Eliminating the contribution of lipopolysaccharide to protein allergenicity in the human cell-line activation test (h-CLAT)

Co-Culture of THP-1 Cells and Normal Human Epidermal Keratinocytes (NHEK) for Modified Human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT)

To improve the accuracy of skin sensitization prediction of chemicals by conventional alternative methods using cells, it is important to reproduce the environment of skin in vitro, such as the crosstalk between keratinocytes and dendritic cells (DCs). We developed a skin sensitization test system based on the markers and criteria of the human cell line activation test (h-CLAT), which combines THP-1 cells as a surrogate for DCs and keratinized normal human epidermal keratinocytes (NHEK). After exposure to chemicals via keratinized NHEK, the cell surface expression of CD54 and CD86 on THP-1 was measured by flow cytometry. This co-culture system evaluated 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB), a typical sensitizer, as positive, lactic acid (LA), a non-sensitizer, as negative, and isoeugenol (IE), a prohapten that requires biological activation to acquire skin sensitization, as positive. However, the expression levels of CD54 and CD86 in DNCB-treated THP-1 were lower than those in normal h-CLAT. Therefore, we investigated the effects of the medium and secretion by NHEK cells on THP-1 cells. CD54 and CD86 expression was enhanced in monocultured THP-1 in the medium for keratinized NHEK and in the conditioned medium of keratinized NHEK. The increase in CD54 and CD86 by changes in the medium type was higher than that by the NHEK secretion; therefore, it was found that the medium composition has a large effect on the evaluation index among the experimental parameters in the co-culture system. It is necessary to find the optimal medium for immunotoxicity assessment in the co-culture system.

Application of Defined Approaches for Skin Sensitization to Agrochemical Products

Skin sensitization testing is a regulatory requirement for safety evaluations of pesticides in multiple countries. Globally harmonized test guidelines that include in chemico and in vitro methods reduce animal use, but no single assay is recommended as a complete replacement for animal tests. Defined approaches (DAs) that integrate data from multiple non-animal methods are accepted; however, the methods that comprise them have been evaluated using monoconstituent substances rather than mixtures or formulations. To address this data gap, we tested 27 agrochemical formulations in the direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA), the KeratinoSens™ assay, and the human cell line activation test (h-CLAT). These data were used as inputs to evaluate three DAs for hazard classification of skin sensitization potential and two DAs for potency categorization. When compared to historical animal results, balanced accuracy for the DAs for predicting in vivo skin sensitization hazard (i.e., sensitizer vs. nonsensitizer) ranged from 56 to 78%. The best performing DA was the “2 out of 3 (2o3)” DA, in which the hazard classification was based on two concordant results from the DPRA, KeratinoSens, or h-CLAT. The KE 3/1 sequential testing strategy (STS), which uses h-CLAT and DPRA results, and the integrated testing strategy (ITSv2), which uses h-CLAT, DPRA, and an in silico hazard prediction from OECD QSAR Toolbox, had balanced accuracies of 56–57% for hazard classification. Of the individual test methods, KeratinoSens had the best performance for predicting in vivo hazard outcomes. Its balanced accuracy of 81% was similar to that of the 2o3 DA (78%). For predicting potency categories defined by the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS), the correct classification rate of the STS was 52% and that of the ITSv2 was 43%. These results demonstrate that non-animal test methods have utility for evaluating the skin sensitization potential of agrochemical formulations as compared to animal reference data. While additional data generation is needed, testing strategies such as DAs anchored to human biology and mechanistic information provide a promising approach for agrochemical formulation testing.