J. Cosmet. Sci., 66, 313–323 (September/October 2015) 313 Risk assessment of allergen metals in cosmetic products HANDE SIPAHI, MOHAMMAD CHAREHSAZ, ZERRIN GÜNGÖR, ONUR ERDEM, BUĞRA SOYKUT, CEMAL AKAY, and AHMET AYDIN, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Pharmacy, Yeditepe University, Istanbul 34755 (H.S., M.C., Z.G., A.A.), and Department of Toxicology, Gulhane Military Medical Academy, Ankara 06010 (O.E., B.S., C.A.), Turkey. Accepted for publication June 12, 2015. Synopsis Cosmetics are one of the most common reasons for hospital referrals with allergic contact dermatitis. Because of the increased use of cosmetics within the population and an increase in allergy cases, monitoring of heavy metals, especially allergen metals, is crucial. The aim of this study was to investigate the concentration of allergen metals, nickel (Ni), cobalt (Co), and chromium (Cr), in the most commonly used cosmetic products including mascara, eyeliner, eye shadow, lipstick, and nail polish. In addition, for safety assessment of cos- metic products, margin of safety of the metals was evaluated. Forty-eight makeup products were purchased randomly from local markets and large cosmetic stores in Istanbul, Turkey, and an atomic absorption spec- trometer was used for metal content determination. Risk assessment of the investigated cosmetic products was performed by calculating the systemic exposure dosage (SED) using Scientifi c Committee on Consumer Safety guideline. According to the results of this investigation in all the samples tested, at least two of the allergen metals, Ni and/or Co and/or Cr were detected. Moreover, 97% of the Ni-detected products, 96% of Cr- and 54% of Co-detected products, contained over 1 μg/g of this metals, which is the suggested ultimate target value for sensitive population and thereby can be considered as the possible allergen. On the basis of the results of this study, SED of the metals was negligible however, contact dermatitis caused by cosmetics is most probably due to the allergen metal content of the products. In conclusion, to assess the safety of the fi nished products, postmarketing vigilance and routine monitoring of allergen metals are very important to protect public health. INTRODUCTION Cosmetic products are commonly used by millions of consumers to keep their body in good condition, to change their appearance, or to correct body odors (1). On the other hand, increased use of cosmetics and/or continuous use over prolonged time may also lead to unwanted adverse health effects, in particular, local dermal effects (2). It was reported that, cosmetics are one of the most common reasons for hospital referrals with allergic contact dermatitis (3). Address all correspondence to Hande Sipahi at handesipahi@hotmail.com.

JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE 314 Nickel (Ni), cobalt (Co), and chromium (Cr) are the metals most commonly responsible for allergic contact dermatitis (4). Duarte et al. reported that 33.5% of 1208 patients in their study had at least one positive reaction to Ni and/or Co and/or Cr in patch test for diagnosis of contact dermatitis (5). Also, it should be consider that contact allergens may cause a mild response on the fi rst few exposures, but after the allergy develops, the response worsens with subsequent exposures and eventually, even short exposures to low concen- trations can cause very severe reactions (6). Because of the increased use of cosmetics within the population and an increase in allergy cases, monitoring of heavy metals especially allergen metals is crucial. The objective of our study was to investigate the concentration of allergen metals, Ni, Co, and Cr, in the most commonly used cosmetic products such as mascara, eyeliner, eye shadow, lipstick, and nail polish. In addition, for safety assessment of cosmetic products, margin of safety (MoS) of the metals was evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS SAMPLING Commonly used makeup products were purchased randomly from local markets and large cosmetic stores in Istanbul, Turkey. Forty-eight samples were divided into seven groups: mascara (n = 5), eye shadow (12), eyeliner (7), lipstick (6), blush (4), nail polish (10), and body cream (4). REAGENTS All reagents were of analytical grade. All aqueous solutions were prepared with deionized water obtained by using ultrapure water system (Aqua-Nova Hepta Distillated, resistivity 0.34 M×cm, Kristianstad, Sweden). HNO3 (65%) and HF (40%) from Merck supra- pure grade (Darmstadt, Germany) were used for digestion of the samples and dilution. Plastic bottles, autosampler cups, tefl on vessels, vials for collecting samples, and glass- ware were cleaned by soaking in HNO3 (10% v/v) for a day, rinsing four times with ultra- pure water and drying in an oven at 40°C. All prepared solutions were stored in high-density polypropylene bottles. Autosampler washing solution containing HNO3 (0.2% v/v) was used to avoid clogging of the autosampler sampling capillary tip and to improve dispersion of sample solution onto the graphite tube. Stock standard solutions of analytes (1 g/l each) were obtained from Merck. Standard solutions were freshly prepared by diluting the stock standard solutions to the desired calibration ranges in 0.2% HNO3. APPARATUS An atomic absorption spectrometer (AAS) technique with a Perkin Elmer AS-800 AAS (MA), equipped with transversely heated graphite furnace (BO 504033), a longitudinal Zeeman background correction system, and an autosampler, was used for metal determi- nation. Argon was used as inert gas for graphite furnace measurements. Samples were