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.

Dendritic cells from control but not atopic donors respond to contact and respiratory sensitizer treatment in vitro with differential cytokine production and altered stimulatory capacity.

BACKGROUND: Chemical haptens induce both contact and allergic respiratory disease with dendritic cells (DCs) controlling and directing immune responses in vivo. Contact and respiratory haptens may promote differential cytokine production yet distinguishing these effects in vitro remains difficult due to human donor variability. Objective We sought to determine the effect of atopic status on the ability of DC to respond to contact and respiratory sensitizer treatment in vitro as DC from atopic donors are believed to promote Th2-type responses. METHODS: Enriched DC from control or atopic donors were treated for 4 h with levels of the contact sensitizer 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB) or the respiratory sensitizer trimellitic anhydride (TMA) that did not reduce cell viability. A sensitive intracellular detection technique was used to measure cytokine production, while T cell responses were assessed in a mixed leucocyte reaction. RESULTS: DC from control, non-atopic, donors produced cytokines differentially in response to sensitizer treatment; DNCB treatment significantly increased the production of Th1 cytokines IL-12 and IFN-gamma while TMA induced the production of IL-13. Control donor DC treated with TMA stimulated less in a mixed leucocyte reaction than untreated cells with any response reduced further by blocking IL-13 in culture. However, DC from atopic donors showed no significant alteration in either cytokine production or T cell stimulatory capacity after sensitizer treatment. CONCLUSION: Haptens modulate DC by changing the production of cytokines that may play a role in T cell stimulation and subsequent polarization of the immune response. DC from atopic donors were unresponsive to chemical sensitizer treatment, and may be deficient in inducing divergent T cell responses.

Does irritation potency contribute to the skin sensitization potency of contact allergens?

Chemicals that possess the capacity to cause skin sensitization have long been recognized to be reactive (electrophilic) or at least the precursor of an electrophile. The chemical species (hapten) covalently bound to skin protein then forms the antigen to which the immune system responds, with sufficient exposure ultimately leading to skin sensitization. However, for this process to occur, many have also considered that in addition to haptenation of skin protein, secondary stimuli (danger signals) are also necessary. Such signals might reasonably be expected to derive from keratinocytes and/or Langerhans cells perturbed by the chemical sensitizer. Whether this disturbance comes from the haptenation process itself or from other properties of the chemical is unknown. We hypothesized that chemicals that were stronger sensitizers might appear so, in part, as a consequence not only of greater (pro)electrophilic reactivity, but also if they were more able to produce inflammatory (danger) signals. To assess this, the sensitizing potency of 55 chemicals in the local lymph node assay was compared with their ability to produce pro-inflammatory signal release, measured as a function of their relative skin irritancy in guinea pigs. A limited trend was demonstrated, consistent with the hypothesis, but indicating that either skin irritation is a poor measure of danger signals, or that such signals are perhaps no more than a necessary requirement for the acquisition of skin sensitization rather than a key determinant of the relative potency of a skin sensitizing chemical. In addition, it is possible that irritancy alone does not represent a complete surrogate marker for the ability of a chemical to produce danger signals relevant to the induction of skin sensitization.

Mammalian class Sigma glutathione S-transferases: catalytic properties and tissue-specific expression of human and rat GSH-dependent prostaglandin D2 synthases.

GSH-dependent prostaglandin D(2) synthase (PGDS) enzymes represent the only vertebrate members of class Sigma glutathione S-transferases (GSTs) identified to date. Complementary DNA clones encoding the orthologous human and rat GSH-dependent PGDS (hPGDS and rPGDS, respectively) have been expressed in Escherichia coli, and the recombinant proteins isolated by affinity chromatography. The purified enzymes were both shown to catalyse specifically the isomerization of prostaglandin (PG) H(2) to PGD(2). Each transferase also exhibited GSH-conjugating and GSH-peroxidase activities. The ability of hPGDS to catalyse the conjugation of aryl halides and isothiocyanates with GSH was found to be less than that of the rat enzyme. Whilst there is no difference between the enzymes with respect to their K(m) values for 1-chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene, marked differences were found to exist with respect to their K(m) for GSH (8 mM versus 0.3 mM for hPGDS and rPGDS, respectively). Using molecular modelling techniques, amino acid substitutions have been identified in the N-terminal domain of these enzymes that lie outside the proposed GSH-binding site, which may explain these catalytic differences. The tissue-specific expression of PGDS also varies significantly between human and rat; amongst the tissues examined, variation in expression between the two species was most apparent in spleen and bone marrow. Differences in catalytic properties and tissue-specific expression of hPGDS and rPGDS appears to reflect distinct physiological roles for class Sigma GST between species. The evolution of divergent functions for the hPGDS and rPGDS is discussed in the context of the orthologous enzyme from chicken.