Local lymph node data for the evaluation of skin sensitization alternatives: A second compilation

Dermatitis

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 8-32

  Kern, Petra S ^a   Gerberick, G Frank ^a   Ryan, Cindy A ^a   Kimber, Ian ^a   Aptula, Aynur ^a   Basketter, David A ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

1 NAPHTHOL; 1,3 PHENYLENEDIAMINE; 2 AMINOPHENOL; 2 BROMO 2 BROMOMETHYLGLUTARONITRILE; 2 NITRO 1,4 PHENYLENEDIAMINE; 2,5 DIAMINOTOLUENE; 3 AMINOPHENOL; 4 METHOXYBENZYL ALCOHOL; 4' HYDROXYCHALCONE; 7,12 DIMETHYLBENZ[A]ANTHRACENE; ABIETIC ACID; ACETONE; ALCOHOL; ALLERGEN; ANETHOLE; ANILINE; BENZO[A]PYRENE; CHALCONE DERIVATIVE; CHEMICAL AGENT; CINNAMALDEHYDE; CINNAMYL ALCOHOL; DIETHYLENETRIAMINE; ESTRAGOLE; HAPTEN; LINALOOL; METHACRYLIC ACID METHYL ESTER; OLIVE OIL; PHENYLENEDIAMINE; RESORCINOL; TRIDECANE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA BASE; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG POTENCY; FEMALE; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; LYMPH NODE; MOUSE; MULTIPLE CHEMICAL SENSITIVITY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SKIN SENSITIZATION; STIMULATION;

ANIMALS; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC CONTACT; FEMALE; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; MICE; MICE, INBRED CBA; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS;

EID: 76149142138     PISSN: 17103568     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2310/6620.2009.09038     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Gerberick GF, Robinson MK. A skin sensitization risk assessment process for evaluation of new ingredients and products. Am J Contact Dermat 2000;11:65-73.
2. Dearman RJ, Basketter DA, Kimber I. Local lymph node assay-use in hazard and risk assessment. J Appl Toxicol 1999;19:299-306.
3. Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Kimber I, et al. Local lymph node assay validation assessment for regulatory purposes. Am J Contact Dermat 2000;11:3-18.
4. Basketter DA, Evans P, Fielder RJ, et al. Local lymph node assay-validation and use in practice. Food Chem Toxicol 2002;40: 593-8.
5. Kimber I, Dearman RJ, Basketter DA, et al. The local lymph node assay: past, present and future. Contact Dermatitis 2002;47:315-28.
6. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Guidelines for testing of chemicals. Guideline no. 429. Skin sensitization: the local lymph node assay. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development; 2002. p. 1-7.
7. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM). The murine local lymph node assay: a test method for assessing the allergic contact dermatitis potential of chemicals/compounds. Report. Paris: ICCVAM; 1999. NIH Publication No.: 99-4494.
8. Balls M, Hellsten E. Statement on the validity of the local lymph node assay for skin sensitization testing. ECVAM Joint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy, 21 March. Altern Lab Anim 2000;28:366-7.
9. European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC). Potency values from the local lymph node assay: application to classification, labelling and risk assessment. Brussels: ECETOC; 2008.
10. Basketter DA, Lea LJ, Cooper K, et al. A comparison of statistical approaches to derivation of EC3 values from local lymph node assay dose responses. J Appl Toxicol 1999;19:261-6.
11. Basketter DA, Andersen KE, Liden C, et al. Evaluation of the skin sensitizing potency of chemicals by using the existing methods and considerations of relevance for elicitation. Contact Dermatitis 2005; 52:39-43.
12. van Loveren H, Cockshott A, Gebel T, et al. Skin sensitization in chemical risk assessment: report of a WHO/IPCS international workshop focusing on dose-response assessment. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2008;50:155-99.
13. Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Kern PS, et al. Compilation of historical local lymph node assay data for the evaluation of skin sensitization alternatives. Dermatitis 2005;16:157-202.
14. Basketter DA, Blaikie L, Dearman RJ, et al. Use of the local lymph node assay for the estimation of relative contact allergenic potency. Contact Dermatitis 2000;42:344-8.
15. Basketter DA, Wright ZM, Warbrick EV, et al. Human potency predictions for aldehydes using the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2001;45:89-94.
16. Gerberick GF, Robinson MK, Ryan CA, et al. Contact allergenic potency: correlation of human and local lymph node assay data. Am J Contact Dermat 2001;12:156-61.
17. Griem P, Goebel C, Scheffler H. Proposal for a risk assessment methodology for skin sensitization based on sensitization potency data. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2003;38:269-90.
18. Schneider K, Akkan Z. Quantitative relationship between the local lymph node assay and human skin sensitization assays. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2004;39:245-55.
19. Basketter DA, Clapp C, Jefferies D, et al. Predictive identification of human skin sensitisation thresholds. Contact Dermatitis 2005;53: 260-7.
20. Basketter DA, Gerberick GF, Kimber I. The local lymph node assay EC3 value: status of validation. Contact Dermatitis 2007;57: 70-5.
21. Ryan CA, Chaney JG, Kern PS, et al. Extrapolating local lymph node assay EC3 values to estimate relative sensitizing potency. J Cutan Ocul Toxicol 2007;26:135-45.
22. Roberts DW, Patlewicz G, Kern PS, et al. Mechanistic applicability domain classification of a local lymph node assay dataset for skin sensitisation. Chem Res Toxicol 2007;16:1019-30.
23. Basketter DA, McFadden JF, Gerberick GF, et al. Nothing is perfect, not even the local lymph node assay. A commentary and the implications for REACH. Contact Dermatitis 2009;60:65-9.
24. Basketter DA, Gerberick GF, Kimber I. Strategies for identifying false positive responses in predictive sensitisation tests. Food Chem Toxicol 1998;36:327-33.
25. Basketter DA, McFadden J, Evans P, et al. Identification and classification of skin sensitisers: identifying false positives and false negatives. Contact Dermatitis 2006;55:268-73.
26. Basketter DA, Gerberick GF, Kimber I. The local lymph node assay: current position in the regulatory classification of skin sensitising chemicals. J Cutan Ocul Toxicol 2007;26:293-301.
27. Robinson MK, Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, et al. The importance of exposure estimation in the assessment of skin sensitization risk. Contact Dermatitis 2000;42:251-9.
28. Gerberick GF, Robinson MK, Felter S. Understanding fragrance allergy using an exposure-based risk assessment approach. Contact Dermatitis 2001;45:333-40.
29. Felter SP, Robinson MK, Basketter DA, Gerberick GF. A review of the scientific basis for default uncertainty factors for use in quantitative risk assessment of the induction of allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 2002;47:257-66.
30. Felter SP, Ryan CA, Basketter DA, Gerberick GF. Application of the risk assessment paradigm to the induction of allergic contact dermatitis. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2003;37:1-10.
31. Basketter DA, Angelini G, Ingber A, et al. Nickel, chromium and cobalt in consumer products: revisiting safe levels in the new millennium. Contact Dermatitis 2003;49:1-7.
32. Api AM, Basketter DA, Cadby PA, et al. Dermal sensitization quantitative risk assessment (QRA) for fragrance ingredients. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2008;52:3-23.
33. Basketter DA, Clapp CJ, Safford BJ, et al. Preservatives and skin sensitisation quantitative risk assessment: risk benefit considerations. Dermatitis 2008;9:20-7.
34. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). Acetyl cedrene: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2005. Report No.: 51629.
35. Patlewicz G, Dimitrov SD, Low LK, et al. TIMES-SS - a promising tool for the assessment of skin sensitization hazard. A characterization with respect to the OECD validation principles for (Q)SAR and an external evaluation for predictivity. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2007;48:225-39.
36. Scientific Committee for Consumer Products (SCCP). Opinion on 2-amino-6-chloro-4-nitrophenol. 2006 Mar 28. COLIPA No.: B99; SCCP/0948/05.
37. Scientific Committee for Consumer Products (SCCP). Opinion on 4-amino-2-hydroxytoluene. 2006 Oct 10. COLIPA no.: A27; SCCP/ 1001/06.
38. Scientific Committee for Consumer Products (SCCP). Opinion on 4-amino-m-cresol. 2005 Sep 20. COLIPA No.: A74; SCCP/0898/05.
39. Scientific Committee for Consumer Products (SCCP). Opinion on HC Red No. 13. 2007 Jun 19. COLIPA No.: B31; SCCP/1075/07.
40. Scientific Committee for Consumer Products (SCCP). Opinion on 4-amino-3-nitrophenol. 2007 Mar 21. COLIPA No.: B51; SCCP/ 1059/06.
41. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). α-Amylcinnamyl alcohol: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2004. Report No.: 45128.
42. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). Anisyl alcohol: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2005. Report No.: 48750.
43. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). Atranol: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2004. Report No.: 44366.
44. White J, Kullavanijaya P, Duangdeeden I, et al. p-Phenylenediamine allergy: the role of Bandrowski's base. Clin Exp Allergy 2006;36: 1289-93.
45. Natsch A, Emter R. Skin sensitizers induce antioxidant response element dependent genes: application to the in vitro testing of the sensitization potential of chemicals. Toxicol Sci 2008;102:110-9.
46. DeLorme MP, Ladics GS, Donner EM, et al. Acute, subchronic and mutagenicity studies with norbornene fluoroalcohol. Drug Chem Toxicol 2005;28:379-95.
47. Dearman RJ, Betts CJ, Farr C, et al. 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 2007;57:242-7.
48. Nilsson A-M, Andresen Bergström M, Luthman K, et al. An a,bunsaturated oxime identified as a strong contact allergen. Indications of antigen formation via several pathways. Food Chem Toxicol 2005;43:1627-36.
49. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). Chloroatranol: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2004. Report No.: 44365.
50. Boman A, Montelius J, Rissanen R-L, Liden C. Sensitizing potential of chlorothalonil in the guinea pig and the mouse. Contact Dermatitis 2000;43:273-9.
51. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). d,l-Citronellol: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2005. Report No.: 48752.
52. Scientific Committee for Consumer Products (SCCP). Opinion on 2,6-dimethoxy-3,5-pyridinediamine HCl. 2005 Sep 20. COLIPA No.: A101; SCCP/0908/05.
53. Scientific Committee for Consumer Products (SCCP). Opinion on 1,3-bis-(2,4-diaminophenoxy)propane. 2007 Jun 19. COLIPA No.: A79; SCCP/1098/07.
54. Scientific Committee for Consumer Products (SCCP). Opinion on toluene-2,5-diamine. 2007 Oct 2. COLIPA No.: A5; SCCP/1084/07.
55. Kostoryz EL, Zhu Q, Zhao H, et al. Assessment of the relative skin sensitization potency of siloranes and bis-GMA using the local lymph node assay and QSAR predicted potency. J Biomed Mater Res A 2006;79:684-8.
56. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). Geranyl nitrile: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2006. Report No.: 51635.
57. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). Hexyl salicylate: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2006. Report No.: 51636.
58. Scientific Committee for Consumer Products (SCCP). Opinion on 3-nitro-p-hydroxyethylaminophenol. 2006 Dec 19. COLIPA No.: B54; SCCP/1036/06.
59. Siebert J. The sensitizing potential of iodopropynyl butylcarbamate in the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2004;51: 318-9.
60. Andresen Bergström M, Luthman K, Nilsson JLG, Karlberg A-T. Conjugated dienes as prohaptens in contact allergy: in vivo and in vitro studies of structure-activity relationships, sensitizing capacity, and metabolic activation. Chem Res Toxicol 2006;19:760-9.
61. Nilsson A-M, Andresen Bergström M, Luthman K, et al. A conjugated diene identified as a prohapten: contact allergenic activity and chemical reactivity of proposed epoxide metabolites. Chem Res Toxicol 2005;18:308-16.
62. Sköld M, Börje A, Harambasic E, Karlberg A-T. Contact allergens formed on air exposure of linalool. Identification and quantification of primary and secondary oxidation products and the effect on skin sensitization. Chem Res Toxicol 2004;17:1697-1705.
63. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). α-Methyl-1,3- benzodioxole-5-propionaldehyde: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2006. Report No.: 50886.
64. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). α-iso- Methylionone: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2005. Report No.: 48749.
65. Betts CJ, Dearman RJ, Heylings JR, et al. Skin sensitization potency of methyl methacrylate in the local lymph node assay: comparisons with guinea-pig data and human experience. Contact Dermatitis 2006;55:140-7.
66. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). Methyl 2-octynoate: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2006. Report No.: 51627.
67. Patlewicz G, Basketter D, Pease C, et al. Further evaluation of quantitative structure-activity relationship models for the prediction of the skin sensitization potency of selected fragrance allergens. Contact Dermatitis 2004;50:91-7.
68. Scientific Committee for Consumer Products (SCCP). Opinion on 4-nitro-o-phenylenediamine. 2006 Dec 19. COLIPA No.: B24; SCCP/0980/06.
69. Roggeband R. Helmlinger G, Smith I, et al. A skin sensitization safety assessment of a new bleach activator technology in detergent applications. Contact Dermatitis 2002;46:211-9.
70. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). dl-alpha-Tocopherol: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2002. Report No.: 40999.
71. Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM). 2,4,6-Trimethyl-3- cyclohexene-1-methanol: local lymph node assay. Woodcliff Lake (NJ): RIFM; 2006. Report No.: 48755.
72. Patlewicz G, Wright ZM, Basketter DA, et al. Structure-activity relationships for selected fragrance allergens. Contact Dermatitis 2002;47:219-26.
73. Basketter DA, Scholes EW, Kimber I. The performance of the local lymph node assay with chemicals identified as contact allergens in the human maximization test. Food Chem Toxicol 1994;32:543-7.
74. Bertrand F, Basketter DA, Roberts DW, Lepoittevin J-P. Skin sensitization to eugenol and isoeugenol in mice: possible metabolic pathways involving ortho-quinone and quinone methide intermediates. Chem Res Toxicol 1997;10:335-43.
75. Estrada E, Patlewicz G, Chamberlain M, et al. Computer-aided knowledge generation for understanding skin sensitization mechanisms: the TOPS-MODE approach. Chem Res Toxicol 2003;16: 1226-35.
76. Basketter D, Sanders D, Jowsey I. The skin sensitization potential of resorcinol: experience with the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2007;56:196-200.