The local lymph node assay (LLNA) is widely used to identify chemicals that are contact sensitizers. The assay involves dosing mice with the chemical on both ears and pooling the superficial parotid lymph nodes for assessment of lymphocyte proliferation as a marker of sensitization. The present study explored potential reduction in animal usage by dosing one ear with the allergen and the other with vehicle-only. The respective draining lymph nodes were processed separately for tritiated thymidine (3H-TdR) incorporation. Cell proliferation in proper axillary and renal nodes, as well as in the spleen was also assessed. Cross-contamination of the chemicals from the dosed ears to other parts of the body via preening was prevented by dosing restrained animals and washing off the residual chemical with saline after 4 h. Dosing the left ear with 0.02% oxazolone (OX) on unrestrained animals resulted in marked cell proliferation in its draining lymph node (stimulation index, SI = 12.8) and in the lymph node draining the contra-lateral vehicle-dosed ear (SI = 6), as well as the proper axillary lymph nodes (SI = 3.3). Increased 3H-TdR incorporation was not observed in the renal lymph nodes (SI = 1.1). Similar stimulation of cells was observed in the lymph node draining the ear contra-lateral to the 30% hexylcinnamaldehyde (HCA)-dosed ear. Increased proliferative activity was observed in contra-lateral draining lymph nodes of restrained mice demonstrating that these results cannot be attributed to cross-contamination of adjacent skin. A significant increase in proliferation of splenocytes was also observed. It is concluded that dermal application of a contact allergen, as exemplified by OX and HCA, may induce cell proliferation in the neighboring lymph nodes and spleen indicative of hapten and/or haptenated proteins diffusing through the skin to peripheral nodes and the blood to produce systemic sensitization. It is also possible that lymphatic capillaries may communicate between the left and right side of the mouse head. Thus the contra-lateral draining anno superficial parotid node c a modified LLNA.
[1]
G. Patlewicz,et al.
The reduced local lymph node assay: the impact of group size
,
2008,
Journal of applied toxicology : JAT.
[2]
Bob Safford,et al.
The impact of vehicle on the relative potency of skin-sensitizing chemicals in the local lymph node assay
,
2008,
Cutaneous and ocular toxicology.
[3]
W. Van den Broeck,et al.
Anatomy and nomenclature of murine lymph nodes: Descriptive study and nomenclatory standardization in BALB/cAnNCrl mice.
,
2006,
Journal of immunological methods.
[4]
Petra S Kern,et al.
The local lymph node assay and skin sensitization: a cut‐down screen to reduce animal requirements?
,
2006,
Contact dermatitis.
[5]
Ian Kimber,et al.
The local lymph node assay: past, present and future
,
2002,
Contact dermatitis.
[6]
W S Stokes,et al.
ICCVAM evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay. Conclusions and recommendations of an independent scientific peer review panel.
,
2001,
Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.
[7]
M. Swartz,et al.
The physiology of the lymphatic system.
,
2001,
Advanced drug delivery reviews.
[8]
G. Edwards,et al.
Lymphatic transport of proteins after s.c. injection: implications of animal model selection.
,
2001,
Advanced drug delivery reviews.
[9]
I Kimber,et al.
The local lymph node assay: developments and applications.
,
1994,
Toxicology.
[10]
E. Buehler,et al.
DELAYED CONTACT HYPERSENSITIVITY IN THE GUINEA PIG.
,
1965,
Archives of dermatology.
[11]
Adam Fedorowicz,et al.
Physical-chemical and solvent considerations in evaluating the influence of carbon chain length on the skin sensitization activity of 1-bromoalkanes.
,
2009,
Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.