Predicting Chemically Induced Skin Sensitization by Using In Chemico / In Vitro Methods

Risk management of skin sensitisers: A commentary

Historically, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to chemicals encouraged hazard identification improvements, more sophisticated risk assessment and implementation of regulatory strategies, including banning of specific sensitising substances. The validation process applied to hazard identification methods demonstrates their accuracy; their use to characterise sensitiser potency facilitates quantitative and transparent risk assessment. Diagnostic patch testing at dermatology clinics worldwide delivers feedback showing where risk assessment/management has been insufficient or did not target the exposure of concern, thereby facilitating improvements. When urgent action to protect human health was required, regulations limited/banned, specific skin sensitisers. This can be seen in practice with the fragrance industry, a known source of ACD, thus requiring risk management, usually restrictions to limit allergy induction, and very rarely specific bans on ingredients. Experience and development of more sophisticated tools, e.g. to assess aggregate exposure from multitude of consumer product types, has led to repeated adaptation of risk assessment and promulgation of updated fragrance use limits. Although targeted control may not always lead to rapid change in the overall clinical picture, it is preferable to a blanket undifferentiated regulatory control of all sensitisers, resulting in unwarranted restrictions for many uses of no health concern, with consequent substantial socio-economic impacts.

Read-across approaches: current applications and regulatory acceptance in Korea, Japan, and China

The aim of this paper was to investigate the current status of read-across approaches in the Republic of Korea, Japan, and China in terms of applications and regulatory acceptance. In the Republic of Korea, over the last 6 years, approximately 8% of safety data records used for chemical registrations were based upon read-across, and a guideline published on the use of read-across results in 2017. In Japan, read-across is generally accepted for screening hazard classification of toxicological endpoints according to the Chemical Substances Control Law (CSCL). In China, read-across data, along with data from other animal alternatives are accepted as a data source for chemical registrations, but could be only considered when testing is not technically feasible. At present, read-across is not widely used for chemical registrations and regulatory acceptance of read-across may differ among countries in Asia. With consideration of the advantages and limitations of read-across, it is expected that read-across may soon gradually be employed in Asian countries. Thus, regulatory agencies need to prepare for this progression.

Enzymes and sensitization via skin exposure: A critical analysis

Some proteins, including enzymes, can induce allergic sensitization of various types, including allergic sensitization of the respiratory tract. There is now an increased understanding of the role that the skin plays in the development of IgE-mediated allergy and this prompts the question whether topical exposure to enzymes used widely in consumer cleaning products could result in allergic sensitization. Here, the evidence that proteins can interact with the skin immune system and the way they do so is reviewed, together with a consideration of the experience gained over decades of the use of enzymes in laundry and cleaning products. The conclusion drawn is that although transcutaneous sensitization to proteins can occur (typically through compromised skin) resulting in IgE antibody-mediated allergy, in practice such skin contact with enzymes used in laundry and cleaning products does not appear to pose a significant risk of allergic disease. Further, the evidence summarized in this publication support the view that proteins do not pose a risk of allergic contact dermatitis.

Skin sensitisation testing in practice: Applying a stacking meta model to cosmetic ingredients

Recently, several non-animal approaches contributing to the identification of skin sensitisation hazard have been introduced. Their validation and acceptance has largely been directed towards regulatory classification. Considering the driving force for replacement of in vivo tests centred on cosmetics, it is reasonable to ask how well the new approaches perform in this respect. In the present study, 219 substances, largely cosmetic raw materials (including dyes, preservatives and fragrances), have been evaluated in our Defined Approach integrating a stacking meta model (version 5), incorporating the individual outcomes of 3 in vitro validated methods (Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay, Keratinosens™, U-SENS™), 2 in silico tools (TIMES SS, TOXTREE) and physicochemical parameters (volatility, pH). Stacking meta model outcomes were compared with existing local lymph node assay (LLNA) data. Non-sensitisers comprised 68/219; 86 were weak/moderate and 65 were stronger sensitisers. The model version revision demonstrate the gain to discriminate sensitizers to non-sensitiser when the in silico TIMES model is incorporated as input parameter. The 85% to 91% accuracy for the cosmetics categories, indicates the stacking meta model offers value for the next generation risk assessment framework. These results pinpoint the power of the stacking meta model relying on a confidence based on the probability given in any individual prediction.