Estimating skin sensitization potency from a single dose LLNA

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

Volumn 71, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 437-443

  Roberts, David W ^a  

^a LIVERPOOL JOHN MOORES UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Contact dermatitis; Full local lymph node assay (LLNA); Probit analysis; Reduced LLNA

Indexed keywords

1 CHLORO 2,4 DINITROBENZENE; 1 CHLOROMETHYLPYRENE; 12 BROMODODECANOIC ACID; 2 AMINO 6 CHLORO 4 NITROPHENOL; 2 AMINOPHENOL; 2 CHLOROMETHYLFLUORENE; 2,3 BUTANEDIONE; 2,4,6 TRICHLORO 1,3,5 TRIAZINE; 3 AMINOPHENOL; 5,5 DIMETHYL 3 METHYLENEDIHYDRO 2(3H) FURANONE; ABIETIC ACID; ALPHA AMYL CINNAMIC ALDEHYDE; ALPHA BUTYL CINNAMIC ALDEHYDE; ANETHOLE; BENZOQUINONE; BENZO[A]PYRENE; BENZYL BENZOATE; BENZYL BROMIDE; BENZYLIDENEACETONE; CINNAMALDEHYDE; CINNAMALDEHYDE DERIVATIVE; DECANOIC ACID DERIVATIVE; FLUORENE DERIVATIVE; FURANONE DERIVATIVE; METHYLNITROSOUREA; PHENOL DERIVATIVE; PYRENE DERIVATIVE; TRIAZINE DERIVATIVE; TRIMELLITIC ANHYDRIDE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; UNINDEXED DRUG;

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG POTENCY; DRUG SAFETY; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; IN VIVO STUDY; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN SENSITIZATION; ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CELL PROLIFERATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DERMATITIS, CONTACT; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFECTS; EVALUATION STUDY; IMMUNOLOGY; LYMPHOCYTE ACTIVATION; MOUSE; PATHOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SKIN; T LYMPHOCYTE;

ANIMALIA;

ANIMALS; CELL PROLIFERATION; DERMATITIS, CONTACT; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; LYMPHOCYTE ACTIVATION; MICE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN; T-LYMPHOCYTES;

EID: 84923276277     PISSN: 02732300     EISSN: 10960295     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2015.01.009     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Anderson S.E., Siegel P.D., Meade B.J. The LLNA: a brief review of recent advances and limitations. J. Allergy 2011, 424203.
2. Ashby J., Basketter D.A., Paton D., Kimber I. Structure activity relationships in skin sensitization using the murine local lymph node assay. Toxicology 1995, 103:177-194.
3. Basketter D.A., Gerberick G.F., Kimber I. The local lymph node assay: current position in the regulatory classification of skin sensitizing chemicals. J. Cutaneous Ocul. Toxicol. 2007, 26:293-301.
4. Basketter D.A., Gerberick F., Kimber I. The local lymph node assay and the assessment of relative potency: status of validation. Contact Dermatitis 2007, 57(2):70-75.
5. Bliss C.J. The calculation of the dosage-mortality curve. Ann. Appl. Biol. 1935, 22:134-167.
6. Dearman R.J., Basketter D.A., Kimber I. Local lymph node assay: use in hazard and risk assessment. J. Appl. Toxicol. 1999, 19:299-306.
7. Ezendam J., Muller A., Hakkert B., van Loveren H. Evaluation of the performance of the reduced local lymph node assay for skin sensitization testing. Regul. Toxicol. Pharm. 2013, 66(1):66-71.
8. Gerberick G., Ryan C., Kern P., Schlatter H., Dearman R., Kimber I., Patlewicz G., Basketter D. Compilation of historical local lymph node data for evaluation of skin sensitization alternative methods. Dermatitis 2005, 16(4):157-202.
9. Kimber I., Dearman R.J., Betts C.J., Gerberick G.F., Ryan C.A., Kern P.S., Patlewicz G.Y., Basketter D.A. The local lymph node assay and skin sensitization: a cut-down screen to reduce animal requirements?. Contact Dermatitis 2006, 54:181-185.
10. OECD (2002). Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals, Guideline No. 429, Skin Sensitization: The Local Lymph Node Assay, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France.
11. OECD (2010). Testing Guideline 429, 429A, 429B. Skin Sensitization: The Local Lymph Node Assay. Updated Guideline, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France.
12. Natsch A., Gfeller H., Haupt T., Brunner G. Chemical reactivity and skin sensitization potential for benzaldehydes: can Schiff base formation explain everything?. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2012, 25:2203-2215.
13. Ritz H.L., Connor D.D., Sauter E.D. Contact sensitization of guinea pigs with unsaturated and halogenated sultones. Contact Dermatitis 1975, 1:349-358.
14. Roberts D.W., Aptula A. Determinants of skin sensitisation potential. J. Appl. Toxicol. 2008, 28:377-387.
15. NAr electrophiles. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2014, 27:240-246.
16. Roberts D.W., Natsch A. High throughput kinetic profiling approach for covalent binding to peptides: application to skin sensitization potency of Michael acceptor electrophiles. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2009, 22:592-603.
17. Roberts D.W., Williams D.L. The derivation of quantitative correlations between skin sensitization and physico-chemical parameters for alkylating agents and their application to experimental data for sultones. J. Theor. Biol. 1982, 99:807-825.
18. Russell W.M.S., Burch R.L. The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique 1959, Methuen, London.
19. Ryan C., Chaney J., Gerberick F.G., Kern P.S., Dearman R.J., Kimber I., Basketter D.A. Extrapolating Local Lymph Node Assay EC3 values to estimate relative sensitizing potency. Cutaneous Ocul. Toxicol. 2007, 26:135-145.
20. Ryan C., Chaney J., Kern P., Patlewicz G., Basketter D., Betts C., Dearman R., Kimber I., Gerberick G. The reduced local lymph node assay: the impact of group size. J. Appl. Toxicol. 2008, 28:518-523.
21. Safford R.J. The dermal sensitisation threshold - a TTC approach for allergic contact dermatitis. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2008, 51:195-200.
22. Safford R.J., Aptula A., Gilmour N. Refinement of the Dermal Sensitisation Threshold (DST) approach using a larger dataset and incorporating mechanistic chemistry domains. Regul. Toxicol. Pharm. 2011, 60:218-224.