Evaluating the sensitization potential of surfactants: integrating data from the local lymph node assay, guinea pig maximization test, and in vitro methods in a weight-of-evidence approach.

An integral part of hazard and safety assessments is the estimation of a chemical's potential to cause skin sensitization. Currently, only animal tests (OECD 406 and 429) are accepted in a regulatory context. Nonanimal test methods are being developed and formally validated. In order to gain more insight into the responses induced by eight exemplary surfactants, a battery of in vivo and in vitro tests were conducted using the same batch of chemicals. In general, the surfactants were negative in the GPMT, KeratinoSens and hCLAT assays and none formed covalent adducts with test peptides. In contrast, all but one was positive in the LLNA. Most were rated as being irritants by the EpiSkin assay with the additional endpoint, IL1-alpha. The weight of evidence based on this comprehensive testing indicates that, with one exception, they are non-sensitizing skin irritants, confirming that the LLNA tends to overestimate the sensitization potential of surfactants. As results obtained from LLNAs are considered as the gold standard for the development of new nonanimal alternative test methods, results such as these highlight the necessity to carefully evaluate the applicability domains of test methods in order to develop reliable nonanimal alternative testing strategies for sensitization testing.

[1]  I Kimber,et al.  Vehicle effects on skin sensitizing potency of four chemicals: assessment using the local lymph node assay , 2001, International journal of cosmetic science.

[2]  Frank Gerberick,et al.  Nothing is perfect, not even the local lymph node assay: a commentary and the implications for REACH , 2009, Contact dermatitis.

[3]  Andreas Natsch,et al.  LC-MS-based characterization of the peptide reactivity of chemicals to improve the in vitro prediction of the skin sensitization potential. , 2008, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[4]  J. Hornung,et al.  Normal keratinization in a spontaneously immortalized aneuploid human keratinocyte cell line , 1988, The Journal of cell biology.

[5]  M. S. Lee,et al.  Comparison of the skin sensitizing potential of unsaturated compounds as assessed by the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) and the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT). , 2008, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[6]  J. Geier,et al.  Is cocamidopropyl betaine a contact allergen? Analysis of network data and short review of the literature , 2011, Contact dermatitis.

[7]  Silvia Casati,et al.  Chemical reactivity measurement and the predicitve identification of skin sensitisers. The report and recommendations of ECVAM Workshop 64. , 2008, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[8]  Reinhard Kreiling,et al.  Comparative testing for the identification of skin-sensitizing potentials of nonionic sugar lipid surfactants. , 2010, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[9]  M. Corazza,et al.  Irritant and Sensitizing Potential of Eight Surfactants Commonly Used in Skin Cleansers: An Evaluation of 105 Patients , 2010, Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug.

[10]  Andreas Natsch,et al.  Performance of a novel keratinocyte-based reporter cell line to screen skin sensitizers in vitro. , 2010, Toxicology and applied pharmacology.

[11]  I. Kimber,et al.  Differential regulation of epidermal langerhans cell migration by interleukins (IL)-1alpha and IL-1beta during irritant- and allergen-induced cutaneous immune responses. , 2002, Toxicology and applied pharmacology.

[12]  Manfred Liebsch,et al.  Comparison of human skin irritation patch test data with in vitro skin irritation assays and animal data , 2010, Contact dermatitis.

[13]  A. Kligman,et al.  The Identification of Contact Allergens by Animal Assay. the Guinea Pig Maximization Test , 1969 .

[14]  W S Stokes,et al.  ICCVAM evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay. The ICCVAM review process. , 2001, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[15]  Silvia Casati,et al.  Chemical Reactivity Measurement and the Predictive Identification of Skin Sensitisers , 2008 .

[16]  A. Natsch,et al.  Use of in vitro testing to identify an unexpected skin sensitizing impurity in a commercial product: a case study. , 2010, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[17]  A. Karlberg,et al.  Allergenic activity of an air‐oxidized ethoxylated surfactant , 2003, Contact dermatitis.

[18]  P. Das,et al.  Skin irritants and contact sensitizers induce Langerhans cell migration and maturation at irritant concentration , 2006, Experimental dermatology.

[19]  H. Sakaguchi,et al.  Development of an in vitro skin sensitization test using human cell lines: the human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT). I. Optimization of the h-CLAT protocol. , 2006, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[20]  DRAFT REVISED,et al.  OECD GUIDELINE FOR THE TESTING OF CHEMICALS , 2010 .

[21]  Reinhard Kreiling,et al.  Application of a weight of evidence approach to assessing discordant sensitisation datasets: implications for REACH. , 2009, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[22]  D. Basketter,et al.  Dose metrics in the acquisition of skin sensitization: thresholds and importance of dose per unit area. , 2008, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[23]  I Kimber,et al.  Skin sensitization testing in potency and risk assessment. , 2001, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[24]  G Frank Gerberick,et al.  Use of a B cell marker (B220) to discriminate between allergens and irritants in the local lymph node assay. , 2002, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[25]  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.

[26]  M. Meade A COMBINED MURINE LOCAL LYMPH NODE AND IRRITANCY ASSAY TO PREDICT SENSITIZATION AND IRRITANCY POTENTIAL OF CHEMICALS , 1998 .

[27]  P. Amerio,et al.  Role of cytokines in epidermal Langerhans cell migration , 1999, Journal of leukocyte biology.

[28]  H. Sakaguchi,et al.  Development of an in vitro skin sensitization test using human cell lines; human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT). II. An inter-laboratory study of the h-CLAT. , 2006, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[29]  M. Rosdy,et al.  Differential expression and release of cytokines by an in vitro reconstructed human epidermis following exposure to skin irritant and sensitizing chemicals. , 1999, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[30]  Takao Ashikaga,et al.  Predicting skin sensitization potential and inter-laboratory reproducibility of a human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT) in the European Cosmetics Association (COLIPA) ring trials. , 2010, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[31]  Carl Westmoreland,et al.  A future approach to measuring relative skin sensitising potency: a proposal , 2006, Journal of applied toxicology : JAT.

[32]  Andreas Natsch,et al.  The Nrf2-Keap1-ARE toxicity pathway as a cellular sensor for skin sensitizers--functional relevance and a hypothesis on innate reactions to skin sensitizers. , 2010, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.