Información de la revista
Vol. 115. Núm. 3.
Páginas T309-T311 (marzo 2024)
Compartir
Compartir
Descargar PDF
Más opciones de artículo
Vol. 115. Núm. 3.
Páginas T309-T311 (marzo 2024)
Case and Research Letter
Acceso a texto completo
Low Clinical Relevance of Positive Patch Test Reactions to Limonene and/or Linalool Hydroperoxides in 247 Consecutive Patients with Eczema
Escasa relevancia clínica en los parches positivos a limoneno y/o linalool en 247 pacientes consecutivos con eccema
Visitas
2089
M. Llamas-Velascoa,b,
Autor para correspondencia
mar.llamasvelasco@gmail.com

Corresponding author.
, L. Martos-Cabrerab, B. Butrónb, J. Sánchez-Péreza,b
a Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IP), Madrid, España
b Departamento de Dermatología, Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, España
Contenido relacionado
M. Llamas-Velasco, L. Martos-Cabrera, B. Butrón, J. Sánchez-Pérez
Este artículo ha recibido
Información del artículo
Texto completo
Bibliografía
Descargar PDF
Estadísticas
Figuras (1)
Tablas (1)
Table 1. Clinical and epidemiological characteristics of tested patients.
Texto completo
To the Editor,

Hydroperoxides of limonene and linalool are found in common fragrances in half of all cosmetic products and household items out there. Also, they can be found in some foods in certain studies.1,2 Their most frequent use is as a food additive, in perfumes, and in cosmetics, and their oxidation products, especially furanoids, pyranoids, and hydroxyperoxides, increase their sensitizing capacity.3 (Fig. 1).

Figure 1.

Formulas of linalool and limonene, IUPAC name, and the main products where they can be present.

(0.44MB).

The frequency of positive patch tests to both hydroperoxides in some series of patients with contact dermatitis is high,2,4–6 but their relevance has been poorly studied.

Therefore, we patch-tested 247 consecutive patients with suspected contact dermatitis at Hospital de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain from 2019 through 2021, using the standard series from the Spanish Contact Dermatitis and Allergy Research Working Group (GEIDAC), to which we additionally added 0.5% and 1% limonene hydroperoxide, and 0.1% and 0.3% linalool hydroperoxide (Chemotechnique Diagnostics, Vellinge, Sweden). These allergens were prepared at the time to avoid oxidation. Readings obtained on days D2 and D4 in full compliance with the ESCD guidelines.7

Clinical information was collected before performing the patch tests. The application of a product containing terpene in the area affected by the eczema and its resolution upon discontinuing this drug was established as relevant in patients with positive patch tests.

A total of 21 out of the 247 patients tested (8.1%) showed positivity to, at least, 1 of the 2 hydroperoxides in some of the concentrations tested, 7 (2.8%) to limonene hydroxyperoxide, 14 (5.6%) to linalool hydroxyperoxide, and 3 (1.2%) to both.

Demographic and clinical data, as well as the results from the patch tests (negative or positive, regardless of intensity), are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Clinical and epidemiological characteristics of tested patients.

Sex/age  Hatopy  Loc  Epic limonene  Rel. limonene  Epic linalool  Rel. linalool  Rem. epic  Rel. other  Final diagnosis 
M/75  No  Folds  POS  NR  NEG    Hydrocortisone/Budesonide  CPR  ACD to corticoids 
M/44  No  T/Folds  POS  CPR  POS  CPR  Fragance m I/II  CPR  ACD to perfume 
W/77  No  T/A  NEG  −  POS  IR  None  −  Psoriasis 
M/74  No  NEG  −  POS  IR  Epoxy resin/benzisothiazolinone  NR/IR  Phytophotodermatitis 
W/55  Yes  NEG  −  POS  IR  MCI/MI, LL  CPR  ACD/ICD/Atopic d 
W/81  No  POS  IR  POS  IR  Ni  IR  Hiperpigmentation 
M/70  No  Sp  POS  UR  POS  UR  MCI/MI  CPR  ACD to preservatives 
W/72  No  NEG  −  POS  NR  Ni  PPR  ICD 
W/67  Yes  Sp  NEG  −  POS  NR  Phenoxyethanol/Ni/Benzisothiazolinone  CPR/PPR/IR  Atopic d 
W/33  Yes  Feet  NEG  −  POS  NR  Formaldehyde 2%/Quaternium imidozolidinylurea/  PR/PR/PR  Atopic d 
W/46  Yes  Folds  NEG  −  POS  NR  Ni  PR  Atopic d 
M/37  Yes  POS  NR  POS  NR  Black rubber/Cobalt/Textile dye mixture/Thiomersal  IR  Atopic d 
W/29  Yes  NEG    POS  IR  Ni/LL  IR  Atopic d 
W/47  Yes  S/T  POS  NR  NEG    PPD/Textile dye mixture  CPR  ACD PPD 
W/60  No  NEG  −  POS  NR  PPD/Textile dye mixture/NI  CPR/PPR  ACD PPD 
W/28  Yes  Sp  NEG  −  POS  UR  MCI/MI; M fragancies I, II  CPR/CPR  ACD to preservatives/fragancies 
W/49  Yes  Sp  NEG  −  POS  UR  Ni  PPR  Atopic d 
M/60  Yes  NEG  −  POS  NR  Fragance m I/Compositae  CPR/UR  ACD and Atopic d 
W/76  No  NEG  −  POS  UR  Sodium gold thiosulfate  IR  Cuperosis 
M/81  Yes  LL  POS  UR  NEG    Ni  PPR  ICD 
W/37  No  Sp  NEG  −  POS  UR  Ni  PPR  Cuperosis 

A, arms; ACD, allergic contact dermatitis; Atopic d, atopic dermatitis; CPR, current positive relevance; Epic, epicutaneous; F, face; Fragance m, fragance mix; H, hands; Hatopy, history of atopy; ICD: irritant contact dermatitis; IR, irritative; LL, lower limbs; loc, location of the lesion; M, man; MCI/MI: Methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone; NEG, negative; Ni, nickle; NR, non-relevant; POS, positive; PPD: paraphenylenediamine; PPR, past positive relevance; PR, past relevance; Rel., relevance; Rem. epic, remaining epicutaneous tests (only the positive ones shown); S, scalp; Sp, spread; T, trunk; UR, unknown relevance; W, woman.

The mean age of patients who tested positive to both terpenes was 57 years (range, 29-81 years). A total of 66% of the patients were women, and none had an occupational origin. The most frequently affected eczema ravaged regions were the hands (in 42% of our cases).

Only in 1 patient (4.7%) the hydroperoxides coexisting with concurrent contact sensitization to FM I and FM II were considered relevant. The remaining positive patches to linalool and/or limonene—a total of 6 (28.6%)—were irritative, not relevant, or of unknown relevance.

In 20 out of 21 patients, other positive reactions were found in the patch tests. The most common one, considered relevant, were 8 positive cases for nickel sulfate, with current or past relevance in 6 cases; 4 positive cases for methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI); 3 for FM I or II, and another 3 for paraphenylenediamine (PPD)/textile dye mixture. The diagnoses of patients with positive patches to hydroperoxides varied and included atopic dermatitis, allergic contact and irritant eczemas, and psoriasis, as seen in Table 1.

In this series of patients who were patch tested with limonene and linalool hydroperoxides with suspected contact dermatitis, most positive patches were irrelevant. In most patients, atopic dermatitis and irritant contact dermatitis explained the clinical lesions. In fact, in cases of contact dermatitis, other allergens from the standard series were involved.

The clinical relevance of hydroxyperoxides in the studies conducted varies widely, ranging from 29% to 97% of the cases reported.4-6 In the GEIDAC prospective series, it was considered that 50% of the patients had clinical relevance, with a prevalence of positive reactions in 5.1% of the patients.3 Nonetheless, the criteria used for relevance are classical, and they do not take the clinical course into consideration. In contrast, in our series, only 4.7% of the positive reactions reported were relevant, and these results are consistent with those reported by Natsch et al.8.

However, we agree with the authors of other series with high prevalences like ours, who also mentioned that the allocation of clinical relevance to these positive reactions is poorly documented and that criteria need to be standardized on this regard.9 Also, that patients with atopic dermatitis may show irritative reading patterns which may be different from those of the overall population.10

In our experience, the clinical relevance of both hydroperoxides is very low, meaning that exposure sources need to be thoroughly investigated before considering their inclusion in the standard series in Spain.

Conflicts of interest

M. Llamas-Velasco: participation in clinical trials, lectures, research support, and advisory boards of Abbvie, Amgen, Almirall, Boehringer, Brystol-Meyers, Celgene, Leo, Lilly, Janssen-Cilag, Novartis, and UCB.

J. Sánchez Pérez: research support, and participation in clinical trials for Abbvie, Almirall, Galderma, Leo, and Boehringer.

The remaining authors declared no conflicts of interest whatsoever.

None of the conflicts of interest reported are associated with the information provided in this article.

References
[1]
N. Bennike, N. Oturai, S. Müller, C.S. Kirkeb, C. Jørgensen, A.B. Christensen, et al.
Fragrance contact allergens in 5588 cosmetic products identified through a novel smartphone application.
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol., 32 (2018), pp. 79-85
[2]
I.A. Ogueta, J. Brared Christensson, E. Gimenez-Arnau, R. Brans, M. Wilkinson, L. Stingeni, et al.
Limonene and linalool hydroperoxides review: Pros and cons for routine patch testing.
Contact Dermatitis., 87 (2022), pp. 1-12
[3]
L.G. Deza, B. García-Bravo, J.F. Silvestre, M.A. Pastor-Nieto, R. González-Pérez, F. Heras-Mendaza, et al.
Contact sensitization to limonene and linalool hydroperoxides in Spain: A GEIDAC* prospective study.
Contact Dermatitis., 76 (2017), pp. 74-80
[4]
J. Bråred Christensson, S. Hellsén, A. Börje, A.T. Karlberg.
Limonene hydroperoxide analogues show specific patch test reactions.
Contact Dermatitis., 70 (2014), pp. 291-299
[5]
D. Dittmar, M.L. Schuttelaar.
Contact sensitization to hydroperoxides of limonene and linalool: Results of consecutive patch testing and clinical relevance.
Contact Dermatitis., 80 (2019), pp. 101-109
[6]
N.H. Bennike, C. Zachariae, J.D. Johansen.
Non-mix fragrances are top sensitizers in consecutive dermatitis patients — a cross-sectional study of the 26 EU-labelled fragrance allergens.
Contact Dermatitis., 77 (2017), pp. 270-279
[7]
J.D. Johansen, K. Aalto-Korte, T. Agner, K.E. Andersen, A. Bircher, M. Bruze, et al.
European Society of Contact Dermatitis guideline for diagnostic patch testing–recommendations on best practice.
Contact Dermatitis., 73 (2015), pp. 195-221
[8]
A. Natsch, M. Nägelin, H. Leijs, M. Van Strien, E. Giménez-Arnau, M. Very, et al.
Exposure source for skin sensitizing hydroperoxides of limonene and linalool remains elusive: An analytical market surveillance.
Food Chem Toxicol., 127 (2019), pp. 156-162
[9]
A. Ramzi, H. Ahmadi, I. Sadiktsis, U. Nilsson.
A two-dimensional non-comprehensive reversed/normal phase high-performance liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry system for determination of limonene and linalool hydroperoxides.
J Chromatogr A., 1566 (2018), pp. 102-110
[10]
J.K. Chen, S.E. Jacob, S.T. Nedorost, J.M. Hanifin, E.L. Simpson, M. Boguniewicz, et al.
A pragmatic approach to patch testing atopic dermatitis patients: Clinical recommendations based on expert consensus opinion.
Dermatitis., 27 (2016), pp. 186-192
Descargar PDF
Idiomas
Actas Dermo-Sifiliográficas
Opciones de artículo
Herramientas
es en

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?