ScienceDirect® Home Skip Main Navigation Links
You have guest access to ScienceDirect. Find out more.
 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
 Quick Search
 Search tips (Opens new window)
    Clear all fields    
 
Font Size: Decrease Font Size  Increase Font Size
 Abstract - selected
Article
Purchase PDF (160 K)

Article Toolbox
 
 
 
Related Articles in ScienceDirect
View More Related Articles
 
View Record in Scopus
 
doi:10.1016/j.fct.2008.01.019    
How to Cite or Link Using DOI (Opens New Window)

Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved.

Comparison of the skin sensitizing potential of unsaturated compounds as assessed by the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) and the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT)

Purchase the full-text article



References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

R. Kreilinga, H.M. Hollnagelb, 1, L. Harengb, D. Eiglerc, M.S. Leea, P. Griema, B. Dreeßend, M. Klebere, A. Albrechtf, C. Garciag and A. Wendelh, Corresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author

aClariant Produkte (Deutschland) GmbH, D-65840 Sulzbach, Germany

bBASF AG, D-67056 Ludwigshafen, Germany

cGoldschmidt GmbH, Goldschmidtstraße 100, D-45127 Essen, Germany

dSasol Germany GmbH, Paul-Baumann-Straße 1, D-45764 Marl, Germany

eCognis Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Rheinpromenade 1, D-40789 Monheim, Germany

fBSL Bioservice Scientific Laboratories GmbH, Behringstraße 6, D-82152 Planegg, Germany

gSEPPIC, 127 chemin de la Poudrerie, F-81100 Castres, France

hUniversity of Konstanz, Biochemical Pharmacology, P.O. Box M447, D-78457 Konstanz, Germany


Received 26 September 2007; 
accepted 12 January 2008. 
Available online 20 January 2008.

Abstract

The skin sensitization potential of eight unsaturated and one saturated lipid (bio)chemicals was tested in both the LLNA and the GPMT to address the hypothesis that chemicals with unsaturated carbon–carbon double bonds may result in a higher number of unspecific (false positive) results in the LLNA compared to the GPMT. Seven substances (oleic acid, linoleic acid, linolenic acid, undecylenic acid, maleic acid, squalene and octinol) gave clear positive results in the LLNA (stimulation index (SI) greater-or-equal, slanted 3) and thus would require labelling as skin sensitizer. Fumaric acid and succinic acid gave clearly negative results. In the GPMT, besides some sporadic skin reactions, reproducible skin reactions indicating an allergic response were found in a few animals for four test substances. Based on the GPMT results, only undecylenic acid would have to be classified and labelled as a skin sensitizer according to the European Dangerous Substance Directive (67/548/EEC) (results for linoleic acid were inconclusive), while the other seven test substances would not require labelling. Possible mechanisms for unspecific skin cell stimulation and lymph node responses are discussed. In conclusion, the suitability of the LLNA for unsaturated compounds bearing structural similarity to the tested substances should be carefully considered and the GPMT should remain available as an accepted test method for skin sensitization hazard identification.

Keywords: Skin sensitization; False positives; OECD guidelines

Abbreviations: GPMT, guinea pig maximization test; LLNA, local lymph node assay; SI, stimulation index; LNWI, lymph node weight index

Article Outline

1. Introduction
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Chemicals
2.2. Animals
2.3. Skin sensitization tests
2.3.1. Local lymph node assay (LLNA)
2.3.2. Guinea pig maximization test (GPMT)
3. Results
3.1. Local lymph node assay
3.2. Guinea pig maximization test
3.3. Consequences for classification and labelling
4. Discussion
Conflict of interest statement
Acknowledgements
References

Corresponding Author Contact InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +49 7531882229; fax: +49 7531883099.
1 Present address: Dow Europe GmbH, CH-8810 Horgen, Switzerland.

 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
Elsevier.com (Opens new window)
About ScienceDirect  |  Contact Us  |  Information for Advertisers  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. ScienceDirect® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V.