How sensitizing is chlorocresol?

Chlorocresol is a biocide with widespread use in industry and pharmaceutical products. It is an occasional human contact sensitizer. The sensitizing potential of chlorocresol was judged strong using the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT) and doubtful in the less sensitive open epicutaneous test (OET). When different induction concentrations were used, the results indicated an optimal sensitizing concentration above which no further increase in the sensitization rate occurred. Rechallenge 2 weeks later showed a marked decrease in sensitivity. Consecutive human patch tests with chlorocresol 2% in pet. showed 11 reactions among 1462 patients tested, but none were explainable and reproducible during re-tests and provocative use tests, indicating that the GPMT overestimated the sensitization potential. The results from guinea pig allergy tests cannot stand alone but have to be validated by other sources of information.     

Studies of new short-period method for delayed contact hypersensitivity assay in the guinea pig

A new method for delayed contact hypersensitivity assay of chemical compounds in guinea pigs, a short-period method (14 days) with a high detection sensitivity, has been developed. The new method was as follows; a combination of a Freund's complete adjuvant (FCA, undiluted) intradermal injection and a 24–h occusive patch on a guinea pig was performed 2x at an interval of 4 days and challenged by non-occlusive topical application II days after the first sensitization (with benzyl alcohol during test development). Acanthosis and spongiosis in the epidermis and mononuclear cell infiltration into the dermis were observed histopathologically at the skin reaction site. This newly developed method (adjuvant and 24–h occusive patch 2 test: AP2 test) could equally and/or better detect the allergenicities of 6 other chemical compounds (bromostyrol, citronellal, benzyl salicyfate. p -aminobenzoic acid ethyl ester, phenylenediamine and formaldehyde) as compared with the cumulative contact enhancement test (CCET) and the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT).     

An evaluation of the suitability of benzocaine as a positive control skin sensitizer

Although they are subject to some limitations, sensitization tests such as the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT) have for many years provided a valuable basis for the identification of skin sensitization potential. Thus, they have been used widely by regulatory authorities such as those in Europe, as a means to identify significant sensitization hazards associated with new chemicals. However, the standard of performance of guinea pig sensitization assays has been demonstrated to the widely variable. Consequently, the OECD sensitization level guideline the de facto world standard) has been updated to incorporate recommendations for action whose aim is to achieve a minimum standard of test conduct. The principle is list a test laboratory should be able to demonstrate an acceptable level of response using a moderately sensitizing chemical. A list of 3 such chemicals is presided, hexyl cinnamic aldehyde, mercaptobenzothiazole and benzocaine. It is our experience that it whilst good result can readily be obtained with the first 2 of these, benzocaine much more difficult. Using both the GPMT and the local lymph node assay (LLNA), an OECD-recommended screening test, benzocaine has given highly variable results. A range of from 0% to 60% positive in the GPMT was found and, in most tests, benzocaine should not classify as a skin sensitizer according to FU criteria. In the LLNA, from a series of 12 tests conducted in 2 laboratories, only occasional positive results were obtained. Furthermore, these positive results were not reproducible. Reasons for this variability are discussed. However, the main conclusion must be that benzocaine does not represent a useful moderately sensitizing positive control.     

Dose-response studies of contact allergens using 3 guinea pig models

A multi-dose-response induction protocol for the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT), including a statistical computer program, has earlier been developed to improve the power of predictive tests for identification of contact allergens. This dose-response protocol, with 2 modifications (i.e., increased number of animals in each group and increased number of challenge concentrations) was evaluated in the GPMT, the cumulative contact enhancement test (CCET) and the Freund's complete adjuvant test (FCAT), using potassium dichromate and hydroxycitronellal as model contact allergens. Application of the dose-response protocol on the CCET and the FCAT resulted in either monotone or non-monotone curves with significant dose-response. However, application of the dose-response protocol on the GPMT gave curves with no significant dose-response. The protocol makes it possible to obtain an EC50 value, thus improving the possibility of ranking contact allergens, which is of substantial use for risk assessments. The dose-response protocol could benefit from a few adjustments: a wider span in the induction doses; change to simultaneous increase in intradermal and topical induction doses to obtain a proper dose-response for the GPMT; the addition of further challenge concentrations. In addition the computer program should allow calculation of threshold concentration for sensitization and EC50 value for a non-monotone curve.     

Studies of new short-period method for delayed contact hypersensitivity assay in the guinea pig

The enhancement effect of cyclophosphamide on the delayed contact hypersensitivity reaction of chemical compounds was studied in Hartley albino guinea pigs. A series of assay procedures. combining the AP2 test (adjuvant and 24-h occlusive patch 2× test, as previously reported) with intraperitoneal cyclophosphamide administration, were examined. The newly developed method was as follows; cyclophosphamide 200 mg/kg intraperitoneal administration 3 days before the 1st sensitization of the AP2 test (cyclophosphamide. adjuvant and 24-h occlusive patch 2× test: CAP2 test). Comparing the CAP2 test with the AP2 test, the cumulative contact enhancement test (CCET) and the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT), the CAP2 test equally and/or better enabled the detection of allergenicities not only of strong allergens such as bromostyrol, citronellal, p -phenylendediamine and formaldehyde, but also of weak allergens such as benzyl salicylate and p -aminobenzoic acid ethyl ester. Acanthosis and spongiosis in the epidermis and mononuclear cell infiltration into the dennis at the skin reaction site were histopathologically observed. Cyclophosphamide effectively enhanced the delayed contact hypersensitivity reaction of weak allergens.     

Studies on the contact sensitizing activity of dithranol (anthralin) and 10-butyryl dithranol (butantrone)

The contact sensitizing activity of dithranol and butantrone (10-butyryl dithranol) was studied in 3 animal models: the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT), the closed patch test (CPT), and the mouse ear swelling test (MEST) in 2 different mouse strains. In the GPMT, both dithranol and, to a greater extent, butantrone showed sensitizing potential. Because butantrone was less irritant, the concentrations used were 10x higher than those of dithranol. In the CPT, only butantrone was slightly positive. In the MEST, with both CF-1 and Balb/c mice, dithranol caused less swelling of the test ear after challenge than butantrone. According to the evaluation criteria of the MEST, only butantrone caused sensitization in 50% of the CF-1 mice and in 40% of the Balb/c mice. Thus, the GPMT was the only test which indicated the minor contact sensitizing potential of dithranol. On the other hand, the 10-butyryl analogue of dithranol showed undoubtedly stronger contact sensitizing potential than the parent compound in all tests. Therefore, as compared to dithranol, an increased risk of sensitization should be considered.     

An interlaboratory evaluation of the Buehler test for the identification and classification of skin sensitizers

The correct identification of potential skin sensitizers is an essential first step in enabling a proper risk assessment to be made and to permit the implementation of appropriate risk management practices designed to avoid the induction of sensitization, Consequently, regulatory guidelines around the world demand that new substances are evaluated to assess their skin sensitization potential. There are two guinea pig test methods which are generally recognised, the guinea pig maximisation test (GPMT) and the occluded patch test described by Buehler. In different countries, one procedure seems to be more prevalent and acceptable to regulatory authorities than the other. Notably, in the European Union, the latest revision of the Annex V (Directive 92/32/EC) Test Method for skin sensitization asks that justification should be given in the situation where the notifi this paper, the validity of the Buehler protocol in the context of European legislation is critically examined. Results from two laboratories are collated. showing that the method can identify significant contact allergens, particularly those which would he registered formally as such according to European legislation. It is demonstrated that minor methodological variations can he tolerated without compromising tesi sensitivity, hut it is recommended that suitable positive control testing is the best way to ensure proper test conduct.     

The value and limitations of rechallenge in the guinea pig maximization test

The guinea pig maximization test (GPMT) has played a primary rôle in the evaluation the evaluation of potential skin contact sensitizers for 25 years. In the OECD Guideline 406 from 1993, it is specifically suggested that equivocal results from the initial challenge in the GPMT should he evaluated further with a repeated challenge. However, there exist few published rechallenge data and the guideline does not describe how rechallenge data should be interpreted. In this paper, we have used examples from published results to illustrate both the positive value and the limitations of repeated challenges, including cross challenge. Testing with modified concentrations may also help to indicate whether or not the response is allergic in nature, particularly where there has been a low level of skin reaction observed in shamtreated controls, or where a low level of skin reaction is the dominant response in the test animals. In conclusion, the data presented demonstrate that, as a tool for the investigation of skin sensitizing potential, the GPMT can benefit from an experienced scientific evaluation of rechallenge data, but that this information should not be treated in a mechanistic fashion.     

Use of the local lymph node assay in the evaluation of the sensitizing potential of pharmaceutical process intermediates

The murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) has recently been developed to determine the contact sensitization potential of chemicals. Since its original development, the LLNA results have been the subject of extensive comparisons with guinea pig and human data. The investigations described here were designed to explore the ability of the LLNA to identify accurately, pharmaceutical process intermediates (PIs) known to cause contact allergy in humans. To that end, 16 PIs previously tested in the guinea-pig maximization test (GPMT) were tested in the LLNA. Another PI known to be a contact sensitizer in humans was tested only in the LLNA. Cases of contact sensitization in humans were reported only for PIs that were extreme sensitizers in the GPMT and had low EC3 values (concentration of the test substance required to generate a threefold increase in lymph node cell proliferation) in the LLNA. These data provide additional evidence that the LLNA is able to discriminate skin sensitizers from chemicals that do not possess a significant skin sensitization potential and is thus a useful method for hazard identification. In addition, this method also offers important animal welfare benefits and may also be useful for risk assessment purposes.     

Identification of contact sensitizers by animal assay

Guinea pig testing constitutes the first step in evaluating the allergenicity of new chemicals and products. Some of the most commonly used animal predictive tests are reviewed. The guinea pig maximization test, which is the recommended test method in Sweden, is described in detail and the interpretation of results obtained with this test is discussed. In the guinea pig maximization test the sensitization capacity of a substance is examined by the use of maximized conditions for i he exposure, i.e. the potential ability of the material to induce a contact allergy is determined. The extent to which an allergen causes contact dermatitis in exposed persons depends on the mode of use and various environmental factors.     

Contact photoallergy testing of sunscreens in guinea pigs

The potential of 3 sunscreens (p-aminobenzoic acid, 4-isopropyldibenzoylmethane and homosalate) and 2 known human photoallergens (musk ambrette and tetrachlorosalicylanilide) to cause photoallergy, phototoxicity, and/or contact sensitization was determined using a guinea pig photoallergy model, as previously described by Harber and associates. The model was slightly modified by employing 6 exposures over 2 weeks and using Hill Top Chambers for application of the test material. Contact photoallergy was detected in guinea pigs treated with musk ambrette or tetrachlorosalicylanilide (TCSA), although with TCSA, a lower incidence of contact sensitivity and phototoxicity was also detected. The results of studies conducted with sunscreens showed that p-aminobenzoic acid was photoallergenic, whereas homosalate and 4-isopropyl-dibenzoylmethane (Eusolex 8020) were not. However, contact sensitization, and to a lesser degree primary irritation, was detected with Eusolex 8020 at the concentrations employed in this study. The results of these studies suggest that this guinea pig model is a suitable model for assessing the photoallergic potential of various compounds, including the sunscreens tested in this study.     

Tixocortol pivalate contact allergy in the GPMT: frequency and cross-reactivity

In spite of their intrinsic anti-inflammatory properties, corticosteroids can induce contact allergy. When studying the allergenic properties of corticosteroids it has to be considered that both the allergenic and anti-inflammatory effect may influence the induction phase as well as the elicitation phase and that such effects may be dose-dependent. A multiple dose guinea pig maximization test (GPMT) was therefore used to study the dose-response relationship of tixocortol pivalate. The GPMT was conducted according to OECD guideline #406, using a multiple-dose design and test results were analysed with logistic regression analysis. There was a significant tixocortol pivalate sensitization of the test animals compared to the control group (p<0.05), after both challenge and re-challenge. The challenge with 1% tixocortol pivalate gave more positive reactions than the challenge with 3%. The highest frequency of positive animals was observed when the animals were treated with low to intermediate induction concentrations and intermediate to high challenge concentrations with tixocortol pivalate in the TRUE Test. Cross-reactivity was found between tixocortol pivalate and hydrocortisone, which was expected from their close molecular resemblance, whereas no cross-reactivity was seen between tixocortol pivalate and the 3 other corticosteroids: amcinonide, budesonide, and hydrocortisone-17-butyrate.     

Experimental contact sensitization with 3,4,5-trichloropyridazine

The potential of 3,4,5-trichloropyridazine to induce contact sensitization was assessed in the guinea pig maximization test of Magnusson and Kligman and also in the closed patch test described by Buehler. The test material was a 1% solution of 3,4,5-trichloropyridazine in a highly refined mineral oil. The test material elicited moderate to severe irritation when diluted in mineral oil to concentrations of 15-25% and minimal irritation at concentrations of 1-3%. Both tests clearly indicated that 3,4,5-trichloropyridazine was a contact sensitizer to guinea pigs, although the response was stronger in the maximization test. Sensitization was distinguished from irritation by the use of concurrent irritation control groups.     

A new animal model for contact dermatitis: the hairless guinea pig.

Allergic and irritant contact reactions were evaluated in the recently identified hairless guinea pig, Crl:IAF(HA)BR, a mutant from the Hartley strain. The cutaneous changes were observed macro- and microscopically. The irritant contact dermatitis was induced by croton oil, 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB), or anthralin. Both hairless and hairy guinea pigs developed similar reactions to these chemicals. The density of the epidermal Langerhans cells (LC) of hairless guinea pigs was significantly higher than that in the hairy strain. Allergic contact sensitization was easily induced with DNCB. Photoallergic contact sensitization was also induced with tetrachlorosalicylanilide (TCSA) but not with tribromosalicylanilide (TBS). However, by administration of cyclophosphamide before sensitization, positive photocontact responses were seen with TBS. These results indicate that hairless guinea pigs can be used as animal models for investigation of immunologic and nonimmunologic contact reactions.     

Sensitizing potential of chlorothalonil in the guinea pig and the mouse

The fungicide chlorothalonil is used extensively under several tradenames for the protection of various horticultural and fruit crops and bananas against fungal infections. It is also used as fungicide in wood preservation and as a preservative in paints. Clinical experience has shown chlorothalonil to be a contact allergen and several cases of allergic contact dermatitis attributed to chlorothalonil have been described. 2 previous guinea pig maximization test studies have shown the sensitizing potential of chlorothalonil to be high. The sensitizing property of chlorothalonil was studied by us with the predictive test methods the local lymph node assay and the cumulative contact enhancement test. In the local lymph node assay, chlorothalonil induced a dose-dependent increase in proliferation with a maximal stimulation index of 19.2 and 27.2. In the cumulative contact enhancement test, a statistically significant dose-dependent high sensitization rate was seen with a maximal sensitization rate of 100%. In conclusion, it is evident that chlorothalonil is an extremely potent contact allergen, inducing sensitization using only topical exposure on intact skin.     

Sensitizing potential in mice, guinea pig and man of the preservative Euxyl K 400 and its ingredient methyldibromo glutaronitrile

The allergenicity of the preservative Euxyl K 400 and its principal allergen methyldibromo glutaronitrile (MDBGN) (1,2-dibromo-2,4-dicyanobutane) was investigated using 3 animal models; in mice, the local lymph node assay (LLNA) and in guinea pigs, the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT) and the cumulative contact enhancement test (CCET) with a dose-response protocol included. Previous attempts to define the sensitization capacity of these chemicals have given conflicting results. For comparison, the frequency and causes of positive patch test reactions to Euxyl K 400 and MDBGN were studied in patients referred to an occupational dermatology clinic. This investigation showed that Euxyl K 400 and MDBGN can give rise to contact allergy in man and that the relevant cases found mainly had similar exposure as non-occupational cases. A contact allergenic potential could be detected for MDBGN in 2 animal models, i.e., the CCET and the LLNA, and also for Euxyl K 400 in the LLNA. However, statistical analysis of the results from the GPMT with MDBGN failed to detect the sensitizing potential of this particular allergen. The results indicate that to be able to detect the allergenic potential of Euxyl K 400 and MDBGN, a predictive test method with multiple topical applications at induction is required. It is therefore important that an investigator is aware of the possibility of using various predictive test models for investigation of potential contact allergens.     

Experiences with Freund''s complete adjuvant test (FCAT) when screening for contact allergens in colophony

A procedure, using Freund's complete adjuvant test (FCAT), for the determination of the allergenic potential of fractions and components in colophony of the gum rosin type is described and discussed. Gum rosin was shown to be a potent sensitizer in 11 test series (153 animals). FCAT is compared with the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT). Gum rosin was a potent sensitizer according to this method as well. The FCAT method was found to be advantageous over the GPMT method in that it is technically simpler to use and a smaller amount of test substance is needed. However, closed challenge was preferred to the prescribed open challenge. The importance of statistical evaluation of the results obtained in predictive testing is stressed.     

Sensitizing potential of acetaldehyde and formaldehyde using a modified cumulative contact enhancement test (CCET)

The contact allergenic activity of acetaldehyde was investigated with a modified cumulative contact enhancement test (CCET) method in guinea pigs. Possible cross-reactivity between acetaldehyde and formaldehyde was also studied. In contrast to the original CCET protocol, we used sham-treated controls and the chemicals were tested with closed epicutaneous application at 1st challenge. The suitability of the method was verified with formaldehyde and the results were comparable with those previously found with the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT). For the 1st time, acetaldehyde was shown to be a contact allergen in predictive tests. No cross-reactivity was observed between acetaldehyde and formaldehyde. Acetaldehyde seems to be a rare sensitizer in man. However, its allergenic activity should be considered, since it might be present as an impurity in ethoxylated surfactants. As the CCET protocol involves topical induction and challenge, we regard the modified version as well suited to evaluation of the contact allergenic potential of chemicals.     

Evaluation of skin sensitization response of dialkyl (C6-C13) phthalate esters

Isolated case reports suggest that dermal contact with some phthalate esters may result in skin sensitization. This issue was investigated in guinea pig sensitization tests, but the results were inconclusive. Consequently, 7 dialkyl phthalate esters, (diisohexyl, diisoheptyl, di(2-ethylhexyl), diisononyl, diisodecyl, diundecyl and ditridecyl phthalates), ranging in carbon number from C6 to C13, were tested in a 104-person panel human repeated insult patch test (HRIPT) using the modified Draize procedure. Test concentrations of 100% were selected for the induction and challenge phases of the HRIPT based upon a 24-h occluded irritation test on 15 panelists. Under the conditions of this HRIPT, no evidence of dermal irritation or sensitization for any of the 7 phthalate esters was observed in the 104-person panel. These HRIPT data provide evidence for the lack of experimental skin sensitization potential for the phthalate esters tested.     

A modified technique of guinea pig testing to identify delayed hypersensitivity allergens

A modified guinea pig testing technique was developed For the detection of weak allergens and allergenicity of materials unsuitable for testing by intradermal injection. This test involved the use of Freund's complete adjuvant to stimulate the immune system of the animal, and external application instead of intradermal injection of the test compound in the induction stage. The allergenicity of Sudan III, Brilliant Lake Red R and Sudan I was tested by this procedure.
In the dose-effect study of Sudan I, the dose dependency of a positive reaction of the induction and challenge concentrations was recognised.
The test was compared with three other guinea pig sensitization tests. The results obtained with this test correlated well with those obtained with the guinea pig maximization test.