Frankild S, Basketter D A, Andersen K E
Department of Dermatology, University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Contact Dermatitis. 1996 Sep;35(3):135-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1996.tb02330.x.
The guinea pig maximization test (GPMT) has played a primary rôle in the evaluation of potential skin contact sensitizers for 25 years. In the OECD Guideline 406 from 1993, it is specifically suggested that equivocal results from the initial challenge in the GPMT should be evaluated further with a repeated challenge. However, there exist few published rechallenge data and the guideline does not describe how rechallenge data should be interpreted. In this paper, we have used examples from published results to illustrate both the positive value and the limitations of repeated challenges, including cross challenge. Testing with modified concentrations may also help to indicate whether or not the response is allergic in nature, particularly where there has been a low level of skin reaction observed in shamtreated controls, or where a low level of skin reaction is the dominant response in the test animals. In conclusion, the data presented demonstrate that, as a tool for the investigation of skin sensitizing potential, the GPMT can benefit from an experienced scientific evaluation of rechallenge data, but that this information should not be treated in a mechanistic fashion.
25年来,豚鼠最大化试验(GPMT)在评估潜在皮肤接触致敏剂方面发挥了主要作用。在1993年的经合组织(OECD)406号指南中,特别建议对GPMT初次激发试验中的可疑结果应通过重复激发试验进行进一步评估。然而,公开的重复激发试验数据很少,且该指南未描述应如何解读重复激发试验数据。在本文中,我们采用已发表结果中的实例来说明重复激发试验(包括交叉激发试验)的积极意义和局限性。采用调整后的浓度进行试验也可能有助于表明反应是否本质上是过敏反应,特别是在假处理对照组中观察到皮肤反应水平较低,或者在试验动物中低水平皮肤反应是主要反应的情况下。总之,本文所展示的数据表明,作为一种研究皮肤致敏潜力的工具,GPMT可受益于对重复激发试验数据进行经验丰富的科学评估,但不应机械地对待这些信息。