Abstract:Dear Editor: The European Baseline Series (EBS) of contact allergens is used throughout Europe as a screening test to diagnose contact allergy as a proxy for allergy contact dermatitis and other hypersensitivity skin diseases (1). Parabens are alkyl esters of p-hydroxybenzoic acid with antimicrobial effects used as preservatives in cosmetics, foods, and drugs that have been included in the so called "baseline series" (2) for more than 40 years. Parabens, which are considered allergologically safe biocides and are classified as safe by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) in Europe (2-4), are frequently present in cosmetics (5). Despite extensive and progressively expanding use worldwide, studies confirm that parabens are seldom responsible for allergic contact dermatitis to cosmetics, and the frequency of sensitivity to parabens has been low and stable for many decades (2). The frequency of positive reactions to paraben mix is less than 0.5% in most clinical series, although it seems that when it occurs it is often of high clinical relevance (6). Nevertheless, several authors have stated that these patients rarely or never have to avoid foods or cosmetics that contain parabens to control their dermatitis (2). Paraben allergy most frequently occurs in patients with long-lasting stasis dermatitis or disruption of skin integrity, with high use of topical drugs, and in those who do not get better under normal treatment and/or skin care (5). The EBS has been periodically adapted by the European Environmental and Contact Dermatitis Research Group (EECDRG) and the European Society of Contact Dermatitis (ESCD), according to frequency studies, but ensuring that tested haptens remain relevant (1). Bruze et al. recommend that haptens should be considered for inclusion in a baseline series when the contact allergy prevalence is 0.5-1.0% or above (7). So, why not exclude paraben mix from the EBS? We analysed all the EBS tests performed at our institution in the last 21 years (2000-2020) to evaluate the frequency of positive reactions to paraben mix 16% pet (Chemotechnique diagnostics, Vellinge Sweden). In total, 5885 patients were patch tested (MOAHLFA index - Table 1), of whom 29 (10 men and 19 women) patients presented with a positive reaction (1+ or more according to ESCD guidelines) to paraben mix (0.49%), with positivity rates varying between 1.79% and 0.0% and progressively falling for the past 20 years (Figure 1). Present or past clinical relevance was found in 19/29 (65.5%) patients (6 men and 13 women), and was related to the use of topical drugs in 16 patients (55.2%) and cosmetics in three patients (10.3%). Paraben reactions occurred mostly in patients with history of leg ulcer, leg dermatitis, and/or chronic venous insufficiency, which is in agreement with the overrepresentation of the group of patients with leg dermatitis compared with the whole population tested (Table 1). The proportion of patients with positive reactions to paraben mix was significantly higher in patients with leg dermatitis compared with patients without leg dermatitis (P<0.05), as well in patients aged >40 (P<0.05), in whom these leg comorbidities are more frequent. Additionally, the higher number of reactions frequently coincided with the highest number of patients with leg dermatitis patch tested in the same year (Figure 1). Cosmetics were considered the causative factor in only three patients, which explains the identical percentage of facial and atopic dermatitis in the paraben mix positive group and the total population tested. As expected, both hand and occupational dermatitis were underrepresented in the group of positive reactions to parabens. In 34.5% of the patients, positive tests were considered not relevant or of unknown relevance. Therefore, in total only 0.32% of all paraben mix reactions were clinically relevant. Patch test reactivity to paraben mix of 0.49% supports the ongoing discussion that parabens should not continue in the baseline series, a position that is further strengthened by the fact that only 0.32% represent relevant reactions (8). As the most relevant sensitizations are related to topical medications and, less frequently, from cosmetics, paraben mix should be part of the topical drugs and cosmetic series.

Recommendation to include hydroxyethyl (meth)acrylate in the British baseline patch test series

2‐Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2‐HEMA) sensitization, a global epidemic at its peak in Spain?

Acrylates and Methacrylates Sensitization in Patients with Orthopedic and Dental Prostheses: Asymptomatic Pre-Implant and Symptomatic Post-Implant Testing

Recommendation to test limonene hydroperoxides 0·3% and linalool hydroperoxides 1·0% in the British baseline patch test series

Pandemic of sensitivity to acrylate containing nail cosmetic among young Israeli women? Result of patch testing 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate in the European baseline series

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

Relationships Between Acrylamide and Glycidamide Hemoglobin Adduct Levels and Allergy-Related Outcomes in General Us Population, Nhanes 2005-2006

Allergic contact dermatitis caused by nail acrylates in Europe. An EECDRG study

Contact allergy caused by acrylates in nail cosmetics: A pilot study from Greece

CD08 ‘If it’s not the hair maybe it’s in the air?’ A case of allergic contact dermatitis from airborne exposure to acrylates

Allergic Contact Dermatitis, Allergic Airborne Dermatitis, and Occupational Asthma Caused by (meth)acrylates in Artificial Nails

The importance of propolis in patch testing--a multicentre survey

CD12 A case of occupational acrylate allergy: a success story!

CD02 What is the relevance of epoxy resin in the baseline series?

Examining the benefits of extended patch test series in children: a comprehensive analysis

Positive Patch Test Reactions to Carba Mix and Thiuram Mix: The North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience (1994-2016)

Twenty‐eight‐day follow‐up of patch test reactions to p‐phenylenediamine and p‐phenylenediamine dihydrochloride: A multicentre study on behalf of the European Environmental and Contact Dermatitis Research Group

What is the added value of patch testing with 30 fragrance allergens in addition to the European Baseline series?

Should Paraben Mix Be Removed from The European Baseline Series

Importance of Supplemental Patch Testing Beyond a Screening Series for Patients With Dermatitis: The North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience

British Society for Cutaneous AllergyOral presentationsCD01 Isobornyl acrylate in nail cosmetics