Comparative evaluation of five in vitro tests for assessing the eye irritation potential of hair-care products.

This study compared five methods, the isolated rabbit eye (IRE), bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP), EpiOcular, fluorescein leakage (FL) and neutral red release (NRR) assays, for predicting the eye irritation potential of hair-care formulations. Ten shampoo and seven conditioner formulations of known ocular irritation potential were tested. Each group included a market-acceptable formulation as a comparative benchmark. Predictions of ocular irritation were made by using classification models (IRE, BCOP and EpiOcular assays) or by direct comparison with benchmarks (IRE, EpiOcular, FL and NRR assays). The BCOP assay was less sensitive than the IRE test in discriminating between formulations of different irritation potentials, and did not perform as well as the other assays in identifying mild formulations. All of the assays appeared to be better at discriminating correctly between the shampoos than between the conditioners. The EpiOcular assay showed the closest concordance between the in vivo results and the in vitro data from cell-based assays (particularly for shampoos). The FL assay also showed a high concordance (particularly for conditioners). There was a tendency for these in vitro assays to over-predict eye irritation potential, but there was no under-prediction and they were particularly successful at identifying mild formulations. The NRR assay was less predictive with both shampoos and conditioners. The results from this comparative evaluation fully support the continued use of the IRE test as a suitable alternative to in vivo eye irritation testing in rabbits, although it also over-predicted the irritancies of several of the formulations. The value of using concurrent benchmarks (reference standards), appropriate to the materials being tested, in interpreting the data obtained from in vitro tests, was also demonstrated. Overall, the results indicate that further comparisons of the IRE, EpiOcular and FL assays are warranted using much larger numbers of test materials.

The classification of skin irritants by human patch test.

The human 4 hour patch test provides an opportunity to identify substances with significant skin irritation potential without recourse to the use of animals. The protocol is designed to avoid the production of more than mild irritant reactions and meets the highest ethical standards. This paper provides the background to the development of the method and comments on its performance in the light of recent intra- and inter-laboratory investigations. In particular, the value of the method in providing 'gold standard' data for the identification of those substances (or preparations) which should, or should not, be classified as irritant to skin in European legislation is discussed. On the basis of the published data and supplementary investigations, recommendations are made on both the conduct and interpretation of the human 4 hour patch test. Finally, the lack of any necessity for formal validation of this assay is addressed.

Interlaboratory evaluation of a human patch test for the identification of skin irritation potential/hazard.

The human 4 hr patch test provides an opportunity to identify substances with significant skin irritation potential without recourse to the use of animals. To demonstrate the validity of the method it must be relevant and reliable. It is self-evident that the method is relevant to the identification of skin irritation hazards to humans. However, it is essential that the results be reproducible. This paper presents data on a number of substances tested by different laboratories. Eight substances were tested by two or more laboratories and the data compared with a standard positive control, 20% sodium dodecyl sulfate. In almost all cases, the outcome of this comparison was identical. Thus, despite the fact that there is known variability among human subjects in terms of skin reactivity to irritants, this simple method showed good reproducibility for the classification of acute skin irritation potential. Therefore, it is argued that this human 4-hr patch test is a valid alternative to the equivalent rabbit test for the assessment of skin irritation hazard to humans.

Individual, ethnic and seasonal variability in irritant susceptibility of skin: the implications for a predictive human patch test.

Since irritants are the major cause of contact dermatitis, it is important to identify those chemicals that possess significant ability to cause skin irritation. This process must then be followed by risk assessment and risk management. Historically, animal tests have played a major rôle in this process, but human volunteer studies are of increasing importance in this field. Where the appropriate safety and ethical controls are in place, human testing can give data that identifies skin irritation hazard. To be of widest value, these human studies must not be flawed due to inter-individual, inter-ethnic or seasonal variation. We conducted a large dose-response study and studied the impact of summer and winter weather on a predictive human assay. Sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS) was tested at 0.1%-20% in 3 national groups of approximately 100 volunteers, using 25 mm Hill Top chambers loaded with 0.2 ml, solution and applied to the upper outer arm for 4 h. Reactions were scored at 24, 48 and/or 72 h after patch application. The German and Chinese studies were completed in a few weeks under similar winter conditions, whereas the UK work was spread fairly evenly over about a 15-month period. Some relatively minor differences were observed in the dose-response curves obtained, probably due to weather conditions. The effect of the weather on the intensity, but not the pattern, of irritant reactivity was also evident in the smaller specific study that assessed reactions to SDS in summer and in winter. Whereas 45% of the panel reacted to 20% SDS in summer, 91% reacted in the winter. However, in both studies, substantial inter-individual variations in response to SDS dominated the pattern of response. When designing a human patch test to discriminate skin irritant substances from those that are of minimal effect, it is this inter-individual variability, rather than any small inter-ethnic or seasonal variation, which must be taken into account. This can be achieved by the routine inclusion of a suitable positive irritant control, which then calibrates each human volunteer panel.

Evaluation of a human patch test for the identification and classification of skin irritation potential.

Current regulations require that the skin irritation/corrosion potential of new chemicals is assessed in the rabbit Draize test, although there are opportunities to use alternative methods to identify the most aggressive materials. Previously, we have proposed that it is possible to employ a strategy that avoids the use of animals and at the same time delivers a more relevant assessment of skin irritation/corrosion potential. The approach is to identify corrosive materials in vitro and then proceed to human volunteer testing for skin irritation. In this study, the human 4-h patch test, its interpretation, and results with 29 test materials are presented. Using 14 materials not classified as "Irritating to skin" by EU criteria, 13 classified as "Irritating to skin" by suppliers, and 2 as "Corrosive - causes burns", it is demonstrated that, by evaluating these on human skin in vitro and in vivo, a significant proportion are either over-classified or under-classified. In conclusion, we are convinced that by application of the approach described in detail here, it is possible to avoid the use of animals, whilst at the same time obtaining an assessment of skin irritation/corrosion potential that is more relevant to man, and which, if required, may be used directly for classification and labelling of substances and preparations within the European Union.

Variation in response of human skin to irritant challenge.

A major obstacle to the establishment of a protocol for in vivo irritant skin testing in humans is the apparent variability of responses between individuals. This study of the threshold response of normal human skin to a standard irritant (sodium lauryl sulfate 0.3-10%), in a group of 22 subjects, revealed a marked interindividual variation in their threshold reaction. The results demonstrate that this phenomenon does exist and that it will have to be allowed for in future human irritant test systems or assays.

The identification and classification of skin irritation hazard by a human patch test.

There exist various regulatory instruments the purpose of which is to ensure that the intrinsic toxic hazards associated with substances and preparations are identified. In the context of identification of skin irritation potential, the method is normally the Draize test. Guidance notes provided by the OECD and the EEC expect that corrosive substances will have been screened out by a variety of methods. Substances or preparations which cause a sufficient degree of skin irritation will be classified as skin irritants. The primary motivation behind the present work was to introduce the concept that it is possible to assess the hazard potential of a substance or preparation to produce skin irritation in a human study. In the example presented here, 20% sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) has been chosen as the positive control. With the protocol currently devised, occluded patch treatment with 20% SLS for up to 4 hr produces an irritant response in just over half of the panel. An irritant response is taken as a clinically evident and significant increase in erythema, oedema or dryness--a minimum of a+ reaction on the ICDRG scale. At such a level of response with the positive control (both in terms of intensity and in proportion of the panel), it is then possible to judge and/or to determine statistically, whether the test material has produced a level of skin irritation which is similar to, greater, or lower than the positive control. In this way a human patch test protocol can form a fundamental component of a strategy for the replacement of animals in determination of skin irritation and corrosion potential. By use of a careful and progressive protocol and by comparison of test data against a positive control it is both possible and practical to classify substances and preparations in terms of their skin irritation potential using that endpoint in the species of concern, man.

A study of the relationship between susceptibility to skin stinging and skin irritation.

In an evaluation of the safety of new chemicals, of products containing them, or of novel formulations of existing chemicals which may come into contact with the skin, it is important to incorporate an assessment of specially susceptible sub-populations. Such a group is represented by those who are more likely to experience sensory effects such as stinging. Since these individuals are easily and rapidly identifiable, we investigated whether they represented a group who were also more susceptible to the effects of an irritant. The primary purpose was to discover whether 'stingers' might represent an easily and rapidly identifiable sub-population with a more generally increased tendency to give skin responses. The response to a 0.3% sodium dodecyl sulphate patch test was assessed in a group of 25 'stingers' and compared to the response in 25 'non-stingers'. There was no difference in either the pattern or strength of the irritant response assessed by subjective erythema and dryness scores. Thus the data suggest that there is no correlation between the susceptibility of an individual to a skin stinging response and an irritation reaction.