PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9599701

Target organs and systems: methodologies to assess immune system function.

M H Karol
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Immunotoxicity encompasses both reduced and heightened immune function. Diverse chemicals can impair functioning of the immune system. Both monographs and books have been devoted to detailed descriptions of immunotoxicity. This paper gives a brief overview of the methods currently used to assess the immunotoxic potential of chemicals. It also discusses the trend toward the use of alternative methods to mammalian models, such as feral species, in vitro assays, and computational models. The strategy of using a tier approach to screen chemicals for immunotoxicity is described, together with the rationale for, and limitations of, this approach. Interpretation of data with regard to clinical disease and human health is addressed. The immune system poses substantial complexities in this regard as the system has functional reserve and functional redundancy.

Explore related subjects

Animal Testing AlternativesAnimalsDisease Models, AnimalHumansHypersensitivityImmune SystemImmunotoxinsIn Vitro TechniquesToxicity TestsJournal ArticleResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.Review

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M H Karol. 1998. Target organs and systems: methodologies to assess immune system function.. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.98106533

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2001

Predictive drug allergy testing: an alternative viewpoint.

T- and B-cells recognise drugs when bound as haptens to carrier molecules. Recent studies suggest that drugs might also bind in a non-covalent form to MHC-peptide complexes and T cell receptors, and are thereby able to stimulate T cells. This has, however, only been shown for drug-specific T cell clones. Functional analysis revealed that drug-reactive T cells secrete high amounts of IL-5 and are cytotoxic. Cytotoxicity is mediated by drug-specific CD4(+) and CD8(+) cells and, as revealed by the immunohistochemical analysis of drug-induced exanthems, might be involved in the killing of keratinocytes thus explaining the drug-induced exanthem. Further work is needed to clarify the type and exact location of the rather labile drug binding to MHC and T cell receptors, and to evaluate what drug allergies might be caused by such an unusual presentation and immune stimulation. This new model as well as findings from the analysis of clinical drug allergies may have major implications on how to test and predict the allergenic potential of drugs. A change and expansion of currently performed test procedures is required to predict the allergenic potential of drugs.

Animal Testing Alternatives↗
PubMed2001

A prevalidation study on in vitro tests for acute skin irritation. results and evaluation by the Management Team.

A prevalidation study on in vitro tests for acute skin irritation was conducted during 1999 and 2000. The overall objective of validation in this area, of which this prevalidation study is an initial stage, is to identify tests capable of discriminating irritants (I) from non-irritants (NI), as defined according to European Union (EU) risk phrases ("R38"; no classification) and the harmonised OECD criteria ("Irritant"; no label). This prevalidation study specifically addressed aspects of: protocol refinement (phase I), protocol transfer (phase II), and protocol performance (phase III), in accordance with the prevalidation scheme defined by the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM). The tests evaluated were: EpiDerm (phases I, II and III), EPISKIN (phases I, II and III), PREDISKIN (phases I and II, and additional protocol refinement), the non-perfused pig ear method (phases I and II, and additional protocol refinement), and the mouse skin integrity function test (SIFT; phases I and II). Modified, standardised test protocols and well-defined prediction models were available for each of the tests at the end of phase I. The results of phase I (intralaboratory reproducibility) were sufficiently promising for all of the tests to progress to phase II. Protocol transfer between the Lead Laboratory and Laboratory 2 was undertaken for all five tests during phase II, and additional refinements were made to the test protocols. For EpiDerm, EPISKIN and the SIFT, the intralaboratory and interlaboratory reproducibilities were acceptable; however, better standardisation of certain aspects of the test protocols was needed prior to commencing phase III. Neither PREDISKIN nor the pig ear test performed sufficiently well in phase II to progress to phase III. The PREDISKIN protocol was overly sensitive, resulting in the prediction of all the NI chemicals as I. The variability in the pig ear test results was too great, indicating that the test would show limited predictive ability. In additional studies (a repeat of phase I), further modification of the PREDISKIN protocol and a change in the prediction model considerably improved the ability of the test to distinguish I from NI chemicals. However, attempts to improve the intralaboratory reproducibility of the pig ear test were unsuccessful. In phase III an initial assessment of the reproducibility and predictive ability, in three independent laboratories per test, was undertaken for the EpiDerm and EPISKIN tests (the SIFT was a late inclusion in the prevalidation study, and is being evaluated in a separate phase III study). A set of 20 coded chemicals (10 I, 10 NI) were tested with the final, refined, test protocols. The intralaboratory reproducibility was acceptable for both EpiDerm and EPISKIN. The interlaboratory reproducibility was considered to be acceptable for EPISKIN; however, for EpiDerm, analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated that there was a statistically significant laboratory effect on the overall variability, suggesting that the interlaboratory transferability of the test needs to be improved. The EpiDerm test had an overall accuracy of 58%, with an over-prediction rate of 37% and an under-prediction rate of 47%. The EPISKIN test had an overall accuracy of 58%, showing an under-prediction rate of 23% and an over-prediction rate of 60%. It is concluded that, as yet, none of the tests evaluated in this prevalidation study are ready for inclusion in a formal validation study on in vitro tests for acute skin irritation. Overall protocol performance of the SIFT is currently being evaluated in a phase III study. Further studies are also in progress to improve the test protocols and prediction models for EpiDerm and EPISKIN.

Animal Testing Alternatives↗
PubMed2001

The toxicity profile of a single dose of paroxetine: an alternative approach to acute toxicity testing in the rat.

In this study we have examined the effect of a single administration of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, paroxetine (120-300 mg kg(-1), orally) in a recently developed rodent model of acute toxicity testing. Reduced body-weight, food consumption, water consumption and body temperature were observed in all paroxetine-treated groups, which were reversible within 7 days. Five days after administration, a dose-dependent increase in red blood cells, haemoglobin and haematocrit was observed with the 3 higher dose levels of paroxetine, which was significant in the 240 and 300 mg kg(-1) treatment groups (P < 0.05). Hyperactivity was apparent in the first 24 hr following treatment, as was evidence of the serotonin syndrome. When the animals were sacrificed (11 days after drug administration), an increase in liver weight was observed in the highest dose. These results are in agreement with those previously observed with paroxetine at the preclinical and clinical levels. They demonstrate that this rodent model, because of its multi-parameter nature, is a useful method for examining the consequences of a single high dose of an antidepressant drug.

Animal Testing Alternatives↗