Selection of Chemicals for the Development and Evaluation of In Vitro Methods for Skin Sensitisation Testing

Advances in the understanding of the biological mechanisms underlying skin sensitisation, and the need to comply with recent regulatory requirements, have favoured the development of alternative approaches, some of which may provide promising screening or partial replacement methods. However, efforts are still required to identify more-robust predictive endpoints, and to further optimise existing methods to be integrated into a testing strategy, with a view to achieving the full replacement of the current animal tests. The European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) and the European Cosmetics Association (Colipa) have been collaborating with the aim of identifying a core set of reference chemicals for test method development and/or optimisation. The use of a common set of reference chemicals in the method development phase, would facilitate an early assessment of the performance of a method with respect to existing tests, and of its possible contribution to a testing strategy. By applying pre-defined criteria, existing databases were mined, and a list of 16 chemicals, including 12 positive controls, of which four require metabolic activation to act as sensitisers, and four negative controls, was collated. The chemicals and the criteria used for their selection are presented.

[1]  D A Basketter,et al.  Multivariate QSAR analysis of a skin sensitization database. , 1994, SAR and QSAR in environmental research.

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

[3]  A. Goossens,et al.  Allergens from the Standard Series , 2006 .

[4]  A M Kligman,et al.  The identification of contact allergens by human assay. 3. The maximization test: a procedure for screening and rating contact sensitizers. , 1989, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[5]  P. Elsner,et al.  Occupational Contact Dermatitis Due to Glyoxal in Health Care Workers , 1990 .

[6]  Petra S Kern,et al.  Mechanistic applicability domain classification of a local lymph node assay dataset for skin sensitization. , 2007, Chemical research in toxicology.

[7]  S. E. King,et al.  The development of allergic contact dermatitis in females during the comparison of two predictive patch tests , 1977, Contact dermatitis.

[8]  Spielmann Horst,et al.  Practical Aspects of the Validation of Toxicity Test Procedures , 1995 .

[9]  G. Klecak,et al.  Screening of fragrance materials for allergenicity in the guinea pig I. Comparison of four testing methods , 1977 .

[10]  D W Roberts,et al.  Correlations between skin sensitization potential and chemical reactivity for p-nitrobenzyl compounds. , 1983, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[11]  S. Seidenari,et al.  Monitoring levels of preservative sensitivity in Europe , 2002, Contact dermatitis.

[12]  F. Malik,et al.  Early and Late Contact Sensitivity Reactions in Guinea Pigs Sensitized to Oxazolone , 1976 .

[13]  R. Rycroft,et al.  Allergic contact dermatitis from para‐nitrobenzyl bromide , 1998, Contact dermatitis.

[14]  E. Buehler,et al.  DELAYED CONTACT HYPERSENSITIVITY IN THE GUINEA PIG. , 1965, Archives of dermatology.

[15]  R. Jolanki,et al.  Occupational contact allergy to glyoxal , 2005, Contact dermatitis.

[16]  P. Friedmann The relationships between exposure dose and response in induction and elicitation of contact hypersensitivity in humans , 2007, The British journal of dermatology.

[17]  T. Maurer,et al.  Predictive evaluation in animals of the contact allergenic potential of medically important substances , 1979, Contact dermatitis.

[18]  Takao Ashikaga,et al.  The COLIPA strategy for the development of in vitro alternatives: Skin sensitisation , 2008 .

[19]  J. Thyssen,et al.  Epidemiological data on consumer allergy to p‐phenylenediamine , 2008, Contact dermatitis.

[20]  J. Bos,et al.  The 500 Dalton rule for the skin penetration of chemical compounds and drugs , 2000, Experimental dermatology.

[21]  I Kimber,et al.  The local lymph node assay: a viable alternative to currently accepted skin sensitization tests. , 1996, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[22]  D A Basketter,et al.  Comparison of the local lymph node assay with the guinea-pig maximization test for the detection of a range of contact allergens. , 1992, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[23]  G F Gerberick,et al.  An interlaboratory evaluation of the Buehler test for the identification and classification of skin sensitizers , 1996, Contact dermatitis.

[24]  D. Basketter,et al.  Results with OECD recommended positive control sensitizers in the maximization, Buehler and local lymph node assays. , 1993, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[25]  J. Fowler,et al.  Fisher's Contact Dermatitis , 1995 .

[26]  D. Basketter,et al.  Local lymph node assay: validation assessment for regulatory purposes. , 2000, American journal of contact dermatitis : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society.

[27]  I Kimber,et al.  Strategies for identifying false positive responses in predictive skin sensitization tests. , 1998, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[28]  Marzulli Fn,et al.  Contact allergy: predictive testing of fragrance ingredients in humans by Draize and Maximization methods. , 1980, Journal of environmental pathology and toxicology.

[29]  H. Maibach,et al.  The use of graded concentrations in studying skin sensitizers: experimental contact sensitization in man. , 1974, Food and cosmetics toxicology.

[30]  H. Lessmann,et al.  Glyoxal is an important allergen for (medical care) cleaning staff. , 2001, International journal of hygiene and environmental health.

[31]  I Kimber,et al.  The murine local lymph node assay: a commentary on collaborative studies and new directions. , 1992, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[32]  A. Kligman Full Length ReportThe Identification of Contact Allergens by Human Assay: III. The Maximization Test: A Procedure for Screening and Rating Contact Sensitizers* , 1966 .

[33]  G. R. Thompson,et al.  Isoeugenol: a survey of consumer patch-test sensitization. , 1983, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[34]  Grace Patlewicz,et al.  Skin sensitization: reaction mechanistic applicability domains for structure-activity relationships. , 2005, Chemical research in toxicology.

[35]  J. Montelius,et al.  Sensitizing potential in mice, guinea pig and man of the preservative Euxyl® K 400 and its ingredient methyldibromo glutaronitrile , 1999, Contact dermatitis.

[36]  Ian Kimber,et al.  Compilation of Historical Local Lymph Node Data for Evaluation of Skin Sensitization Alternative Methods , 2005, Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug.

[37]  J. Lepoittevin Metabolism versus chemical transformation or pro‐ versus prehaptens? , 2006, Contact dermatitis.

[38]  D. Basketter,et al.  In Vitro Approaches to the Identification and Characterization of Skin Sensitizers , 2007 .

[39]  J. Serup,et al.  Guidelines on sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) exposure tests , 1997, Contact dermatitis.

[40]  I Kimber,et al.  Human potency predictions for aldehydes using the local lymph node assay , 2001, Contact dermatitis.