Ohtake Toshiyuki, Maeda Yosuke, Hayashi Tae, Yamanaka Hidenori, Nakai Makoto, Takeyoshi Masahiro
Chemicals Assessment and Research Center, Chemicals Evaluation and Research Institute (CERI), 1600, Shimotakano, Sugito-machi, Kitakatsushika-gun, Saitama 345-0043, Japan.
Chemicals Assessment and Research Center, Chemicals Evaluation and Research Institute (CERI), 1600, Shimotakano, Sugito-machi, Kitakatsushika-gun, Saitama 345-0043, Japan.
Toxicology. 2018 Jan 15;393:9-14. doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2017.10.015. Epub 2017 Nov 1.
The skin sensitization potential of chemicals has been traditionally assessed using regulatory accepted in vivo methods, such as guinea pig maximization test or mouse local lymph node assays (LLNAs). A huge effort to reduce and replace the use of animals for safety assessments of chemicals because of regulatory requirements and ethical issues is presently underway, and alternative non-animal methods have been greatly developed. So far, a few studies have investigated the sensitization potencies of isocyanates which is a group of highly reactive chemicals that are known to be occupational allergens. The present study evaluated nine commonly used isocyanates using an in vivo LLNA and assessed the applicability of an Integrated Testing Strategy (ITS) consisting of an in silico Derek Nexus prediction, an in chemico direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA), and an in vitro human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT) to isocyanates. All nine isocyanates were evaluated as positive using the LLNA, Derek Nexus and DPRA, whereas seven chemicals tested positive using the h-CLAT: hexamethylene diisocyanate tested negative, and 1,5-diisocyanatonaphthalene could not be examined because of a solubility issue. When assessed using the ITS, the positive/negative evaluations of skin sensitization hazard were consistent with those assessed using the LLNA for all nine chemicals. However, the potency prediction results of the ITS tended to be underestimated, compared with those of the LLNA. The data presented in this work provide insights into the performance of non-animal testing approaches for evaluating the skin sensitization potencies of isocyanates.
传统上,化学物质的皮肤致敏潜力是通过监管部门认可的体内方法进行评估的,如豚鼠最大化试验或小鼠局部淋巴结试验(LLNA)。由于监管要求和伦理问题,目前正在大力努力减少和替代用于化学物质安全性评估的动物使用,并且替代性非动物方法已得到极大发展。到目前为止,已有一些研究调查了异氰酸酯的致敏潜力,异氰酸酯是一类高反应性化学物质,已知是职业过敏原。本研究使用体内LLNA评估了九种常用的异氰酸酯,并评估了由计算机辅助Derek Nexus预测、化学直接肽反应性测定(DPRA)和体外人细胞系激活试验(h-CLAT)组成的综合测试策略(ITS)对异氰酸酯的适用性。使用LLNA、Derek Nexus和DPRA评估,所有九种异氰酸酯均为阳性,而使用h-CLAT测试时,七种化学物质呈阳性:六亚甲基二异氰酸酯测试为阴性,1,5-二异氰酸萘因溶解度问题无法检测。当使用ITS进行评估时,所有九种化学物质的皮肤致敏危害阳性/阴性评估结果与使用LLNA评估的结果一致。然而,与LLNA相比,ITS的效力预测结果往往被低估。这项工作中呈现的数据为评估异氰酸酯皮肤致敏潜力的非动物测试方法的性能提供了见解。