A chemical dataset for evaluation of alternative approaches to skin-sensitization testing

Common fragrance chemicals activate dendritic cells in coculture with keratinocytes

BACKGROUND

Fragrances are important contact allergens; however, investigation of their skin sensitization potency has been challenging in new approach methods (NAMs). Many fragrance chemicals are susceptible to autoxidation or can be metabolized by enzymes constitutively expressed in skin keratinocytes. Strong sensitizers can be formed in both of these processes. Further, keratinocytes can modulate the dendritic cell (DC) activation and maturation potential, a key event in the acquisition of contact allergy.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the 2D coculture model consisting of keratinocytes and DCs using different weak to moderate sensitizing fragrance chemicals. Further, to investigate fragrances and related oxidation products in the in vitro model and compare to in vivo data.

METHODS

Chemicals were tested in the coculture activation test (COCAT), consisting of HaCaT keratinocytes and THP-1 cells. THP-1 cell surface expression of costimulatory and adhesion molecules (CD86 and CD54) collected after 24 h incubation with the chemicals was analysed using flow cytometry.

RESULTS

Twenty-four molecules were tested positive, three were negative (n = 27). Four pairs were evaluated, with aldehydes showing a 6- to 13-fold stronger responses compared to their corresponding alcohols.

CONCLUSIONS

Results provide insight into the activation of DC in their natural environment of keratinocytes. α,β-Unsaturated alcohols were classified as weaker sensitizers compared to their corresponding aldehydes. In sum, testing of fragrances retrieved results in good agreement with in vivo data.

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.

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.

Enzymes and sensitization via skin exposure: A critical analysis

Some proteins, including enzymes, can induce allergic sensitization of various types, including allergic sensitization of the respiratory tract. There is now an increased understanding of the role that the skin plays in the development of IgE-mediated allergy and this prompts the question whether topical exposure to enzymes used widely in consumer cleaning products could result in allergic sensitization. Here, the evidence that proteins can interact with the skin immune system and the way they do so is reviewed, together with a consideration of the experience gained over decades of the use of enzymes in laundry and cleaning products. The conclusion drawn is that although transcutaneous sensitization to proteins can occur (typically through compromised skin) resulting in IgE antibody-mediated allergy, in practice such skin contact with enzymes used in laundry and cleaning products does not appear to pose a significant risk of allergic disease. Further, the evidence summarized in this publication support the view that proteins do not pose a risk of allergic contact dermatitis.

Strategies to Develop a Suitable Formulation for Inflammatory Skin Disease Treatment

Skin barrier functions, environmental insults, and genetic backgrounds are intricately linked and form the basis of common inflammatory skin disorders, such as atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, and seborrheic dermatitis, which may seriously affect one’s quality of life. Topical therapy is usually the first line of management. It is believed that successful topical treatment requires pharmaceutical formulation from a sufficient dosage to exert therapeutic effects by penetrating the stratum corneum and then diffusing to the target area. However, many factors can affect this process including the physicochemical properties of the active compound, the composition of the formulation base, and the limitations and conditions of the skin barrier, especially in inflammatory skin. This article briefly reviews the available data on these issues and provides opinions on strategies to develop a suitable formulation for inflammatory skin disease treatment.

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, phenylacetaldehyde, CAS Registry Number 122-78-1

The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. The material (phenylacetaldehyde) was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data show that phenylacetaldehyde is not genotoxic and provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) > 100 for the repeated dose and developmental and reproductive toxicity endpoints. Data from phenylacetaldehyde provided a No Expected Sensitization Induction Level (NESIL) of 590 μg/cm² for the skin sensitization endpoint. The local respiratory toxicity endpoint was completed using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to phenylacetaldehyde was below the TTC (0.03 mg/kg/day, 0.03 mg/kg/day, and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on data and ultraviolet (UV) spectra; phenylacetaldehyde is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The environmental endpoints were evaluated; phenylacetaldehyde was not found to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) environmental standards and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]) are <1.

High-throughput screening (HTS)-based spectrophotometric direct peptide reactivity assay (Spectro-DPRA) to predict human skin sensitization potential

Some cosmetic ingredients can act as a chemical hapten to induce an immune response; therefore, evaluating the sensitizing potential of cosmetic ingredients is essential. We previously developed a novel in chemico direct peptide reactivity assay involving a spectrophotometric evaluation (Spectro-DPRA) for animal skin sensitization tests (local lymph node assay; LLNA). Based on previous research, we expanded the test materials to confirm the effectiveness of the Spectro-DPRA method for predicting the animal skin sensitization potential, and further determined the feasibility of the method for estimating the human skin sensitization potential. Spectro-DPRA showed 83.1% or 89.1% accuracy compared to a conventional LLNA or prediction based on human data, respectively, with a combination model using both a cysteine peptide and lysine peptide cut-off. To identify the effect of the lipophilicity of a chemical on predicting the skin sensitization potential, we applied our prediction model to chemicals with a Log P_ow range of -1 to 4. Overall predictability was increased, and the accuracy compared to the LLNA and human data was 91.5% and 94.9%, respectively, in the combination cut-off prediction model. In conclusion, Spectro-DPRA serves as an easy, rapid, and high-throughput in chemico screening method with high accuracy to predict the human skin sensitization potential of chemicals.

Evaluation of skin sensitization potential of chemicals by local lymph node assay using 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine with flow cytometry

The local lymph node assay using 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine with flow cytometry (LLNA: BrdU-FCM) is a modified LLNA used to identify skin sensitizers. This assay measures the proliferation of auricular lymph node cells (LNCs) during the induction phase of skin sensitization and the number of BrdU-positive LNCs using flow cytometry. We determined if LLNA: BrdU-FCM can evaluate the skin sensitization potential of 20 substances, including 16 sensitizers and 4 non-sensitizers, that were tested using LLNA: DA and LLNA: BrdU-ELISA but not listed in OECD TG 429. After selecting appropriate vehicles and conducting pre-screen tests in 2 phases, solvents and test concentrations for the main test were determined. In the main study, we measured changes in LN weight, the number of LNCs, and the proportion of BrdU incorporated into LNCs to calculate stimulation indexes (SI). SI was calculated based on the total number of LNCs and BrdU incorporation in LNCs. We found that all substances were correctly classified as sensitizers or non-sensitizers. Overall, we confirmed that the LLNA: BrdU-FCM can evaluate skin sensitization potential of the 20 substances. Additionally, our results of combining 22 reference substances listed in OECD TG 429 and 20 additional substances showed that concordance of LLNA: BrdU-FCM with the LLNA was higher than before.

Evaluation and improvement of QSAR predictions of skin sensitization for pesticides

In vivo skin sensitization assays have to be provided by applicants to the competent authorities in the European Union for the approval of active substances (AS) in pesticides. This study aimed to test the practicability of in silico predictions for AS by freely available (Q)SAR tools to evaluate their use as a time- and cost-effective alternative to animal testing in the context of the 3R concept. Predictions of skin sensitization for 48 selected sensitizing and non-sensitizing AS by the software programs CAESAR, Toxtree, OECD (Q)SAR Toolbox, CASE Ultra, Leadscope and SciQSAR were collected and compared. Different data evaluation methodologies (score definition, mean, weighted mean, threshold score definition) were applied to optimize the predictions. The calculation methods were internally cross-validated and further validated with an additional validation set of 80 AS. Although the presented calculation methodologies are not suitable as a stand-alone method, this study has shown weaknesses and strengths of some prominent (Q)SAR programs and diverse combinatorial options in the prediction of skin sensitization by pesticidal AS. The present study will help to foster discussions on in silico alternatives to animal testing in the pesticide area.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis Evaluation: Strategies for the Preschooler

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The environment for the developing children is complex as they are exposed to a variety of activities and settings where potential environmental allergens may be encountered. Recent evidence supports the clinical benefit of patch testing young children suffering from recalcitrant dermatitis. While patch testing has been recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration in children ages 6-18 years old, patch testing strategies for young children of preschool age (between 2 and 6 years old) have yet to be defined.

RECENT FINDINGS

Allergic contact dermatitis is underdiagnosed among pediatric patients, particularly those suffering from concomitant atopic dermatitis as the interplay between the two diseases is complex. Recent reports in literature supported the clinical value, safety, and efficacy of patch testing pediatric patients. This review provides an overview of specific pediatric allergens, special considerations, practical modifications, and systematic exposure-driven guidance approaches toward patch testing preschoolers.

An improvement of LLNA:DA to assess the skin sensitization potential of chemicals

We developed a modified local lymph node assay based on ATP (LLNA:DA), termed the Two-Stage LLNA:DA, to further reduce the animal numbers in the identification of sensitizers. In the Two-Stage LLNA:DA procedure, 13 chemicals ranging from non-sensitizers to extreme sensitizers were selected. The first stage used reduced LLNA:DA (rLLNA:DA) to screen out sensitive chemicals. The second stage used LLNA:DA based on OECD 442 (A) to classify those potential sensitizers screened out in the first stage. In the first stage, the SIs of the methyl methacrylate, salicylic acid, methyl salicylate, ethyl salicylate, isopropanol and propanediol were below 1.8 and need not to be tested in the second step. Others continued to be tested by LLNA:DA. In the second stage, sodium lauryl sulphate and xylene were classified as weak sensitizers. a-hexyl cinnamic aldehyde and eugenol were moderate sensitizers. Benzalkonium chloride and glyoxal were strong sensitizers, and phthalic anhydride was an extreme sensitizer. The 9/9, 11/12, 10/11, and 8/13 (positive or negative only) categories of the Two-Stage LLNA:DA were consistent with those from the other methods (LLNA, LLNA:DA, GPMT/BT and HMT/HPTA), suggesting that Two-Stage LLNA:DA have a high coincidence rate with reported data. In conclusion, The Two-Stage LLNA:DA is in line with the "3R" rules, and can be a modification of LLNA:DA but needs more study.

Mouse Model of Hydroquinone Hypersensitivity via Innate and Acquired Immunity and its Promotion by Combined Reagents

We established a mouse model of contact hypersensitivity (CHS) to hydroquinone (HQ), a widespread chemical in our environment. HQ was painted onto flanks; then, HQ was challenged by painting onto ear pinnas on days 7 and 14. The CHS after the second challenge was markedly greater than that after the first challenge. Both challenges increased thymic stromal lymphopoietin and T helper type 2 cytokines in ear pinnas, whereas IFN-γ (typical T helper type 1 cytokine) was decreased, despite an increase in IL-18 (typical IFN-γ inducer). In nude mice (T cell-reduced), although a first challenge induced CHS, a second challenge did not augment it. In severe combined immunodeficient, severe combined immunodeficient-beige, and IL-1-deficient mice, CHS was not induced. However, CHS was inducible in severe combined immunodeficient-beige mice after transfer of natural killer cells from HQ-sensitized normal mice. Tretinoin (used for enhancing the skin-whitening effect of HQ) and resin monomers (used to prevent polymerization of HQ) lowered the HQ concentration needed to establish sensitization to HQ. The augmented CHS after a second challenge was reduced by JNJ7777120, dexamethasone, suplatast tosilate (T helper type 2-cytokine inhibitor), and anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin antibody. These results suggest that (i) thymic stromal lymphopoietin, IL-1, and T and/or natural killer cells are important in establishing and augmenting CHS to HQ and (ii) inflammatory chemicals may promote CHS to HQ as adjuvants.

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-ethyl-1-butanol, CAS Registry Number 97-95-0

The use of this material under current conditions is supported by existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data from the suitable read across analog 2-ethylhexanol (CAS # 104-76-7) show that this material is not genotoxic. Data from the suitable read across analog isopropyl alcohol (CAS # 67-63-0) show that this material does not have skin sensitization potential. The local respiratory toxicity endpoint was completed using the TTC (Threshold of Toxicological Concern) for a Cramer Class I material (1.4 mg/day). The repeated dose toxicity endpoint was completed using 2-ethylhexanol (CAS # 104-76-7) and 1-heptanol, 2-propyl (CAS # 10042-59-8) as suitable read across analogs, which provided a MOE > 100. The developmental and reproductive toxicity endpoint was completed using 2-ethyl-hexanol (CAS # 104-76-7) and isobutyl alcohol (CAS # 78-83-1) as suitable read across analogs, which provided a MOE > 100. The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on suitable UV spectra. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework.

Chemical applicability domain of the Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) for skin sensitisation potency. Part 2. The biological variability of the murine Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) for skin sensitisation

The Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) is the most common in vivo regulatory toxicology test for skin sensitisation, quantifying potency as the EC3, the concentration of chemical giving a threefold increase in thymidine uptake in the local lymph node. Existing LLNA data can, along with clinical data, provide useful comparator information on the potency of sensitisers. Understanding of the biological variability of data from LLNA studies is important for those developing non-animal based risk assessment approaches for skin allergy. Here an existing set of 94 EC3 values for 12 chemicals, all tested at least three times in the same vehicle have been analysed by calculating standard deviations (SD) for logEC3 values. The SDs range from 0.08 to 0.22. The overall SD for the 94 logEC3 values is 0.147. Thus the 95% confidence limits (2xSD) for LLNA EC3 values are within a factor of 2, comparable to those for physico-chemical measurements such as partition coefficients and solubility. The residual SDs of Quantitative Mechanistic Models (QMMs) based on physical organic chemistry parameters are similar to the overall SD of the LLNA, indicating that QMMs of this type are unlikely to be bettered for predictive accuracy.

The local lymph node assay in practice: a current regulatory perspective

Following the formal acceptance of the local lymph node assay (LLNA) as an Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) guideline in April 2002, the UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) informed notifiers that this was now the method of choice for the assessment of skin sensitization potential under the EU notification scheme for new industrial chemicals (NONS). This paper summarizes the experience of the HSE for the 2-year period immediately following the issuing of this statement, during which 48 LLNA study reports were assessed for notification purposes. The issues discussed here include adherence to the OECD guideline, interpretation of results, and classification outcomes. Generally, notifying laboratories followed the OECD guideline successfully, with regard to the sex/ strain/numbers of mice used, the precise process used for measurement of cell proliferation, and the use of recommended vehicles and positive controls. Initially, use of the individual animal approach (measuring the cell proliferation in each animal rather than for a pooled dose group) highlighted problems caused by technical inexperience, but these were overcome by practice. Toxicity or irritation were found to be minor factors in dose selection; more important was the choice of vehicle to correctly maximize the test substance concentration, while maintaining appropriate application properties. Contrary to concerns that the LLNA would prove to be less sensitive or more sensitive than the traditionally used Guinea Pig Maximization Test (GPMT), the proportion of new substances classified as skin sensitizers was within the range observed in previous years. Although the sample size is relatively small, the experience of the HSE indicates that the LLNA is satisfactory for routine regulatory use.

Is skin penetration a determining factor in skin sensitization potential and potency? Refuting the notion of a LogKow threshold for skin sensitization

It is widely accepted that substances that cannot penetrate through the skin will not be sensitizers. LogKow and molecular weight (MW) have been used to set thresholds for sensitization potential. Highly hydrophilic substances e.g. LogKow ≤ 1 are expected not to penetrate effectively to induce sensitization. To investigate whether LogKow >1 is a true requirement for sensitization, a large dataset of substances that had been evaluated for their skin sensitization potential under Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and restriction of CHemicals (REACH), together with available measured LogKow values was compiled using the OECD eChemPortal. The incidence of sensitizers relative to non-sensitizers above and below a LogKow of 1 was explored. Reaction chemistry principles were used to explain the sensitization observed for the subset of substances with a LogKow ≤0. 1482 substances were identified with skin sensitization data and measured LogKow values. 525 substances had a measured LogKow ≤ 1, 100 of those were sensitizers. There was no significant difference in the incidence of sensitizers above and below a LogKow of 1. Reaction chemistry principles that had been established for lower MW and more hydrophobic substances were found to be still valid in rationalizing the skin sensitizers with a LogKow ≤ 0. The LogKow threshold arises from the widespread misconception that the ability to efficiently penetrate the stratum corneum is a key determinant of sensitization potential and potency. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.