverse-effect level of MDM Hydantoin was considered to be greater than 1000 mg/kg/day.

Topical therapeutic corneal and scleral tissue cross-linking solutions: in vitro formaldehyde release studies using cosmetic preservatives

It was found that concentration (dilution factor) was found to be the most important parameter governing the percent of FA released, and maximal release was noted at the lowest concentrations studied (submillimolar).

Ten‐year trends in contact allergy to formaldehyde and formaldehyde‐releasers

Preservatives such as formaldehyde and formaldehyde‐releasers are common causes of contact allergy and should be avoided in children under the age of five.

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 11 REFERENCES

Contact allergy to preservatives – II

To determine whether the prevalence of allergic reactions to certain preservatives warrants their inclusion in a routine series for patch testing, a tray of 14 preservatives was tested in 501 consecutive suspected contact dermatitis patients and Kathon CG® and alkyl trimethyl ammonium chloride only was found.

The repeated open application test (ROAT)

Repeated open application tests (ROATs) were performed with common ingredients of vehicles in 86 patients with contact dermatitis, finding that of the patients with a questionable (?+) patch test result, 44% were positive in ROATs.

Updating the maximization test for identifying contact allergens

The maximization test for detecting contact allergens has proved to possess both sensitivity and specificity. However, modifications have become necessary because of excessive irritancy reactions to

Threshold responses in formaldehyde-sensitive subjects.

Manual of Contact Dermatitis

Fregert'sManual of Contact Dermatitisis packed with useful information and is highly recommended as a primer for those learning dermatology and as a brief refresher text for the practicing clinician.

Updating the maxim-Ization test for 1dentifymg contact allergens. Contact Dermatitis

  • 1975

Expert Panel of the Cosmetic Ingredient Review . Final report of the Safety Assessment for DMDM hydantom

  • 1987

Results of patch tests with substances abandoned

  • Cosmetics & Toiletnes
  • 1985

Manual of contact dermatitis, 2nd edition

  • 1981

Frequency of preservative use m cosmetic formulas as disclosed

  • Contact Dermatitis
  • 1984