Comparative analysis of skin sensitization potency of acrylates (methyl acrylate, ethyl acrylate, butyl acrylate, and ethylhexyl acrylate) using the local lymph node assay

Contact Dermatitis

Volumn 57, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 242-247

  Dearman, Rebecca J ^a   Betts, Catherine J ^a   Farr, Craig ^b,c   McLaughlin, James ^c,d   Berdasco, Nancy ^c,e   Wiench, Karin ^c,f   Kimber, Ian ^a  

^a JEALOTT S HILL INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

^b ARKEMA INC   (United States)

^c Basic Acrylic Monomer Manufacturers Inc (BAMM)   (United States)

^d ROHM AND HAAS COMPANY   (United States)

^e DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY   (United States)

^f BASF SE   (Germany)

Author keywords

Acrylates; Local lymph node assay; Skin sensitization potency

Indexed keywords

ACRYLIC ACID BUTYL ESTER; ACRYLIC ACID DERIVATIVE; ACRYLIC ACID ETHYL ESTER; ACRYLIC ACID METHYL ESTER; ETHYLHEXYL ACRYLATE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ANIMAL CELL; ARTICLE; CELL PROLIFERATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONCENTRATION (PARAMETERS); CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG POTENCY; FEMALE; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; LYMPH NODE CELL; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; SKIN SENSITIZATION;

ACRYLATES; ALLERGENS; ANIMALS; CELL PROLIFERATION; DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC CONTACT; DISEASE MODELS, ANIMAL; FEMALE; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; LYMPH NODES; MICE; MICE, INBRED CBA; SKIN TESTS;

EID: 34548590870     PISSN: 01051873     EISSN: 16000536     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01215.x     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R. Sensitization to patch test acrylates. Contact Dermatitis 1988 : 18 : 10 15.
2. Rustemeyer T, Frosch P J. Occupational skin diseases in dental laboratory technicians. (I). Clinical picture and causative factors. Contact Dermatitis 1996 : 34 : 125 133.
3. Kanerva L, Jolanki R, Estlander T. 10 years of patch testing with the (meth)acrylate series. Contact Dermatitis 1997 : 37 : 255 258.
4. Geukens S, Goossens A. Occupational contact allergy to (meth)acrylates. Contact Dermatitis 2001 : 44 : 153 159.
5. van der Walle H B, Klecak G, Geleik H, Bensink T. Sensitizing potential of 14 mono-(meth)-acrylates in the guinea pig. Contact Dermatitis 1982 : 8 : 223 235.
6. Wahlberg J E, Boam A. Guinea pig maximization test. In : Current Problems in Dermatology, Volume 14. Contact Allergy Predictive Tests in Guinea Pigs, Andersen K E, Maibach H I (eds Basel, Karger, 1985 : 59 106.
7. Warbrick E V, Dearman R J, Ashby J, Schmezer P, Kimber I. Preliminary assessment of the skin sensitizing activity of selected rodent carcinogens using the local lymph node assay. Toxicology 2001 : 163 : 63 69.
8. Hayes B B, Meade B J. Contact sensitivity to selected acrylate compounds in B6C3F1 mice: relative potency, cross reactivity, and comparison of test methods. Drug Chem Toxicol 1999 : 22 : 491 506.
9. Kimber I, Basketter D A. Contact sensitization: a new approach to risk assessment. Human Ecol Risk Assess 1997 : 3 : 385 395.
10. Basketter D A, Wright Z M, Warbrick E V, Dearman R J, Kimber I, Ryan C A, Gerberick G F, White I R. Human potency predictions for aldehydes using the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2001 : 45 : 89 94.
11. Kimber I, Basketter D A, Butler M et al. Classification of contact allergens according to potency: proposals. Food Chem Toxicol 2003 : 41 : 1799 1809.
12. Basketter D A, Blaikie L, Dearman R J et al. Use of the local lymph node assay for estimation of relative contact allergenic potency. Contact Dermatitis 2000 : 42 : 344 348.
13. Gerberick G F, Robinson M K, Ryan C A, Dearman R J, Kimber I, Basketter D A, Wright Z, Marks J G. Contact allergenic potency: correlation of human and local lymph node assay data. Am J Contact Dermatitis 2001 : 12 : 156 161.
14. Kimber I, Basketter D A. The murine local lymph node assay: a commentary on collaborative studies and new directions. Food Chem Toxicol 1992 : 30 : 165 169.
15. Kimber I, Dearman R J, Basketter D A, Ryan C A, Gerberick G F. The local lymph node assay: past, present and future. Contact Dermatitis 2002 : 47 : 315 318.
16. Basketter D A, Lea L J, Dickens A, Briggs D, Pate I, Dearman R J, Kimber I. A comparison of statistical approaches to the derivation of EC3 values from local lymph node assay dose responses. J Appl Toxicol 1999 : 19 : 261 266.
17. Betts C J, Beresford L, Dearman R J, Lalko J, Kimber I. Ethanol: diethylphthalate: an appropriate vehicle for the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2007 : 56 : 70 75.
18. Basketter D A, Andersen, K E, Liden C, Van Loveren, H, Boman A, Kimber I, Alanko K, Berggren E. Evaluation of the skin sensitizing potency of chemicals by using existing methods and considerations of relevance for elicitation. Contact Dermatitis 2005 : 52 : 39 43.
19. Kimber I, Hilton J, Dearman R J et al. An international evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay and comparison of modified procedures. Toxicology 1995 : 103 : 63 73.
20. Dearman R J, Wright Z M, Basketter D A, Ryan C A, Gerberick G F, Kimber I. The suitability of hexyl cinnamic aldehyde as a calibrant for the murine local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2001 : 44 : 357 361.
21. Basketter D A, Cadby P. Reproducible prediction of contact allergenic potency using the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2004 : 50 : 15 17.
22. Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R, Tarvainen K. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by exposure to acrylates during work with dental prostheses. Contact Dermatitis 1993 : 28 : 268 275.
23. Estlander T, Alanako K, Jolanki B. Dental materials. In : Contact Dermatitis, 4th edition, Frosch P J, Menne T, Lepoittevin J-P (eds Berlin, Springer, 2006 : 653 678.
24. Le Coz C J, Lepoittevin J-P. Dictionary of contact allergens: chemical structures, sources and references. In : Contact Dermatitis, 4th edition, Frosch P J, Menne T, Lepoittevin J-P (eds Berlin, Springer, 2006 : 943 1105.