A highly sensitive and selective high pressure liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC/MS-MS) method for the direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA)

Defining the reactivity of nanoparticles to peptides through direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA) using a high pressure liquid chromatography system with a diode array detector

The possibility of inducing skin sensitization reactions following exposure to various chemicals can lead to skin diseases, and the evaluation of skin sensitivity to such substances is very important. However, as animal tests for skin sensitization are prohibited, the OECD Test Guideline 442 C was designated as part of an alternative testing method. Therefore, in this study, the reactivity of cysteine and lysine peptides to nanoparticle substrates was identified through HPLC-DAD analysis according to the skin sensitization animal replacement test method specified in the OECD Test Guideline 442 C. In this study, all criteria for skin sensitization experiments specified in OECD Test Guideline 442 C were satisfied. As a result of analyzing the disappearance rates of cysteine and lysine peptides for the five types of nanoparticle substrates (TiO2, CeO2, Co3O4, NiO, and Fe2O3) using the established analytical method, all were identified as positive. Therefore, our findings suggest that basic data from this technique can contribute to skin sensitization studies by providing the depletion percentage of cysteine and lysine peptides for nanoparticle materials that have not yet been tested for skin sensitization.

Alternative Methods for Skin-Sensitization Assessment

Skin sensitization is a term used to refer to the regulatory hazard known as allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in humans or contact hypersensitivity in rodents, an important health endpoint considered in chemical hazard and risk assessments. Information on skin sensitization potential is required in various regulatory frameworks, such as the Directive of the European Parliament and the Council on Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals (REACH). The identification of skin-sensitizing chemicals previously required the use of animal testing, which is now being replaced by alternative methods. Alternative methods in the field of skin sensitization are based on the measurement or prediction of key events (KE), i.e., (i) the molecular triggering event, i.e., the covalent binding of electrophilic substances to nucleophilic centers in skin proteins; (ii) the activation of keratinocytes; (iii) the activation of dendritic cells; (iv) the proliferation of T cells. This review article focuses on the current state of knowledge regarding the methods corresponding to each of the key events in skin sensitization and considers the latest trends in the development and modification of these methods.

Pre-validation study of spectrophotometric direct peptide reactivity assay (Spectro-DPRA) as a modified in chemico skin sensitization test method

Skin sensitization is induced when certain chemicals bind to skin proteins. Direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA) has been adopted by the OECD as an alternative method to evaluate skin sensitization by assessing a substance's reaction to two model peptides. A modified spectrophotometric method, Spectro-DPRA, can evaluate skin sensitization, in a high throughput fashion, to obviate some limitations of DPRA. Pre-validation studies for Spectro-DPRA were conducted to determine transferability and proficiency, within- and between-laboratory reproducibility, and predictive ability based on GLP principles at three laboratories (AP, KTR, and KCL). All laboratories confirmed high (> 90%) concordance for evaluating the sensitivity induced by ten chemical substances. The concordance among the three tests performed by each laboratory was 90% for AP, 100% for KTR, and 100% for KCL. The mean accuracy of the laboratories was 93.3% [compared to the standard operating procedure (SOP)]. The reproducibility among the three laboratories was as high as 86.7%; the accuracy was 86.7% for AP, 100% for KTR, and 86.7% for KCL (compared to the SOP). An additional 54 substances were assessed in 3 separate labs to verify the prediction rate. Based on the result, 29 out of 33 substances were classified as sensitizers, and 19 out of 21 identified as non-sensitizers; the corresponding sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy values were 87.9%, 90.5%, and 88.9%, respectively. These findings indicate that the Spectro-DPRA can address the molecular initiating event with improved predictability and reproducibility, while saving time and cost compared to DPRA or ADRA.

Safety Assessment of Nanomaterials in Cosmetics: Focus on Dermal and Hair Dyes Products

Nanomaterials use in cosmetics is markedly enhancing, so their exposure and toxicity are important parameters to consider for their risk assessment. This review article provides an overview of the active cosmetic ingredients used for cosmetic application, including dermal cosmetics and also hair dye cosmetics, as well as their safety assessment, enriched with a compilation of the safety assessment tests available to evaluate the different types of toxicity. In fact, despite the increase in research and the number of papers published in the field of nanotechnology, the related safety assessment is still insufficient. To elucidate the possible effects that nanosized particles can have on living systems, more studies reproducing similar conditions to what happens in vivo should be conducted, particularly considering the complex interactions of the biological systems and active cosmetic ingredients to achieve newer, safer, and more efficient nanomaterials. Toward this end, ecological issues and the toxicological pattern should also be a study target.

Evaluation of skin sensitization induced by four ionic liquids

Ionic liquids (ILs) are synthetic solvents used as replacements for volatile organic solvents. Human exposure occurs through dermal or oral routes. In rodents, several ILs were reported to induce dermal toxicity, irritation, and sensitization. Due to the potential for occupational exposure, and industrial use as nonvolatile solvents, 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium chloride (EMIM, 6.25% to 50% v/v), 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium chloride (BMIM, 3.12% to 12.5% v/v), 1-butyl-1-methylpyrrolidinium chloride (BMPY, 0.825% to 6.25% v/v), and N-butylpyridinium chloride (NBuPY, 0.825% to 12.5% v/v) were nominated to the National Toxicology Program and evaluated for skin sensitization. The test compound was applied to the ears of female BALB/c mice daily for 3 days in a primary irritancy (IRR)/local lymph node assay (LLNA). Sensitization was assessed in vitro in the direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA), KeratinoSens™ assay, and human cell line activation test (h-CLAT). In the LLNA, the butylated ILs, BMIM, and BMPY were more potent than NBuPY (butylated) or EMIM (ethylated), which was neither an irritant nor a sensitizer. NBuPY induced skin irritation in vivo at ≥3.12% (p ≤ 0.01), and sensitization in vitro in the KeratinoSens™ assay and h-CLAT, but was negative for sensitization in vivo and in the DPRA. Although SI3 was not achieved, dermal treatment with 12.5% BMIM or 6.25% BMPY increased (p ≤ 0.01) lymph node cell proliferation in the LLNA. In vitro, BMIM was positive for sensitization in the h-CLAT, and BMPY was positive in the h-CLAT and KeratinoSens™ assay; both were negative in the DPRA. Integrated data analyses, weighted toward in vivo data, suggested that BMIM and BMPY may induce weak to mild sensitization.

Assessment of Transdermal Delivery of Topical Compounds in Skin Scarring Using a Novel Combined Approach of Raman Spectroscopy and High-Performance Liquid Chromatography

Objective: The goal of any topical formulation is efficient transdermal delivery of its active components. However, delivery of compounds can be problematic with penetration through tough layers of fibrotic dermal scar tissue. Approach: We propose a new approach combining high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and Raman spectroscopy (RS) using a topical of unknown composition against a well-known antiscar topical (as control). Results: Positive detection of compounds within the treatment topical using both techniques was validated with mass spectrometry. RS detected conformational structural changes; the 1,655/1,446 cm^-1 ratio estimating collagen content significantly decreased (p < 0.05) over weeks 4, 12, and 16 compared with day 0. The amide I band, known to represent collagen and protein in skin, shifted from 1,667 to 1,656 cm^-1, which may represent a change from β-sheets in elastin to α-helices in collagen. Confirmatory elastin immunohistochemistry decreased compared with day 0, conversely the collagen I/III ratio increased in the same samples by week 12 (p < 0.05, and p < 0.0001, respectively), in keeping with normal scar formation. Optical coherence tomography attenuation coefficient representing collagen deposition was significantly decreased at week 4 compared with day 0 and increased at week 16 (p < 0.05). Innovation: This study provides a platform for further research on the simultaneous evaluation of the effects of compounds in cutaneous scarring by RS and HPLC, and identifies a role for RS in the therapeutic evaluation and theranostic management of skin scarring. Conclusions: RS can provide noninvasive information on the effects of topicals on scar pathogenesis and structural composition, validated by other analytical techniques.

A direct peptide reactivity assay using a high-throughput mass spectrometry screening platform for detection of skin sensitizers

Chemical-peptide conjugation is the molecular initiating event in skin sensitization. The OECD test guideline uses a high-performance liquid chromatography/ultraviolet (HPLC/UV) detection method to quantify chemical-peptide conjugation in a direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA), which measures the depletion of two synthetic peptides containing lysine or cysteine residues. To improve assay throughput, sensitivity and accuracy, an automated 384-well plate-based RapidFire solid-phase extraction (SPE) system coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) DPRA was developed and validated in the presence of a newly designed internal standard. Compared to the HPLC/UV-based DPRA, the automated SPE-MS/MS-based DPRA improved throughput from 16 min to 10 s per sample, and substrate peptides usage was reduced from 100 mM to 5 μM. When implementing the SPE-MS/MS-based DPRA into a high-throughput platform, we found 10 compounds that depleted lysine peptide and 24 compounds that depleted cysteine peptide (including 7 unreported chemicals from 55 compounds we tested) in a concentration-response manner. The adduct formation between cysteine and cinnamic aldehyde and ethylene glycol dimethacrylate were further analyzed using high-performance liquid chromatography time-of-flight mass spectrometry (HPLC-TOF-MS) to confirm the conjugation. Overall, the automated SPE-MS/MS-based platform is an efficient, economic, and accurate way to detect skin sensitizers.