Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
1.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol ; 138: 105330, 2023 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36599391

RESUMO

Over the last decade, research into methodologies to identify skin sensitization hazards has led to the adoption of several non-animal methods as OECD test guidelines. However, predictive accuracy beyond the chemical domains of the individual validation studies remains largely untested. In the present study, skin sensitization test results from in vitro and in chemico methods for 12 plant extracts and 15 polymeric materials are reported and compared to available in vivo skin sensitization data. Eight plant extracts were tested in the DPRA and h-CLAT, with the 2 out of 3 approach resulting in a balanced accuracy of 50%. The balanced accuracy for the 11 plant extracts assessed in the SENS-IS was 88%. Excluding 5 polymers inconclusive in vitro, the remainder, assessed using the 2 out of 3 approach, resulted in 63% balanced accuracy. The SENS-IS method, excluding one polymeric material due to technical inapplicability, showed 68% balanced accuracy. Although based on limited numbers, the results presented here indicate that some substance subgroups may not be in the applicability domains of the method used and careful analysis is required before positive or negative results can be accepted.


Assuntos
Dermatite Alérgica de Contato , Animais , Alternativas aos Testes com Animais/métodos , Polímeros/toxicidade , Pele
2.
Chem Res Toxicol ; 29(5): 901-13, 2016 05 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27070937

RESUMO

Because of ethical and regulatory reasons, several nonanimal test methods to assess the skin sensitization potential of chemicals have been developed and validated. In contrast to in vivo methods, they lack or provide limited metabolic capacity. For this reason, identification of pro-haptens but also pre-haptens, which require molecular transformations to gain peptide reactivity, is a challenge for these methods. In this study, 27 pre- and pro-haptens were tested using nonanimal test methods. Of these, 18 provided true positive results in the direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA; sensitivity of 67%), although lacking structural alerts for direct peptide reactivity. The reaction mechanisms leading to peptide depletion in the DPRA were therefore elucidated using mass spectrometry. Hapten-peptide adducts were identified for 13 of the 18 chemicals indicating that these pre-haptens were activated and that peptide binding occurred. Positive results for five of the 18 chemicals can be explained by dipeptide formations or the oxidation of the sulfhydryl group of the peptide. Nine of the 27 chemicals were tested negative in the DPRA. Of these, four yielded true positive results in the keratinocyte and dendritic cell based assays. Likewise, 16 of the 18 chemicals tested positive in the DPRA were also positive in either one or both of the cell-based assays. A combination of DPRA, KeratinoSens, and h-CLAT used in a 2 out of 3 weight of evidence (WoE) approach identified 22 of the 27 pre- and pro-haptens correctly (sensitivity of 81%), exhibiting a similar sensitivity as for directly acting haptens. This analysis shows that the combination of in chemico and in vitro test methods is suitable to identify pre-haptens and the majority of pro-haptens.


Assuntos
Alternativas aos Testes com Animais , Haptenos/química , Pele/efeitos dos fármacos , Cromatografia Líquida de Alta Pressão , Espectrometria de Massas , Peptídeos/química
3.
Altern Lab Anim ; 39(4): 365-87, 2011 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21942548

RESUMO

In 2009, the Bovine Corneal Opacity and Permeability (BCOP) test was accepted by the regulatory bodies for the identification of corrosive and severe ocular irritants (Global Harmonised System [GHS] Category 1). However, no in vitro test is currently accepted for the differentiation of ocular irritants (GHS Category 2) and non-irritants (GHS No Category). Human reconstructed tissue models have been suggested for incorporation into a tiered testing strategy to ultimately replace the Draize rabbit eye irritation test (OECD TG 405). The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the EpiOcular(TM) reconstructed cornea-like tissue model and the COLIPA pre-validated EpiOcular Eye Irritation Test (EpiOcular-EIT) could be used as suitable components of this testing strategy. The in-house validation of the EpiOcular-EIT was performed by using 60 test substances, including a broad variety of chemicals and formulations for which in vivo data (from the Draize rabbit eye irritation test) were available. The test substances fell into the following categories: 18 severe irritants/corrosives (Category 1), 21 irritants (Category 2), and 21 non-irritants (No Category). Test substances that decreased tissue viability to ≤ 60% (compared to the negative control tissue) were considered to be eye irritants (Category 1/2). Test substances resulting in tissue viability of > 60% were considered to be non-irritants (No Category). For the assessed dataset and the classification cut-off of 60% viability, the EpiOcular-EIT provided 98% and 84% sensitivity, 64% and 90% specificity, and 85% and 86% overall accuracy for the literature reference and BASF proprietary substances, respectively. Applying a 50% tissue viability cut-off to distinguish between irritants and non-irritants resulted in 93% and 82% sensitivity, 68% and 100% specificity, and 84% and 88% accuracy for the literature reference and BASF proprietary substances, respectively. Further, in the EpiOcular-EIT (60% cut-off), 100% of severely irritating substances under-predicted by the BCOP assay were classified as Category 1/2. The results obtained in this study, based on 60 test substances, indicate that the EpiOcular-EIT and the BCOP assay can be combined in a testing strategy to identify strong/severe eye irritants (Category 1), moderate and mild eye irritants (Category 2), and non-irritants (No Category) in routine testing. In particular, when the bottom-up strategy with the 60% viability cut-off was employed, none of the severely irritating substances (Category 1) were under-predicted to be non-irritant. Sensitivity for Category 1/2 substances was 100% for literature reference substances and 89% for BASF SE proprietary substances.


Assuntos
Opacidade da Córnea/induzido quimicamente , Olho/efeitos dos fármacos , Irritantes/toxicidade , Testes de Toxicidade/métodos , Animais , Bovinos , Humanos , Permeabilidade , Coelhos
4.
ALTEX ; 37(4): 652-664, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32840629

RESUMO

Several in vitro OECD test guidelines address key events 1-3 of the adverse outcome pathway for skin sensitization, but none are validated for sensitizer potency assessment. The reaction of sensitizing molecules with skin proteins is the molecular initiating event and appears to be rate-limiting, as chemical reactivity strongly correlates with sensitizer potency. The kinetic direct peptide reactivity assay (kDPRA), a modification of the DPRA (OECD TG 442C), allows derivation of rate constants of the depletion of the cysteine-containing model peptide upon reaction with the test item. Its reproducibility was demonstrated in an inter-laboratory study. Here, we present a database of rate constants, expressed as log kmax, for 180 chemicals to define the prediction threshold to identify strong sensitizers (classified as GHS 1A). A threshold of log kmax -2 offers a balanced accuracy of 85% for predicting GHS 1A sensitizers according to the local lymph node assay. The kDPRA is proposed as a stand-alone assay for identification of GHS 1A sensitizers among chemicals identified as sensitizers by other tests or defined approaches. It may also be used for the prediction of sensitizer potency on a continuous scale, ideally in combination with continuous parameters from other in vitro assays. We show how the rate constant could be combined with read-outs of other in vitro assays in a defined approach. A decision model based on log kmax alone has, however, a high predictivity and can be used as stand-alone model for identification of GHS 1A sensitizers among chemicals predicted as sensitizers.


Assuntos
Substâncias Perigosas , Peptídeos/toxicidade , Dermatopatias/induzido quimicamente , Alternativas aos Testes com Animais , Animais , Bases de Dados Factuais , Humanos , Curva ROC
5.
ALTEX ; 37(4): 639-651, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32521036

RESUMO

While the skin sensitization hazard of substances can be identified using non-animal methods, the classification of potency into UN GHS sub-categories 1A and 1B remains challenging. The kinetic direct peptide reactivity assay (kDPRA) is a modification of the DPRA wherein the reaction kinetics of a test substance towards a synthetic cysteine-containing peptide are evaluated. For this purpose, several concentrations of the test substance are incubated with the synthetic peptide for several incubation times. The reaction is stopped by addition of monobromobimane, which forms a fluorescent complex with the free cysteine of the model peptide. The relative remaining non-depleted amount of peptide is determined. Kinetic rate constants are derived from the depletion vs concentration and time matrix and used to distinguish between UN GHS sub-category 1A sensitizers and test substances in sub-category 1B/not classified test substances. In this study, we present a ring trial of the kDPRA with 24 blind-coded test substances in seven laboratories. The intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility were 96% and 88%, respectively (both for differentiating GHS Cat 1A sensitizers from GHS Cat 1B/not classified). Following an independent peer review, the kDPRA was considered to be acceptable for the identification of GHS Cat 1A skin sensitizers. Besides GHS Cat 1A identification, the kDPRA can be used as part of a defined approach(es) with a quantitative data integration procedure for skin sensitization potency assessment. For this aim, next to reproducibility of classification, the quantitative reproducibility and variability of the rate constants were quantified in this study.


Assuntos
Alternativas aos Testes com Animais/métodos , Bioensaio/métodos , Laboratórios/normas , Dermatopatias/induzido quimicamente , Animais , Humanos , Cinética , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes
6.
Toxicol In Vitro ; 45(Pt 1): 134-145, 2017 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28882705

RESUMO

While the skin sensitization hazard of substances can already be identified using non-animal methods, the classification of potency sub-categories GHS-1A and 1B is still challenging. Potency can be measured by the dose at which an effect is observed; since the protein-adduct formation is determining the dose of the allergen in the skin, peptide reactivity was used to assess the potency. The Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA; one concentration and reaction-time) did not sufficiently discriminate between sub-categories 1A and 1B (56% accuracy compared to LLNA data, n=124). An extended protocol termed 'quantitative DPRA' (three concentrations and one reaction-time), discriminated sub-categories GHS 1A and 1B with an accuracy of 81% or 57% compared to LLNA (n=36) or human (n=14) data, respectively. The analysis of the Cys-adducts was already sufficient; additional analysis of Lys-adducts did not improve the predictivity. An additional modification, the 'kinetic DPRA' (several concentrations and reaction-times) was used to approximate the rate constant of Cys-peptide-adduct formation. 35 of 38 substances were correctly assigned to the potency sub-categories (LLNA data), and the predictivity for 14 human data was equally high. These results warrant the kinetic DPRA for further validation in order to fully replace in vivo testing for assessing skin sensitization including potency sub-classification.


Assuntos
Alternativas aos Testes com Animais/métodos , Bioensaio/métodos , Pele/efeitos dos fármacos , Animais , Dermatite Alérgica de Contato , Substâncias Perigosas , Humanos , Ensaio Local de Linfonodo , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
7.
Toxicol In Vitro ; 28(4): 571-87, 2014 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24389116

RESUMO

The knowledge-based search engine Go3R, www.Go3R.org, has been developed to assist scientists from industry and regulatory authorities in collecting comprehensive toxicological information with a special focus on identifying available alternatives to animal testing. The semantic search paradigm of Go3R makes use of expert knowledge on 3Rs methods and regulatory toxicology, laid down in the ontology, a network of concepts, terms, and synonyms, to recognize the contents of documents. Search results are automatically sorted into a dynamic table of contents presented alongside the list of documents retrieved. This table of contents allows the user to quickly filter the set of documents by topics of interest. Documents containing hazard information are automatically assigned to a user interface following the endpoint-specific IUCLID5 categorization scheme required, e.g. for REACH registration dossiers. For this purpose, complex endpoint-specific search queries were compiled and integrated into the search engine (based upon a gold standard of 310 references that had been assigned manually to the different endpoint categories). Go3R sorts 87% of the references concordantly into the respective IUCLID5 categories. Currently, Go3R searches in the 22 million documents available in the PubMed and TOXNET databases. However, it can be customized to search in other databases including in-house databanks.


Assuntos
Alternativas aos Testes com Animais/métodos , Bases de Dados Factuais , Substâncias Perigosas/toxicidade , Ferramenta de Busca , Terminologia como Assunto , Bem-Estar do Animal , Animais , Pesquisa Biomédica/métodos , Documentação , Projetos de Pesquisa
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA