Development of novel in vitro photosafety assays focused on the Keap1-Nrf2-ARE pathway.

Although photoallergens require UV energy for antigen formation, the subsequent immune response is considered to be the same as in ordinary skin sensitization. Therefore, in vitro tests for skin sensitization should also be applicable for photoallergy testing. In this study, we examined whether activation of the Keap1 (Kelch-like ECH-associated protein 1)-Nrf2 (nuclear factor-erythroid 2-related factor 2)-ARE (antioxidant response element) pathway could be used to assess the photoallergenic potential of chemicals, using the reporter cell line AREc32 or KeratinoSens(TM) . First, we identified an appropriate UVA irradiation dose [5 J cm(-2) irradiation in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS)] by investigating the effect of UV irradiation on ARE-dependent gene induction using untreated or 6-methylcoumarin (6-MC)-treated cells. Irradiation of well-known photoallergens under this condition increased ARE-dependent gene expression by more than 50% compared with both vehicle and non-irradiated controls. When the cut-off value for detecting photoallergens was set at 50% induction, the accuracy of predicting photoallergenic/phototoxic chemicals was 70% in AREc32 cells and 67% in KeratinoSens(TM) cells, and the specificity was 100% in each case. We designate these assays as a photo-ARE assay and photo-KeratinoSens(TM) , respectively. Our results suggest that activation of the Keap1-Nrf2-ARE pathway is an effective biomarker for evaluating both photoallergenic and phototoxic potentials. Either of the above tests might be a useful component of a battery of in vitro tests/in silico methods for predicting the photoallergenicity and phototoxicity of chemicals. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Evaluation of Antineoplastic Delayed-Type Hypersensitivity Skin Reactions In Vitro.

Delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) is caused by a broad number of drugs used in clinic, and antineoplastic drugs show an elevated proportion of DTH, which potentially affects the quality of life of patients. Despite the serious problem and the negative economic impact deriving from market withdrawal of such drugs and high hospitalization costs, nowadays, there are no standard validated methods in vitro or in vivo to evaluate the sensitizing potential of drugs in the preclinical phase. Enhanced predictions in preclinical safety evaluations are really important, and for that reason, the aim of our work is to adapt in vitro DPRA, ARE-Nrf2 luciferase KeratinoSensTM, and hCLAT assays for the study of the sensitizing potential of antineoplastic agents grouped by mechanism of action. Our results reveal that the above tests are in vitro techniques able to predict the sensitizing potential of the tested antineoplastics. Moreover, this is the first time that the inhibition of the VEGFR1 pathway has been identified as a potential trigger of DTH.

Skin Sensitization Potential and Cellular ROS-Induced Cytotoxicity of Silica Nanoparticles.

Nowadays, various industries using nanomaterials are growing rapidly, and in particular, as the commercialization and use of nanomaterials increase in the cosmetic field, the possibility of exposure of nanomaterials to the skin of product producers and consumers is increasing. Due to the unique properties of nanomaterials with a very small size, they can act as hapten and induce immune responses and skin sensitization, so accurate identification of toxicity is required. Therefore, we selected silica nanomaterials used in various fields such as cosmetics and biomaterials and evaluated the skin sensitization potential step-by-step according to in-vitro and in-vivo alternative test methods. KeratinoSensTM cells of modified keratinocyte and THP-1 cells mimicking dendritic-cells were treated with silica nanoparticles, and their potential for skin sensitization and cytotoxicity were evaluated, respectively. We also confirmed the sensitizing ability of silica nanoparticles in the auricle-lymph nodes of BALB/C mice by in-vivo analysis. As a result, silica nanoparticles showed high protein binding and reactive oxygen species (ROS) mediated cytotoxicity, but no significant observation of skin sensitization indicators was observed. Although more studies are needed to elucidate the mechanism of skin sensitization by nanomaterials, the results of this study showed that silica nanoparticles did not induce skin sensitization.

Copper and Cobalt Ions Released from Metal Oxide Nanoparticles Trigger Skin Sensitization.

Human skins are exposed to nanomaterials in everyday life from various sources such as nanomaterial-containing cosmetics, air pollutions, and industrial nanomaterials. Nanomaterials comprising metal haptens raises concerns about the skin sensitization to nanomaterials. In this study, we evaluated the skin sensitization of nanomaterials comparing metal haptens in vivo and in vitro. We selected five metal oxide NPs, containing copper oxide, cobalt monoxide, cobalt oxide, nickel oxide, or titanium oxide, and two types of metal chlorides (CoCl2 and CuCl2), to compare the skin sensitization abilities between NPs and the constituent metals. The materials were applied to KeratinoSensTM cells for imitated skin-environment setting, and luciferase induction and cytotoxicity were evaluated at 48 h post-incubation. In addition, the response of metal oxide NPs was confirmed in lymph node of BALB/C mice via an in vivo method. The results showed that CuO and CoO NPs induce a similar pattern of positive luciferase induction and cytotoxicity compared to the respective metal chlorides; Co3O4, NiO, and TiO2 induced no such response. Collectively, the results implied fast-dissolving metal oxide (CuO and CoO) NPs release their metal ion, inducing skin sensitization. However, further investigations are required to elucidate the mechanism underlying NP-induced skin sensitization. Based on ion chelation data, metal ion release was confirmed as the major "factor" for skin sensitization.

Skin Sensitization Evaluation of Carbon-Based Graphene Nanoplatelets.

Graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs) are one of the major types of carbon based nanomaterials that have different industrial and biomedical applications. There is a risk of exposure to GNP material in individuals involved in their large-scale production and in individuals who use products containing GNPs. Determining the exact toxicity of GNP nanomaterials is a very important agenda. This research aimed to evaluate the skin sensitization potentials induced by GNPs using two types of alternative to animal testing. We analyzed the physicochemical characteristics of the test material by selecting a graphene nanomaterial with a nano-size on one side. Thereafter, we evaluated the skin sensitization effect using an in vitro and an in vivo alternative test method, respectively. As a result, we found that GNPs do not induce skin sensitization. In addition, it was observed that the administration of GNPs did not induce cytotoxicity and skin toxicity. This is the first report of skin sensitization as a result of GNPs obtained using alternative test methods. These results suggest that GNP materials do not cause skin sensitization, and these assays may be useful in evaluating the skin sensitization of some nanomaterials.

Sensitivity of KeratinoSensTM and h-CLAT for detecting minute amounts of sensitizers to evaluate botanical extract.

Cosmetic ingredients are often complex mixtures from natural sources such as botanical extracts that might contain minute amounts of constituents with sensitizing potential. The sensitivity of in vitro skin sensitization test methods such as KeratinoSensTM and h-CLAT for the detection of minute amounts of sensitizer in mixtures remains unclear. In this study, we assessed the detection sensitivity of the binary test battery comprising KeratinoSensTM and h-CLAT for minute amounts of sensitizers by comparing the LLNA EC3 (estimated concentration of a substance expected to produce a stimulation index of 3) values to the minimum detection concentrations (MDCs) exceeding the positive criteria for each of the two in vitro test methods. 146 sensitizers with both sets of in vitro data and LLNA data were used. MDC values for KeratinoSensTM and h-CLAT were calculated from exposure concentrations exceeding positive criteria for each in vitro test method (EC1.5 and minimum induction thresholds, respectively). The dilution rate used to expose culture medium was also considered. For 86% of analyzed sensitizers, the in vitro test methods showed MDC values lower than LLNA EC3 values, suggesting that the binary test battery with KeratinoSensTM and h-CLAT have greater sensitivity for detection of minute amounts of sensitizer than LLNA. These results suggest the high applicability of KeratinoSensTM and h-CLAT for detecting skin sensitizing constituents present in botanical extract.

The dermal sensitization threshold (DST) approach for mixtures evaluated as negative in in vitro test methods; mixture DST.

Cosmetic ingredients often comprise complex mixtures, such as botanical extracts, which may contain skin sensitizing constituents. In our previous study for the sensitivity of the evaluations of skin sensitizing constituents in mixtures using the binary in vitro test battery with KeratinoSensTM and h-CLAT, some sensitizers showed higher detection limits in in vitro test methods than in murine local lymph node assays (LLNA). Thus, to minimize the uncertainty associated with decreased sensitivity for these sensitizers, a risk assessment strategy was developed for mixtures with negative results from the binary test battery. Assuming that the no expected sensitization induction level of mixtures (mixture NESIL) can be derived for mixtures with negative in vitro test results, we assessed 146 sensitizers with in vitro and LLNA data according to the assumption of indeterminate constituents in mixtures. Finally, we calculated 95th percentile probabilities of mixture NESILs and derived dermal sensitization thresholds for mixtures (mixture DST) with negative in vitro test results of 6010 µg/cm2. Feasibility studies indicated that this approach was practical for risk assessments of products in the cosmetic industry. This approach would be a novel risk assessment strategy for incorporating the DST approach and information from in vitro test methods.