Application of the risk assessment paradigm to the induction of allergic contact dermatitis

Biocidal products: Opportunities in risk assessment, management, and communication

In the coronavirus disease 2019 era, biocidal products are increasingly used for controlling harmful organisms, including microorganisms. However, assuring safety against adverse health effects is a critical issue from a public health standpoint. This study aimed to provide an overview of key aspects of risk assessment, management, and communication that ensure the safety of biocidal active ingredients and products. The inherent characteristics of biocidal products make them effective against pests and pathogens; however, they also possess potential toxicities. Therefore, public awareness regarding both the beneficial and potential adverse effects of biocidal products needs to be increased. Biocidal active ingredients and products are regulated under specific laws: the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act for the United States; the European Union (EU) Biocidal Products Regulation for the EU; and the Consumer Chemical Products and Biocide Safety Management Act for the Republic of Korea. Risk management also needs to consider the evidence of enhanced sensitivity to toxicities in individuals with chronic diseases, given the increased prevalence of these conditions in the population. This is particularly important for post-marketing safety assessments of biocidal products. Risk communication conveys information, including potential risks and risk-reduction measures, aimed at managing or controlling health or environmental risks. Taken together, the collaborative effort of stakeholders in risk assessment, management, and communication strategies is critical to ensuring the safety of biocidal products sold in the market as these strategies are constantly evolving.

Skin sensitisation prediction using read-across, an illustrative next generation risk assessment (NGRA) case study for vanillin

Skin sensitisation is a key adverse human health effect to be addressed in the safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients. Regulatory demands and scientific progress have led to the development of a Next Generation Risk Assessment (NGRA) framework, relying on the use of New Approach Methodologies (NAM) Defined Approaches (DA) and read-across instead of generating animal data. This case study illustrates the application of read-across for the prediction of the skin sensitisation potential of vanillin at the hypothetical use concentration of 0.5% in a shower gel and face cream. A three-step process was applied to select the most suitable analogues based on their protein reactivity, structural characteristics, physicochemical properties, skin metabolism profile and availability of skin sensitisation data. The applied read-across approach predicted a weak skin sensitiser potential for vanillin corresponding with a Local Lymph Node Assay EC3 value of 10%. Based on this EC3 value a point of departure of 2500 μg/cm2 was derived, resulting in an acceptable exposure level (AEL) of 25 μg/cm2. Because the consumer exposure levels (CEL) for the face cream (13.5 μg/cm2) and shower gel (0.05 μg/cm2) scenarios were lower than the AEL, the NGRA concluded both uses as safe.

Assessing the risk of induction of skin sensitization to plant protection products: A quantitative approach

Exposure to skin sensitizers is common and regulated in many industry sectors. For cosmetics, a risk-based approach has been implemented, focused on preventing the induction of sensitization. First, a No Expected Sensitization Induction Level (NESIL) is derived, then modified by Sensitization Assessment Factors (SAFs) to derive an Acceptable Exposure Level (AEL). The AEL is used in risk assessment, being compared with an estimated exposure dose, specific to the exposure scenario. Since in Europe there is increased concern regarding exposure towards potentially sensitizing pesticides via spray drift, we explore how existing practice can be modified to allow Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) of pesticides for bystanders and residents. NESIL derivation by the Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA), the globally required in vivo assay for this endpoint, is reviewed alongside consideration of appropriate SAFs. Using a case study, the principle that the NESIL in μg/cm² can be derived by multiplying LLNA EC3% figure by a factor of 250 is adopted. The NESIL is then reduced by an overall SAF of 25 to establish an exposure level below which there is minimal bystander and resident risk. Whilst this paper focuses on European risk assessment and management, the approach is generic and universally applicable.

Current trends in read-across applications for chemical risk assessments and chemical registrations in the Republic of Korea

Read-across, an alternative approach for hazard assessment, has been widely adopted when in vivo data are unavailable for chemicals of interest. Read-across is enabled via in silico tools such as quantitative structure activity relationship (QSAR) modeling. In this study, the current status of structure activity relationship (SAR)-based read-across applications in the Republic of Korea (ROK) was examined considering both chemical risk assessments and chemical registrations from different sectors, including regulatory agencies, industry, and academia. From the regulatory perspective, the Ministry of Environment (MOE) established the Act on Registration and Evaluation of Chemicals (AREC) in 2019 to enable registrants to submit alternative data such as information from read-across instead of in vivo data to support hazard assessment and determine chemical-specific risks. Further, the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) began to consider read-across approaches for establishing acceptable intake (AI) limits of impurities occurring during pharmaceutical manufacturing processes under the ICH M7 guideline. Although read-across has its advantages, this approach also has limitations including (1) lack of standardized criteria for regulatory acceptance, (2) inconsistencies in the robustness of scientific evidence, and (3) deficiencies in the objective reliability of read-across data. The application and acceptance rate of read-across may vary among regulatory agencies. Therefore, sufficient data need to be prepared to verify the hypothesis that structural similarities might lead to similarities in properties of substances (between source and target chemicals) prior to adopting a read-across approach. In some cases, additional tests may be required during the registration process to clarify long-term effects on human health or the environment for certain substances that are data deficient. To improve the quality of read-across data for regulatory acceptance, cooperative efforts from regulatory agencies, academia, and industry are needed to minimize limitations of read-across applications.

Decision making in next generation risk assessment for skin allergy: Using historical clinical experience to benchmark risk

Our aim is to develop and apply next generation approaches to skin allergy risk assessment that do not require new animal test data and better quantify uncertainties. Quantitative risk assessment for skin sensitisation uses safety assessment factors to extrapolate from the point-of-departure to an acceptable human exposure level. It is currently unclear whether these safety assessment factors are appropriate when using non-animal test data to derive a point-of departure. Our skin allergy risk assessment model Defined Approach uses Bayesian statistics to infer a human-relevant metric of sensitiser potency with explicit quantification of uncertainty, using any combination of human repeat insult patch test, local lymph node assay, direct peptide reactivity assay, KeratinoSens™, h-CLAT or U-SENS™ data. Here we describe the incorporation of benchmark exposures pertaining to use of consumer products with clinical data supporting a high/low risk categorisation for skin sensitisation. Margins-of-exposure (potency estimate to consumer exposure level ratio) are regressed against the benchmark risk classifications, enabling derivation of a risk metric defined as the probability that an exposure is low risk. This approach circumvents the use of safety assessment factors and provides a simple and transparent mechanism whereby clinical experience can directly feed-back into risk assessment decisions.

Implementation of a dermal sensitization threshold (DST) concept for risk assessment: structure-based DST and in vitro data-based DST

Skin sensitization resulting in allergic contact dermatitis represents an important toxicological endpoint as part of safety assessments. When available substance-specific sensitization data are inadequate, the dermal sensitization threshold (DST) concept has been proposed to set a skin exposure threshold to provide no appreciable risk of skin sensitization. Structure-based DSTs, which include non-reactive, reactive, and high potency category (HPC) DSTs, can be applied to substances with an identified chemical structures. An in vitro data-based "mixture DST" can be applied to mixtures based on data from in vitro test methods, such as KeratinoSens™ and the human Cell Line Activation Test. The purpose of this review article is to discuss the practical use of DSTs for conducting sound sensitization risk assessments to assure the safety of consumer products. To this end, several improvements are discussed in this review. For application of structure-based DSTs, an overall structural classification workflow was developed to exclude the possibility that "HPC but non-reactive" chemicals are misclassified as "non-reactive", because such chemicals should be classified as HPC chemicals considering that HPC rules have been based on the chemical structure of high potency sensitizers. Besides that, an extended application of the mixture DST principle to mixtures that either is cytotoxic or evaluated as positive was proposed. On a final note, we also developed workflows that integrate structure-based and in vitro-based mixture DST. The proposed workflows enable the application of the appropriate DST, which serves as a point of departure in the quantitative sensitization risk assessment.

Next generation risk assessment for skin allergy: Decision making using new approach methodologies

Our aim is to develop and apply next generation approaches to skin allergy risk assessment (SARA) that do not require new animal test data and better quantify uncertainties. Significant progress has been made in the development of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs), non-animal test methods, for assessment of skin sensitisation and there is now focus on their application to derive potency information for use in Next Generation Risk Assessment (NGRA). The SARA model utilises a Bayesian statistical approach to infer a human-relevant metric of sensitiser potency and a measure of risk associated with a given consumer exposure based upon any combination of human repeat insult patch test, local lymph node, direct peptide reactivity assay, KeratinoSens™, h-CLAT or U-SENS™ data. Here we have applied the SARA model within our weight of evidence NGRA framework for skin allergy to three case study materials in four consumer products. Highlighting how to structure the risk assessment, apply NAMs to derive a point of departure and conclude on consumer safety risk. NGRA based upon NAMs were, for these exposures, at least as protective as the historical risk assessment approaches. Through such case studies we are building our confidence in using NAMs for skin allergy risk assessment.

Weight of Evidence Approach for Skin Sensitization Potency Categorization of Fragrance Ingredients

Reliable human potency data are necessary for conducting quantitative risk assessments, as well as development and validation of new nonanimal methods for skin sensitization assessments. Previously, human skin sensitization potency of fragrance materials was derived primarily from human data or the local lymph node assay.

Approaches to Safety Evaluation of Baby Wipes

Disposable baby wipes manufactured by Procter & Gamble, soft sheets bearing lotion that is balanced to maintain natural skin pH, are convenient for cleaning the diaper area and a quick cleanup on baby’s face and hands.

Updating exposure assessment for skin sensitization quantitative risk assessment for fragrance materials

In 2008, a proposal for assessing the risk of induction of skin sensitization to fragrance materials Quantitative Risk Assessment 1 (QRA1) was published. This was implemented for setting maximum limits for fragrance materials in consumer products. However, there was no formal validation or empirical verification after implementation. Additionally, concerns remained that QRA1 did not incorporate aggregate exposure from multiple product use and included assumptions, e.g. safety assessment factors (SAFs), that had not been critically reviewed. Accordingly, a review was undertaken, including detailed re-evaluation of each SAF together with development of an approach for estimating aggregate exposure of the skin to a potential fragrance allergen. This revision of QRA1, termed QRA2, provides an improved method for establishing safe levels for sensitizing fragrance materials in multiple products to limit the risk of induction of contact allergy. The use of alternative non-animal methods is not within the scope of this paper. Ultimately, only longitudinal clinical studies can verify the utility of QRA2 as a tool for the prevention of contact allergy to fragrance materials.

Read-across can increase confidence in the Next Generation Risk Assessment for skin sensitisation: A case study with resorcinol

Historically skin sensitisation risk assessment for cosmetic ingredients was based on animal models, however regulatory demands have led to Next Generation Risk Assessment (NGRA), using data from New Approach Methodologies (NAM) and Defined Approaches (DA). This case study was meant to investigate if the use of resorcinol at 0.2% in a face cream was safe and a maximum use concentration could be defined. The NAM data and DA predictions could not provide sufficient confidence to determine a point of departure (POD). Therefore, the application of read-across was explored to increase the level of confidence. Analogue searches in various tools and databases using "mode of action" and "chemical structural features" retrieved 535 analogues. After refinement by excluding analogues without a defined structure, similar reactivity profile and skin sensitisation data, 39 analogues remained. A final selection was made based on three approaches: expert judgment, chemical similarity or Local Lymph Node Assay data (LLNA). All read-across approaches supported a moderate potency. A POD derived from the LLNA EC3 of 3.6% was determined leading to a favourable NGRA conclusion and a maximum use concentration of 0.36%. This was supported by a traditional risk assessment based on the available animal data for resorcinol.

Adjustment of a no expected sensitization induction level derived from Bayesian network integrated testing strategy for skin sensitization risk assessment

Skin sensitization is a key adverse effect to be addressed during hazard identification and risk assessment of chemicals, because it is the first step in the development of allergic contact dermatitis. Multiple non-animal testing strategies incorporating in vitro tests and in silico tools have achieved good predictivities when compared with murine local lymph node assay (LLNA). The binary test battery of KeratinoSens^TM and h-CLAT could be used to classify non-sensitizers as the first part of bottom-up approach. However, the quantitative risk assessment for sensitizing chemicals requires a No Expected Sensitization Induction Level (NESIL), the dose not expected to induce skin sensitization in humans. We used Bayesian network integrated testing strategy (BN ITS-3) for chemical potency classification. BN ITS-3 predictions were performed without a pre-processing step (selecting data from their physic-chemical applicability domains) or post-processing step (Michael acceptor chemistry correction), neither of which necessarily improve prediction accuracy. For chemicals within newly defined applicability domain, all under-predictions fell within one potency class when compared with LLNA results, indicating no chemicals that were incorrectly classified by more than one class. Considering the potential under-prediction by one class, a worst case value to each class from BN ITS-3 was used to derive a NESIL. When in vivo and human data from suitable analogs cannot be used to estimate the uncertainty, adjusting the NESIL derived from BN ITS-3 may help perform skin sensitization risk assessment. The overall workflow for risk assessment was demonstrated by incorporating the binary test battery of KeratinoSens^TM and h-CLAT.

The dermal sensitization threshold (DST) approach for mixtures evaluated as negative in in vitro test methods; mixture DST

Cosmetic ingredients often comprise complex mixtures, such as botanical extracts, which may contain skin sensitizing constituents. In our previous study for the sensitivity of the evaluations of skin sensitizing constituents in mixtures using the binary in vitro test battery with KeratinoSens^TM and h-CLAT, some sensitizers showed higher detection limits in in vitro test methods than in murine local lymph node assays (LLNA). Thus, to minimize the uncertainty associated with decreased sensitivity for these sensitizers, a risk assessment strategy was developed for mixtures with negative results from the binary test battery. Assuming that the no expected sensitization induction level of mixtures (mixture NESIL) can be derived for mixtures with negative in vitro test results, we assessed 146 sensitizers with in vitro and LLNA data according to the assumption of indeterminate constituents in mixtures. Finally, we calculated 95th percentile probabilities of mixture NESILs and derived dermal sensitization thresholds for mixtures (mixture DST) with negative in vitro test results of 6010 μg/cm². Feasibility studies indicated that this approach was practical for risk assessments of products in the cosmetic industry. This approach would be a novel risk assessment strategy for incorporating the DST approach and information from in vitro test methods.

Percutaneous permeability of 1-phenoxy-2-propanol, a preservative in cosmetics

1-Phenoxy-2-propanol (PP) is used as a preservative in cosmetics. PP is currently permitted to be used to up to 1% in cosmetic formulations in Korea and Europe. For risk assessment, percutaneous absorption is a crucial factor, but dermal absorption of PP has not yet been reported. In this study, Franz diffusion method was used to determine the percutaneous penetration of PP using the dorsal skin of rats. Each formulation of shampoo or cream, 113.6 mg/cm², was applied to a donor compartment of Franz diffusion cell for 24 h. Receptor fluid was collected at 0, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 h following dermal application. Remaining formulation was removed with a cotton swab after last sampling. Using tape stripping method, stratum corneum was removed. PP in epidermis and dermis was extracted in PBS for 24 h. The concentration of PP from the swab, stratum corneum, and epidermis and dermis samples was determined using high performance liquid chromatography. Total percutaneous absorption rates of PP for shampoo and cream were 50.0 ± 6.0% and 33.0 ± 3.2%, respectively. In vitro skin permeability was calculated as 1,377.2 ± 240.1 mg/cm² for shampoo and 1,038.0 ± 72.2 mg/cm² for cream for 24 h.

Consideration of criteria required for assignment of a (skin) sensitiser a substance of very high concern (SVHC) under the REACH regulation

The identification, characterisation, risk assessment and risk management of materials that cause allergic sensitisation is an important requirement for human health protection. It has been proposed that for some chemical and protein allergens, and in particular for those that cause sensitisation of the respiratory tract (associated with occupational asthma), it may be appropriate to regard them as Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC) under the provisions of REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and restriction of CHemicals). We have argued previously that categorisation of sensitising agents as SVHC should be used only in exceptional circumstances. In the present article, the subject of SVHC is addressed from another perspective. Here the information that would be required to provide a compelling case for categorisation of a skin sensitising substance as a SVHC is considered. Three skin sensitising chemicals have been identified to serve as working examples. These are chromate, a potent contact allergen, and the skin sensitisers formaldehyde and isoeugenol. The key criterion influencing the decision regarding a skin sensitiser being categorised as SVHC is the extent to which impacts on the quality of life are reversible. Consequently, SVHC categorisation for skin sensitising chemicals should be used only in exceptional circumstances.

Risk Assessment of residual monomer migrating from acrylic polymers and causing Allergic Contact Dermatitis during normal handling and use

Acrylic, Poly Methyl Methacrylate (PMMA) based polymers are found in many industrial, professional and consumer products and are of low toxicity, but do contain very low levels of residual monomers and process chemicals that can leach out during handling and use. Methyl Methacrylate, the principle monomer is of low toxicity, but is a recognized weak skin sensitizer. The risk of induction of contact allergy in consumers was determined using a method based upon the Exposure-based Quantitative Risk Assessment approach developed for fragrance ingredients. The No Expected Sensitization Induction Level (NESIL) was based on the threshold to induction of sensitization (EC3) in the Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) since no Human Repeat Insult Patch Test (HRIPT) data were available. Categorical estimation of Consumer Exposure Level was substituted with a worst case assumption based upon the quantitative determination of MMA monomer migration into simulants. Application of default and Chemical-Specific Adjustment Factors results in a Risk Characterization Ratio (RCR) of 10,000 and a high Margin of Safety for induction of Allergic Contact Dermatitis (ACD) in consumers handling polymers under conservative exposure conditions. Although there are no data available to derive a RCR for elicitation of ACD it is likely to be lower than that for induction.

Report of the EPAA–ECVAM Workshop on the Validation of Integrated Testing Strategies (ITS)

The use of Integrated Testing Strategies (ITS) permits the combination of diverse types of chemical and toxicological data for the purposes of hazard identification and characterisation. In November 2008, the European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA), together with the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), held a workshop on Overcoming Barriers to Validation of Non-animal Partial Replacement Methods/Integrated Testing Strategies, in Ispra, Italy, to discuss the extent to which current ECVAM approaches to validation can be used to evaluate partial replacement in vitro test methods (i.e. as potential ITS components) and ITS themselves. The main conclusions of these discussions were that formal validation was only considered necessary for regulatory purposes (e.g. the replacement of a test guideline), and that current ECVAM approaches to validation should be adapted to accommodate such test methods (1). With these conclusions in mind, a follow-up EPAA–ECVAM workshop was held in October 2009, to discuss the extent to which existing validation principles are applicable to the validation of ITS test methods, and to develop a draft approach for the validation of such test methods and/or overall ITS for regulatory purposes. This report summarises the workshop discussions that started with a review of the current validation methodologies and the presentation of two case studies (skin sensitisation and acute toxicity), before covering the definition of ITS and their components, including their validation and regulatory acceptance. The following main conclusions/recommendations were made: that the validation of a partial replacement test method (for application as part of a testing strategy) should be differentiated from the validation of an in vitro test method for application as a stand-alone replacement, especially with regard to its predictive capacity; that, in the former case, the predictive capacity of the whole testing strategy (rather than of the individual test methods) would be more important, especially if the individual test methods had a high biological relevance; that ITS allowing for flexible and ad hoc approaches cannot be validated, whereas the validation of clearly defined ITS would be feasible, although practically quite difficult; and that test method developers should be encouraged to develop and submit to ECVAM not only full replacement test methods, but also partial replacement methods to be placed as parts of testing strategies. The added value from the formal validation of testing strategies, and the requirements needed in view of regulatory acceptance of the data, require further informed discussion within the EPAA forum on the basis of case studies provided by industry.

Guiding principles for the implementation of non-animal safety assessment approaches for cosmetics: skin sensitisation

Characterisation of skin sensitisation potential is a key endpoint for the safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients especially when significant dermal exposure to an ingredient is expected. At present the mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA) remains the 'gold standard' test method for this purpose however non-animal test methods are under development that aim to replace the need for new animal test data. COLIPA (the European Cosmetics Association) funds an extensive programme of skin sensitisation research, method development and method evaluation and helped coordinate the early evaluation of the three test methods currently undergoing pre-validation. In May 2010, a COLIPA scientific meeting was held to analyse to what extent skin sensitisation safety assessments for cosmetic ingredients can be made in the absence of animal data. In order to propose guiding principles for the application and further development of non-animal safety assessment strategies it was evaluated how and when non-animal test methods, predictions based on physico-chemical properties (including in silico tools), threshold concepts and weight-of-evidence based hazard characterisation could be used to enable safety decisions. Generation and assessment of potency information from alternative tools which at present is predominantly derived from the LLNA is considered the future key research area.

Alternative (non-animal) methods for cosmetics testing: current status and future prospects-2010

The 7th amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive prohibits to put animal-tested cosmetics on the market in Europe after 2013. In that context, the European Commission invited stakeholder bodies (industry, non-governmental organisations, EU Member States, and the Commission's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety) to identify scientific experts in five toxicological areas, i.e. toxicokinetics, repeated dose toxicity, carcinogenicity, skin sensitisation, and reproductive toxicity for which the Directive foresees that the 2013 deadline could be further extended in case alternative and validated methods would not be available in time. The selected experts were asked to analyse the status and prospects of alternative methods and to provide a scientifically sound estimate of the time necessary to achieve full replacement of animal testing. In summary, the experts confirmed that it will take at least another 7-9 years for the replacement of the current in vivo animal tests used for the safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients for skin sensitisation. However, the experts were also of the opinion that alternative methods may be able to give hazard information, i.e. to differentiate between sensitisers and non-sensitisers, ahead of 2017. This would, however, not provide the complete picture of what is a safe exposure because the relative potency of a sensitiser would not be known. For toxicokinetics, the timeframe was 5-7 years to develop the models still lacking to predict lung absorption and renal/biliary excretion, and even longer to integrate the methods to fully replace the animal toxicokinetic models. For the systemic toxicological endpoints of repeated dose toxicity, carcinogenicity and reproductive toxicity, the time horizon for full replacement could not be estimated.

Non-Animal Approaches for Consumer Safety Risk Assessments: Unilever's Scientific Research Programme

Non-animal based approaches to risk assessment are now routinely used for assuring consumer safety for some endpoints (such as skin irritation) following considerable investment in developing and applying new methods over the past 20 years. Unilever's research programme into non-animal approaches for safety assessment is currently focused on the application of new technologies to risk assessments in the areas of skin allergy, cancer and general toxicity (including inhalation toxicity). In all of these areas, a long-term investment is essential to increase the scientific understanding of the underlying biological and chemical processes that we believe will ultimately form a sound basis for novel risk assessment approaches. Our research programme in these priority areas consists of in-house research as well as Unilever-sponsored academic research, involvement with EU-funded projects (e.g. Sens-it-iv, carcino-GENOMICS), participation in cross-industry collaborative research (e.g. COLIPA, EPAA) and ongoing involvement with other scientific initiatives on non-animal approaches to risk assessment (e.g. UK NC3Rs, US ‘Human Toxicology Project’ consortium).

The human repeated insult patch test in the 21st century: a commentary

The human repeated insult patch test (HRIPT) is over half a century old, but is still used in several countries as a confirmatory test in the safety evaluation of skin sensitizers. This is despite the criticism it receives from an ethical perspective and regarding the scientific validity of such testing. In this commentary, the HRIPT is reviewed, with emphasis on ethical aspects and where the test can, and cannot, contribute in a scientifically meaningful manner to safety evaluation. It is concluded that where there is a specific rationale for testing, for example, to substantiate a no-effect level for a sensitizing chemical or to ensure that matrix effects are not making an unexpected contribution to sensitizing potency, then rigorous independent review may confirm that an HRIPT is ethical and scientifically justifiable. The possibility that sensitization may be induced in volunteers dictates that HRIPTs should be conducted rarely and in cases where the benefits overwhelmingly outweigh the risk. However, for the very large majority of HRIPTs conducted concerning the risk of skin sensitization, there is neither scientific justification nor any other merit.

Skin safety evaluation of laundry detergent products

The conduct of a scientifically sound safety assessment of new ingredients and finished products is essential prior to their introduction into the marketplace. Such assessments are based on a risk assessment paradigm established by the National Academy of Science (NAS, 1983) that consists of a four-step process: hazard identification, dose-response assessment, exposure assessment, and risk characterization. This risk assessment paradigm has been (1) used as a framework for estimating an adverse health risk posed by environmental chemicals, and (2) applied to systemic toxicological endpoints. The general principles of risk assessment may be applied to skin safety evaluation of consumer products, considering that dermal toxicity is also a threshold phenomenon. This study describes a risk assessment-based approach for skin safety evaluation of laundry detergent products.

Assuring Consumer Safety without Animal Testing: A Feasibility Case Study for Skin Sensitisation

Allergic Contact Dermatitis (ACD; chemical-induced skin sensitisation) represents a key consumer safety endpoint for the cosmetics industry. At present, animal tests (predominantly the mouse Local Lymph Node Assay) are used to generate skin sensitisation hazard data for use in consumer safety risk assessments. An animal testing ban on chemicals to be used in cosmetics will come into effect in the European Union (EU) from March 2009. This animal testing ban is also linked to an EU marketing ban on products containing any ingredients that have been subsequently tested in animals, from March 2009 or March 2013, depending on the toxicological endpoint of concern. Consequently, the testing of cosmetic ingredients in animals for their potential to induce skin sensitisation will be subject to an EU marketing ban, from March 2013 onwards. Our conceptual framework and strategy to deliver a non-animal approach to consumer safety risk assessment can be summarised as an evaluation of new technologies (e.g. ‘omics’, informatics), leading to the development of new non-animal ( in silico and in vitro) predictive models for the generation and interpretation of new forms of hazard characterisation data, followed by the development of new risk assessment approaches to integrate these new forms of data and information in the context of human exposure. Following the principles of the conceptual framework, we have been investigating existing and developing new technologies, models and approaches, in order to explore the feasibility of delivering consumer safety risk assessment decisions in the absence of new animal data. We present here our progress in implementing this conceptual framework, with the skin sensitisation endpoint used as a case study.

Application of a Systems Biology Approach to Skin Allergy Risk Assessment

We have developed an in silico model of the induction of skin sensitisation, in order to characterise and quantify the contribution of each pathway to the overall biological process. This analysis has been used to guide our research on skin sensitisation and in vitro test development programmes, and provides a theoretical rationale for the interpretation and integration of non-animal predictive data for risk assessment (RA) purposes. The in vivo mouse Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) is now in widespread use for the evaluation of skin sensitisation potential and potency. Recent changes in European Union (EU) legislation (i.e. the 7th Amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive) have made the development of non-animal approaches to provide the data for skin sensitisation RA a key business need. Several in vitro predictive assays have already been developed for the prediction of skin sensitisation. However, these are based on the determination of a small number of pathways within the overall biological process, and our understanding of the relative contribution of these individual pathways to skin sensitisation induction is limited. To address this knowledge gap, a “systems biology” approach has been used to construct a computer-based mathematical model of the induction of skin sensitisation, in collaboration with Entelos, Inc. The biological mechanisms underlying the induction phase of skin sensitisation are represented by nonlinear ordinary differential equations and defined by using information from over 500 published papers. By using the model, we have identified knowledge gaps for future investigative research, and key factors that have a major influence on the induction of skin sensitisation (e.g. TNF-α production in the epidermis). The relative contribution of each of these key pathways has been assessed by determining their contributions to the overall process (e.g. sensitiser-specific T-cell proliferation in the draining lymph node). This information provides a biologically-relevant rationale for the interpretation and potential integration of diverse types of non-animal predictive data. Consequently, the Skin Sensitisation Physiolab® (SSP) platform represents one approach to integration that is likely to prove an invaluable tool for hazard evaluation in a new framework for consumer safety RA.

Pyrethrum Allergic Contact Dermatitis in Humans—Real?, Common?, or Not Documented?: An Evidence-Based Approach

Pyrethrum has been reported to produce allergic contact dermatitis in humans. Moreover, it has been speculated that cross reactions occur in ragweed-sensitized people. This review presents the botany, contemporary chemistry, and case reports of alleged allergic contact dermatitis. Our interpretation suggests that the evidence presented in literature does not show that allergic contact dermatitis results from exposure to pyrethrum. Similarly, the data do not suggest cross reactions in ragweed-sensitized people. Changes in the chemical composition of the refined pyrethrins suggest the putative sensitizer is present at a lower level in today's refined extracts than in ground pyrethrum flowers or the extracts used earlier.

The impact of vehicle on the relative potency of skin-sensitizing chemicals in the local lymph node assay

The identification and characterization of chemicals that possess skin-sensitizing potential are typically performed using predictive tests. However, human exposure to skin-sensitizing chemicals often occurs via a matrix (vehicle) that differs from that used in these tests. It is thus important to account for the potential impact of vehicle differences when undertaking quantitative risk assessment for skin sensitization. This is achieved through the application of a specific sensitization assessment factor (SAF), scaled between 1 and 10, when identifying an acceptable exposure level. The objective of the analysis described herein is to determine the impact of vehicle differences on local lymph node assay (LLNA) EC3 values (concentrations of test chemical required to provoke a 3-fold increase in lymph node cell proliferation). Initially, the inherent variability of the LLNA was investigated by examining the reproducibility of EC3 values for 14 chemicals that have been tested more than once in the same vehicle (4:1 acetone:olive oil, AOO). This analysis reveals that the variability in EC3 value for these chemicals following multiple assessments is <5-fold. Next, data from the literature and previously unpublished studies were compiled for 18 chemicals that had been assessed in the LLNA using at least 2 of 15 different vehicles. These data demonstrate that often the variability in EC3 values observed for a given chemical in different vehicles is no greater than the 5-fold inherent variability observed when assessing a chemical in the same vehicle on multiple occasions. However, there are examples where EC3 values for a chemical differ by a factor of more than 10 between different vehicles. These observations were often associated with an apparent underestimation of potency (higher EC3 values) with predominantly aqueous vehicles or propylene glycol. These data underscore the need to consider vehicle effects in the context of skin-sensitization risk assessments.

Skin sensitization: strategies for the assessment and management of risk

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is to a considerable extent a preventable disease. Limitation can be achieved by correct identification of skin sensitizers, characterization of their potency, understanding human skin exposure and application of good risk assessment/management strategies. Various methods exist which are accurate for the predictive identification of chemicals that possess skin-sensitizing properties. These are enshrined in regulations that aim to provide a harmonized approach to hazard identification. One of the methods, the local lymph node assay, also delivers information on the relative potency of sensitizers. Efforts are continuing in the European Union and at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to use elements of this information for regulatory categorization of skin sensitizers. However, greater use can be made of this potency information in the application of quantitative risk assessments. Such assessments depend also on the availability of accurate data on human skin exposure, one aspect where legislation has little role to play. Management of risks by restriction of skin exposure is, in contrast, a key point where legislation can play an important role, helping to establish a level playing field for industry and setting good standards based on the legislator's ability to access all data. Ultimately, the combination of accurate hazard identification, potency measurement, risk assessment and management, underpinned by enabling legislation, will lead to reduction of ACD. For individuals who do still develop contact allergy, avoidance of ACD should continue to be a goal, based on raising awareness of skin protection, allergen labelling and other skincare strategies.