Safety Evaluation Center, Fujifilm Corporation.
Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University.
J Toxicol Sci. 2019;44(9):585-600. doi: 10.2131/jts.44.585.
Amino acid derivative reactivity assay (ADRA) has previously been developed as an alternative method to direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA) to evaluate key event 1 in skin sensitization mechanisms. However, when using alternative methods for skin sensitization, integrated approaches to testing and assessment (IATA) that combine the results of multiple tests evaluating different key events are generally required. To verify whether ADRA can be used in IATA, we replaced DPRA with ADRA in five IATA methods combining DPRA, KeratinoSens, and h-CLAT: (i) the "2 out of 3" approach, (ii) the "3 out of 3" approach, (iii) sequential testing strategy (STS), (iv) integrated testing strategy by scoring approach (ITS-SA), and (v) the "ITS by two methods approach" (ITS-2MA). The prediction accuracy of the "2 out of 3" approach using ADRA (1 mM) and ADRA (0.5 mg/mL) was 90.0% and 91.1%, respectively, for human data, and was very similar to that obtained using DPRA (91.1%). The "3 out of 3" approach also showed good predictability (83.2%) using either ADRA (1 mM) or ADRA (0.5 mg/mL) compared to DPRA. Regarding the accuracy of the prediction of sensitization intensity for the human data by the third classification, prediction accuracy using ADRA was almost the same as STS, ITS-SA, or ITS-2MA using DPRA. As a result, this study showed that ADRA can be used as a test method for key event 1 in the evaluation of skin sensitization by combining multiple alternative methods.
氨基酸衍生物反应性测定法(ADRA)以前被开发为替代直接肽反应性测定法(DPRA)的方法,用于评估皮肤致敏机制中的关键事件 1。然而,当使用替代方法进行皮肤致敏测试时,通常需要结合多个评估不同关键事件的测试结果的综合测试和评估方法(IATA)。为了验证 ADRA 是否可用于 IATA,我们在结合 DPRA、KeratinoSens 和 h-CLAT 的五种 IATA 方法中用 ADRA 替代 DPRA:(i)“2 选 3”法,(ii)“3 选 3”法,(iii)序贯测试策略(STS),(iv)通过计分方法的综合测试策略(ITS-SA),和(v)“通过两种方法的 ITS 法”(ITS-2MA)。对于人类数据,使用 ADRA(1mM)和 ADRA(0.5mg/mL)的“2 选 3”法的预测准确性分别为 90.0%和 91.1%,与 DPRA 获得的结果非常相似。与 DPRA 相比,“3 选 3”法使用 ADRA(1mM)或 ADRA(0.5mg/mL)也显示出良好的可预测性(83.2%)。关于第三个分类对人类数据致敏强度预测的准确性,使用 ADRA 的预测准确性与 STS、ITS-SA 或 DPRA 下的 ITS-2MA 几乎相同。因此,这项研究表明,ADRA 可与多种替代方法结合,用作评估皮肤致敏的关键事件 1 的测试方法。