Sensitisation to the acrylate co‐polymers glyceryl acrylate/acrylic acid co‐polymer, sodium polyacrylate and acrylates/C10‐30 alkyl acrylate cross‐polymer (Carbopol®) is rare
Livia F. Soriano,M. M. U. Chowdhury,Philippa Cousen,Simon Dawe,Sharizan A. Ghaffar,Adam Haworth,Catherine R. Holden,Aoife Hollywood,Graham A. Johnston,Stephen Kirk,Avad A. Mughal,David I. Orton,Robin Parker,Asha Rajeev,Krisztina Scharrer,Aparna Sinha,Natalie M. Stone,Donna Thompson,Sarah Wakelin,Heather Whitehouse,Catriona Wootton,Deirdre A. Buckley
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.14679
2024-08-28
Contact Dermatitis
Abstract:A BSCA audit (September 2021–2022) across 20 patch test centres in the UK and Ireland assessed sensitisation to three acrylate co‐polymers in 1302 patients. The results showed minimal reactions: one doubtful, one irritant to glyceryl acrylate/acrylic acid co‐polymer; four irritant, one doubtful, one 1+ to sodium polyacrylate; none to Carbopol®. Background Acrylate polymers and cross‐polymers (ACPs) are frequently used cosmetic ingredients. The British Society for Cutaneous Allergy (BSCA) and the UK Cosmetic, Toiletry and Perfumery Association (CTPA) collaborated to investigate the allergenic potential of three commonly‐used ACPs. Objectives The objective of this study is to determine the prevalence of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to three ACPs: glyceryl acrylate/acrylic acid co‐polymer, sodium polyacrylate, and acrylates/C10‐30 alkyl acrylate cross‐polymer (Carbopol®). Materials and Methods The BSCA prospectively audited data collected from 20 centres in the UK and Ireland between 1st September 2021 and 1st September 2022. Patients with suspected ACD to (meth)acrylates, with facial dermatitis, or consecutive patients, were patch tested to glyceryl acrylate/acrylic acid co‐polymer 10% aqueous (aq.) sodium polyacrylate 2% aq., and to acrylates/C10‐30 alkyl acrylate cross‐polymer 2% aq. (Carbopol®). The frequencies of positive, irritant, and doubtful reactions were recorded. Results In total, 1302 patients were patch tested. To glyceryl acrylate/acrylic acid co‐polymer, there was one doubtful reaction in a patient allergic to multiple (meth)acrylates, and one irritant. To sodium polyacrylate, there were four irritant reactions, one doubtful, and one positive reaction; in all cases, relevance was unknown and there was no demonstrable (meth)acrylate allergy. There were no reactions to Carbopol®. Conclusions Sensitisation to these concentrations of the three tested ACPs is rare. Elicitation of dermatitis in (meth)acrylate‐sensitised patients by exposure to these three ACPs appears unlikely.
dermatology,allergy