Dendritic cells as a tool for the predictive identification of skin sensitisation hazard.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Animal Testing Alternatives↗
Biomedical subjects
Peter Griem
Publications and source records attributed to Peter Griem.
Characterization of the sensitizing potential of chemicals by in vitro analysis of dendritic cell activation and skin penetration.
Development of in vitro models to identify sensitizing chemicals receives public interest since animal testing should be avoided whenever possible. In this article we analyze two essential properties of sensitizing chemicals: skin penetration and dendritic cell (DC) activation. Activation of immature DC derived from peripheral blood monocytes was evaluated by flow cytometric analysis of CD86 positive cells and quantitative measurement of interleukin-1beta and aquaporin P3 gene expression. The sensitizer 2,4,6-trinitrobenzenesulfonic acid induced a concentration-dependent response for all parameters, whereas the irritant sodium lauryl sulfate did not. When two related aromatic amines, p-toluylenediamine (PTD) and hydroxyethyl-p-phenylenediamine (HE-PPD) were tested, both induced substantial DC activation indicating their potential sensitizing properties. These findings contrasted with in vivo results: in murine local lymph node assays (LLNA) PTD, but not HE-PPD, was sensitizing using acetone/aqua/olive oil as vehicle. Skin penetration measurement revealed that this was due to bioavailability differences. On retesting HE-PPD in the LLNA using the penetration enhancer dimethylsulfoxide as vehicle, it induced a specific response. We conclude that in vitro analysis of DC activation capability of the two selected chemicals demonstrates that prediction of skin sensitization potential is possible provided that skin penetration data indicate sufficient bioavailability of the test compound.
Amines↗
Proposal for a risk assessment methodology for skin sensitization based on sensitization potency data.
In this paper, we propose a quantitative risk assessment methodology for skin sensitization aiming at the derivation of 'safe' exposure levels for sensitizing chemicals, used e.g., as ingredients in consumer products. Given the limited number of sensitizers tested in human sensitization tests, such as the human repeat-insult patch test (HRIPT) or the human maximization test (HMT), we used EC3 values from the local lymph node assay (LLNA) in mice because they provide the best quantitative measure of the skin sensitizing potency of a chemical. A comparison of LLNA EC3 values with HRIPT and HMT LOEL, and NOEL values was carried out and revealed that the EC3, expressed as area dose, can be used as a surrogate value for the human NOEL in risk assessment. The uncertainty/extrapolation factor approach was used to derive (a) an 'acceptable non-sensitizing area dose' (ANSAD) to protect non-allergic individuals against skin sensitization and (b) an 'acceptable non-eliciting area dose' (ANEAD) to protect allergic individuals against elicitation of allergic contact dermatitis. For ANSAD derivation, interspecies, intraspecies and time extrapolation factors are applied to the LLNA EC3. For ANEAD derivation, additional application of a variable sensitization-elicitation extrapolation factor is proposed. Values for extrapolation factors are derived and discussed, the proposed methodology is applied to the sensitizers methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, cinnamic aldehyde and nickel and results are compared to published risk assessments.
Allergens↗