Gibbs Susan, Kosten Ilona, Veldhuizen Rosalien, Spiekstra Sander, Corsini Emanuela, Roggen Erwin, Rustemeyer Thomas, Feilzer Albert J, Kleverlaan Cees J
Department of Oral Cell Biology, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Dermatology, VU university medical center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Dermatology, VU university medical center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Toxicology. 2018 Jan 15;393:62-72. doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2017.10.014. Epub 2017 Oct 25.
According to the new EU Medical Devices (MDR) legislation coming into effect in 2017, manufactures will have to comply with higher standards of quality and safety for medical devices in order to meet common safety concerns regarding such products. Metal alloys are extensively used in dentistry and medicine (e.g. orthopedic surgery and cardiology) even though clinical experience suggests that many metals are sensitizers. The aim of this study was to further test the applicability domain of the in vitro reconstructed human epidermis (RhE) IL-18 assay developed to identify contact allergens and in doing so: i) determine whether different metal salts, representing leachables from metal alloys used in medical devices, could be correctly labelled and classified; and ii) assess the ability of different salts for the same metal to penetrate the skin stratum corneum. Twenty eight chemicals including 15 metal salts were topically exposed to RhE. Nickel, chrome, gold, palladium were each tested in two different salt forms, and titanium in 4 different salt forms. Metal salts were labelled (YES/NO) as sensitizer if a threshold of more than 5 fold IL18 release was reached. The in vitro estimation of expected sensitization induction level (potency) was assessed by interpolating in vitro EC50 and IL-18 SI2 with LLNA EC3 and human NOEL values from standard reference curves generated using DNCB (extreme) and benzocaine (weak). Metal salts, in contrast to other chemical sensitizers and with the exception of potassium dichromate (VI) and cobalt (II) chloride, were not identified as contact allergens since they only induced a small or no increase in IL-18 production. This finding was not related to a lack of stratum corneum skin penetration since EC50 values (decrease in metabolic activity; MTT assay) were obtained after topical RhE exposure to 8 of the 15 metal salts. For nickel, gold and palladium salts, differences in EC50 values between two salts for the same metal could not be attributed to differences in molarity or valency. For chrome salts the difference in EC50 values may be explained by different valencies (VI vs. III), but not by molarity. In general, metal salts were classified as weaker sensitizers than was indicated from in vivo LLNA EC3 and NOEL data. Our in vitro results show that metals are problematic chemicals to test, in line with the limited number of standardized human and animal studies, which are not currently considered adequate to predict systemic hypersensitivity or autoimmunity, and despite clinical experience, which clearly shows that many metals are indeed a risk to human health.
根据2017年生效的欧盟新医疗器械法规(MDR),制造商必须遵守更高的医疗器械质量和安全标准,以应对有关此类产品的常见安全问题。金属合金广泛应用于牙科和医学领域(如骨科手术和心脏病学),尽管临床经验表明许多金属具有致敏性。本研究的目的是进一步测试为识别接触性过敏原而开发的体外重建人表皮(RhE)IL-18检测方法的适用范围,具体如下:i)确定代表医疗器械中使用的金属合金浸出物的不同金属盐是否能够被正确标记和分类;ii)评估同一金属的不同盐穿透皮肤角质层的能力。将包括15种金属盐在内的28种化学物质局部暴露于RhE。镍、铬、金、钯每种都以两种不同的盐形式进行测试,钛以4种不同的盐形式进行测试。如果IL18释放超过5倍阈值,则将金属盐标记为(是/否)致敏剂。通过将体外EC50和IL-18 SI2与使用DNCB(强)和苯佐卡因(弱)生成的标准参考曲线中的LLNA EC3和人类无观察到有害作用水平(NOEL)值进行插值,评估预期致敏诱导水平(效力)的体外估计值。与其他化学致敏剂相比,金属盐除了重铬酸钾(VI)和氯化钴(II)外,未被鉴定为接触性过敏原,因为它们仅诱导IL-18产生少量增加或不增加。这一发现与角质层皮肤穿透不足无关,因为在将15种金属盐中的8种局部暴露于RhE后获得了EC50值(代谢活性降低;MTT检测)。对于镍、金和钯盐,同一金属的两种盐之间的EC50值差异不能归因于摩尔浓度或化合价的差异。对于铬盐,EC50值的差异可能由不同的化合价(VI与III)解释,但不能由摩尔浓度解释。总体而言,金属盐被分类为比体内LLNA EC3和NOEL数据表明的致敏性更弱的致敏剂。我们的体外结果表明,金属是难以测试的化学物质,这与标准化的人体和动物研究数量有限一致,目前这些研究被认为不足以预测全身超敏反应或自身免疫,尽管临床经验清楚地表明许多金属确实对人类健康构成风险。