ICCVAM Evaluation of the Murine Local Lymph Node Assay: II. Conclusions and Recommendations of an Independent Scientific Peer Review Panel |
| |
Authors: | Jack H. Dean Lorraine E. Twerdok Raymond R. Tice Denise M. Sailstad David G. Hattan William S. Stokes |
| |
Affiliation: | a Sanofi-Synthelabo Research, Sanofi-Synthelabo Inc. P.O. Box 3026, Malvern, Pennsylvania, 19355;b American Petroleum Institute, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20005;c National Toxicology Program Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, MD EC-17, P.O. Box 12233, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27709;d ILS, Inc. P.O. Box 13501, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27709;e Experimental Toxicology Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, MD-92, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27711;f Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, 1110 Vermont Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20205 |
| |
Abstract: | The validation status of the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA), a method for assessing the allergic contact dermatitis potential of chemicals, was evaluated by an independent peer review panel (Panel) convened by the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM). The LLNA measures lymphocyte proliferation using incorporation of radioactive thymidine or iododeoxyuridine into cells of the draining lymph nodes of mice topically exposed to a test article. The Panel concluded that the assay performed as well as currently accepted guinea pig methods [guinea pig maximization test (GPMT)/Buehler assay (BA)] for the hazard identification of strong to moderate chemical sensitizing agents, but that it might not correctly identify all weak sensitizers or metals (potential false negative response) or all strong irritants (potential false positive response). The Panel concluded also that the LLNA involves less pain and distress than conventional guinea pig methods. The Panel unanimously recommended the LLNA as a stand-alone alternative for contact sensitization hazard assessment, provided that certain protocol modifications were made. These included collection of individual, rather than pooled, animal response data; the inclusion of a concurrent positive control; and consideration of dose–response information and statistical analyses. A standardized LLNA protocol is provided. |
| |
Keywords: | Abbreviations: allergic contact dermatitisAbbreviations: local lymph node assayAbbreviations: guinea pigAbbreviations: mice |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|