Basketter David A, Kimber Ian
Safety and Environmental Assurance Centre, Unilever, Bedford, UK.
Contact Dermatitis. 2007 Jan;56(1):1-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01009.x.
Predictive toxicology tests for the prospective identification of skin-sensitizing chemicals are well known and have been used for many years. However, of these, only the local lymph node assay (LLNA) has actually undergone formal independent assessment to determine the accuracy of the predictions, particularly with respect to the likelihood of false positives and false negatives. Often, efforts to increase the sensitivity of a test (reducing false negatives) tend to increase the number of false positives. In this short review, these issues are discussed in particular relation to the 3 predictive tests available in regulatory toxicology, the guinea-pig maximization test, the occluded patch test of Buehler and the LLNA. A key perspective is that no predictive test is without limitations; having a good appreciation of these limitations is necessary for making the best use of the information derived from these methods.
用于前瞻性识别皮肤致敏化学物质的预测毒理学测试广为人知且已使用多年。然而,其中只有局部淋巴结试验(LLNA)实际经过了正式的独立评估,以确定预测的准确性,特别是关于假阳性和假阴性的可能性。通常,提高测试灵敏度(减少假阴性)的努力往往会增加假阳性的数量。在这篇简短的综述中,将特别针对监管毒理学中可用的三种预测测试,即豚鼠最大化试验、Buehler封闭斑贴试验和LLNA,讨论这些问题。一个关键观点是,没有一种预测测试是没有局限性的;充分认识这些局限性对于充分利用从这些方法中获得的信息是必要的。