Propyl gallate on liposomes

A hypothesis suggesting that the allergic potential of propyl gallate is boosted by its attachment to liposomes in cosmetics is put forward. 13 women with allergy to propyl gallate are presented.     

Allergic contact dermatitis from propyl gallate: dose response comparison using various application methods

The antioxidant propyl gallate, in a deodorant product, caused an allergic contact dermatitis in 1 subject during developmental controlled use testing. Subsequent dose response elicitation studies with this subject revealed a differing threshold of sensitivity to propyl gallate dependent upon application method. Increasing the level of occlusion increased the elicitation response. Responsiveness from greatest to least was: occluded patch on the upper arm greater than semi-occluded axilla greater than open application on the antecubital fossa. The thresholds determined for propyl gallate (w/v in 25:75 ethanol:water) were: (a) 0.0025% for the upper arm occluded patch; (b) 0.0035% for the underarm without shaving; (c) 0.005% for the underarm with shaving; (d) 0.015% for the antecubital fossa. Occluded patch responsiveness to propyl gallate was monitored and remained unchanged throughout a 2-year period. These data are useful in understanding the relationship between occlusive allergic contact dermatitis patch testing and clinical contact dermatitis.     

Positive rates to propyl gallate on patch testing: a change in trend

Propyl gallate (E310) has, until recently, been used as a major antioxidant in fatty food and, in the cosmetic industry, in the manufacture of lipsticks. Propyl gallate has a high sensitizing potential; however, the frequency of allergic contact dermatitis from antioxidants of the gallate type was previously thought to be surprisingly low. Previous exposure and orally induced tolerance, as suggested by Khan and colleagues, may have explained the low rates of allergic contact dermatitis to propyl gallate in the past. The objectives were to assess the prevalence of allergic contact dermatitis to propyl gallate in our centre from 1988 to 2005. From 1988 to 2005, 9529 patients were patch tested to the face series, 6973 were females and 2556 were males. Patch tests were read at 2 D and 4 D. Positive reactions were scored as per International Contact Dermatitis Research Group recommendations as negative, +, ++, and +++ reactions. Propyl gallate was used at a 1% petrolatum (pet.). A total of 55 patients had positive reactions to propyl gallate 1% pet. (0.57%), 46 were female (0.65%) and 9 were male (0.33%). Using chi-square, there was a significant difference ( P < 0.05) in the positivity rates between the 1988–96 period (0.45%) and the 1997–2005 period (0.77%). A review of our face series performed in the last 18 years has shown a statistically significant increase in propyl gallate-positive rates on patch testing over the last decade. An increase in its use in the cosmetic industry may well be the explanation for this. Nevertheless, a concomitant reduction of propyl gallate as an antioxidant in food, with oral tolerance being less likely to develop, may also be a contributing factor in the increasing trend of allergic contact dermatitis caused by propyl gallate.