Artificial disruption of skin barrier prior to irritant patch testing does not improve test design

British Journal of Dermatology

Volumn 150, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 82-89

  Gebhard, K L ^a   Effendy, I ^b   Loffler H ^a  

^a PHILIPPS UNIVERSITY MARBURG   (Germany)

^b Municipal Hospital Bielefeld   (Germany)

Author keywords

Bioengineering methods; Irritant contact dermatitis; Skin irritation; Sodium lauryl sulphate; Transepidermal water loss

Indexed keywords

DODECYL SULFATE SODIUM;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CAPILLARY PERMEABILITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; EPIDERMIS; ERYTHEMA; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; HYDRATION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PATCH TEST; PRICK TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCORING SYSTEM; SKIN INCISION; SKIN IRRITATION; SKIN MANIFESTATION; SKIN PENETRATION; SKIN WATER LOSS;

ADULT; BODY WATER; DERMATITIS, IRRITANT; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS; ERYTHEMA; FEMALE; HUMANS; IRRITANTS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATCH TESTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SKIN IRRITANCY TESTS; SODIUM DODECYL SULFATE; TIME FACTORS; WATER LOSS, INSENSIBLE;

EID: 1242320229     PISSN: 00070963     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2004.05700.x     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Löffler H, Effendy I, Happle R. [Irritant contact dermatitis]. Hautarzt 2000; 51: 203-15.
2. Frosch PJ. Cutaneous irritation. In: Textbook of Contact Dermatitis (Rycroft RCG, Menné T, Frosch PJ et al., eds). Berlin: Springer, 1992: 28-61.
3. Lammintausta K, Maibach HI. Exogenous and endogenous factors in skin irritation. Int J Dermatol 1988; 27: 213-22.
4. Frosch PJ, Rustemeyer T, Schnuch A. Kontaktdermatitis, Teil I [Contact dermatitis. I]. Hautarzt 1996; 47: 874-82.
5. Lee CH, Maibach HI. The sodium lauryl sulfate model: an overview. Contact Dermatitis 1995; 33: 1-7.
6. Löffler H, Effendy I, Happle R. [Patch testing with sodium lauryl sulfate: benefits and drawbacks in research and practice]. Hautarzt 1999; 50: 769-78.
7. Berardesca E, Maibach HI. Bioengineering and the patch test. Contact Dermatitis 1988; 18: 3-9.
8. Tupker RA, Willis C, Berardesca E et al. Guidelines on sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) exposure tests. A report from the Standardization Group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1997; 37: 53-69.
9. Wilhelm KP, Surber C, Maibach HI. Quantification of sodium lauryl sulfate irritant dermatitis in man: comparison of four techniques: skin color reflectance, transepidermal water loss, laser Doppler flow measurement and visual scores. Arch Dermatol Res 1989; 281: 293-5.
10. Agner T. Noninvasive measuring methods for the investigation of irritant patch test reactions: a study of patients with hand eczema, atopic dermatitis and controls. Acta Derm Venereol (Suppl.) (Stockh) 1992; 173: 1-26.
11. Whitton JT, Everall JD. The thickness of the epidermis. Br J Dermatol 1973; 89: 467-76.
12. Triebskorn A, Gloor M. Noninvasive methods for dermination of skin hydration. In: Noninvasive Methods for Quantification of Skin Functions (Frosch PJ, Kligman AM, eds). Basel: Karger, 1993: 42-55.
13. Pinnagoda J, Tupker RA, Agner T et al. Guidelines for transepidermal water loss (TEWL) measurement. A report from the Standardization Group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1990; 22: 164-78.
14. Frosch PJ, Kligman AM. The soap chamber test. J Am Acad Dermatol 1979; 1: 35-41.
15. Pinnagoda J, Tupker RA, Coenraads PJ et al. Comparability and reproducibility of the results of water loss measurements: a study of 4 evaporimeters. Contact Dermatitis 1989; 20: 241-6.
16. Agner T, Serup J. Time course of occlusive effects on skin evaluated by measurement of transepidermal water loss (TEWL). Including patch tests with sodium lauryl sulphate and water. Contact Dermatitis 1993; 28: 6-9.
17. Aramaki J, Löffler C, Kawana S et al. Irritant patch testing with sodium lauryl sulphate: interrelation between concentration and exposure time. Br J Dermatol 2001, 145: 704-8.
18. Friebe K, Effendy I, Löffler H. Effects of skin occlusion in patch testing with sodium lauryl sulfate. Br J Dermatol 2003; 148: 65-9.
19. Froebe CL, Simion FA, Rhein LD et al. Stratum corneum lipid removal by surfactants: relation to in vivo irritation. Dermatologica 1990; 181: 277-83.
20. Agner T, Serup J. Sodium lauryl sulphate for irritant patch testing - a dose-response study using bioengineering methods for determination of skin irritation. J Invest Dermatol 1990; 95: 543-7.
21. Serup J, Staberg B. Differentiation of allergic and irritant reactions by transepidermal water loss. Contact Dermatitis 1987; 16: 129-32.
22. Nassif A, Chan SC, Storrs FJ et al. Abnormal skin irritancy in atopic dermatitis and in atopy without dermatitis. Arch Dermatol 1994; 130: 1402-7.
23. Magnusson B, Hersle K. Patch test methods. I. A comparative study of six different types of patch tests. Acta Derm Venereol 1965; 45: 123-8.
24. Frosch PJ, Kligman AM. The Duhring chamber: an improved technique for epicutaneous testing of irritant and allergic reactions. Contact Dermatitis 1979; 5: 73-81.
25. Denda M, Emami S, Wood LC et al. Epidermal injury vs. barrier disruption as initiators of epidermal proliferation and inflammation. J Invest Dermatol 1995; 104: 562.
26. Nickoloff BJ, Naidu Y. Perturbation of epidermal barrier function correlates with initiation of cytokine cascade in human skin. J Am Acad Dermatol 1994; 30: 535-46.
27. Effendy I, Löffler H, Maibach HI. Epidermal cytokines in murine cutaneous irritant responses. J Appl Toxicol 2000; 20: 335-41.
28. Wilmer JL, Burleson FG, Kayama F et al. Cytokine induction in human epidermal keratinocytes exposed to contact irritants and its relation to chemical-induced inflammation in mouse skin. J Invest Dermatol 1994; 102: 915-22.
29. Kondo S, Pastore S, Shivji GM et al. Characterization of epidermal cytokine profiles in sensitization and dictation phases of allergic contact dermatitis as well as irritant contact dermatitis in mouse skin. Lymphokine Cytokine Res 1994; 13: 367-75.
30. von den Driesch P, Fartasch M, Huner A et al. Expression of integrin receptors and ICAM-1 on keratinocytes in vivo and in an In vitro reconstructed epidermis: effect of sodium dodecyl sulphate. Arch Dermatol Res 1995; 287: 249-53.
31. Dahl MV, Trancik RJ. Sodium lauryl sulfate irritant patch tests: degree of inflammation at various times. Contact Dermatitis 1977; 3: 263-6.
32. Welzel J, Wilhelm KP, Wolff HH. Skin permeability barrier and occlusion: no delay of repair in irritated human skin. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 35: 163-8.
33. Agner T, Fullerton A, Broby-Johansen U et al. Irritant patch testing: penetration of sodium lauryl sulphate into human skin. Skin Pharmacol 1990; 3: 213-7.
34. Patil S, Singh P, Sarasour K et al. Quantification of sodium lauryl sulfate penetration into the skin and underlying tissue after topical application - pharmacological and toxicological implications. J Pharm Sci 1995; 84: 1240-4.
35. Basketter DA, Whittle E, Griffiths HA et al. The identification and classification of skin irritation hazard by a human patch test. Food Chem Toxicol 1994; 32: 769-75.
36. York M, Basketter DA, Cuthbert JA et al. Skin irritation testing in man for hazard assessment - evaluation of four patch systems. Hum Exp Toxicol 1995; 14: 729-34.
37. York M, Griffiths HA, Whittle E et al. Evaluation of a human patch test for the identification and classification of skin irritation potential. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 34: 204-12.
38. Robinson MK, Perkins MA, Basketter DA. Application of a 4-h human patch test method for comparative and investigative assessment of skin irritation. Contact Dermatitis 1998; 38: 194-202.
39. Aramaki J, Effendy I, Happle R et al. Which bioengineering assay is appropriate for irritant patch testing with sodium lauryl sulfate? Contact Dermatitis 2001; 45: 286-90.
40. Agner T, Serup J. Skin reactions to irritants assessed by non-invasive bioengineering methods. Contact Dermatitis 1989; 20: 352-9.
41. Agner T, Serup J. Individual and instrumental variations in irritant patch-test reactions - clinical evaluation and quantification by bioengineering methods. Clin Exp Dermatol 1990; 15: 29-33.