• 1
    Schnuch A, Geier J, Uter W et al. National rates and regional differences in sensitization to allergens of the standard series. Population adjusted frequencies of sensitization (PAFS) in 40,000 patients from a multicenter study (IVDK). Contact Dermatitis 1997: 37: 200209.
  • 2
    Schnuch A, Lessmann H, Geier J, Frosch P J, Uter W. Contact allergy to fragrances: frequencies of sensitization from 1996 to 2002. Results of the IVDK. Contact Dermatitis 2004: 50: 6576.
  • 3
    Schnuch A, Uter W, Geier J, Gefeller O. Epidemiology of contact allergy: an estimation of morbidity employing the clinical epidemiology and drug utilisation research (CE-DUR) approach. Contact Dermatitis 2002: 47: 3239.
  • 4
    Frosch P J, Johansen J D, Menné T et al. Further important sensitizers in patients sensitive to fragrances. I. Reactivity to frequently used chemicals. Contact Dermatitis 2002: 47: 7885.
  • 5
    Frosch P J, Pirker C, Rastogi S C et al. Patch testing with a new fragrance mix detects additional patients sensitive to perfumes and missed by the current fragrance mix. Contact Dermatitis 2005: 52: 207215.
  • 6
    Katsarma G, Gawkrodger D J. Suspected fragrance allergy requires extended patch testing to individual fragrance allergens. Contact Dermatitis 1999: 41: 193197.
  • 7
    Schnuch A, Uter W, Geier J, Lessmann H, Frosch P J. Contact allergy to farnesol in 2021 consecutively patch tested patients. Results of the IVDK. Contact Dermatitis 2004: 50: 117121.
  • 8
    Frosch P J, Johansen J D, Menné T et al. Lyral® is an important sensitizer in patients sensitive to fragrances. Br J Dermatol 1999: 141: 10761083.
  • 9
    Geier J, Brasch J, Schnuch A et al. Lyral® has been included in the patch test standard series in Germany. Contact Dermatitis 2002: 46: 295297.
  • 10
    Directive 2003/15/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 February 2003 amending Council Directive 76/768/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products. Off J Eur Union 2003: L66: 2635.
  • 11
    Uter W, Schnuch A, Geier J, Frosch P J. Epidemiology of contact dermatitis: the information network of the departments of dermatology (IVDK) in Germany – a surveillance system on contact allergies. Eur J Dermatol 1998: 8: 3640.
  • 12
    Fregert S. Manual of Contact Dermatitis. On behalf of the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group and the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 2nd edition. Copenhagen, Munksgaard Publishers, 1981.
  • 13
    Schnuch A, Aberer W, Agathos M, Brasch J, Frosch P J, Richter G. Leitlinien der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft (DDG) zur Durchführung des Epikutantests mit Kontaktallergenen. Hautarzt 2001: 52: 864866.
  • 14
    Wahlberg J E, Lindberg M. Patch testing. In: Contact Dermatitis, 4th edition, Frosch, Menné, Lepoittevin (eds): Berlin, Springer, 2006: 365390.
  • 15
    Schnuch A. PAFS – population adjusted frequency of sensitization (I) – influence of sex and age. Contact Dermatitis 1996: 34: 377382.
  • 16
    Brasch J, Geier J, Henseler T. Evaluation of patch test results by use of the reaction index – an analysis of data recorded by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK). Contact Dermatitis 1995: 33: 375380.
  • 17
    Geier J, Uter W, Lessmann H, Schnuch A. The positivity ratio – another parameter to assess the diagnostic quality of a patch test preparation. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 280282.
  • 18
    Hausen B M, Brinkmann J, Dohn W. Lexikon der Kontaktallergene. Landsberg am Lech, Ecomed Fachverlag, 1992/1994.
  • 19
    Buckley D A, Wakelin S H, Seed P T, Holloway D, Rycroft R J G, White I R, McFadden J P. The frequency of fragrance allergy in a patch-test population over a 17-year period. Br J Dermatol 2000: 142: 279283.
  • 20
    Johansen J D, Heydorn S, Menné T. Oak moss extracts in the diagnosis of fragrance contact allergy. Contact Dermatitis 2002: 46: 157161.
  • 21
    Schnuch A, Geier J, Uter W, Frosch P J. Another look at allergies to fragrances: frequencies of sensitization to the fragrance mix and its constituents. Results from the IVDK. Exogenous Dermatol 2002: 1: 231237.
  • 22
    Johansen J D, Andersen K E, Svedman C et al. Chloroatranol, an extremely potent allergen hidden in perfumes: a dose-response elicitation study. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 49: 180184.
  • 23
    Johansen J D, Bernard G, Gimenez-Arnau E, Lepoittevin J P, Bruze M, Andersen K E. Comparison of elicitation potential of chloroatranol and atranol – 2 allergens in oak moss absolute. Contact Dermatitis 2006: 54: 192195.
  • 24
    Rastogi S C, Bossi R, Johansen J D, Menné T, Bernard G, Gimenez-Arnau E, Lepoittevin J P. Content of oak moss allergens atranol and chloroatranol in perfumes and similar products. Contact Dermatitis 2004: 50: 367370.
  • 25
    Uter W, Gefeller O, Geier J, Schnuch A. Limited concordance between “oakmoss” and colophony in clinical patch testing. J Invest Dermatol 2001: 116: 478479.
  • 26
    Buckley D A, Rycroft R J, White I R, McFadden J P. Contaminating resin acids have not caused the high rate of sensitivity to oak moss. Contact Dermatitis 2002: 47: 1920.
  • 27
    Frosch P J, Pilz B, Andersen K E et al. Patch testing with fragrances: results of a multicenter study of the European Environmental and Contact Dermatitis Research Group with 48 frequently used constituents of perfumes. Contact Dermatitis 1995: 33: 333342.
  • 28
    Frosch P J, Rastogi S C, Pirker C et al. Patch testing with a new fragrance mix – reactivity to the individual constituents and chemical detection in relevant cosmetic products. Contact Dermatitis 2005: 52: 216225.
  • 29
    Johansen J D, Frosch P J, Svedman C, Andersen K E, Bruze M, Pirker C, Menné T. Hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde known as Lyral: quantitative aspects and risk assessment of an important fragrance allergen. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 310316.
  • 30
    Hendriks S A, Van-Ginkel C J. Evaluation of the fragrance mix in the European standard series. Contact Dermatitis 1999: 41: 161162.
  • 31
    Basketter D A, Blaikie L, Dearman R J et al. Use of the local lymph node assay for the estimation of relative contact allergenic potency. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 344348.
  • 32
    Basketter D A, Evans P, Gerberick G F, Kimber I A. Factors affecting thresholds in allergic contact dermatitis: safety and regulatory considerations. Contact Dermatitis 2002: 47: 16.
  • 33
    Barratt M D, Basketter D A. Possible origin of the skin sensitization potential of isoeugenol and related compounds. (I). Preliminary studies of potential reaction mechanisms. Contact Dermatitis 1992: 27: 98104.
  • 34
    Larsen W, Nakayama H, Lindberg M et al. Fragrance contact dermatitis: A worldwide multicenter investigation (part I). Am J Contact Dermat 1996: 7(2): 7783.
  • 35
    Johansen J D, Andersen K E, Menné T. Quantitative aspects of isoeugenol contact allergy assessed by use and patch tests. Contact Dermatitis 1996: 34: 414418.
  • 36
    Andersen K E. Time/dose relationships in elicitation of isoeugenol contact allergy. Am J Contact Dermat 2000: 11: 134 Abstr 31.
  • 37
    Bruze M, Johansen J D, Andersen K E et al. Deodorants: an experimental provocation study with isoeugenol. Contact Dermatitis 2005: 52: 260267.
  • 38
    Rastogi S C, Heydorn S, Johansen J D, Basketter D A. Fragrance chemicals in domestic and occupational products. Contact Dermatitis 2001: 45: 221225.
  • 39
    Rastogi S C, Johansen J D, Menné T et al. Contents of fragrance allergens in children’s cosmetics and cosmetic-toys. Contact Dermatitis 1999: 41: 8488.
  • 40
    Johansen J D, Rastogi S C, Menné T. Exposure to selected fragrance materials. A case study of fragrance-mix-positive eczema patients. Contact Dermatitis 1996: 34: 106110.
  • 41
    Ford R A, Api A M, Suskind R R. Allergic contact sensitization potential of hydroxycitronellal in humans. Food Chem Toxicol 1988: 26: 921926.
  • 42
    Krasteva M, Peguet-Navarro J, Moulon C, Courtellemont P, Redziniak G, Schmitt D. In vitro primary sensitization of hapten-specific T cells by cultured human epidermal Langerhans cells – a screening predictive assay for contact sensitizers. Clin Exp Allergy 1996: 26: 563570.
  • 43
    Suskind R R. The hydroxycitronellal story: what can we learn from it?. In: Fragrances – Beneficial and Adverse Effects, FroschP J, JohansenJ D, WhiteI R (eds): Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Springer, 1998: 159165.
  • 44
    Svedman C, Bruze M, Johansen J D et al. Deodorants: an experimental provocation study with hydroxycitronellal. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 217223.
  • 45
    Heydorn S, Menné T, Andersen K E, Bruze M, Svedman C, Basketter D, Johansen J D. The fragrance hand immersion study – an experimental model simulating real-life exposure for allergic contact dermatitis on the hands. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 324330.
  • 46
    Heydorn S, Andersen K E, Johansen J D, Menné T. A stronger patch test elicitation reaction to the allergen hydroxycitronellal plus the irritant sodium lauryl sulfate. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 49: 133139.
  • 47
    Basketter D A, Chamberlain M. Validation of skin sensitization assays. Food Chem Toxicol 1995: 33: 10571059.
  • 48
    Opdyke D L J. Fragrance raw materials monographs: cinnamic aldeyhde. Food Cosmet Toxicol 1979: 17: 253258.
  • 49
    Marzulli F N, Maibach H I. Contact allergy: predictive testing of fragrance ingredients in humans by Draize and maximization methods. J Environ Pathol Toxicol 1980: 3: 235245.
  • 50
    Basketter D A, Wright Z M, Warbrick E V, Dearman R J, Kimber I, Ryan C A, Gerberick G F, White I R. Human potency predictions for aldehydes using the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2001: 45: 8994.
  • 51
    Patlewicz G, Basketter D A, Smith C K, Hotchkiss S A M, Roberts D W. Skin-sensitization structure-activity relationships for aldehydes. Contact Dermatitis 2001: 44: 331336.
  • 52
    Gerberick G F, Robinson M K, Felter S P, White I R, Basketter D A. Understanding fragrance allergy using an exposure-based risk assessment approach. Contact Dermatitis 2001: 45: 333340.
  • 53
    Bruze M, Johansen J D, Andersen K E et al. Deodorants: an experimental provocation study with cinnamic aldehyde. J Am Acad Dermatol 2003: 48: 194200.
  • 54
    Johansen J D, Andersen K E, Rastogi S C, Menné T. Threshold responses in cinnamic-aldehyde-sensitive subjects: results and methodological aspects. Contact Dermatitis 1996: 34: 165171.
  • 55
    Belsito D V, Fowler J F, Sasseville D, Marks J G, DeLeo V A, Storrs F J. Delayed-type hypersensitivity to fragrance materials in a select North American population. Dermatitis 2006: 17: 2328.
  • 56
    Brites M M, Goncalo M, Figueiredo A. Contact allergy to fragrance mix – a 10-year study. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 43: 181182.
  • 57
    Johansen J D, Menné T. The fragrance mix and its constituents: a 14-year material. Contact Dermatitis 1995: 32: 1823.
  • 58
    Rastogi S C, Menné T, Johansen J D. The composition of fine fragrances is changing. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 130132.
  • 59
    Cheung C, Hotchkiss S A, Pease C K. Cinnamic compound metabolism in human skin and the role metabolism may play in determining relative sensitisation potency. J Dermatol Sci 2003: 31: 919.
  • 60
    Weibel H, Hansen J. Penetration of the fragrance compounds, cinnamaldehyde and cinnamyl alcohol, through human skin in vitro. Contact Dermatitis 1989: 20: 167172.
  • 61
    Geier J, Schnuch A. Reaktionen auf Zimtalkohol und Zimtaldehyd. Dermatosen 1997: 45: 2930.
  • 62
    Haustein U-F, Herrmann J, Hoppe U, Engel W, Sauermann G. Growth inhibition of coryneform bacteria by a mixture of three natural products – farnesol, glyceryl monolaurate, and phenoxyethanol: HGQ. J Soc Cosmet Chem 1993: 44: 211220.
  • 63
    Sugai T. Group study IV – farnesol and lily aldehyde. Environ Dermatol 1994: 1: 213214.
  • 64
    Malten K E, Van-Ketel W G, Nater J P, Liem D H. Reactions in selected patients to 22 fragrance materials. Contact Dermatitis 1984: 11: 110.
  • 65
    Goossens A, Merckx L. Allergic contact dermatitis from farnesol in a deodorant. Contact Dermatitis 1997: 37: 179180.
  • 66
    Hemmer W, Focke M, Leitner B, Gotz M, Jarisch R. Axillary dermatitis from farnesol in a deodorant. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 168169.
  • 67
    Devos S A, Constandt L. Contact dermatitis from a dry stick deodorant. Contact Dermatitis 2002: 47: 170171.
  • 68
    Hausen B M, Evers P, Stüwe H T, König W A, Wollenweber E. Propolis allergy (IV). Studies with further sensitizers from propolis and constituents common to propolis, poplar buds and balsam of Peru. Contact Dermatitis 1992: 26: 3444.
  • 69
    Hausen B M, Simatupang T, Bruhn G, Evers P, Koenig W A. Identification of new allergenic constituents and proof of evidence for coniferyl benzoate in Balsam of Peru. Am J Contact Dermat 1995: 6: 199208.
  • 70
    Schnuch A, Geier J, Lessmann H, Uter W. Rückgang der Nickelkontakt-allergie in den letzten Jahren. Eine Folge der “Nickel-Verordnung”? Auswertungen der Daten des IVDK der Jahre 1992–2001. Hautarzt 2003: 54: 626532.
  • 71
    Rastogi S C, Johansen J D, Frosch P et al. Deodorants on the European market: quantitative chemical analysis of 21 fragrances. Contact Dermatitis 1998: 38: 2935.
  • 72
    Rastogi S C, Lepoittevin J-P, Johansen J D et al. Fragrances and other materials in deodorants: search for potentially sensitizing molecules using combined GC-MS and structure activity relationship (SAR) analysis. Contact Dermatitis 1998: 39: 293303.
  • 73
    Rastogi S C, Johansen J D, Menné T. Natural ingredients based cosmetics. Content of selected fragrance sensitizers. Contact Dermatitis 1996: 34: 423426.
  • 74
    Calnan C D, Cronin E, Rycroft R J. Allergy to perfume ingredients. Contact Dermatitis 1980: 6: 500501.
  • 75
    Romaguera C, Camarasa J M, Alomar A, Grimalt F. Patch tests with allergens related to cosmetics. Contact Dermatitis 1983: 9: 167168.
  • 76
    De-Groot A C, Coenraads P J, Bruynzeel D P et al. Routine patch testing with fragrance chemicals in The Netherlands. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 184185.
  • 77
    Gerberick G F, Robinson M K, Ryan C A et al. Contact allergenic potency: correlation of human and local lymph node assay data. Am J Contact Dermat 2001: 12: 156161.
  • 78
    Kayser D, Schlede E, (Hrsg.). Chemikalien und Kontaktallergie – eine bewertende Zusammenstellung. München, MMV Medizin Verlag, 1995.
  • 79
    Heydorn S, Johansen J D, Andersen K E, Bruze M, Svedman C, White I R, Basketter D A, Menné T. Fragrance allergy in patients with hand eczema – a clinical study. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 317323.
  • 80
    Heydorn S, Menné T, Andersen K E, Bruze M, Svedman C, White I R, Basketter D A. Citral a fragrance allergen and irritant. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 49: 3236.
  • 81
    Kunkeler A C, Weijland J W, Bruynzeel D P. The role of coumarin in patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 1998: 39: 327328.
  • 82
    Matura M, Skold M, Borje A et al. Selected oxidized fragrance terpenes are common contact allergens. Contact Dermatitis 2005: 52: 320328.
  • 83
    Schnuch A, Lessmann H, Geier J, Uter W. White petrolatum (Ph. Eur.) is virtually non-sensitizing. Analysis of IVDK data on 80 000 patients tested between 1992 and 2004 and short discussion of identification and designation of allergens. Contact Dermatitis 2006: 54: 338343.
  • 84
    Dearman R J, Wright Z M, Basketter D A, Ryan C A, Gerberick G F, Kimber I. The suitability of hexyl cinnamic aldehyde as a calibrant for the murine local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2001: 44: 357361.
  • 85
    Mitchell J C, Adams R M, Glendenning W E et al. Results of standard patch tests with substances abandoned. Contact Dermatitis 1982: 8: 336337.
  • 86
    Fergurson J, Sharma S. Cinnamic aldehyde test concentrations [letter]. Contact Dermatitis 1984: 10: 191192.
  • 87
    Adams R M, Maibach H I. A five-year study of cosmetic reactions. J Am Acad Dermatol 1985: 13: 10621069.
  • 88
    Heydorn S, Menné T, Johansen J D. Fragrance allergy and hand eczema – a review. Contact Dermatitis 2003: 48: 5966.
  • 89
    Hausen B M Rauchen, Süßigkeiten, Perubalsam – ein circulus vitiosus? Beobachtungen zur Perubalsamallergie. Akt Dermatol 2001: 27: 136143.
  • 90
    Benzyl benzoate. In: Martindale. The Extra Pharmacopoeia, 31st edition, ReynoldsJ E F. (ed.): London, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, 1996: 1431.
  • 91
    Basketter D A, Flyvholm M A, Menné T. Classification criteria for skin-sensitizing chemicals: a commentary. Contact Dermatitis 1999: 40: 175182.