Assessment of contact sensitivity of four thiourea rubber accelerators: comparison of two mouse lymph node assays with the guinea pig maximization test

Isothiocyanates are important as haptens in contact allergy to chloroprene rubber

BACKGROUND

Contact allergy to chloroprene rubber products is well known. Thiourea compounds are considered the cause of allergy. Diethylthiourea commonly occurs in this type of product and can decompose to the sensitizer ethyl isothiocyanate.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the clinical importance of degradation products and metabolites from organic thioureas in contact allergy to chloroprene rubber with a focus on isothiocyanates and isocyanates.

METHODS

Patients with contact allergy to diphenylthiourea were patch tested with phenyl isothiocyanate and phenyl isocyanate. Patients with known contact allergy to diethylthiourea were retested with diethylthiourea, while chemical analyses of their chloroprene rubber products were performed. The stability of diethylthiourea, diphenylthiourea and dibutylthiourea in patch-test preparations was investigated. Liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry and solid-phase microextraction/gas chromatography were used for determination of organic thioureas and isothiocyanates.

RESULTS

All patients allergic to diphenylthiourea reacted to phenyl isothiocyanate, two of eight reacted to phenyl isocyanate and six of eight reacted to diphenylthiourea. Four patients allergic to diethylthiourea reacted at retest; diethylthiourea was detected in all chloroprene rubber samples, with levels of 2-1200 nmol cm^-2 . At 35 °C, ethyl isothiocyanate was emitted from all samples. Patch-test preparations of diethylthiourea, diphenylthiourea and dibutylthiourea all emitted the corresponding isothiocyanate, with diethylthiourea showing the highest rate of isothiocyanate emission.

CONCLUSIONS

Thiourea compounds are degraded to isothiocyanates, which are generally strong or extreme sensitizers, thus acting as prehaptens. This process occurs in both chloroprene rubber products and patch-test preparations. Positive reactions to phenyl isocyanate indicate cutaneous metabolism, as the only known source of exposure to phenyl isocyanate is through bioactivation of diphenylthiourea.

Investigation of diethylthiourea and ethyl isothiocyanate as potent skin allergens in chloroprene rubber

BACKGROUND

Exposure to chloroprene rubber has resulted in numerous cases of allergic contact dermatitis, attributed to organic thiourea compounds used as vulcanization accelerators. However, thiourea compounds are not considered to be strong haptens.

OBJECTIVES

To analyse common commercial chloroprene materials for their contents of diethylthiourea (DETU), dibutylthiourea (DBTU), diphenylthiourea (DPTU), and their degradation products, isothiocyanates; and to investigate the sensitization potencies of possible degradation products of the mentioned thiourea compounds.

METHODS

Liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (MS) was used for quantification of organic thiourea compounds in chloroprene products, such as medical, sports and diving gear; isothiocyanates were measured by solid-phase microextraction/gas chromatography/MS. Sensitization potencies were determined with the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA).

RESULTS

DETU was identified at concentrations of 2.7-9.4 µg/cm(2) in all samples, whereas neither DBTU nor DPTU was detected. At 37°C, degradation of DETU in the materials to ethyl isothiocyanate (EITC) was detected. EITC and ethyl isocyanate showed extreme and strong sensitization potencies, respectively, in the LLNA.

CONCLUSIONS

DETU can act as a prehapten, being degraded to EITC when subjected to body temperature upon skin contact. EITC could thus be the culprit behind allergic contact dermatitis caused by chloroprene rubber.

Diphenylthiourea, a common rubber chemical, is bioactivated to potent skin sensitizers

Diphenylthiourea (DPTU) is a known skin sensitizer commonly used as a vulcanization accelerator in the production of synthetic rubber, for example, neoprene. The versatile usage of neoprene is due to the multifaceted properties of the material; for example, it is stretchable, waterproof, and chemical- and abrasion-resistant. The wide application of neoprene has resulted in numerous case reports of dermatitis patients allergic to DPTU. The mechanism by which DPTU works as a contact allergen has not been described; thus, the aim of the present study was to investigate if DPTU is a prohapten that can be activated by skin metabolism. The metabolic activation and covalent binding of (14)C-labeled DPTU to proteins were tested using a skinlike cytochrome P450 (P450) cocktail containing the five most abundant P450s found in human skin (CYP1A1, 1B1, 2B6, 2E1, and 3A5) and human liver microsomes. The incubations were carried out in the presence or absence of the metabolite trapping agents glutathione, methoxylamine, and benzylamine. The metabolism mixtures were analyzed by LC-radiochromatography, LC-MS, and LC-MS/MS. DPTU was mainly metabolically activated to reactive sulfoxides resulting in desulfurated adducts in both enzymatic systems used. Also, phenylisothiocyanate and phenylisocyanate were found to be metabolites of DPTU. The sensitizing capacity of the substrate (DPTU) and three metabolites was tested in the murine local lymph node assay. Two out of three metabolites tested were strong skin sensitizers, whereas DPTU itself, as previously known, was negative using this mouse model. In conclusion, DPTU forms highly reactive metabolites upon bioactivation by enzymes present in the skin. These metabolites are able to induce skin sensitization and are probable causes for DPTU allergy. To increase the possibilities of diagnosing contact allergy to DPTU-containing items, we suggest that suitable metabolites of DPTU should be used for screening testing.

Allergic contact dermatitis to thiourea in a neoprene knee brace

SUMMARY An elderly woman developed an itchy, weeping, erythematous, papular eruption, confined to the skin under her neoprene knee brace. Allergic contact dermatitis to diethylthiourea and to her neoprene knee brace were diagnosed by positive patch test reactions. Allergic contact dermatitis from thioureas may be underdiagnosed, as they are not tested as part of the standard patch test series. Clinicians are encouraged to consider this diagnosis in patients with reactions to synthetic rubber, especially neoprene.

Synthesis and NMR spectroscopic studies of allylsulfanyl-N1-alkyl-N4-phenyl-1,4-phenylenediamines and their cyclization products, 2,3-dihydro-1-benzothiophenes and thiochromans

Regioselective addition of allylthiol at the C-3 position adjacent to the nitrogen carrying the phenyl group of the 1,4-phenylenediamine moiety of compounds 1-4 was rigorously confirmed by 1D NOE difference in combination with gHMBC experiments. The structures of 1,4-phenylenediamines 1-4, allylsulfanyl-N1-alkyl-N4-phenyl-1,4-phenylenediamines 5-8 and cyclization products 9-14 were completely analyzed in both CDCl3 and DMSO-d6 solutions. The 1H and 13C NMR spectra of 10 and 11, which contain two chiral centers, exhibit duplication for several signals, indicating the existence of two diastereomeric forms. The full structures of 5 and 9 were unambiguously confirmed by x-ray crystallography. The 1H and 13C NMR spectra of all compounds were assigned using one- and two-dimensional NMR techniques (APT, DEPT, 1D NOE difference, COSY, NOESY, HETCOR, gHMQC and gHMBC).

Use of the local lymph node assay in the evaluation of the sensitizing potential of pharmaceutical process intermediates

The murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) has recently been developed to determine the contact sensitization potential of chemicals. Since its original development, the LLNA results have been the subject of extensive comparisons with guinea pig and human data. The investigations described here were designed to explore the ability of the LLNA to identify accurately, pharmaceutical process intermediates (PIs) known to cause contact allergy in humans. To that end, 16 PIs previously tested in the guinea-pig maximization test (GPMT) were tested in the LLNA. Another PI known to be a contact sensitizer in humans was tested only in the LLNA. Cases of contact sensitization in humans were reported only for PIs that were extreme sensitizers in the GPMT and had low EC3 values (concentration of the test substance required to generate a threefold increase in lymph node cell proliferation) in the LLNA. These data provide additional evidence that the LLNA is able to discriminate skin sensitizers from chemicals that do not possess a significant skin sensitization potential and is thus a useful method for hazard identification. In addition, this method also offers important animal welfare benefits and may also be useful for risk assessment purposes.

The local lymph node assay: past, present and future

The local lymph node assay (LLNA) was developed originally as a method for the identification of chemicals that have the potential to cause skin sensitization and allergic contact dermatitis. The assay is based on an understanding that the acquisition of contact sensitization is associated with, and dependent upon, the stimulation by chemical allergens of lymphocyte proliferative responses in skin-draining lymph nodes. Those chemicals that provoke a defined level of lymph node cell (LNC) proliferation (a 3-fold or greater increase compared with concurrent vehicle controls) are classified as skin sensitizers. Following its original inception and development, the LLNA was the subject of both national and international interlaboratory collaborative trials, and of very detailed comparisons with other test methods and with human skin sensitization data. The assay has now been validated fully as a stand-alone test for the purposes of hazard identification. In recent years, there has been a growing interest also in the use of the LLNA to assess the potency of contact allergens and in risk assessment. There is reason to believe that the extent of skin sensitization achieved is associated with the vigour of LNC proliferation induced in draining nodes. Given this relationship, the relative potency of skin sensitizing chemicals is measured in the LLNA by derivation of an EC3 value, this being the concentration of chemical required to provoke a 3-fold increase in the proliferation of LNC compared with controls. Experience to date indicates that relative potency as determined using this approach correlates closely with what is known of the activity of skin sensitizing chemicals in humans. In this article, we review the development, evaluation and validation of the LLNA for the purposes of hazard identification, and the more recent application of the method for evaluation of potency in the context of risk assessment. In addition, we consider what new applications and modifications are currently being investigated.

ICCVAM evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay. Conclusions and recommendations of an independent scientific peer review panel

The validation status of the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA), a method for assessing the allergic contact dermatitis potential of chemicals, was evaluated by an independent peer review panel (Panel) convened by the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM). The LLNA measures lymphocyte proliferation using incorporation of radioactive thymidine or iododeoxyuridine into cells of the draining lymph nodes of mice topically exposed to a test article. The Panel concluded that the assay performed as well as currently accepted guinea pig methods [guinea pig maximization test (GPMT)/Buehler assay (BA)] for the hazard identification of strong to moderate chemical sensitizing agents, but that it might not correctly identify all weak sensitizers or metals (potential false negative response) or all strong irritants (potential false positive response). The Panel concluded also that the LLNA involves less pain and distress than conventional guinea pig methods. The Panel unanimously recommended the LLNA as a stand-alone alternative for contact sensitization hazard assessment, provided that certain protocol modifications were made. These included collection of individual, rather than pooled, animal response data; the inclusion of a concurrent positive control; and consideration of dose-response information and statistical analyses. A standardized LLNA protocol is provided.

Local lymph node assay: use in hazard and risk assessment

The murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) was developed as an alternative method for the identification of chemicals that have the ability to cause skin sensitization and allergic contact dermatitis. The assay now has been evaluated extensively in the context of both national and international inter-laboratory collaborative trials and has been the subject of detailed comparisons with guinea pig test methods and human skin sensitization data. On the basis of these evaluations the LLNA has been endorsed recently by the US Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) as a stand-alone method for skin sensitization testing. The assay offers a number of important benefits compared with conventional guinea pig test methods, among these being provision of an objective and quantitative endpoint. Moreover, the LLNA provides advantages in the context of animal welfare; compared with guinea pig tests, fewer animals are required and these animals are subject to less trauma. It is important now that the validation status of the LLNA is recognized and the method applied widely so that these advantages may be realized. Hazard identification represents only the first step in the risk assessment process. A full toxicological evaluation of skin sensitization activity requires an understanding of relative potency. Guinea pig methods do not lend themselves readily to assessment of potency, and interest recently has focused on the utility of the LLNA for this purpose. Contained within this review article are brief descriptions of the history of the LLNA and the immunobiological basis for the method, together with detailed accounts of the conduct and interpretation of the assay. Procedural modifications to, and alternative endpoints for, the LLNA are considered also. Finally, the current regulatory status of the LLNA is summarized and the application of the method for the purposes of defining relative potency and developing risk assessments is reviewed.