Ethanol and Diethyl Phthalate: Vehicle Effects in the Local Lymph Node Assay

Toxicological investigation of lilial

Lilial (also called lysmeral) is a fragrance ingredient presented in many everyday cosmetics and household products. The concentrations of lilial in the final products is rather low. Its maximum concentration in cosmetics was limited and recently, its use in cosmetics products was prohibited in the EU due to the classification as reproductive toxicant. Additionally, according to the European Chemicals Agency, it was under assessment as one of the potential endocrine disruptors, i.e. a substance that may alter the function of the endocrine system and, as a result, cause health problems. Its ability to act as an androgen receptor agonist and the estrogenic and androgenic activity of its metabolites, to the best of our knowledge, have not yet been tested. The aim of this work was to determine the intestinal absorption, cytotoxicity, nephrotoxicity, mutagenicity, activation of cellular stress-related signal pathways and, most importantly, to test the ability to disrupt the endocrine system of lilial and its Phase I metabolites. This was tested using set of in vitro assays including resazurin assay, the CHO/HPRT mutation assay, γH2AX biomarker-based genotoxicity assay, qPCR and in vitro reporter assays based on luminescence of luciferase for estrogen, androgen, NF-κB and NRF2 signalling pathway. It was determined that neither lilial nor its metabolites have a negative effect on cell viability in the concentration range from 1 nM to 100 µM. Using human cell lines HeLa9903 and MDA-kb2, it was verified that this substance did not have agonistic activity towards estrogen or androgen receptor, respectively. Lilial metabolites, generated by incubation with the rat liver S9 fraction, did not show the ability to bind to estrogen or androgen receptors. Neither lilial nor its metabolites showed a nephrotoxic effect on human renal tubular cells (RPTEC/TERT1 line) and at the same time they were unable to activate the NF-κB and NRF2 signalling pathway at a concentration of 50 µM (HEK 293/pGL4.32 or pGL4.37). Neither lilial nor its metabolites showed mutagenic activity in the HPRT gene mutation test in CHO-K1 cells, nor were they able to cause double-strand breaks in DNA (γH2AX biomarker) in CHO-K1 and HeLa cells. In our study, no negative effects of lilial or its in vitro metabolites were observed up to 100 µM using different in vitro tests.

Estimating uncertainty in LLNA EC3 data and its impact on regulatory classifications

The murine Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) is a test that produces numerical results (EC3 values) quantifying the sensitization potency of chemicals. These results are broadly used in toxicology and serve as a basis for various classifications, which determine subsequent regulatory decisions. The continuing interest in LLNA data and the diminished likelihood of new experimental EC3 data being generated sparked this investigation of uncertainty. Instead of using the Gaussian distribution as a default choice for assessing variability in a data set, two strictly positive distributions were proposed and their performance over the available experimental EC3 values was tested. In the application stage, how the uncertainty in EC3 values affects the possible classifications was analyzed, and the percentage of the chemicals receiving ambiguous classification was determined. It was shown that this percentage is high, which increases the risk of improper classification. Two approaches were suggested in regulatory practice to address the uncertainty in the EC3 data: the approaches based on "grey zones" and the classification distribution. If a chemical cannot be classified unambiguously, the latter appears to be an acceptable means to assess the level of sensitization potency of chemicals and helps provide better regulatory decisions.

Evaluation of pollutants in perfumes, colognes and health effects on the consumer: a systematic review

Cosmetic products, especially perfumes and colognes, are widely used in various communities. However, the use of these products can have side effects on consumers. This article aims to review the relevant literature published up to August 2020 to determine whether perfumes and colognes can affect people's health. Relevant articles were identified through electronic search. A total of 562 articles were selected and finally 37 related articles were included in the study after the screening process. The results of this systematic study showed that phthalates, aldehydes, parabens and aluminum-based salts are the most important contaminants in aromatic products that cause side effects such as allergies, breast cancer, reproductive disorders, especially in males, skin allergies, nervous system damage and migraine headaches for consumers. The incidence of complications in people using these products depends on parameters such as age, gender, race, amount of substance consumed, duration of use and economic status, and regarding the relationship between diseases such as cancer, respiratory disorders and endocrine with common contaminants in aromatic products, incidence of these diseases is probable in consumers which require further research to prove.

Updating exposure assessment for skin sensitization quantitative risk assessment for fragrance materials

In 2008, a proposal for assessing the risk of induction of skin sensitization to fragrance materials Quantitative Risk Assessment 1 (QRA1) was published. This was implemented for setting maximum limits for fragrance materials in consumer products. However, there was no formal validation or empirical verification after implementation. Additionally, concerns remained that QRA1 did not incorporate aggregate exposure from multiple product use and included assumptions, e.g. safety assessment factors (SAFs), that had not been critically reviewed. Accordingly, a review was undertaken, including detailed re-evaluation of each SAF together with development of an approach for estimating aggregate exposure of the skin to a potential fragrance allergen. This revision of QRA1, termed QRA2, provides an improved method for establishing safe levels for sensitizing fragrance materials in multiple products to limit the risk of induction of contact allergy. The use of alternative non-animal methods is not within the scope of this paper. Ultimately, only longitudinal clinical studies can verify the utility of QRA2 as a tool for the prevention of contact allergy to fragrance materials.

Screening of phthalate esters in 47 branded perfumes

In the last few years, the use of phthalates in perfumes has gained attention because these chemicals are sometimes added intentionally as a solvent and a fixative. Five phthalate esters, dimethyl phthalate (DMP), diethyl phthalate (DEP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP), benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP), and diethyl hexyl phthalate (DEHP), were measured in 47 branded perfumes using headspace solid phase microextraction (SPME) followed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). The results revealed considerable amounts of phthalate in all 47 brands with detection frequencies > limit of quantitation in the following order: DEP (47/47) > DMP (47/47) > BBP (47/47) > DEHP (46/47) > DBP (23/45). Of the 47 brands, 68.1, 72.3, 85.1, 36.2, and 6.7 % had DEP, DMP, BBP, DEHP, and DBP levels, respectively, above their reported threshold limits. Of these phthalates, DEP was found to have the highest mean value (1621.625 ppm) and a maximum of 23,649.247 ppm. The use of DEP in the perfume industry is not restricted because it does not pose any known health risks for humans. DMP had the second highest level detected in the perfumes, with a mean value of 30.202 ppm and a maximum of 405.235 ppm. Although DMP may have some uses in cosmetics, it is not as commonly used as DEP, and again, there are no restrictions on its use. The levels of BBP were also high, with a mean value of 8.446 ppm and a maximum of 186.770 ppm. Although the EU banned the use of BBP in cosmetics, 27 of the tested perfumes had BBP levels above the threshold limit of 0.1 ppm. The mean value of DEHP found in this study was 5.962 ppm, and a maximum was 147.536 ppm. In spite of its prohibition by the EU, 7/28 perfumes manufactured in European countries had DEHP levels above the threshold limit of 1 ppm. The DBP levels were generally low, with a mean value of 0.0305 ppm and a maximum value of 0.594 ppm. The EU banned the use of DBP in cosmetics; however, we found three brands that were above the threshold limit of 0.1 ppm, and all were manufactured in European countries. The results of this study are alarming and definitely need to be brought to the attention of the public and health regulators. Although some phthalate compounds are still used in cosmetics, many scientists and environmental activists have argued that phthalates are endocrine-disrupting chemicals that have not been yet proven to be safe for any use, including cosmetics. Phthalates may also have different degrees of estrogenic modes of action. Furthermore, we should not dismiss the widespread use of phthalates in everyday products and exposure to these chemicals from sources such as food, medications, and other personal care products.

Potency values from the local lymph node assay: application to classification, labelling and risk assessment

Hundreds of chemicals are contact allergens but there remains a need to identify and characterise accurately skin sensitising hazards. The purpose of this review was fourfold. First, when using the local lymph node assay (LLNA), consider whether an exposure concentration (EC3 value) lower than 100% can be defined and used as a threshold criterion for classification and labelling. Second, is there any reason to revise the recommendation of a previous ECETOC Task Force regarding specific EC3 values used for sub-categorisation of substances based upon potency? Third, what recommendations can be made regarding classification and labelling of preparations under GHS? Finally, consider how to integrate LLNA data into risk assessment and provide a rationale for using concentration responses and corresponding no-effect concentrations. Although skin sensitising chemicals having high EC3 values may represent only relatively low risks to humans, it is not possible currently to define an EC3 value below 100% that would serve as an appropriate threshold for classification and labelling. The conclusion drawn from reviewing the use of distinct categories for characterising contact allergens was that the most appropriate, science-based classification of contact allergens according to potency is one in which four sub-categories are identified: 'extreme', 'strong', 'moderate' and 'weak'. Since draining lymph node cell proliferation is related causally and quantitatively to potency, LLNA EC3 values are recommended for determination of a no expected sensitisation induction level that represents the first step in quantitative risk assessment.

Dose-Response Relationships and Threshold Levels in Skin and Respiratory Allergy

A literature study was performed to evaluate dose-response relationships and no-effect levels for sensitization and elicitation in skin- and respiratory allergy. With respect to the skin, dose-response relationships and no-effect levels were found for both intradermal and topical induction, as well as for intradermal and topical elicitation of allergenic responses in epidemiological, clinical, and animal studies. Skin damage or irritation may result in a significant reduction of the no-effect level for a specific compound. With respect to the respiratory tract, dose-response relationships and no-effect levels for induction were found in several human as well as animal studies. Although dose-response relationships for elicitation were found in some epidemiological studies, concentration-response relationships were present only in a limited number of animal studies. Reported results suggest that especially relatively high peak concentrations can induce sensitization, and that prevention of such concentrations will prevent workers from developing respiratory allergy. Moreover, induction of skin sensitization may result in subsequent heightened respiratory responsiveness following inhalation exposure. The threshold concentration for the elicitation of allergic airway reactions in sensitized subjects is generally lower than the threshold to induce sensitization. Therefore, it is important to consider the low threshold levels for elicitation for recommendation of health-based occupational exposure limits, and to avoid high peak concentrations. Notwithstanding the observation of dose-response relationships and no-effect levels, due to a number of uncertainties, no definite conclusions can be drawn about absolute threshold values for allergens with respect to sensitization of and elicitation reactions in the skin and respiratory tract. Most predictive tests are generally meant to detect the potential of a chemical to induce skin and/or respiratory allergy at relatively high doses. Consequently, these tests do not provide information of dose-response relationships at lower doses such as found in, for example, occupational situations. In addition, the observed dose-response relationships and threshold values have been obtained by a wide variety of test methods using different techniques, such as intradermal exposure versus topical or inhalation exposure at the workplace, or using different endpoints, which all appear important for the outcome of the test. Therefore, especially with regard to respiratory allergy, standardized and validated dose-response test methods are urgently required in order to be able to recommend safe exposure levels for allergens at the workplace.

The impact of vehicle on the relative potency of skin-sensitizing chemicals in the local lymph node assay

The identification and characterization of chemicals that possess skin-sensitizing potential are typically performed using predictive tests. However, human exposure to skin-sensitizing chemicals often occurs via a matrix (vehicle) that differs from that used in these tests. It is thus important to account for the potential impact of vehicle differences when undertaking quantitative risk assessment for skin sensitization. This is achieved through the application of a specific sensitization assessment factor (SAF), scaled between 1 and 10, when identifying an acceptable exposure level. The objective of the analysis described herein is to determine the impact of vehicle differences on local lymph node assay (LLNA) EC3 values (concentrations of test chemical required to provoke a 3-fold increase in lymph node cell proliferation). Initially, the inherent variability of the LLNA was investigated by examining the reproducibility of EC3 values for 14 chemicals that have been tested more than once in the same vehicle (4:1 acetone:olive oil, AOO). This analysis reveals that the variability in EC3 value for these chemicals following multiple assessments is <5-fold. Next, data from the literature and previously unpublished studies were compiled for 18 chemicals that had been assessed in the LLNA using at least 2 of 15 different vehicles. These data demonstrate that often the variability in EC3 values observed for a given chemical in different vehicles is no greater than the 5-fold inherent variability observed when assessing a chemical in the same vehicle on multiple occasions. However, there are examples where EC3 values for a chemical differ by a factor of more than 10 between different vehicles. These observations were often associated with an apparent underestimation of potency (higher EC3 values) with predominantly aqueous vehicles or propylene glycol. These data underscore the need to consider vehicle effects in the context of skin-sensitization risk assessments.

The effects of vehicles on the human dermal irritation potentials of allyl esters

Allyl esters, frequently used in the fragrance industry, often contain a certain percentage of free allyl alcohol. Allyl alcohol is known to have a potential for delayed skin irritation. Also present in the finished product are different solvent systems, or vehicles, which are used to deliver the fragrances based upon their intended application. This study was conducted to determine whether different vehicles affect the skin irritation potential of five different allyl esters. The allyl esters tested were allyl amyl glycolate, allyl caproate, allyl (cyclohexyloxy)acetate, allyl cyclohexylpropionate, and allyl phenoxyacetate in the vehicles diethyl phthalate, 3:1 diethyl phthalate:ethanol, and 1:3 diethyl phthalate:ethanol at concentrations of 0.1%, 0.5%, 1.0%, and 2.0% (w/w). A modified cumulative irritation test was conducted in 129 human subjects. Test materials (0.3 ml) were applied under occlusion to skin sites on the back for 1 day (24 h) using Hill Top chambers. Irritation was assessed at 1, 2, 4, and 5 days following application of test materials. Cumulative irritation scores varied considerably among test materials. There were no delayed irritation observations. The highest irritation scores were observed at the 2.0% concentration for all test materials. The irritation scores for allyl amyl glycolate, allyl (cyclohexyloxy)acetate, and allyl phenoxyacetate were highest in 1:3 diethyl phthalate:ethanol, thus the resulting calculated no-observed-effect levels, 0.12%, 0.03%, and 0%, respectively, were much lower for this vehicle compared to the diethyl phthalate vehicle, 0.33%, 0.26%, 0.25%, respectively. These data showed a trend for lower concentration thresholds to induce irritation when higher levels of ethanol were used in the vehicle.

Investigation of the dermal sensitization potential of various essential oils in the local lymph node assay

Essential oils are commonly used fragrance ingredients. The oils themselves are complex mixtures, which may contain naturally occurring contact sensitizers. The local lymph node assay was used to evaluate the dermal sensitization potential of basil, citronella, clove leaf, geranium, litsea cubeba, lemongrass, and palmarosa oils. Three of the major components--citral, eugenol, and geraniol--were included to investigate any difference in sensitization potential arising from their exposure in a mixture. Each fragrance material was tested at five concentration ranging from 2.5% to 50% w/v in 1:3 ethanol:diethyl phthalate. The stimulation index (SI) values were calculated for each dose level, an SI > or = 3 was considered a positive response. The estimated concentration (EC3) required to elicit a positive was calculated and taken as a measure of relative potency. The EC3 values and potency classification for basil, clove leaf, litsea cubeba, lemongrass and palmarosa oils were calculated to be <2.5% (> or = moderate), 7.1% (weak), 8.4% (weak), 6.5% (weak) and 9.6% (weak), respectively. Citronella and geranium oils were negative. The individual components citral, eugenol and geraniol resulted in EC3 values of 6.3%, 5.4% and 11.4%, respectively. In general, the potency of each essential oil did not differ significantly from that observed for its main individual component.