The laboratory role in the assessment of sensitization and irritation potential of cosmetics;Il laboratorio nella valutazione delle proprietà irritanti e sensibilizzanti dei cosmetici

Annali Italiani di Dermatologia Allergologica Clinica e Sperimentale

Volumn 66, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 9-23

  Balato, Anna ^a   Balato, Nicola ^a   Megna, Matteo ^a   Raimondo, Annunziata ^a   Cantelli, Mariateresa ^a   Cirillo, Teresa ^a   Patruno, Cataldo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES FEDERICO II   (Italy)

Author keywords

Allergic contact dermatitis; Consumer safety; Cosmetic testing; Irritant contact dermatitis; Tests in vitro

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER; COSMETIC; IRRITANT AGENT; RECEPTOR;

ARTICLE; BIOAVAILABILITY; CELL ASSAY; DENDRITIC CELL; DERMATITIS; DERMIS; EDEMA; ERYTHEMA; EXCISION; GENE EXPRESSION; HUMAN; IMMUNOCOMPETENT CELL; IN VITRO STUDY; INNATE IMMUNITY; INTRACELLULAR SIGNALING; KERATINOCYTE; PREDICTION; PROTEIN BINDING; SENSITIZATION; SKIN ALLERGY; SKIN IRRITATION; SKIN METASTASIS; SKIN WATER LOSS; STRATUM CORNEUM; ULTRAVIOLET IRRADIATION;

EID: 84866709805     PISSN: 15926826     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (102)

1. Maxwell G, Aleksic M, Aptula A, et al. Assuring consumer safety without animal testing: a feasibility case study for skin sensitization. Altern Lab Anim 2008; 36: 557.
2. van de Sandt J, Roguet R, Cohen C, et al. The use of human keratinocytes and human skin models for predicting skin irritation. ATLA 1999; 27: 723.
3. Gibbs S. In vitro irritation models and immune reactions. Skin Pharmacol Physiol 2009; 22: 103.
4. Macfarlane M, Jones P, Goebel C, et al. A tiered approach to the use of alternatives to animal testing for the safety assessment of cosmetics: Skin irritation. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2009; 54: 188.
5. Boelsma E, Gibbs S, Faller C, et al. Characterization and comparison of reconstructed skin models: morphological and immunohistochemical evaluation. Acta Derm Venereol 2000; 80: 82.
6. Gibbs S, Vietsch H, Meier U, et al. Effect of skin barrier competence on SLS and water-induced IL-1α expression. Exp Dermatol 2002; 11: 217.
7. Vicanova J, Mommaas AM, Mulder AA, et al. Impaired desquamation in the in vitro reconstructed human epidermis. Cell Tissue Res 1996; 1: 115.
8. Mak VH, Cumpstone MB, Kennedy AH, et al. Barrier function of human keratinocyte cultures grown at the air-liquid interface. J Invest Dermatol 1991; 96: 323.
9. Jírová D, Basketter D, Liebsch M, et al. Comparison of human skin irritation patch test data with in vitro skin irritation assays and animal data. Contact Dermatitis 2010; 62: 109.
10. Tinois E, Tiollier J, Gaucherand M, et al. In vitro and posttransplantation differentiation of human keratinocytes grown on the human type IV collagen film of a bilayered dermal substitute. Exp Cell Res 1991; 193: 310.
11. Rosdy M, Clauss LC. Terminal epidermal differentiation of human keratinocytes grown in chemically defined medium on inert filter substrates at the air-liquid interface. J Invest Dermatol 1990; 95: 409.
12. Ponec M, Boelsma E, Weerheim A. Lipid and ultrastructural characterization of reconstructed skin models. Int J Pharm 2000; 203: 211.
13. Ponec M, E Boelsma, S Gibbs. Characterization of reconstructed skin models. Skin Pharmacol 2002; 176: 167.
14. De Brugerolle F, Picarles V, Chibout S. Predictivity of an in vitro model for acute and chronic skin irritation (SkinEthic) applied to the testing of topical vehicles. Cell Biol Toxicol 1999; 15: 121.
15. Faller C, Bracher M. Reconstructed skin kits: reproducibility of cutaneous irritancy testing. Skin Pharmacol Appl Skin Physiol 2002; 1: 74.
16. Tornier C, Amsellem C, De Brugerolle A. Assessment of the optimized SkinEthicTM Reconstructed Human Epidermis (RHE) 42 bis skin irritation protocol over 39 test substances. Toxicol In Vitro 2010; 24: 245.
17. Cannon CL, Neal PJ, Southee JA, et al. New epidermal model for dermal irritancy testing. Toxicol In Vitro 1994; 8: 889.
18. Roguet R, Cohen C, Dossou KG, et al. Episkin are constituted human epidermis for assessing in vitro the irritancy of topically applied compounds. Toxicol In Vitro 1993; 8: 283.
19. Roguet R, Regnier M, Cohen C, et al. The use of in vitro reconstituted human skin in dermotoxicity testing. Toxicol In Vitro 1994; 8: 635.
20. Portes P, Grandidier MH, Cohen C, et al. Refinement of the Episkin protocol for the assessment of acute skin irritation of chemicals: follow-up to the ECVAM prevalidation study. Toxicol In Vitro 2002; 16: 765.
21. Faller C, Bracher M, Dami N, et al. Predictive ability of reconstructed human epidermis equivalents for the assessment of skin irritation of cosmetics. Toxicol In Vitro 2002; 16: 557.
22. Asselineau D, Prunieras M. Reconstruction of 'simplified' skin: control of fabrication. Br J Dermatol 1984; 111: 219.
23. Karasek MA, Charlton ME. Growth of postembryonic skin epithelial cells on collagen gels. J Invest Dermatol 1971; 56: 205.
24. Bell E, Ivarsson B, Merrill C. Production of a tissue-like structure by contraction of collagen lattices by human fibroblasts of different proliferative potential in vitro. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1979; 76: 1274.
25. Sahuc F, Nakazawa K, Berthod F, et al. Mesenchymal epithelial interactions regulate gene expression of type VII collagen and kalinin in keratinocytes and dermalepidermal junction formation in a skin equivalent model. Wound Repair Regen 1996; 4: 93.
26. Schlotmann K, Kaeten M, Black AF, et al. Cosmetic efficacy claims in vitro using a three-dimensional human skin model. Int J Cosmet Sci 2001; 23: 309.
27. Fentem JH, Briggs D, Chesné C, et al. A prevalidation study on in vitro tests for acute skin irritation: results and evaluation by the management team. Toxicol In Vitro 2001; 15: 57.
28. Heylings JR, Diot S, Esdaile DJ, et al. A prevalidation study on the in vitro skin irritation function test (SIFT) for prediction of acute skin irritation in vivo: results and evaluation of ECVAM phase III. Toxicol In Vitro 2003; 17: 123.
29. Botham PA. The validation of in vitro methods for skin irritation. Toxicol Lett 2004; 149: 387.
30. Spielmann H, Hoffmann S, Liebsch M, et al. The ECVAM international validation study on in vitro tests for acute skin irritation: report on the validity of the Episkin and EpiDerm assays and on the skin integrity function test. Altern Lab Anim 2007; 35: 559.
31. Basketter DA, Casati S, Gerberick GF, et al. Skin sensitization. Altern Lab Anim 2005; 33: 83.
32. Aptula AO, Patlewicz G, Roberts DW, et al. Non enzymatic glutathione reactivity and in vitro toxicity: a non-animal approach to skin sensitization. Toxicol In Vitro 2006; 20: 239.
33. Sakaguchi H, Ryan C, Ovigne JM, et al. Predicting skin sensitization potential and inter-laboratory reproducibility of a human cell line activation test (h-CLAT) in the European Cosmetics Association (COLIPA) ring trials. Toxicol In Vitro 2010; 24: 1810.
34. Jowsey IR, Basketter DA, Westmoreland C, et al. A future approach to measuring relative skin sensitising potency: a proposal. J Appl Toxicol 2006; 26: 341.
35. Natsch A, Emter R, Ellis G. Filling the concept with data: integrating data from different in vitro and in silico assays on skin sensitizers to explore the battery approach for animal-free skin sensitization testing. Toxicol Sci 2009; 107: 106.
36. Upadhye MR, Maibach HI. Influence of area of application of allergen on sensitization in contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1992; 27: 281.
37. Basketter DA, Jefferies D, Safford BJ, et al. The impact of exposure variables on the induction of skin sensitization. Contact Dermatitis 2006; 55: 178.
38. Miller MA, Kasting GB. Toward a better understanding of pesticide dermal absorption: diffusion model analysis of parathion absorption in vitro and in vivo. J Toxicol Environ Health 2010; 73: 284.
39. Gerberick F, Aleksic M, Basketter D, et al. Chemical reactivity measurement and the predicitve identification of skin sensitisers: the report and recommendations of ECVAM. Altern Lab Anim 2008; 36: 215.
40. Gerberick GF, Troutman JA, Foertsch LM, et al. Investigation of peptide reactivity of pro-hapten skin sensitizers using a peroxidase-peroxide oxidation system. Toxicol Sci 2009; 112: 164.
41. Sieben S, Baron JM, Blömeke B, et al. Multiple cytochrome P450-isoenzymes mRNA are expressed in dendritic cells. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 1999; 118: 358.
42. Sanderson JP, Naisbitt DJ, Farrell J, et al. Sulfamethoxazole and its metabolite nitroso sulfamethoxazole stimulate dendritic cell costimulatory signaling. J Immunol. 2007; 178: 5533.
43. Lichter J, Heckelen A, Fischer K, et al. Expression of Nacetyltransferase in monocyte-derived dendritic cells. J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2008; 71: 960.
44. Hirel B, Chesne C, Pailheret JP, et al. In vitro expression of drug metabolizing enzyme activities in human adult keratinocytes under various culture conditions and their response to inducers. Toxicol In Vitro 1995; 9: 49.
45. Kawakubo Y, Merk HF, Masaoudi TA, et al. N-acetylation of paraphenylenediamine in human skin and keratinocytes. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2000; 292: 150.
46. Baron JM, Höller D, Schiffer R, et al. Expression of multiple cytochrome p450 enzymes and multidrug resistanceassociated transport proteins in human skin keratinocytes. J Invest Dermatol 2001; 116: 541.
47. Saeki M, Saito Y, Nagano M, et al. mRNA expression of multiple cytochrome p450 isozymes in four types of cultured skin cells. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2002; 127: 333.
48. dos Santos GG, Reinders J, Ouwehand K, et al. Progress on the development of human in vitro dendritic cell based assays for assessment of the sensitizing potential of a compound. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2009; 236: 372.
49. Schreiner M, Peiser M, Briechle D, et al. A loose-fit coculture of activated keratinocytes and dendritic cell-related cells for prediction of sensitizing potential. Allergy 2007; 62: 1419.
50. Lehmann B, Pietzsch J, Kämpf A, et al. Human keratinocyte line HaCaT metabolizes 1alpha-hydroxyvitamin D3 and vitamin D3 to 1alpha,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (calcitriol). J Dermatol Sci 1998; 18: 118.
51. Goebel C, Hewitt NJ, Kunze G, et al. Skin metabolism of aminophenols: human keratinocytes as a suitable in vitro model to qualitatively predict the dermal transformation of 4-amino-2-hydroxytoluene in vivo. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2009; 235: 114.
52. Martin SF, Dudda JC, Bachtanian E, et al. Toll-like receptor and IL-12 signaling control susceptibility to contact hypersensitivity. J Exp Med 2008; 205: 2151.
53. Gerberick GF, Troutman JA, Foertsch LM, et al. Investigation of peptide reactivity of pro-hapten skin sensitizers using a peroxidase-peroxide oxidation system. Toxicol Sci 2009; 112: 164.
54. Ott H, Bergström MA, Heise R, et al. Cutaneous metabolic activation of carvoxime, a self-activating, skin-sensitizing prohapten. Chem Res Toxicol 2009; 22: 399.
55. Hart DNJ. Dendritic cells: unique leukocyte population which control the primary immune response. Blood 1997; 90: 3245.
56. Banchereau J, Steinman RM. Dendritic cells and the control of immunity. Nature 1998; 392: 245.
57. Aiba S, Katz SI. Phenotypic and functional characteristic of in vivo-activated Langerhans cells. J Immunol 1990; 145: 2791.
58. Ozawa H, Nakagawa S, Tagami H, et al. Interleukin-1 beta and granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor mediate Langerhans cell maturation differently. J Invest Dermatol 1996; 106: 441.
59. Aeby P, Takao A, Diembeck W, et al. The COLIPA strategy for the development of in vitro alternatives: skin sensitization. AATEX 2007; 14: 375.
60. Nukada I, Miyazawa M, Kosaka N, et al. Production of IL-8 in THP-1 cells following contact allergen stimulation via mitogen-activated protein kinase or tumor necrosis factor-a production. J Toxicol Sci 2008; 33: 175.
61. Ryan CA, Gerberick GF, Gildea LA, et al. Interactions of contact allergens with dendritic cells: opportunities and challenges for the development of novel approaches to hazard assessment. Toxicol Sci 2005; 88: 4.
62. Aiba S, Terunuma A, Manome H, et al. Dendritic cells differently responded to haptens and irritants by their production of cytokines and expression of co-stimulatory molecules. Eur J Immunol 1997; 27: 3031.
63. Ashikaga T, Hoya M, Itagaki H, et al. Evaluation of CD86 expression and MHC class II molecule internalization in THP-1 human monocyte cells as predictive endpoints for contact sensitizers. Toxicol In Vitro 2002; 16: 711.
64. Yoshida Y, Sakaguchi H, Ito Y, et al. Evaluation of the skin sensitization potential of chemicals using expression of co-stimulatory molecules, CD54 and CD86, on the naïve THP-1 cell line. Toxicol In Vitro 2003; 17: 221.
65. Ade N, Martinozzi-Teissier S, Pallardy M, et al. Activation of U937 cells by contact sensitizers: CD8 expression is independent of apoptosis. J Immunotoxicol 2006; 3: 189.
66. Azam P, Peiffer JL, Chamousset D, et al. The cytokine dependent MUTZ-3 cell line as an in vitro model for the screening of contact sensitizers. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2006; 212: 14.
67. Hulette BC, Ryan CA, Gerberick GF. Elucidating changes in surface marker expression of dendritic cells following chemical allergen treatment. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2002; 182: 226.
68. Rousset F, Verda D, Garrigue JL, et al. In vitro prediction of contact sensitivity with human cell lines. Contact Dermatitis 2002; 46: 6.
69. Ashikaga T, Yoshida Y, Hirota M, et al. Development of an in vitro skin sensitization test using human cell lines: human cell line activation test (h-CLAT): optimization of the h-CLAT protocol. Toxicol In Vitro 2006; 20: 767.
70. Sakaguchi H, Ashikaga T, Miyazawa M, et al. Development of an in vitro skin sensitization test using human cell lines: human cell line activation test (h-CLAT): an interlaboratory study of the h-CLAT. Toxicol In Vitro 2006; 20: 74.
71. Sakaguchi H, Ashikaga T, Miyazawa M, et al. The relationship between CD86/CD54 expression and THP-1 cell viability in an in vitro skin sensitization test: human cell line activation test (h-CLAT). Cell Biol Toxicol 2009; 25: 109.
72. Basketter DA, Gerberick GF, Kimber I, et al. The local lymph node assay: a viable alternative to currently accepted skin sensitization test. Food Chem Toxicol 1996; 34: 986.
73. Basketter DA, Gerberick GF, Kimber I, et al. Strategies for identifying false positive response in predictive skin sensitization tests. Food Chem Toxicol 1998; 36: 327.
74. Ryan CA, Gerberick GF, Cruse LW, et al. Activity of human contact allergens in the murine local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2000; 43: 95.
75. Basketter DA, Gilmour N, Dearman RJ, et al. Classification of skin sensitization potency using the local lymph node assay. Toxicologist 2003; 72: 101.
76. Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Kern PS, et al. A chemical dataset for evaluation of alternative approaches to skin-sensitization testing. Contact Dermatitis 2004; 50: 274.
77. Basketter DA, Sanders D, Jowsey IR. The skin sensitization potential of resorcinol: experience with the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2007; 56: 196.
78. Ahikaga T, Sakaguchi H, Sono S, et al. A comparative evaluation of in vitro skin sensitization tests: the human cell line activation test (h-CLAT) versus the local lymph node assay (LLNA). ATLA 2010; 38: 275.
79. Python F, Goebel C, Aeby P. Assessment of the U937 cell line for the detection of contact allergens. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2007; 220: 113.
80. Migdal C, Foggia L, Tailhardat M, et al. Sensitization effect of thimerosal is mediated in vitro via reactive oxygen species and calcium signalling. Toxicology 2010; 274: 1.
81. Sakaguchi H, Ashikaga T, Miyazawa M, et al. Development of an in vitro skin sensitization test using human cell lines; human cell line activation test (h-CLAT) II: an inter-laboratory study of the h-CLAT. Toxicol In Vitro 2006; 20: 774.
82. Gildea LA, Ryan CA, Foertesc LM, et al. Identification of gene expression changes induced by chemical allergens in dendritic cells: opportunities for skin sensitization testing. J Invest Dermatol 2006; 126: 1813.
83. Hirota M, Moro O. MIP-1β, a novel biomarker for in vitro sensitization test using human monocytic cell line. Toxicol In Vitro 2006; 20: 736.
84. Hooyberghs J, Schoeters E, Lambrechts N, et al. A cellbased in vitro alternative to identify skin sensitizers by gene expression. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2008; 231: 103.
85. Schoeters E, Verheyen GR, Nelissen I, et al. Microarray analyses in dendritic cells reveal potential biomarkers for chemical-induced skin sensitization. Mol Immunol 2007; 44: 3222.
86. Ryan CA, Gildea LA, Hulette BC, et al. Gene expression changes in peripheral blood derived dendritic cells following exposure to a contact allergen. Toxicol Lett 2004; 150: 301.
87. Python F, Goebel C, Aeby P. Comparative DNA microarray analysis of human monocyte derived dendritic cells and MUTZ-3 cells exposed to the moderate skin sensitizer cinnamaldehyde. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2009; 239: 273.
88. Biomarkers Definitions Working Group. Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2001; 69: 89.
89. Welss T, Basketter DA, Schröder KR. In vitro skin irritation: facts and future. State of the art review of mechanisms and models. Toxicol In Vitro 2004;18: 231.
90. Coquette A, Berna N, Vandenbosch A, et al. Analysis of interleukin-1alpha (IL-1alpha) and interleukin-8 (IL-8) expression and release in in vitro reconstructed human epidermis for the prediction of in vivo skin irritation and/ or sensitization. Toxicol In Vitro 2003; 17: 311.
91. Parodi A, Sanguineti R, Catalano M, et al. A comparative study of leukaemia inhibitory factor and interleukin-1α intracellular content in a human keratinocyte cell line after exposure to cosmetic fragrances and sodium dodecyl sulphate. Toxicol Lett 2010; 192: 101.
92. An S, Kim S, Huh Y, et al. Expression of surface markers on the human monocytic leukaemia cell line, THP-1, as indicators for the sensitizing potential of chemicals. Contact Dermatitis 2009; 60: 185.
93. Mitjans M, Galbiati V, Lucchi L, et al. Use of IL-8 release and p38 MAPK activation in THP-1 cells to identify allergens and to assess their potency in vitro. Toxicol In Vitro 2010; 24: 1803.
94. Toebak, MJ, Pohlmann, PR, Sampat-Sardjoepersad SC, et al. CXCL8 secretion by dendritic cell spredicts contact allergens from irritants. Toxicol In Vitro 2006; 20: 117.
95. Python F, Goebel C, Aeby P. Assessment of the U937 cell line for the detection of contact allergens. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2007; 220: 113.
96. Miyazawa M, Ito Y, Kosaka N, et al. Role of TNF-alpha and extracellular ATP in THP-1 cell activation following allergen exposure. J Toxicol Sci 2008; 33: 71.
97. Verheyen GR, Schoeters E, Nuijten JM, et al. Cytokine transcript profiling in CD34+-progenitor derived dendritic cells exposed to contact allergens and irritants. Toxicol Lett 2005; 155: 187.
98. Schoeters E, Nuijten JM, Van Den Heuvel RL, et al. Gene expression signatures in CD34+-progenitor-derived dendritic cells exposed to the chemical contact allergen nickel sulfate. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2006; 216: 131.
99. Miyazawa M, Ito Y, Yoshida Y, et al. Phenotypic alterations and cytokine production in THP-1 cells in response to allergens. Toxicol In Vitro 2007; 21: 428.
100. Antonopoulos C, Cumberbatch M, Mee JB, et al. IL-18 is a key proximal mediator of contact hypersensitivity and allergen-induced Langerhans cell migration in murine epidermis. J Leukoc Biol 2008; 83: 361.
101. Corsini E, Mitjans M, Galbiati V, et al. Use of IL-18 production in a human keratinocyte cell line to discriminate contact sensitizers from irritants and low molecular weight respiratory allergens. Toxicol In Vitro 2009; 23: 789.
102. Vandebriel RJ, Pennings JL, Baken KA, et al. Keratinocyte gene expression profiles discriminate sensitizing and irritating compounds. Toxicol Sci 2010; 117: 81.