Performance standard-based validation study for local lymph node assay: 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine-flow cytometry method

Assessment of skin sensitization potential of zinc oxide, aluminum oxide, manganese oxide, and copper oxide nanoparticles through the local lymph node assay: 5-bromo-deoxyuridine flow cytometry method

The advent of nanotechnology has significantly spurred the utilization of nanoparticles (NPs) across diverse sectors encompassing industry, agriculture, engineering, cosmetics, and medicine. Metallic oxides including zinc oxide (ZnO), copper oxide (CuO), manganese oxide (Mn2O3), and aluminum oxide (Al2O3), in their NP forms, have become prevalent in cosmetics and various dermal products. Despite the expanding consideration of these compounds for dermal applications, their potential for initiating skin sensitization (SS) has not been comprehensively examined. An in vivo assay, local lymph node assay: 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine-flow cytometry method (LLNA: BrdU-FCM) recognized as an alternative testing method for screening SS potential was used to address these issues. Following the OECD TG 442B guidelines, NPs suspensions smaller than 50 nm size were prepared for ZnO and Al2O3 at concentrations of 10, 25, and 50%, and Mn2O3 and CuO at concentrations of 5, 10, and 25%, and applied to the dorsum of each ear of female BALB/c mice on a daily basis for 3 consecutive days. Regarding the prediction of test substance to skin sensitizer if sensitization index (SI)≥2.7, all 4 NPs were classified as non-sensitizing. The SI values were below 2.06, 1.33, 1.42, and 0.99 for ZnO, Al2O3, Mn2O3, and CuO, respectively, at all test concentrations. Although data presented were negative with respect to adverse SS potential for these 4 NPs, further confirmatory tests addressing other key events associated with SS adverse outcome pathway need to be carried out to arrive at an acceptable conclusion on the skin safety for both cosmetic and dermal applications.

Local lymph node assay: 5-bromo-d-deoxyuridine-ELISA method for comparative study in assessing chemical potencies and skin sensitization in BALB/c and CBA/J strains

Local lymph node assay (LLNA) is a predictive in vivo method to provide estimates of relative potency and to contribute to risk assessment/risk management regarding skin sensitizing potency of chemicals and formulations as a stand-alone alternative test. In addition, LLNA is relatively rapid and cost-effective compared to the Buehler method (Guinea pig test), and confers important animal welfare benefits. CBA/J and BALB/c strains are widely commercially available and have been evaluated by formal LLNA validation studies. However, the LLNA method using BrdU with ELISA, unlike other LLNA methods (OECD TG 429, 442 A, 442B), has not been previously validated. Therefore, in this study a validation method was performed to evaluate if the LLNA:BrdU-ELISA method could also be used to identify sensitizers among chemicals listed in OECD TG 429 using CBA/J and BALB/c strains. Here, we newly found that the LLNA:BrdU-ELISA validation method correctly identified 12 of 13 sensitizers in the BALB/c, 11 of 13 sensitizers in the CBA/J, and 3 of 5 non-sensitizers were identified in the two strains. Collectively, we found that the results of LLNA:BrdU-ELISA method provide a similar level of performance for accuracy and sensitivity in two mouse strains BALB/c and CBA/J.

•

LLNA:BrdU-ELISA validation method correctly identified sensitizers and non-sensitizers in OECD TG 429 in both strains.

•

We newly found that the LLNA:BrdU-ELISA validation method correctly identified sensitizers and non-sensitizers in both BALB/c and CBA/J strains.

Skin Sensitization Evaluation of Carbon-Based Graphene Nanoplatelets

Graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs) are one of the major types of carbon based nanomaterials that have different industrial and biomedical applications. There is a risk of exposure to GNP material in individuals involved in their large-scale production and in individuals who use products containing GNPs. Determining the exact toxicity of GNP nanomaterials is a very important agenda. This research aimed to evaluate the skin sensitization potentials induced by GNPs using two types of alternative to animal testing. We analyzed the physicochemical characteristics of the test material by selecting a graphene nanomaterial with a nano-size on one side. Thereafter, we evaluated the skin sensitization effect using an in vitro and an in vivo alternative test method, respectively. As a result, we found that GNPs do not induce skin sensitization. In addition, it was observed that the administration of GNPs did not induce cytotoxicity and skin toxicity. This is the first report of skin sensitization as a result of GNPs obtained using alternative test methods. These results suggest that GNP materials do not cause skin sensitization, and these assays may be useful in evaluating the skin sensitization of some nanomaterials.

Copper and Cobalt Ions Released from Metal Oxide Nanoparticles Trigger Skin Sensitization

Human skins are exposed to nanomaterials in everyday life from various sources such as nanomaterial-containing cosmetics, air pollutions, and industrial nanomaterials. Nanomaterials comprising metal haptens raises concerns about the skin sensitization to nanomaterials. In this study, we evaluated the skin sensitization of nanomaterials comparing metal haptens in vivo and in vitro. We selected five metal oxide NPs, containing copper oxide, cobalt monoxide, cobalt oxide, nickel oxide, or titanium oxide, and two types of metal chlorides (CoCl₂ and CuCl₂), to compare the skin sensitization abilities between NPs and the constituent metals. The materials were applied to KeratinoSens^TM cells for imitated skin-environment setting, and luciferase induction and cytotoxicity were evaluated at 48 h post-incubation. In addition, the response of metal oxide NPs was confirmed in lymph node of BALB/C mice via an in vivo method. The results showed that CuO and CoO NPs induce a similar pattern of positive luciferase induction and cytotoxicity compared to the respective metal chlorides; Co₃O₄, NiO, and TiO₂ induced no such response. Collectively, the results implied fast-dissolving metal oxide (CuO and CoO) NPs release their metal ion, inducing skin sensitization. However, further investigations are required to elucidate the mechanism underlying NP-induced skin sensitization. Based on ion chelation data, metal ion release was confirmed as the major “factor” for skin sensitization.

Flow cytometric evaluation of the potential of metal oxide nanoparticles for skin sensitization using 5-Bromo-2-deoxyuridine

Although skin sensitization potential of various chemicals has been extensively studied, there are only a few reports on nanoparticles induced skin sensitization. Aiming to fill this lacuna, in this study we evaluated the potential of metal oxide nanoparticles (NPs) to induce skin sensitization with flow cytometry. Seven different metal oxide NPs, including copper oxide, cobalt oxide, nickel oxide, titanium oxide, cerium oxide, iron oxide, and zinc oxide were applied to Balb/c mice. After selecting the proper vehicle, the NPs were applied, and the skin sensitization potential were assessed using 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine with flow cytometry. Physiochemical properties such as hydrodynamic size, polydispersity, and zeta potential were measured for the NPs prior to the tests. All the seven metal oxide NPs studied showed negative responses for skin sensitization potential. These results suggest that the OECD TG 442B using 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine with flow cytometry can be applied to evaluate the potential of NPs for skin sensitization.

Evaluation of the Skin Sensitization Potential of Carbon Nanotubes Using Alternative In Vitro and In Vivo Assays

Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are one of the major types of nanomaterials that have various industrial and biomedical applications. However, there is a risk of accidental exposure to CNTs in individuals involved in their large-scale production and in individuals who use products containing CNTs. This study aimed to evaluate the skin sensitization induced by CNTs using two alternative tests. We selected single-wall carbon nanotubes and multi-walled carbon nanotubes for this study. First, the physiochemical properties of the CNTs were measured, including the morphology, size, and zeta potential, under various conditions. Thereafter, we assessed the sensitization potential of the CNTs using the ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase KeratinoSens™ assay, an in vitro alternative test method. In addition, the CNTs were evaluated for their skin sensitization potential using the LLNA: BrdU-FCM in vivo alternative test method. In this study, we report for the first time the sensitization results of CNTs using the KeratinoSens™ and LLNA: BrdU-FCM test methods in this study. This study found that both CNTs do not induce skin sensitization. These results suggest that the KeratinoSens™ and LLNA: BrdU-FCM assay may be useful as alternative assays for evaluating the potential of some nanomaterials that can induce skin sensitization.

The activity of methacrylate esters in skin sensitisation test methods II. A review of complementary and additional analyses

Allergic contact dermatitis is an important occupational health issue, and there is a need to identify accurately those chemicals that have the potential to induce skin sensitisation. Hazard identification was performed initially using animal (guinea pig and mouse) models. More recently, as a result of the drive towards non-animal methods, alternative in vitro and in silico approaches have been developed. Some of these new in vitro methods have been formally validated and have been assigned OECD Test Guideline status. The performance of some of these recently developed in vitro methods, and of 2 quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR) approaches, with a series of methacrylate esters has been reviewed and reported previously. In this article that first review has been extended further with additional data and complementary analyses. Results obtained using in vitro methods (Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay, DPRA; ARE-Nrf2 luciferase test methods, KeratinoSens and LuSens; Epidermal Sensitisation Assay, EpiSensA; human Cell Line Activation Test, h-CLAT, and the myeloid U937 Skin Sensitisation test, U-SENS), and 2 QSAR approaches (DEREK™-nexus and TIMES-SS), with 11 methacrylate esters and methacrylic acid are reported here, and compared with existing data from the guinea pig maximisation test and the local lymph node assay. With this series of chemicals it was found that some in vitro tests (DPRA and ARE-Nrf2 luciferase) performed well in comparison with animal test results and available human skin sensitisation data. Other in vitro tests (EpiSensA and h-CLAT) proved rather more problematic. Results with DEREK™-nexus and TIMES-SS failed to reflect accurately the skin sensitisation potential of the methacrylate esters. The implications for assessment of skin sensitising activity are discussed.

Evaluation of skin sensitization potential of chemicals by local lymph node assay using 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine with flow cytometry

The local lymph node assay using 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine with flow cytometry (LLNA: BrdU-FCM) is a modified LLNA used to identify skin sensitizers. This assay measures the proliferation of auricular lymph node cells (LNCs) during the induction phase of skin sensitization and the number of BrdU-positive LNCs using flow cytometry. We determined if LLNA: BrdU-FCM can evaluate the skin sensitization potential of 20 substances, including 16 sensitizers and 4 non-sensitizers, that were tested using LLNA: DA and LLNA: BrdU-ELISA but not listed in OECD TG 429. After selecting appropriate vehicles and conducting pre-screen tests in 2 phases, solvents and test concentrations for the main test were determined. In the main study, we measured changes in LN weight, the number of LNCs, and the proportion of BrdU incorporated into LNCs to calculate stimulation indexes (SI). SI was calculated based on the total number of LNCs and BrdU incorporation in LNCs. We found that all substances were correctly classified as sensitizers or non-sensitizers. Overall, we confirmed that the LLNA: BrdU-FCM can evaluate skin sensitization potential of the 20 substances. Additionally, our results of combining 22 reference substances listed in OECD TG 429 and 20 additional substances showed that concordance of LLNA: BrdU-FCM with the LLNA was higher than before.

Regarding the references for reference chemicals of alternative methods

The selection of reference and proficiency chemicals is an important basis for method validation and proficiency evaluations. Reference chemicals are a set of test substances used by a method developer to evaluate the reliability and relevance of a new method, in comparison to reference data (usually to a validated reference method). Proficiency chemicals, as defined in OECD Guidance Document on Good In Vitro Method Practices, are defined post validation as a subset of the reference chemicals or other chemicals with sufficient supporting data that are used by naïve laboratories to demonstrate technical competence with a validated test method. Proficiency chemicals should cover different physical states, several chemical classes within the applicability domain of the method and yield the full range of responses (in the validated reference method and in vivo), they shall be commercially available (at non-prohibitive costs) and have high quality reference data. If reference and subsequent proficiency chemicals are chosen without sufficient evidence for their inclusion, both test method evaluation and demonstration of technical proficiency can be hampered. In this report we present cases in which the selection of reference chemicals led to problems in the reproduction of the reference results and demonstration of technical proficiency: The variability of results was not always taken into account in selection of several reference substances of the LLNA (OECD TG 429). Based on the available reference data one proficiency chemical for the Corrositex skin corrosion test (OECD TG 435) should be replaced. Likewise, the expected in vitro result for one of the proficiency chemicals for the BCOP (OECD TG 437) was difficult to reproduce in several labs. Furthermore, it was not possible to obtain one of the proficiency chemicals for the Steroidogenesis Assay (OECD TG 456) at non-prohibitive costs at a reasonable purity. Based on these, we recommend changes of current proficiency chemicals lists with established OECD Test Guidelines and provide recommendations for developing future sets of reference chemicals.

Comparison of BALB/c and CBA/J mice for the local lymph node assay using bromodeoxyuridine with flow cytometry (LLNA: BrdU-FCM)

The local lymph node assay using 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine (BrdU) with flow cytometry (LLNA: BrdU-FCM) is a modified LLNA that is used to identify skin sensitizers by counting BrdU-incorporated lymph node cells (LNCs) with flow cytometry. Unlike other LLNA methods (OECD TG 429, 442A and 442B) in which the CBA/J mouse strain is used, LLNA: BrdU-FCM was originally designed to be compatible with BALB/c, a mouse strain that is more widely used in many countries. To justify the substitution of CBA/J for BALB/c, the equivalence of the test results between two strains shall be established prior to the official implementation of LLNA: BrdU-FCM. This study aims to compare the test results of LLNA: BrdU-FCM produced in BALB/c mice with those in CBA/J mice for 18 reference substances, including 13 sensitizers and 5 non-sensitizers, listed in OECD Test Guideline 429. Based on the LLNA: BrdU-FCM test procedure, we selected an appropriate solvent and then performed preliminary tests to determine the non-irritating dose ranges for the main study, which revealed the difference in the irritation responses to 8 of the 18 chemicals between the two strains. In the main study, we measured the changes in the number of total LNCs, which indicated differences in the responses to test chemicals between the two strains. However, the stimulation index obtained with the counts of BrdU-incorporated LNCs with 7-AAD using flow cytometry yielded comparable results and 100% concordance between the BALB/c and CBA/J mouse strains was achieved, suggesting that the performance of LLNA: BrdU-FCM using BALB/c mice was equivalent to that with CBA/J mice.