Estimating skin sensitization potency from a single dose LLNA

Skin sensitization is an important aspect of safety assessment. The mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA) developed in the 1990s is an in vivo test used for skin sensitization hazard identification and characterization. More recently a reduced version of the LLNA (rLLNA) has been developed as a means of identifying, but not quantifying, sensitization hazard. The work presented here is aimed at enabling rLLNA data to be used to give quantitative potency information that can be used, inter alia, in modeling and read-across approaches to non-animal based potency estimation. A probit function has been derived enabling estimation of EC3 from a single dose. This has led to development of a modified version of the rLLNA, whereby as a general principle the SI value at 10%, or at a lower concentration if 10% is not testable, is used to calculate the EC3. This version of the rLLNA has been evaluated against a selection of chemicals for which full LLNA data are available, and has been shown to give EC3 values in good agreement with those derived from the full LLNA.     

Novel approach for classifying chemicals according to skin sensitizing potency by non-radioisotopic modification of the local lymph node assay

The murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) is currently recognized as a stand-alone sensitization test for determining the sensitizing potential of chemicals, and it has the advantage of yielding a quantitative endpoint that can be used to predict the sensitization potency of chemicals. The EC3 has been proposed as a parameter for classifying chemicals according to the sensitization potency. We previously developed a non-radioisotopic endpoint for the LLNA based on 5-bromo-2'-deoxyuridine (BrdU) incorporation (non-RI LLNA), and we are proposing a new procedure to predict the sensitization potency of chemicals based on comparisons with known human contact allergens. Nine chemicals (i.e. diphencyclopropenone, p-phenylenediamine, glutaraldehyde, cinnamicaldehyde, citral, eugenol, isopropyl myristate, propyleneglycol and hexane) categorized as human contact allergen classes 1-5 were tested by the non-RI LLNA with the following reference allergens: 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB) as a class 1 human contact allergen, isoeugenol as a class 2 human contact allergen and alpha-hexylcinnamic aldehyde (HCA) as a class 3 human contact allergen. Consequently, nine test chemicals were almost assigned to their correct allergen class. The results suggested that the new procedure for non-RI LLNA can provide correct sensitization potency data. Sensitization potency data are useful for evaluating the sensitization risk to humans of exposure to new chemical products. Accordingly, this approach would be an effective modification of LLNA with regard to its experimental design. Moreover, this procedure can be applied also to the standard LLNA with radioisotopes and to other modifications of the LLNA.     

Chemistry-based risk assessment for skin sensitization: quantitative mechanistic modeling for the S(N)Ar domain

There is a strong impetus to develop nonanimal based methods to predict skin sensitization potency. An approach based on physical organic chemistry, whereby chemicals are classified into reaction mechanistic domains and quantitative models or read-across methods are derived for each domain, has been the basis of several recent publications. This article is concerned with the S(N)Ar reaction mechanistic domain. Electrophiles able to react by the S(N)Ar mechanism have long been recognized as skin sensitizers and have been used extensively in research studies on the biology of skin sensitization. Although qualitative discriminant analysis approaches have been developed for estimating the sensitization potential for S(N)Ar electrophiles on a yes/no qualitative basis, no quantitative mechanistic model (QMM) has so far been developed for this domain. Here, we derive a QMM that correlates skin sensitization potency, quantified by murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) EC3 data on a range of S(N)Ar electrophiles. It is based on the Hammett σ(-) values for the activating groups and the Taft σ* value for the leaving group. The model takes the form pEC3=2.48 Σσ(-) + 0.60 σ* - 4.51. This QMM, generated from mouse LLNA data, provides a reactivity parameter 2.48 Σσ(-) + 0.60 σ*, which was applied to a set of 20 compounds for which guinea pig test results were available in the literature and was found to successfully discriminate the sensitizers from the nonsensitizers. The reactivity parameter correctly predicted a known human sensitizer 2,4-dichloropyrimidine. New LLNA data on two further S(N)Ar electrophiles are consistent with the QMM.     

Skin sensitisation, vehicle effects and the local lymph node assay.

Accurate risk assessment in allergic contact dermatitis is dependent on the successful prospective identification of chemicals which possess the ability to behave as skin sensitisers, followed by appropriate measurement of the relative ability to cause sensitisation; their potency. Tools for hazard identification have been available for many years; more recently, a novel approach to the quantitative assessment of potency--the derivation of EC3 values in the local lymph node assay (LLNA)--has been described. It must be recognised, however, that these evaluations of chemical sensitisers also may be affected by the vehicle matrix in which skin exposure occurs. In this article, our knowledge of this area is reviewed and potential mechanisms through which vehicle effects may occur are detailed. Using the LLNA as an example, it is demonstrated that the vehicle may have little impact on the accuracy of basic hazard identification; the data also therefore support the view that testing ingredients in specific product formulations is not warranted for hazard identification purposes. However, the effect on potency estimations is of greater significance. Although not all chemical allergens are affected similarly, for certain substances a greater than 10-fold vehicle-dependent change in potency is observed. Such data are vital for accurate risk assessment. Unfortunately, it does not at present appear possible to predict notionally the effect of the vehicle matrix on skin sensitising potency without recourse to direct testing, for example by estimation of LLNA EC3 data, which provides a valuable tool for this purpose.     

Mechanistic applicability domain classification of a local lymph node assay dataset for skin sensitization

The goal of eliminating animal testing in the predictive identification of chemicals with the intrinsic ability to cause skin sensitization is an important target, the attainment of which has recently been brought into even sharper relief by the EU Cosmetics Directive and the requirements of the REACH legislation. Development of alternative methods requires that the chemicals used to evaluate and validate novel approaches comprise not only confirmed skin sensitizers and non-sensitizers but also substances that span the full chemical mechanistic spectrum associated with skin sensitization. To this end, a recently published database of more than 200 chemicals tested in the mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA) has been examined in relation to various chemical reaction mechanistic domains known to be associated with sensitization. It is demonstrated here that the dataset does cover the main reaction mechanistic domains. In addition, it is shown that assignment to a reaction mechanistic domain is a critical first step in a strategic approach to understanding, ultimately on a quantitative basis, how chemical properties influence the potency of skin sensitizing chemicals. This understanding is necessary if reliable non-animal approaches, including (quantitative) structure-activity relationships (Q)SARs, read-across, and experimental chemistry based models, are to be developed.     

The murine local lymph node assay: regulatory and potency considerations under REACH

From June 2007, new chemicals legislation on the registration, evaluation, authorization and restriction of chemicals (REACH) will come into force across the European Union. This will require the submission of data on human health effects of chemicals, including chemical safety assessments which will require measurements of potency. For skin sensitization hazard identification, REACH states that the first-choice in vivo assay is the local lymph node assay (LLNA). This test has also been the UK competent authority's preferred test for skin sensitization since 2002, and has now replaced guinea pig tests in dossiers submitted to it under the Notification of New Substances Regulations. Advantages of the LLNA over guinea pig tests include improvements in animal welfare, a more scientific approach to hazard identification, and the inclusion of a dose-response element in the endpoint, which enables an estimation of potency. However, notifiers to the UK competent authority have sometimes been reluctant to use the assay because of concerns over false-positive reactions. Across Europe, these concerns have been heightened in the lead-up to the introduction of REACH, since the use of in vivo alternatives to the LLNA will require scientific justification. This review will address some of these concerns from a regulatory perspective.     

Prediction of skin sensitization potency of chemicals by human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT) and an attempt at classifying skin sensitization potency

The human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT), an in vitro skin sensitization test, is based on the augmentation of CD86 and CD54 expression in THP-1 cells following exposure to chemicals. The h-CLAT was found to be capable of determining the hazard of skin sensitization. In contrast, the local lymph node assay (LLNA), widely used as a stand-alone method in Europe and US, identifies the same hazard, but also classifies the potency by using the estimated concentration of SI = 3 (EC3). In this study, several values calculated from the h-CLAT data were evaluated for its correlation to the LLNA EC3 determination. A statistically significant correlation was observed between h-CLAT concentration providing a cell viability of 75% (CV75), h-CLAT estimated concentration of RFI = 150 for CD86 (EC150), and for CD54 (EC200) with LLNA’s EC3. From EC150 and EC200, a minimum induction threshold (MIT) was determined as the smaller of either EC150 or EC200. MIT showed a correlation with EC3 (R = 0.638). Also, MIT had an approximate 80% accuracy for sub-categories of the globally harmonized system (GHS) when a tentative threshold of 13 μg/mL was used. From these data, the h-CLAT values may be one of the useful tools to predict the allergic potency of chemicals.     

The impact of vehicle on the relative potency of skin-sensitizing chemicals in the local lymph node assay

The identification and characterization of chemicals that possess skin-sensitizing potential are typically performed using predictive tests. However, human exposure to skin-sensitizing chemicals often occurs via a matrix (vehicle) that differs from that used in these tests. It is thus important to account for the potential impact of vehicle differences when undertaking quantitative risk assessment for skin sensitization. This is achieved through the application of a specific sensitization assessment factor (SAF), scaled between 1 and 10, when identifying an acceptable exposure level. The objective of the analysis described herein is to determine the impact of vehicle differences on local lymph node assay (LLNA) EC3 values (concentrations of test chemical required to provoke a 3-fold increase in lymph node cell proliferation). Initially, the inherent variability of the LLNA was investigated by examining the reproducibility of EC3 values for 14 chemicals that have been tested more than once in the same vehicle (4:1 acetone:olive oil, AOO). This analysis reveals that the variability in EC3 value for these chemicals following multiple assessments is <5-fold. Next, data from the literature and previously unpublished studies were compiled for 18 chemicals that had been assessed in the LLNA using at least 2 of 15 different vehicles. These data demonstrate that often the variability in EC3 values observed for a given chemical in different vehicles is no greater than the 5-fold inherent variability observed when assessing a chemical in the same vehicle on multiple occasions. However, there are examples where EC3 values for a chemical differ by a factor of more than 10 between different vehicles. These observations were often associated with an apparent underestimation of potency (higher EC3 values) with predominantly aqueous vehicles or propylene glycol. These data underscore the need to consider vehicle effects in the context of skin-sensitization risk assessments.     

Skin sensitization testing in potency and risk assessment.

The purpose of this article is to review, and make recommendations for, the use of relevant skin sensitization test methods, for the purposes of determination of relative potency and the threshold dose necessary for the induction of skin sensitization, and for risk assessment. In addressing the first area, the utility of three guinea pig tests (the guinea pig maximization test, the occluded patch test, and the open epicutaneous test) of the local lymph node assay (LLNA) and of human volunteer testing for the assessment of relative potency and identification of thresholds for sensitization were considered. The following conclusions were drawn. (1) Although attempts have been made to modify the guinea pig maximization test for the purposes of deriving dose-response relationships, this method is usually unsuitable for determination of relative sensitizing potency. (2) Guinea pig methods that do not require the use of adjuvant and which employ a relevant route of exposure (the occluded patch test and the open epicutaneous test) are more appropriate for the assessment of relative skin-sensitizing potency. (3) The LLNA is suitable for the determination of relative skin sensitizing potency, and the adaptation of this method for derivation of comparative criteria such as EC3 values (the estimated concentration of test chemical required to induce a stimulation index of 3 in the LLNA) provides an effective and quantitative basis for such measurements. (4) For all the methods identified above, potency is assessed relative to other chemical allergens of known skin sensitizing potential. The estimation of likely threshold concentrations is dependent upon the availability of suitable benchmark chemicals of known potency for human sensitization. (5) Human testing (and specifically, the Human Repeat Insult Patch Test) can provide information of value in confirming the absence of skin sensitizing activity of formulations and products under specific conditions of use and exposure. Based on the above, the following recommendations are made. (1) If results are already available from suitable guinea pig tests, then judicious interpretation of the data may provide information of value in assessing relative skin sensitizing potency. This option should be explored before other analyses are conducted. (2) The LLNA is the recommended method for new assessments of relative potency, and/or for the investigation of the influence of vehicle or formulation on skin sensitizing potency. (3) Whenever available, human skin sensitization data should be incorporated into an assessment of relative potency. With respect to risk assessment, the conclusion drawn is that all the available data on skin-sensitizing activity in animals and man should be integrated into the risk-assessment process. Appropriate interpretation of existing data from suitable guinea pig studies can provide valuable information with respect to potency, as the first step in the development of a risk assessment. However, for de novo investigations, the LLNA is the method favored for providing quantitative estimations of skin-sensitizing potency that are best suited to the risk assessment process. Finally, human testing is of value in the risk assessment process, but is performed only for the purposes of confirming product safety.     

Local lymph node assay responses to paraphenylenediamine: intra- and inter-laboratory evaluations.

The murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) is a method for the prospective identification of skin sensitizing chemicals. Proliferative responses induced in lymph nodes draining the site of topical application of the test chemical are measured and those chemicals that induce a stimulation index of three or more compared with concurrent vehicle-treated controls are considered to have the potential to cause skin sensitization. Dose-response data from the LLNA may be used to derive an estimate of relative skin sensitizing potency, based upon derivation of the concentration of chemical required to cause a stimulation index of 3 (EC3 value) as calculated by linear interpolation. The purpose of the present investigations was to examine the stability of LLNA responses and the consistency of derived EC3 values induced by the contact allergen paraphenylenediamine (PPD). Analyses were conducted once a month over a 4-month period in each of two independent laboratories. In all assays, and in both laboratories, PPD elicited a positive response. Although some minor differences in responses between and within laboratories were observed, the derived EC3 values were generally very consistent. In Laboratory 1, EC3 values varied between 0.06 and 0.09% PPD, whereas in Laboratory 2 the range was 0.09-0.20%. These EC3 values are consistent with clinical experience of this material insofar as it is a common and relatively potent cause of allergic contact dermatitis in humans. Taken together, these data confirm the stability of LLNA responses both with time and between laboratories and provide additional support for the use of derived EC3 values in the assessment of relative skin sensitizing potency.     

Skin sensitization risk assessment model using artificial neural network analysis of data from multiple in vitro assays

The sensitizing potential of chemicals is usually identified and characterized using in vivo methods such as the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA). Due to regulatory constraints and ethical concerns, alternatives to animal testing are needed to predict skin sensitization potential of chemicals. For this purpose, combined evaluation using multiple in vitro and in silico parameters that reflect different aspects of the sensitization process seems promising.We previously reported that LLNA thresholds could be well predicted by using an artificial neural network (ANN) model, designated iSENS ver.1 (integrating in vitro sensitization tests version 1), to analyze data obtained from two in vitro tests: the human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT) and the SH test. Here, we present a more advanced ANN model, iSENS ver.2, which additionally utilizes the results of antioxidant response element (ARE) assay and the octanol–water partition coefficient (Log P, reflecting lipid solubility and skin absorption). We found a good correlation between predicted LLNA thresholds calculated by iSENS ver.2 and reported values. The predictive performance of iSENS ver.2 was superior to that of iSENS ver.1. We conclude that ANN analysis of data from multiple in vitro assays is a useful approach for risk assessment of chemicals for skin sensitization.     

Relating skin sensitizing potency to chemical reactivity: reactive Michael acceptors inhibit NF-κB signaling and are less sensitizing than S(N)Ar- and S(N)2- reactive chemicals

The skin sensitization potency of chemicals is partly related to their reactivity to proteins. This can be quantified as the rate constant of the reaction with a model peptide, and a kinetic profiling approach to determine rate constants was previously proposed. A linear relationship between the skin sensitization potency in the local lymph node assay (LLNA) and the rate constant for Michael acceptors was reported, characterized by a relatively flat regression line. Thus, a 10-fold increase of reactivity correlates to an increase of the sensitization potential of only 1.7-fold. Here, we first validate this model by repeating previous data and testing additional Michael acceptors and prove that the model is both reproducible and robust to the addition of new data. Chemicals of different mechanistic applicability domains, namely, S(N)Ar- and S(N)2-reactive sensitizers, were then tested with the same kinetic profiling approach. A linear relationship between sensitization potency in the LLNA and rate constants was also found, yet with a much steeper slope, i.e., for S(N)Ar- and S(N)2-reactive sensitizers, increasing reactivity correlates to a much stronger increase in sensitization potency. On the basis of the well-known inhibitory activity of some Michael acceptors on IKK kinase, it was hypothesized that the difference in the slopes is due to the specific anti-inflammatory potential of Michael acceptor chemicals. Therefore, all chemicals were tested for anti-inflammatory activity in a reporter gene assay for the inhibition of NF-κB activation. Increasingly reactive Michael acceptors have increasing anti-inflammatory potential in this assay, whereas no such biological activity was detected for the S(N)Ar and S(N)2 reactive sensitizers. Thus, the increasing reactivity of Michael acceptors confers both anti-inflammatory and skin sensitizing/pro-inflammatory potential, which may partially neutralize each other. This may be the reason for the relatively weak relationship between the potency in the LLNA and the rate constant of this particular group of chemicals.     

Non-enzymatic glutathione reactivity and in vitro toxicity: a non-animal approach to skin sensitization.

The development of non-animal methods to predict the potential of chemicals to cause skin sensitization is of great importance. On the basis of many published studies into the underlying chemical mechanisms skin sensitization, the immunological priming which leads to the disease allergic contact dermatitis, is recognized as a reactive chemistry endpoint. Consequently, the combination of chemical assays with in vitro techniques may provide a useful surrogate to animal testing for skin sensitization. This study attempts to investigate the relationship between skin sensitization assessed in the local lymph node assay (LLNA) initially and a thiol reactivity index based on glutathione (GSH), pEC(50) thiol (EC(50) being defined as the concentration of the test substance which gives 50% depletion of free thiol under standard conditions) in combination with a measure of cytotoxicity (pIGC(50)) to Tetrahymena pyriformis (TETRATOX). The pEC(50) thiol values and the pIGC(50) values were determined for twenty-four compounds for which LLNA test data were available. Thiol reactivity was found to discriminate sensitizers from non-sensitizers according to the rule: pEC(50) thiol>-0.55 indicates that the compound will be a skin sensitizer. However, because of metabolic activation a pEC(50) thiol<-0.55 does not necessarily mean that the compound will be a non-sensitizer. Excess toxicity to T. pyriformis (i.e. the extent of toxic potency over that expected by non-polar narcosis) was determined in order to assess biological reactivity. The best discrimination based on excess toxicity in the TETRATOX assay was given by the "rule": excess toxicity>0.50 indicates that the compound will be a skin sensitizer. These approaches become more powerful when combined. When taken together, the thiol and TETRATOX assays predict the sensitization potential of 23 of the 24 compounds correctly. alpha-Hexylcinnamic aldehyde is incorrectly predicted to be a non-sensitizer, whereas LLNA results suggest it may be a weak sensitizer, this inaccuracy being rationalized in terms of its high hydrophobicity. Due to the selectivity of electro(nucleo)philic reactions some sensitizing compounds will not be identified using a single nucleophile such as thiol.     

Development of a peptide reactivity assay for screening contact allergens.

Allergic contact dermatitis resulting from skin sensitization is a common occupational and environmental health problem. In recent years, the local lymph node assay (LLNA) has emerged as a practical option for assessing the skin sensitization potential of chemicals. In addition to accurate identification of skin sensitizers, the LLNA can also provide a reliable measure of relative sensitization potency; information that is pivotal in successful management of human health risks. However, even with the significant animal welfare benefits provided by the LLNA, there is still interest in the development of nonanimal test methods for skin sensitization testing. One characteristic of a chemical allergen is its ability to react with proteins prior to the induction of skin sensitization. The majority of chemical allergens is electrophilic and as such reacts with nucleophilic amino acids like cysteine or lysine. In order to determine if reactivity correlates with sensitization potential, 38 chemicals representing allergens of different potencies (weak to extreme) and nonsensitizers were evaluated for their ability to react with glutathione or three synthetic peptides containing either cysteine, lysine, or histidine. Following a 15-min reaction time for glutathione or a 24 h reaction period for the three synthetic peptides, the samples were analyzed by HPLC. UV detection was used to monitor the depletion of glutathione or the peptide following reaction. The results demonstrate that a significant correlation (Spearman correlation) exists between allergen potency and the depletion of glutathione (p = 0.001), lysine (p = 0.025), and cysteine (p = 0.020), but not histidine. The peptide with the highest sensitivity was cysteine (80.8%) whereas histidine was the least sensitive (11.5%). The data presented show that measuring peptide reactivity has utility for screening chemicals for their skin sensitization potency and thus potential for reducing our reliance on animal test methods.     

The local lymph node assay: current position in the regulatory classification of skin sensitizing chemicals

The local lymph node assay (LLNA) is being used increasingly in the identification of skin sensitizing chemicals for regulatory purposes. In the context of new chemicals legislation (REACH) in Europe, it is the preferred assay. The rationale for this is that the LLNA quantitative and objective approach to skin sensitization testing allied with the important animal welfare benefits that the method offers. However, as with certain guinea pig sensitization tests before it, this increasing use also brings experience with an increasingly wide range of industrial and other chemicals where the outcome of the assay does not always necessarily meet with the expectations of those conducting it. Sometimes, the result appears to be a false negative, but rather more commonly, the complaint is that the chemical represents a false positive. Against this background we have here reviewed a number of instances where false positive and false negative results have been described and have sought to reconcile science with expectation. Based on these analyses, it is our conclusion that false positives and false negatives do occur in the LLNA, as they do with any other skin sensitization assay (and indeed with all tests used for hazard identification), and that this occurs for a number of reasons. We further conclude, however, that false positive results in the LLNA, as with the guinea pig maximization test, arise most commonly via failure to distinguish what is scientifically correct from that which is unpalatable. The consequences of this confusion are discussed in the article, particularly in relation to the need to integrate both potency measurement and risk assessments into classification and labelling schemes that aim to manage potential risks to human health.     

A comparison of statistical approaches to the derivation of EC3 values from local lymph node assay dose responses.

Effective risk assessment and management of allergic contact dermatitis require three key factors: adequate hazard identification, measurement of the relative potency of identified hazards and an understanding of the nature, extent and duration of exposure. Suitable methods for hazard identification, such as the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) and the guinea-pig maximization test, are well established and conditions of human exposure normally can be well anticipated. Thus, the need is for a robust and quantitative method for the estimation of relative skin sensitizing potency. One possible approach is via the analysis of LLNA dose-response data. In the LLNA, contact allergens are defined currently as those chemicals that cause a threefold or greater increase in lymph node cell proliferative activity compared with concurrent vehicle-treated controls. It is possible to estimate the concentration of a sensitizer required to generate a threefold stimulation of proliferation in draining lymph nodes; such a concentration is known as the EC3 value. Using a variety of statistical approaches to derive EC3 values from LLNA dose-response data for 10 chemicals, it has been demonstrated that simple linear interpolation between the values either side of the threefold stimulation index provides a robust assessment of the EC3 value without the need for recourse to more sophisticated statistical techniques. Provided that the appropriate concentrations of test chemical have been selected, EC3 values obtained in this way are reproducible both within and between laboratories and form the basis for examination of the utility of this approach for the estimation of relative skin sensitizing potency.     

An in vitro human skin test for assessing sensitization potential

Sensitization to chemicals resulting in an allergy is an important health issue. The current gold‐standard method for identification and characterization of skin‐sensitizing chemicals was the mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA). However, for a number of reasons there has been an increasing imperative to develop alternative approaches to hazard identification that do not require the use of animals. Here we describe a human in‐vitro skin explant test for identification of sensitization hazards and the assessment of relative skin sensitizing potency. This method measures histological damage in human skin as a readout of the immune response induced by the test material. Using this approach we have measured responses to 44 chemicals including skin sensitizers, pre/pro‐haptens, respiratory sensitizers, non‐sensitizing chemicals (including skin‐irritants) and previously misclassified compounds. Based on comparisons with the LLNA, the skin explant test gave 95% specificity, 95% sensitivity, 95% concordance with a correlation coefficient of 0.9. The same specificity and sensitivity were achieved for comparison of results with published human sensitization data with a correlation coefficient of 0.91. The test also successfully identified nickel sulphate as a human skin sensitizer, which was misclassified as negative in the LLNA. In addition, sensitizers and non‐sensitizers identified as positive or negative by the skin explant test have induced high/low T cell proliferation and IFNγ production, respectively. Collectively, the data suggests the human in‐vitro skin explant test could provide the basis for a novel approach for characterization of the sensitizing activity as a first step in the risk assessment process. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.