CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 10Contact Dermatitis and AllergiesDrug-Induced Adverse ReactionsDermatology and Skin Diseases

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

High rate of sensitization to Kathon CG, detected by patch tests in patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis

Open access
Silva, Eliane Aparecida, Bosco, Marcia Regina Miras, Lozano, Rejane Rojas, Latini, Ana Carla Pereira, Souza, Vânia Nieto Brito de·2020·Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia
DOI 10.1016/j.abd.2019.09.026PMC PMC7175102
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Kathon CG, a combination of methylchloroisothiazolinone and methylisothiazolinone, is widely used as preservative in cosmetics, as well in household cleaning products, industrial products such as paints and glues. It has emerged as an important sensitizing agent in allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the reactivity to this substance in patients subjected to patch tests at the Dermatology Institute in Bauru, São Paulo from 2015 to 2017 and its correlation with other preservatives, the professional activity and location of the lesions. METHODS: The patients were submitted to standard series of epicutaneous tests, standardized by the Brazilian Group Studies on Contact Dermatitis. RESULTS: Out the 267 patients tested, 192 presented positivity to at least one substance and 29 of the patients (15.10%) presented reaction to Kathon CG, with predominance of the female gender (n=27); main professional activity associated with Kathon CG sensibilization was cleaning (17.24%), followed by aesthetic areas (13.79%) and health care (10.34%). The most prevalent sensitizations among the substances tested were nickel sulphate (56.3%), followed by cobalt chloride (23.4%), neomycin (18.2%), potassium dichromate (17.7%), thimerosal (14.5%), formaldehyde (13.2%), paraphenylenediamine (9.3%), and fragrance mix (8.3%). STUDY LIMITATIONS: We do not have data from patients that were submitted to patch test a decade ago in order to confront to current data and establish whether or no sensitization to Kathon CG has increased. CONCLUSION: High positivity to Kathon CG corroborates the recent findings in the literature, suggesting more attention to concentration of this substance, used in cosmetics and products for domestic use.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.abd.2019.09.026

Cites

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Location and frequency of lesions in patients with positive tests (percentage).
Figure 1 Location and frequency of lesions in patients with positive tests (percentage).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Characteristics of patients with positive results to the Kathon CG (n = 29).
Figure 2 Characteristics of patients with positive results to the Kathon CG (n = 29).CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Ayala, 1996, Statistical evaluation of the persistence of acquired hypersensitivity by standardized patch tests, Contact Dermatitis, 34, 354, 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1996.tb02222.x · DOI
  2. Grupo Brasileiro de Estudo em Dermatite de Contato. Estudo multicêntrico para elaboração de uma bateria padrão brasileira de teste de contato. An Bras Dermatol. 2000;75:147–56.
  3. Duarte, 1989, Utilização da bateria de testes epicutâneos preconizados pelo International Contact Dermatitis Research Group (ICDRG) em população não selecionada de São Paulo, An Bras Dermatol, 64, 207
  4. Serra Baldrich, 1995, Contact dermatitis: clinical review of 800 patients tested using the standard European series, Allergol Immunopathol (Madr), 23, 67
  5. Scherrer, 2014, Increasing trend of sensitization to Methylchloroisothiazolinone/Methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI), An Bras Dermatol, 89, 527, 10.1590/abd1806-4841.20142852 · DOI
  6. Urwin, 2013, Methylchloroisothiazolinone and methylisothiazolinone contact allergy: a new epidemic, Contact Dermatitis, 68, 253, 10.1111/cod.12064 · DOI
  7. Geier, 2012, Recent increase in allergic reactions to methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone: is methylisothiazolinone the culprit?, Contact Dermatitis, 67, 334, 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2012.02157.x · DOI
  8. Mowad, 2000, Methylchloroisothiazolinone revisited, Am J Contact Dermat, 11, 115, 10.1053/AC.2000.6344 · DOI
  9. Lundov, 2010, Prevalence and cause of methylisothiazolinone contact allergy, Contact Dermatitis, 63, 164, 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2010.01774.x · DOI
  10. Duarte, 2013, Patch test standard series recommended by the Brazilian Contact Dermatitis Study Group during the 2006–2011 period, An Bras Dermatol, 88, 1015, 10.1590/abd1806-4841.20132374 · DOI
  11. Duarte, 2000, Dermatite de contato, An Bras Dermatol, 75, 529
  12. Schnuch, 2011, Genetic factors in contact allergy – review and future goals, Contact Dermatitis, 64, 2, 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2010.01800.x · DOI
  13. Pónyai, 2016, Methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone and methylisothiazolinone sensitivity in Hungary, Dermatol Res Pract, 2016, 4579071, 10.1155/2016/4579071 · DOI
  14. Lundov, 2011, Methylisothiazolinone contact allergy: a review, Br J Dermatol, 165, 1178, 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2011.10523.x · DOI
  15. Uter, 2012, Current patch test results with the European baseline series and extensions to it from the “European Surveillance System on Contact Allergy” network, 2007–2008, Contact Dermatitis, 67, 9, 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2012.02070.x · DOI
  16. García-Bravo, 2004, Estudio epidemiológico de la dermatitis alérgica de contacto em España (2001), Actas Dermo Sifiliogr, 95, 14, 10.1016/S0001-7310(04)79199-1 · DOI
  17. García Gavín, 2011, Epidemiología del eczema de contacto en España, Resultados de la Red Española de Vigilancia en Alergia de Contacto (REVAC) durante el año 2008, Actas Dermosifiliogr, 102, 98, 10.1016/j.ad.2010.10.015 · DOI
  18. Sampaio, 2008, Eczema ou Dermatite Eczematosa de Contato, Dermatologia, 189
  19. Mose, 2012, Occupational contact dermatitis in painters: an analysis of patch test data from the Danish Contact Dermatitis Group, Contact Dermatitis, 67, 293, 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2012.02074.x · DOI
  20. Statham, 2010, Concomitant contact allergy to methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone and formaldehyde releasing preservatives, Contact Dermatitis, 62, 56, 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2009.01653.x · DOI
  21. Pontén, 2016, Concomitant contact allergies to formaldehyde, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, methylisothiazolinone, and fragrance mixes I and II, Contact Dermatitis, 5, 285, 10.1111/cod.12598 · DOI
  22. Duarte, 2011, Allergic contact dermatitis in private practice: what are the main sensitizers?, Dermatitis, 22, 225, 10.2310/6620.2011.11009 · DOI
  23. Dinkloh, 2015, Contact sensitization in patients with suspected cosmetic intolerance: results of the IVDK 2006–2011, J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol, 29, 1071, 10.1111/jdv.12750 · DOI

Cited by

See all 10

Metadata

Authors
Silva, E. A., Bosco, M. R. M., Lozano, R. R., Latini, A. C. P., & Souza, V. N. B. D.
Affiliations
Instituto Lauro de Souza Lima (BR)
Corresponding author
Silva, Eliane Aparecida
ORCID
Venue
Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-03
Volume
95
Issue
2
Pages
194-199
ISSN
0365-0596 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.abd.2019.09.026
PMC
PMC7175102
OpenAlex
W3003981741
Cited by
10
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Contact Dermatitis and Allergies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Drug-Induced Adverse Reactions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Dermatology and Skin Diseases
Keywords
Kathon CG, methylchloroisothiazolinone, methylisothiazolinone, allergic contact dermatitis, sensitization, preservatives, patch testing, occupational exposure, cleaning agents, cosmetics, nickel sulfate, thimerosal, formaldehyde, fragrance mix
MeSH terms
Adult, Brazil, Cosmetics, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patch Tests, Preservatives, Pharmaceutical, Retrospective Studies, Thiazoles, Logistic Models, Dermatitis, Allergic Contact, Statistics, Nonparametric

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: High rate of sensitization to Kathon CG, detected by patch tests in patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.abd.2019.09.026
The paper
Silva, E. A., Bosco, M. R. M., Lozano, R. R., Latini, A. C. P., & Souza, V. N. B. D. (2020). High rate of sensitization to Kathon CG, detected by patch tests in patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis. Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abd.2019.09.026