Chemical applicability domain of the Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) for skin sensitisation potency. Part 2. The biological variability of the murine Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) for skin sensitisation

The Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) is the most common in vivo regulatory toxicology test for skin sensitisation, quantifying potency as the EC3, the concentration of chemical giving a threefold increase in thymidine uptake in the local lymph node. Existing LLNA data can, along with clinical data, provide useful comparator information on the potency of sensitisers. Understanding of the biological variability of data from LLNA studies is important for those developing non-animal based risk assessment approaches for skin allergy. Here an existing set of 94 EC3 values for 12 chemicals, all tested at least three times in the same vehicle have been analysed by calculating standard deviations (SD) for logEC3 values. The SDs range from 0.08 to 0.22. The overall SD for the 94 logEC3 values is 0.147. Thus the 95% confidence limits (2xSD) for LLNA EC3 values are within a factor of 2, comparable to those for physico-chemical measurements such as partition coefficients and solubility. The residual SDs of Quantitative Mechanistic Models (QMMs) based on physical organic chemistry parameters are similar to the overall SD of the LLNA, indicating that QMMs of this type are unlikely to be bettered for predictive accuracy.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

The local lymph node assay and potential application to the identification of drug allergens

The local lymph node assay (LLNA) is a method for the identification of skin sensitization hazard. The method is based upon measurement of proliferative responses induced in draining lymph nodes following topical exposure of mice to the test chemical. More recently the LLNA has also been used for the evaluation of relative skin sensitization potency in the context of risk assessment. Idiosyncratic drug reactions resulting from the stimulation of allergic or autoimmunogenic responses are poorly understood but represent an important clinical problem. In this article, the potential utility of the LLNA, either in a conventional modified configuration, to provide information of value in assessment the potential for systemic allergenicity is considered.     

Classification of contact allergens according to potency: proposals

It is clear that contact allergens vary substantially with regard to the relative potency with which they are able to induce skin sensitisation. Considerations of potency will in the future become a significant factor in the classification of skin sensitising chemicals. It is therefore appropriate to establish what is known of potency and thresholds in the induction of skin sensitisation and the elicitation of allergic contact dermatitis, and to identify approaches that might be available for assessment of relative potency for the purposes of categorising chemical allergens. This paper was prepared by an ECETOC (European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology) Task Force that had the objective of recommending approaches for the measurement of potency and definition of thresholds for both the induction and elicitation of contact sensitisation. The deliberations recorded here build upon recommendations made previously by an ECETOC Task Force that considered the conduct of standard skin sensitisation test methods for the purposes of hazard identification and risk assessment (ECETOC, Monograph No. 29, Brussels, 2000). The emphasis in this present paper is also on standard and accepted methods for the assessment of skin sensitisation, and for which OECD guidelines are available: the local lymph node assay (LLNA), the guinea pig maximisation test and the occluded patch test of Buehler. For various reasons, discussed in detail herein, attention focused primarily upon consideration of categorisation of chemical allergens and the identification of thresholds with respect to the induction of skin sensitisation, rather than the elicitation of allergic contact dermatitis. It is concluded that although the LLNA is the method of choice for the determination of skin sensitisation potency for the purposes of categorisation, if data are already available from appropriate guinea pig tests then their judicious interpretation may provide information of value in determinations of potency and categorisation. Included here are detailed and specific recommendations for how best the results of the three test methods considered can be used for the categorisation of chemical allergens as a function of skin sensitisation potency.     

A future approach to measuring relative skin sensitising potency: a proposal

Current approaches to skin sensitisation risk assessment are dependent upon the availability of information regarding two fundamental parameters. Firstly, data relating to the relative skin sensitising potency of the chemical, and secondly, information regarding likely conditions of human exposure. During the past two decades, much has been achieved in terms of refining methods capable of informing these parameters. For example, the development of the local lymph node assay (LLNA) has made it possible to predict skin sensitising hazard, and to determine relative skin sensitising potency, in a way that was not possible previously. Taken together with accurate information about predicted exposure, such potency data can be used to facilitate the derivation of effective risk assessments. However, although the LLNA provides an integrated assessment of skin sensitising activity, it does require the use of experimental animals and there is growing enthusiasm for designing robust alternative approaches that will reduce or obviate that need. Progress is being made in defining alternative experimental strategies that avoid animal use, but it is clear that accurate characterisation of skin sensitisation hazards will require the effective integration of various sources of information. For this reason, we exemplify here one possible approach that, in theory, provides a framework for not only the identification of skin sensitising chemicals, but also the estimation of relative sensitising potency. This paradigm depends upon development of an understanding of the various biological, biochemical and chemical factors that impact on the allergenic properties of chemicals and the acquisition of skin sensitisation, and an ability to measure these in vitro.     

Applicability of amino acid derivative reactivity assay (4 mM) for the prediction of skin sensitization by combining multiple alternative methods to evaluate key events

The amino acid derivative reactivity assay (ADRA) is an alternative method for evaluating key event 1 (KE-1) in the skin sensitization mechanism included in OECD TG442C (OECD, 2021). Recently, we found that ADRA with a 4-mM test chemical solution had a higher accuracy than the original ADRA (1 mM). However, ADRA (4 mM) has yet to be evaluated using integrated approaches to testing and assessment (IATA), a combination of alternative methods for evaluating KE. In this study, the sensitization potency of three defined approaches (DAs) using ADRA (4 mM) as KE-1 was predicted and compared with those of two additional ADRAs or direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA): (i) “2 out of 3” approach, (ii) “3 out of 3” approach, and (iii) integrated testing strategy (ITS). In the hazard identification of chemical sensitizers, the accuracy of human data and local lymph node assay (LLNA) remained almost unchanged among the three approaches evaluated. Potency classifications for sensitization were predicted with the LLNA and human data sets using ITS. The potency classifications for the sensitization potency prediction accuracy of LLNA data using any alternative method were almost unchanged, at approximately 70%, and those with ITS were not significantly different. When ITS was performed using DPRA, the prediction accuracy was approximately 73% for human data, which was similar to that of the LLNA data; however, the accuracy tended to increase for all ADRA methods. In particular, when ITS was performed using ADRA (4 mM), the prediction accuracy was approximately 78%, which proved to be a practical level.     

Examination of a vehicle for use with water soluble materials in the murine local lymph node assay.

The murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) is a validated method for identifying skin sensitization hazard. Vehicle choice can influence the sensitization potential of haptens in both the LLNA and in humans, therefore selection of an appropriate vehicle is important. Suggested vehicles for the LLNA include organic solvents and organic-aqueous mixtures. However, due to its high surface tension and poor wetting qualities, water is not recommended and therefore testing aqueous soluble materials can be problematic. The aims of this investigation were to identify a water-based vehicle that possesses better skin wetting properties than water alone, and to assess its performance relative to other solvents in the LLNA using aqueous soluble haptens. The selected wetting agent was the surfactant Pluronic(R) L92 (L92). Concentrations of L92 of up to 50% did not induce positive responses in the LLNA. 1% aqueous L92 was chosen for further examination. Dose-response analyses were performed with dinitrobenzene sulfonic acid (DNBS) and formaldehyde formulated either in water, 1% L92, dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) or dimethyl formamide (DMF). Potassium dichromate (PDC) and nickel sulfate were tested in 1% L92, DMSO or DMF. The highest concentration of potassium dichromate was retested in each vehicle and in water to assess the effect of the wetting agent. Estimates of the relative sensitizing potency in each vehicle were determined by calculation of EC3 values (the estimated concentration required to induce a threshold positive response). While DNBS and formaldehyde produced positive responses in all four vehicles, their relative potency varied among the vehicles. The rank ordering of potencies for both materials was, from highest to lowest, DMF > or = DMSO > 1% L92 > water. Compared with water, use of 1% L92 resulted in >2-fold increase in potency for DNBS and >3-fold increase for formaldehyde. PDC was positive in DMF, DMSO and 1% L92. The potency ranking was DMF > or = DMSO > 1% L92. Re-evaluation of 0.5% PDC confirmed that formulations of both DMSO and DMF induced strong proliferative responses, whereas somewhat less proliferation was recorded with the 1% L92 vehicle. PDC in water was without activity. The performance of 1% L92 as a vehicle for nickel sulfate was assessed relative to DMSO and DMF. In DMSO, nickel sulfate produced a stimulation index (SI) >3 at only the highest level. Testing in DMF induced low levels of proliferation, but failed to produce a SI of 3 at any concentration tested. When formulated in 1% L92, nickel sulfate caused a SI of 3 when tested at 2.5%. Based on the results of these experiments, for identification of sensitization hazard of aqueous soluble materials using the LLNA, DMF and DMSO are the preferred vehicles. However, if a test material is not soluble in DMF or DMSO, or if higher test concentrations can be achieved in an aqueous vehicle, then 1% L92 may provide a better alternative to water alone in terms of improved assay performance.     

Structure--activity relationship between the in vivo skin sensitizing potency of analogues of phenyl glycidyl ether and the induction of Nrf2-dependent luciferase activity in the KeratinoSens in vitro assay

Because of regulatory constraints and ethical considerations, research on alternatives to animal testing to predict the skin sensitization potential of novel chemicals has become a high priority. Ideally, these alternatives should not only predict the hazard of novel chemicals but also rate the potency of skin sensitizers. Currently, no alternative method gives reliable potency estimations for a wide range of chemicals in differing structural classes. Performing potency estimations within specific structural classes has thus been proposed. Detailed structure-activity studies for the in vivo sensitization capacity of a series of analogues of phenyl glycidyl ether (PGE) were recently published. These studies are part of an investigation regarding the allergenic activity of epoxy-resin monomers. Here we report data on the same chemicals in the KeratinoSens in vitro assay, which is based on a stable transgenic keratinocyte cell line with a luciferase gene under the control of an antioxidant response element. A strong correlation between the EC3 values in the local lymph node assay (LLNA) and both the luciferase-inducing concentrations and the cytotoxicity in the cell-based assay was established for six analogues of PGE. This correlation allowed the potency in the LLNA of two novel structurally closely related derivatives to be predicted by read-across with errors of 1.4- and 2.6-fold. However, the LLNA EC3 values of two structurally different bifunctional monomers were overpredicted on the basis of this data set, indicating that accurate potency estimation by read-across based on in vitro data might be restricted to a relatively narrow applicability domain.     

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.     

B220 analysis with the local lymph node assay: proposal for a more flexible prediction model

The mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA) has been developed and validated for the identification of chemicals that have the potential to induce skin sensitisation. In common with other predictive test methods the accuracy of the LLNA is not absolute and experience has revealed that a few chemicals, including for instance a minority of skin irritants, may elicit false-positive reactions in the assay. To improve further the performance of the LLNA, and to eliminate or reduce false-positives, there has been interest in an adjunct method in which the ability of chemicals to cause increases in the frequency of B220(+) lymphocytes in skin-draining lymph nodes is measured. Previous studies suggest that the use of B220 analyses aligned with the standard LLNA may serve to distinguish further between contact allergens and skin irritants. In the original predictive model, chemicals were regarded as being skin sensitisers if they were able to induce a 1.25-fold or greater increase in the percentage of B220(+) cells within lymph nodes compared with concurrent vehicle controls. Although this first prediction model has proven useful, in the light of more recent experience, and specifically as a consequence of some variability observed in the frequency of B220(+) lymphocytes in nodes taken from vehicle control-treated animals, it is timely now to reconsider and refine the model. As a result a new prediction model is proposed in which reliance on the use of absolute thresholds is reduced, and in which small changes in control values can be better accommodated.     

Potency values from the local lymph node assay: Application to classification,labelling and risk assessment

Hundreds of chemicals are contact allergens but there remains a need to identify and characterise accurately skin sensitising hazards. The purpose of this review was fourfold. First, when using the local lymph node assay (LLNA), consider whether an exposure concentration (EC3 value) lower than 100% can be defined and used as a threshold criterion for classification and labelling. Second, is there any reason to revise the recommendation of a previous ECETOC Task Force regarding specific EC3 values used for sub-categorisation of substances based upon potency? Third, what recommendations can be made regarding classification and labelling of preparations under GHS? Finally, consider how to integrate LLNA data into risk assessment and provide a rationale for using concentration responses and corresponding no-effect concentrations. Although skin sensitising chemicals having high EC3 values may represent only relatively low risks to humans, it is not possible currently to define an EC3 value below 100% that would serve as an appropriate threshold for classification and labelling. The conclusion drawn from reviewing the use of distinct categories for characterising contact allergens was that the most appropriate, science-based classification of contact allergens according to potency is one in which four sub-categories are identified: ‘extreme’, ‘strong’, ‘moderate’ and ‘weak’. Since draining lymph node cell proliferation is related causally and quantitatively to potency, LLNA EC3 values are recommended for determination of a no expected sensitisation induction level that represents the first step in quantitative risk assessment.     

Optimised testing strategies for skin sensitization – The LLNA and beyond

As toxicology in the 21st century progresses towards a future which aims at avoiding the use of in vivo testing, the endpoint of skin sensitisation can now be found in the front line. Accordingly, it was appropriate for several industry sectors to meet and review what has been learned from the currently most widely used in vivo method, the local lymph node assay (LLNA), and to consider the status of progress as we attempt to move beyond that test. No toxicology test is perfect, an experience brought into focus by issues of false positives and, to a lesser extent, false negatives in the LLNA. Use of weight of evidence arguments for classification and labelling, as well as for risk assessment was emphasised and it was also noted that a sufficient body of evidence now exists for conduct of methods other than the LLNA for carefully defined chemical classes. In terms of in vitro alternatives, progress towards methods which will deliver mainly hazard identification is being made, with some entering the final stages of validation, whereby (Q)SAR tools still need improvement to be used on a large scale in practise. As various other challenges also remain, e.g. testing lipophilic substances, as well as the development of non-animal methods which deliver reliable information on potency for risk assessment, these will remain a topic for continuing research and development.     

Assessing the potency of respiratory allergens: uncertainties and challenges

In contrast to skin sensitisation, there are no accepted tests for the identification of chemicals or proteins with the potential to cause sensitisation of the respiratory tract. Although progress has been made, the assessment of respiratory sensitisation potential remains associated with significant challenges and uncertainties. Nevertheless, there is interest in determining whether it is possible to assess the relative potency of respiratory sensitisers. The second Adaptation to Technical Progress (ATP) to the EU Classification, Labelling and Packaging (CLP) Regulation recently introduced changes to criteria for classification and labelling of chemicals and preparations, bringing it in line with the 3rd revision to the UN Globally Harmonised System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). Among other things, the second ATP introduces sub-categories for respiratory and skin sensitisers, discriminating between strong sensitisers and other sensitisers. Here we examine whether such categorisation of protein and/or chemical respiratory allergens is realistic and/or feasible. For this purpose comparisons have been drawn with skin sensitisation, where potency categorisation has now been widely accepted and successfully integrated into the regulatory process. The conclusion drawn is that, on the basis of the currently available information, potency categorisation for respiratory sensitisers is premature and could potentially be misleading.     

Assessing the potency of respiratory allergens: Uncertainties and challenges

In contrast to skin sensitisation, there are no accepted tests for the identification of chemicals or proteins with the potential to cause sensitisation of the respiratory tract. Although progress has been made, the assessment of respiratory sensitisation potential remains associated with significant challenges and uncertainties. Nevertheless, there is interest in determining whether it is possible to assess the relative potency of respiratory sensitisers. The second Adaptation to Technical Progress (ATP) to the EU Classification, Labelling and Packaging (CLP) Regulation recently introduced changes to criteria for classification and labelling of chemicals and preparations, bringing it in line with the 3rd revision to the UN Globally Harmonised System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). Among other things, the second ATP introduces sub-categories for respiratory and skin sensitisers, discriminating between strong sensitisers and other sensitisers. Here we examine whether such categorisation of protein and/or chemical respiratory allergens is realistic and/or feasible. For this purpose comparisons have been drawn with skin sensitisation, where potency categorisation has now been widely accepted and successfully integrated into the regulatory process. The conclusion drawn is that, on the basis of the currently available information, potency categorisation for respiratory sensitisers is premature and could potentially be misleading.     

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.