Assessment of commercial polymers with and without reactive groups using amino acid derivative reactivity assay based on both molar concentration approach and gravimetric approach.

The amino acid derivative reactivity assay (ADRA), an alternative method for testing skin sensitization, has been established based on the molar concentration approach. However, the additional development of gravimetric concentration and fluorescence detection methods has expanded its range of application to mixtures, which cannot be evaluated using the conventional testing method, the direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA). Although polymers are generally treated as mixtures, there have been no reports of actual polymer evaluations using alternative methods owing to their insolubility. Therefore, in this study, we evaluated skin sensitization potential of polymers, which is difficult to predict, using ADRA. As polymers have molecular weights ranging from several thousand to more than several tens of thousand Daltons, they are unlikely to cause skin sensitization due to their extremely low penetration into the skin, according to the 500-Da rule. However, if highly reactive functional groups remain at the ends or side chains of polymers, relatively low-molecular-weight polymer components may penetrate the skin to cause sensitization. Polymers can be roughly classified into three major types based on the features of their constituent monomers; we investigated the sensitization capacity of each type of polymer. Polymers with alert sensitization structures at their ends were classified as skin sensitizers, whereas those with no residual reactive groups were classified as nonsensitizers. Although polymers with a glycidyl group need to be evaluated carefully, we concluded that ADRA (0.5 mg/ml) is generally sufficient for polymer hazard assessment.

[In chemico skin sensitization alternative method: development of ADRA and listing to OECD test guideline].

Amino acid Derivative Reactivity Assay (ADRA) is an alternative method developed based on the principle of covalent bonding between sensitizer and proteins in the early stage of the mechanism of skin sensitization. The Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA) with same principle previously listed in the OECD test guidelines (TG) have some problems such as precipitation of the test chemical in the reaction solution and co-elution of the peptide with the test chemical. While, instead of DPRA, the ADRA was developed using two chemically synthesized nucleophilic reagents-namely, NAC and NAL in which naphthalene rings with a high molar absorbance coefficient (MAC) in the ultraviolet range have been introduced to N-termini of the cysteine and lysine that can react with the test chemical. Therefore, in March 2016, we set up a validation team with the aim for adoption in the OECD TG, ADRA's validation tests were conducted. After reporting the results of validation study, holding a third-party evaluation meeting and two commenting rounds, ADRA was able to be adopted in the OECD TG in June 2019. In addition, since the introduction of naphthalene with a high MAC has made it possible to reduce the concentration, enabling the following items. 1) Decrease in the frequency of precipitation of the test chemicals in the reaction solution. 2) Decrease in the frequency of co-eluting of the nucleating reagent and the chemical. 3) Evaluation of chemicals with unknown molecular weight using the gravimetric approach. 4) High-sensitivity detection of nucleophilic reagents by the fluorescence method. 5) Evaluation of the mixture by a combination of the gravimetric approach and fluorescence detection.

Evaluation of combinations of in vitro sensitization test descriptors for the artificial neural network-based risk assessment model of skin sensitization.

The skin sensitization potential of chemicals has been determined with the use of the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA). However, in recent years public concern about animal welfare has led to a requirement for non-animal risk assessment systems for the prediction of skin sensitization potential, to replace LLNA. Selection of an appropriate in vitro test or in silico model descriptors is critical to obtain good predictive performance. Here, we investigated the utility of artificial neural network (ANN) prediction models using various combinations of descriptors from several in vitro sensitization tests. The dataset, collected from published data and from experiments carried out in collaboration with the Japan Cosmetic Industry Association (JCIA), consisted of values from the human cell line activation test (h-CLAT), direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA), SH test and antioxidant response element (ARE) assay for chemicals whose LLNA thresholds have been reported. After confirming the relationship between individual in vitro test descriptors and the LLNA threshold (e.g. EC3 value), we used the subsets of chemicals for which the requisite test values were available to evaluate the predictive performance of ANN models using combinations of h-CLAT/DPRA (N = 139 chemicals), the DPRA/ARE assay (N = 69), the SH test/ARE assay (N = 73), the h-CLAT/DPRA/ARE assay (N = 69) and the h-CLAT/SH test/ARE assay (N = 73). The h-CLAT/DPRA, h-CLAT/DPRA/ARE assay and h-CLAT/SH test/ARE assay combinations showed a better predictive performance than the DPRA/ARE assay and the SH test/ARE assay. Our data indicates that the descriptors evaluated in this study were all useful for predicting human skin sensitization potential, although combinations containing h-CLAT (reflecting dendritic cell-activating ability) were most effective for ANN-based prediction.