Registration Dossier

Toxicological information

Sensitisation data (human)

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Endpoint:
sensitisation data (humans)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
weight of evidence
Reliability:
4 (not assignable)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: Unsuitable test system or conditions and/or insufficient reporting of methods and/or results data.

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
review article or handbook
Title:
The lanolin Paradox
Author:
Wolf R
Year:
1996
Bibliographic source:
Dermatology, 1996, 192, 198-202

Materials and methods

Type of sensitisation studied:
skin
Study type:
other: Review/comment
Test guideline
Qualifier:
no guideline required
Principles of method if other than guideline:
This publication is a review/comment on the contemporary knowledge of Lanolin and sensitization. The author briefly described some of the early studies of Lanolin and skin sensitization potential.
GLP compliance:
no
Remarks:
Not relevant

Test material

Reference
Name:
Unnamed
Type:
Constituent
Details on test material:
Not relevant

Method

Type of population:
other: Not applicable
Ethical approval:
not applicable
Subjects:
not applicable
Clinical history:
Not applicable
Controls:
Not applicable
Route of administration:
dermal
Details on study design:
This publication is a review/comment on the contemporary knowledge of Lanolin and sensitization. The author briefly described some of the early studies of Lanolin and skin sensitization potential.

Results and discussion

Results of examinations:
This publication is a review/comment on the contemporary knowledge of Lanolin and sensitization. The author briefly described some of the early studies of Lanolin and skin sensitization potential. Four “Lanolin Paradoxes” are presented: 1) Lanolin in topical therapeutic agents sensitizes a high proportion of patients whereas the same concentration in cosmetics do not, 2) Patients with an allergic contact dermatitis to lanolin in a medication applied to a stasis ulcer can nevertheless use lanolin-containing cosmetics and not experience a reaction, 3) Lanolin-sensitive individuals often show false-negative patch test reactions to unaltered Lanolin, 4) Patch-testing with 30% wool wax alcohols can not be considered a reliable method for testing for Lanolin skin sensitization potential as there are too many false positive and false negatives. Each of these paradoxes is supported by examples.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Conclusions:
This publication is a review of various observations related to Lanolin and skin sensitization.
Executive summary:

This publication is a review/comment on the contemporary knowledge of Lanolin and sensitization. The author briefly described some of the early studies of Lanolin and skin sensitization potential. Four “Lanolin Paradoxes” are presented: 1) Lanolin in topical therapeutic agents sensitizes a high proportion of patients whereas the same concentration in cosmetics do not, 2) Patients with an allergic contact dermatitis to lanolin in a medication applied to a stasis ulcer can nevertheless use lanolin-containing cosmetics and not experience a reaction, 3) Lanolin-sensitive individuals often show false-negative patch test reactions to unaltered Lanolin, 4) Patch-testing with 30% wool wax alcohols can not be considered a reliable method for testing for Lanolin skin sensitization potential as there are too many false positive and false negatives. Each of these paradoxes is supported by examples.

 

Evaluation and conclusion:

This publication is a review of various observations related to Lanolin and skin sensitization.