Skin sensitization, false positives and false negatives: Experience with guinea pig assays

Journal of Applied Toxicology

Volumn 30, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 381-386

  Basketter, David A ^a   Kimber, Ian ^b  

^a DABMEB CONSULTANCY LTD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Buehler test; False negative; False positive; Guinea pig maximization test; In vitro alternatives; Local lymph node assay; Skin sensitization; Validation

Indexed keywords

2 BROMO 2 BROMOMETHYLGLUTARONITRILE; 4 HYDROXYBENZOIC ACID ESTER; ABIETIC ACID; ALCOHOL; BENZALKONIUM CHLORIDE; BENZOCAINE; EUGENOL; FRAGRANCE; GERANIOL; SULFANILIC ACID; VANILLIN; ALLERGEN;

ALLERGY TEST; CLASSIFICATION; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; GOLD STANDARD; GUINEA PIG; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; NONHUMAN; PATCH TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SKIN ALLERGY; SKIN SENSITIZATION; ANIMAL; ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVE; CELL CULTURE; DERMATITIS, CONTACT; DRUG EFFECTS; HAMSTER; HUMAN; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; LYMPH NODE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROCEDURES; SKIN; TOXICITY; TOXICITY TESTING;

ALLERGENS; ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVES; ANIMALS; CELLS, CULTURED; CRICETINAE; DERMATITIS, CONTACT; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; HUMANS; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; LYMPH NODES; PATCH TESTS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; SKIN; TOXICITY TESTS;

CAVIA;

EID: 77955443847     PISSN: 0260437X     EISSN: 10991263     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jat.1545     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Andersen KE, White IR, Goossens A. 2006. Allergens from the standard series. In Contact Dermatitis, 4th edn, Frosch PJ, Menné T, Lepoittevin J-P (eds). Springer: Heidelberg; 453-492.
2. Basketter DA. 2008 Skin immunology and sensitisation. In Principles and Practice of Skin Toxicology, Chilcott RP, Price S (eds). Wiley: Chichester; 149-168.
3. Basketter DA. 2010 Methyldibromo glutaronitrile, skin sensitisation and quantitative risk assessment. Cut. Ocul. Toxicol. 29: 4-9.
4. Basketter DA, Gerberick GF. 1996. Interlaboratory evaluation of the Buehler test. Contact Dermatitis 35: 146-151.
5. Basketter DA, Kimber I. 2009. Updating the skin sensitization in vitro data assessment paradigm in 2009. J. Appl. Toxicol. 29: 545-550.
6. Basketter DA, Scholes EW. 1992 Comparison of the local lymph node assay with the guinea- pig maximization test for the detection of a range of contact allergens. Food Chem. Toxicol. 30: 65-69.
7. Basketter DA, Scholes EW, Evans CD, Kimber I. 1992. Divergent responses to sulphanilic acid in the guinea pig maximization test and the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 27: 209-213.
8. Basketter DA, Scholes EW, Wahlkvist H, Montelius J. 1995. An evaluation of the suitability of benzocaine as a positive control skin sensitizer. Contact Dermatitis 33: 28-32.
9. Basketter DA, Gerberick GF, Kimber I. 1998. Strategies for identifying false positive responses in predictive sensitization tests. Food Chem. Toxicol. 36: 327-333. (Pubitemid 28255346)
10. Basketter DA, Evans P, Fielder RJ, Dearman RJ, Kimber I. 2002. Local lymph node assay - validation, conduct and use in practice: a commentary. Food Chem. Toxicol. 40: 593-598.
11. Basketter DA, Marriott M, Gilmour NJ, White I. 2004. Skin irritants masquerading as minor allergens: the case of benzalkonium chloride. Contact Dermatitis 50: 213-217. (Pubitemid 38833429)
12. Basketter DA, Andersen KE, Lidén C, van Loveren H, Boman A, Kimber I, Alanko K, Berggren E. 2005. Evaluation of the skin sensitising potency of chemicals using existing methods and considerations of relevance for elicitation. Contact Dermatitis 52: 39-43.
13. Basketter DA, McFadden J, Evans P, Andersen KE, Jowsey I. 2006. Identification and classification of skin sensitizers: identifying false positives and false negatives. Contact Dermatitis 55: 268-273. (Pubitemid 44536301)
14. Basketter DA, Ball N, Cagen S, Carrillo J-C, Certa H, Eigler D, Esch H, Graham C, Haux D, Kreiling R, Mehling A. 2009a. Application of a weight of evidence approach to analysing discordant sensitization datasets: implication for REACH. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 55: 90-96.
15. Basketter DA, McFadden JF, Gerberick GF, Cockshott A, Kimber I. 2009b. Nothing is perfect, not even the local lymph node assay. A commentary and the implications for REACH. Contact Dermatitis 60: 65-69.
16. Beck M, Holden A. 1988. Benzocaine - an unsatisfactory indicator of topical local anaesthetic sensitization for the U.K. Br. J. Dermatol. 118: 91-94.
17. Bruze M, Gruvberger B, Agrup G. 1988. Sensitization studies in the guinea pig with the active ingredients of Euxyl® K400. Contact Dermatitis 18: 37-39. (Pubitemid 18047735)
18. Buckley DA, Wakelin SH, Seed PT, Holloway D, Rycroft RJ, White IR, McFadden JP. 2000. The frequency of fragrance allergy in a patch-test population over a 17-year period. Br. J. Dermatol. 142: 279-283.
19. Buehler EV. 1965. Delayed contact hypersensitivity in the guinea pig. Arch. Dermatol. 91: 171-177.
20. Commission of the European Communities. 2006. Regulation (EC) no. 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) no. 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) no. 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC,93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC. Offic. J. Eur. Union, L 396/1 of 30.12.2006. (http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/reach/ index-en.htm).
21. Cronin E. 1980. Contact Dermatitis. Churchill Livingstone: Edinburgh; 805-806.
22. Cronin MTD, Basketter DA. 1994. Multivariate QSAR analysis of a skin sensitization database. SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 2: 159-179.
23. ECHA. 2008. Guidance on Information Requirements and Chemical Safety Assessment. Chapter R.7a: Endpoint Specific Guidance. European Chemicals Agency: Helsinki; 256-288.
24. EEC. 1967. Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances. Offic. J. Eur. Comm. 196: 1-98.
25. Fisher AA. 1973. The paraben paradox. Cutis 12: 830-832.
26. Frankild S, Basketter DA, Andersen KE. 1996. The value and limitations of rechallenge in the guinea pig maximisation test. Contact Dermatitis 35: 135-140. (Pubitemid 26373681)
27. Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Kimber I, Dearman RJ, Lea LJ, Basketter DA. 2000. Local lymph node assay: validation assessment for regulatory purposes. Am. J. Contact Dermatitis 11: 3-18. (Pubitemid 30143868)
28. Gerberick, GF, Ryan CA, Kern PS, Schlatter H, Dearman RJ, Kimber I, Patlewicz G, Basketter DA. 2005. Compilation of historical local lymph node assay data for the evaluation of skin sensitization alternatives. Dermatitis 16: 157-202. (Pubitemid 43053764)
29. Hausen BM. 1993. The sensitizing potency of Euxyl® K400 and its components 1,2-dibromo-2,4-dicyanobutane and 2-phenoxyethanol. Contact Dermatitis 28: 149-153.
30. ICCVAM. 2008. Appendix B: Comparative LLNA, Guinea Pig, and Human Data Used in the Performance Evaluation. Available from:. http://iccvam.niehs.nih. gov/methods/immunotox/llna-panelDocs08.htm (accessed 24 March 2010).
31. Johansen JD, Veien NK, Laurberg G, Kaaber K, Thormann J, Lauritzen M, Avnstorp C. 2005. Contact allergy methyldibromo glutaronitrile - data from a 'front line' network. Contact Dermatitis 52: 138-141.
32. Karlberg AT. 1988. Contact allergy to colophony. Chemical identifications of allergens, sensitization experiments and clinical experiences. Acta Dermatol. Venereol. Suppl. (Stockh.) 139: 1-43.
33. Kern PS, Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Kimber I, Aptula A, Basketter DA. 2010. Historical local lymph node data for the evaluation of skin sensitization alternatives: a second compilation. Dermatitis 21: 8-32.
34. Kimber I, Basketter DA, Butler M, Gamer A, Garrigue JL, Newsome C, Steiling W, Vohr H-W. 2003 Classification of allergens according to potency: proposals. Food Chem. Toxicol. 41: 1799-1809. (Pubitemid 37249347)
35. Kligman AM. 1966. The identification of contact allergens by human assay. III. The maximization test: a procedure for screening and rating contact sensitizers. J. Invest. Dermatol. 47: 393-409.
36. Kligman AM, Basketter DA. 1995. A critical commentary and updating of the guinea pig maximisation test. Contact Dermatitis 32: 129-134.
37. Kreiling R, Hollnagel HM, Hareng L, Eigler D, Lee MS, Griem P, Dreesen B, Kleber M, Albrecht A, Garcia C, Wendel A. 2008. Comparison of the skin sensitizing potential of unsaturated compounds and assessed by the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) and the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT). Food Chem. Toxicol. 46: 1896-1904.
38. Loveless SE, Api AM, Crevel RW, Debruyne E, Gamer A, Jowsey IR, Kern P, Kimber I, Lea L, Lloyd P, Mehmood Z, Steiling W, Veenstra G, Woolhiser M, Hennes C. 2010. Potency values from the local lymph node assay: application to classification, labelling and risk assessment. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 56: 54-66.
39. Magnusson B, Kligman AM. 1970. Allergic Contact Dermatitis in the Guinea Pig: Identification of Contact Allergens. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
40. McGarry HF. 2007. The murine local lymph node assay: regulatory and potency considerations under REACH. Toxicology 238: 71-89. (Pubitemid 47239226)
41. NIH 1999. The Murine Local Lymph Node Assay. The Results of an Independent Peer Review Evaluation Coordinated By the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) and the National Toxicology Program Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM). NIH Publication no. 99-4494. Research Triangle Park, NC: NIH.
42. OECD. 1992. Skin Sensitization. Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals No. 406. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
43. OECD. 2002. The Local Lymph Node Assay. Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals No. 429. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
44. Rietschel RL, Fowler JF. 2008. Fisher's Contact Dermatitis, 6th edn. DC Becker: Hamilton; 162-163.
45. Schnuch A, Lessmann H, Geier J, Frosch PJ, Uter W. 2004. Contact allergy to fragrances: frequencies of sensitization from 1996 to 2002. Results of the IVDK*. Contact Dermatitis 50: 65-76. (Pubitemid 38657359)
46. Soni MG, Burdock GA, Taylor SL, Greenberg NA. 2001. Safety assessment of propyl paraben: a review of the published literature. Food Chem. Toxicol. 39: 513-532. (Pubitemid 32429464)
47. Soni MG, Taylor SL, Greenberg NA, Burdock GA. 2002. Evaluation of the health aspects of methyl paraben: a review of the published literature. Food Chem. Toxicol. 40: 1335-1373.
48. Soni MG, Carabin IG, Burdock GA. 2005. Safety assessment of esters of p-hydroxybenzoic acid (parabens). Food Chem. Toxicol. 43: 985-1101.
49. United Nations. 2009. Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). Part 3: Health Hazards. Available from: http://www.unece.org/trans/danger/publi/ghs/ghs-rev03/English/03e-part3.pdf
50. Uter W, Lessmann H, Geier J, Schnuch A. 2008. Is the irritant benzalkonium chloride a contact allergen? A contribution to the ongoing debate from a clinical perspective. Contact Dermatitis 58: 359-363. (Pubitemid 351733065)
51. Vohr H-V, Jurgen AH. 2005. The local lymph node assay being too sensitive? Arch. Toxicol. 79: 721-728.
52. Wahlberg JE, Boman A. 1985. Guinea pig maximization test. Curr. Prob. Dermatol. 14: 59-106.
53. Wahlkvist H, Boman A, Montelius J, Wahlberg JE. 1999. Sensitizing potential in mice, guinea pig and man of the preservative Euxyl® K400 and its ingredient methyldibromo glutaronitrile. Contact Dermatitis 41: 330-338. (Pubitemid 30018889)
54. Wilkinson JD, Shaw S, Andersen KE, Brandao FM, Bruynzeel DP, Bruze M, Camarasa JMG, Diepgen T, Ducombs G, Frosch PJ, Goossens A, Lachappelle J-M, Lahti A, Menné T, Seidenari S, Tosti A, Wahlberg JE. 2002. Monitoring levels of biocide sensitivity in Europe. A ten year overview (1991-2000) Contact Dermatitis 46: 207-210.
55. Zachariae C, Rastogi S, Devantier C, Menné T, Johansen JD. 2003. Methyldibromo glutaronitrile: clinical experience and exposure-based risk assessment. Contact Dermatitis 48: 150-154. (Pubitemid 36683483)