Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Contact Dermatitis pp 179–187Cite as

Predictive Tests for Irritants and Allergens and Their Use in Quantitative Risk Assessment

  • Chapter

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersen KE, Maibach HI (1985) Contact allergy predictive tests in guinea pigs. Karger, Basel (Current problems in dermatology, vol 14)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Andersen KE, Volund A, Frankild S (1995) The guinea pig maximization test with a multiple dose design. Acta Derm Venereol 75:463–469

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Basketter DA, Cadby P (2004) Reproducible prediction of contact allergenic potency using the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 50:15–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Basketter DA, Gerberick GF, Kimber I, Loveless SE (1996) The local lymph node assay: a viable alternative to currently accepted skin sensitisation tests. Food Chem Toxicol 34:985–997

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Basketter DA, Chamberlain M, Griffiths HA, York M (1997a) The classification of skin irritants by human patch test. Food Chemical Toxicol 35:845–852

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Basketter DA, Reynolds FS, York M (1997b) Predictive testing in contact dermatitis — irritant dermatitis. In: Goh CL, Koh D (eds) Clinics in dermatology — contact dermatitis, vol 15. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 637–644

    Google Scholar 

  7. Basketter DA, Gilpin GR, Kuhn M, Lawrence RS, Reynolds FS, Whittle E (1998) Patch tests versus use tests in skin irritation risk assessment. Contact Dermatitis 39:252–256

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Basketter DA, Gerberick GF, Kimber I, Willis C (1999a) The toxicology of contact dermatitis, chap 3. Wiley, Chichester, pp 39–56

    Google Scholar 

  9. Basketter DA, Gerberick GF, Kimber I, Willis C (1999b) The toxicology of contact dermatitis, chap 4. Wiley, Chichester, pp 57–72

    Google Scholar 

  10. Basketter DA, Gerberick GF, Kimber I, Willis CM (1999c) Toxicology of contact dermatitis. Allergy, irritancy and urticaria. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  11. Basketter DA, Lea LJ, Dickens A, Briggs D, Pate I, Dearman RJ, Kimber I (1999d) A comparison of statistical approaches to derivation of EC3 values from local lymph node assay dose responses. J Appl Toxicol 19:261–266

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Basketter DA, Blaikie L, Dearman RJ, Kimber I, Ryan CA, Gerberick GF, Harvey P, Evans P, White IR, Rycroft RJG (2000) Use of the local lymph node assay for the estimation of relative contact allergenic potency. Contact Dermatitis 42:344–348

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Basketter DA, Pease Smith CK, Patlewicz GY (2003) Contact allergy: the local lymph node assay for the prediction of hazard and risk. Clin Exp Dermatol 28:218–221

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Buehler EV (1965) Delayed contact hypersensitivity in the guinea pig. Arch Dermatol 91:171–177

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Chan PD, Baldwin RC, Parson RD, Moss JN, Sterotelli R, Smith JM, Hayes AW (1983) Kathon biocide: manifestation of delayed contact dermatitis in guinea pigs is dependent on the concentration for induction and challenge. J Invest Dermatol 81:409–411

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. De Groot AC (1990) Methylisothiazolinone/methylchloroisothiazolinone (Kathon CG) allergy: an updated review. Am J Contact Dermatitis 1:151–156

    Google Scholar 

  17. Draize JH, Woodard G, Calvery HO (1944) Methods for the study of irritation and toxicity of substances applied topically to the skin and mucous membranes. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 82:377–390

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. EC (1992) Annex to Commission Directive 92/69/EEC of 31 July 1992 adapting to technical progress for the seventeenth time Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances. Official J Eur Commun L383A:35

    Google Scholar 

  19. Felter SP, Robinson MK, Basketter DA, Gerberick GF (2002) A review of the scientific basis for default uncertainty factors for use in quantitative risk assessment of the induction of allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 47:257–266

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Felter SP, Ryan CA, Basketter DA, Gerberick GF (2003) Application of the risk assessment paradigm to the induction of allergic contact dermatitis. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 37:1–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Fentem JH, Archer GEB, Balls M, Botham PA, Curren RD, Earl LK, Esdaile DJ, Holzhutter H-G, Liebsch M (1998) The ECVAM international validation study on in vitro tests for skin corrosivity. 2. Results and evaluation by the Management Team. Toxicol In Vitro 12:483–524

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Frosch PJ, Kurte A, Pilz B (1993) Efficacy of skin barrier creams. III. The repetitive irritation test (RIT) in humans. Contact Dermatitis 29:113–118

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Gabard B, Treffel P, Charton-Picard F, Eloy R (1995) Irritant reactions on hairless micropig skin: a model for testing barrier creams? Karger, Basel, pp 275–287 (Current problems in dermatology, vol 23)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gad SC, Dunn BJ, Dobbs DW, Reilly C, Walsh RD (1986) Development and validation of an alternative dermal sensitisation test: the mouse ear swelling test (MEST). Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 84:93–114

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Kimber I, Dearman RJ, Lea LJ, Basketter DA (1999) Local lymph node assay: validation assessment for regulatory purposes. Am J Cont Derm 11(1):3–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gerberick GF, Robinson MK, Felter S, White I, Basketter DA. (2001) Understanding fragrance allergy using an exposure-based risk assessment approach. Contact Dermatitis 45:333–340

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Kern PS, Dearman RJ, Kimber I, Patlewicz GY, Basketter DA (2004) A chemical dataset for the evaluation of alternative approaches to skin sensitization testing. Contact Dermatitis 50:274–288

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Griem P, Goebel C, Scheffler H (2003) Proposal for a risk assessment methodology for skin sensitization based on sensitization potency data. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 38:269–290

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Hall-Manning TJ, Holland GH, Basketter DA, Barratt MD (1995) Skin irritation potential of mixed surfactant systems in a human 4 hour covered patch test. Allergologie 18:465

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hannuksela A, Hannuksela M (1995) Irritant effects of a detergent in wash and chamber tests. Contact Dermatitis 32:163–166

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Hilton J, Dearman RJ, Harvey P, Evans P, Basketter DA, Kimber I (1998) Estimation of relative skin sensitising potency using the local lymph node assay: a comparison of formaldehyde with glutaraldehyde. Am J Contact Derm 9:29–33

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Holland G, York M, Basketter DA (1995) Irritants — corrosive materials, oxidising/reducing agents, acids and alkalis, concentrated salt solutions etc. In: Maibach HI, Coenraads PJ (eds) Irritant contact dermatitis syndrome. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 55–64

    Google Scholar 

  33. Jenkins HL, Adams MG (1989) Progressive evaluation of skin irritancy of cosmetics using human volunteers. Int J Cosmet Sci 11:141–149

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Kimber I, Basketter DA (1992) The murine local lymph node assay: a commentary on collaborative studies and new directions. Food Chem Toxic 30:165–169

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Kimber I, Basketter DA (1997) Contact sensitisation: a new approach to risk assessment. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 3:385–395

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Kimber I, Dearman RJ (1991) Investigation of lymph node cell proliferation as a possible immunological correlate of contact sensitizing potential. Food Chem Toxic 29:125–129

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Kimber I, Dearman RJ, Scholes EW, Basketter DA (1994) The local lymph node assay: developments and applications. Toxicology 93:13–31

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Kimber I, Pichowski JP, Betts CJ, Cumberbatch M, Basketter DA, Dearman RJ (2001) Alternative approaches to the identification and charactersiation of chemical allergens. Toxicol In Vitro 15:307–331

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Kimber I, Dearman RJ, Basketter DA, Ryan CA, Gerberick GF (2002) The local lymph node assay: past, present and future. Contact Derm 47:315–328

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Lewis RW, Basketter DA (1995) Transcutaneous electrical resistance: application in predicting skin corrosives. In: Elsner P, Maibach HI (eds) Irritant dermatitis: new clinical and experimental aspects. Karger, Basel, pp 243–255

    Google Scholar 

  41. Magnusson B, Kligman AM (1970) Allergic contact dermatitis in the Guinea pig. Thomas, Springfield, IL

    Google Scholar 

  42. Maibach HI, Coenraads PJ (1995) The irritant contact dermatitis syndrome. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  43. Malten KE (1981) Thoughts on irritant contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 7:238–247

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Marzulli FN, Maibach HI (1975) The rabbit as a model for evaluating skin irritants: a comparison of results obtained on animals and man using repeated skin exposures. Food Cosmet Toxicol 13:533–540

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. NIH publication no 99-4494 (1999) The murine local lymph node assay: a test method for assessing the allergic contact dermatitis potential of chemical compounds

    Google Scholar 

  46. Patil SM, Patrick E, Maibach HI (1996) Animal, human, and in vitro test methods for predicting skin irritation. In: Marzulli FN, Maibach HI (eds) Dermatotoxicology. Taylor and Francis, Washington, DC, pp 411–436

    Google Scholar 

  47. Prins M, Swinkels OQ, Kolkman EG, Wuis EW, Hekster YA, van der Valk PG (1998) Skin irritation by dithranol cream. A blind study to assess the role of the cream formulation. Acta Derm Venereol 78:262–265

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Schneider K, Akkan Z (2004) Quantitative relationship between the local lymph node assay and human skin sensitization assays. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 39:245–255

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Simion FA (1995) In vivo models to predict skin irritation. In: Van der Valk PGM, Maibach HI (eds) The irritant contact dermatitis syndrome. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 329–334

    Google Scholar 

  50. Walker AP, Basketter DA, Baverel M, Diembeck W, Matthies W, Mougin D, Paye M, Rothlisburger R, Dupuis J (1996) Test guideline for assessment of skin compatibility of cosmetic finished products in man. Food Chem Toxicol 34:551–560

    Google Scholar 

  51. Walker AP, Basketter DA, Baverel M, Diembeck W, Matthies W, Mougin D, Paye M, Rothlisburger R, Dupuis J (1997) Test guidelines for assessment of skin tolerance of potentially irritant cosmetic ingredients in man. Food Chem Toxicol 35:1099–1106

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Warbrick EV, Dearman RJ, Lea LJ, Basketter DA, Kimber I (1999) Local lymph node assay responses to paraphenylenediamine: intra-and inter-laboratory evaluations. J Appl Toxicol 19:255–260

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Weaver JE, Carding CW, Maibach HI (1985) Dose response assessments of Kathon biocide. I.Diagnostic use and diagnostic threshold patch testing with sensitised humans. Contact Dermatitis 12:141–145

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Welss T, Basketter DA, Schroder KR (2004) In vitro skin irritation: facts and future. State of the art review of mechanisms and models. Toxicol In Vitro 18:231–243

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Wigger-Alberti W, Hinnen U, Elsner P (1997) Predictive testing of metalworking fluids: a comparison of 2 cumulative human irritation models and correlation with epidemiological data. Contact Dermatitis 36:14–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Zachariae C, Rastogi S, Devantier C, Menne T, Johansen JD (2003) Methyldibromo glutaronitrile: clinical experience and exposure-based risk assessment. Contact Dermatitis 48:150–154

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Unilever Environmental Safety Laboratory, Colworth House, Sharnbrook, Bredford, MK44 ILQ, UK

    David Basketter

  2. Syngenta Central Toxicology Laboratory, Alderley Park, Macclesfield, Cheshire, SK10 4TJ, UK

    Ian Kimber

Authors
  1. David Basketter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ian Kimber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Klinikum Dortmund gGmbH, Hautklinik Lehrstuhl Dermatologie der Universität Witten/Herdecke, Beurhausstr. 40, 44137, Dortmund, Germany

    Peter J. Frosch (Professor) (Professor)

  2. Dermatologisk afdeling K, Amtssygehuset Gentofte, 2900, Hellerup, Denmark

    Torkil Menné (Professor Dr.) (Professor Dr.)

  3. Laboratoire de Dermato-Chimie Clinique Dermatologique, CHU, 67091, Strasbourg Cedex, France

    Jean-Pierre Lepoittevin (Professor) (Professor)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Basketter, D., Kimber, I. (2006). Predictive Tests for Irritants and Allergens and Their Use in Quantitative Risk Assessment. In: Frosch, P.J., Menné, T., Lepoittevin, JP. (eds) Contact Dermatitis. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-31301-X_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-31301-X_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-24471-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31301-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation