Abstract
The histopathological examination of lymphoid organs together with a T-dependent antibody (TDAR) assay are the primary components of preclinical immunotoxicity assessment. Additional testing including measurement of cellular immunity may be considered. Besides ex vivo lymphocyte proliferation assays, either delayed or contact hypersensitivity models can be used. Contact hypersensitivity testing is typically performed either in mice or in guinea pigs and is directly derived from classical models used for the detection of contact sensitizing chemicals. Whatever the selected model, it is comprised of a sensitizing phase where the animals are applied a strong contact sensitizer topically, then a rest phase, and finally an eliciting phase where sensitized animals are challenged topically with the same contact sensitizer.
In mice, the ear-swelling test is the reference procedure in which mice are sensitized to the ear or shaved abdominal skin and then challenged on the ear. Ear swelling usually measured from ear thickness reflects a cell-mediated immune response. In guinea pigs, a strong sensitizer is applied on the shaved skin of the abdomen or the interscapular area. The sensitized animals are challenged on another area of the shaved abdomen, and the cell-mediated response is assessed semiquantitatively from the magnitude of induced erythema inconsistently associated with edema. Treatment or exposure with immunosuppressive chemicals can result in a significantly decreased ear swelling or skin reaction. Contact hypersensitivity models are seldom used nowadays in preclinical immunotoxicity testing, most likely because of the lack of standardization and extensive validation as well as their use being restricted to mice or guinea pigs.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Descotes J (2006) Methods of evaluating immunotoxicity. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2:249–259
Kimber I, Maurer T (1996) Toxicology of contact hypersensitivity. Taylor & Francis, London
Benacerraf B, Gell PG (1959) Studies on hypersensitivity. III. The relation between delayed reactivity to the picryl group of conjugates and contact sensitivity. Immunology 2:219–229
Krasteva M, Kehren J, Ducluzeau MT, Sayag M, Cacciapuoti M, Akiba H, Descotes J, Nicolas JF (1999) Contact dermatitis. I. Pathophysiology of contact sensitivity. Eur J Dermatol 9:65–77
Jacobsen C (1975) Trinitrophenylation of the bilirubin binding site of human serum albumin. Int J Pept Protein Res 7:161–165
Kripke ML, Munn CG, Jeevan A, Tang JM, Bucana C (1990) Evidence that cutaneous antigen-presenting cells migrate to regional lymph nodes during contact sensitization. J Immunol 145:2833–2838
Shelley WB, Juhlin L (1977) Selective uptake of contact allergens by the Langerhans cell. Arch Dermatol 113:187–192
Bacci S, Alard P, Dai R, Nakamura T, Streilein JW (1997) High and low doses of haptens dictate whether dermal or epidermal antigen-presenting cells promote contact hypersensitivity. Eur J Immunol 27:442–448
Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Dearman RJ, Kimber I (2007) Local lymph node assay (LLNA) for detection of sensitization capacity of chemicals. Methods 41:54–60
Asherson GL, Ptak W (1968) Contact and delayed hypersensitivity in the mouse. I. Active sensitization and passive transfer. Immunology 15:405–416
Phanuphak P, Moorhead JW, Claman HN (1974) Tolerance and contact sensitivity to DNFB in mice. I. In vivo detection by ear swelling and correlation with in vitro cell stimulation. J Immunol 112:115–123
Roupe G, Ridell B (1979) The cellular infiltrate in contact hypersensitivity to picryl chloride in the mouse. Acta Derm Venereol 59:191–195
Cho GY, Hough W (1986) Time course of contact hypersensitivity to DNFB and histologic findings in mice. J Korean Med Sci 1:31–36
Descotes J, Tedone R, Evreux JC (1985) Immunotoxicity screening of drugs and chemicals: value of contact hypersensitivity to picryl chloride in the mouse. Methods Find Exp Clin Pharmacol 7:303–305
Descotes J, Evreux JC (1981) Depressant effects of major tranquillizers on contact hypersensitivity to picryl chloride in the mouse. Experientia 37:1004–1005
Bäck O, Larsen A (1982) Contact sensitivity in mice evaluated by means of ear swelling and a radiometric test. J Invest Dermatol 78:309–312
Goto Y, Inoue Y, Tsuchiya M, Isobe M, Ueno H, Uchi H, Furue M, Hayashi H (2000) Suppressive effect of topically applied CX-659S, a novel diaminouracil derivative, on the contact hypersensitivity reactionb in various animal models. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 123:341–348
Laschi-Loquerie A, Descotes J, Tachon P, Evreux JC (1984) Influence of lead acetate on hypersensitivity. Experimental study. J Immunopharmacol 6:87–93
Descotes J, Tedone R, Evreux JC (1988) Enhancement of antibody response and delayed-type hypersensitivity by thalidomide in mice. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 2:493–497
Blaylock BL, Kouchi Y, Comment CE, Pollock PL, Luster MI (1993) Topical application of T-2 toxin inhibits the contact hypersensitivity response in BALB/c mice. J Immunol 150:5135–5143
Blaylock BL, Newsom KK, Holladay SD, Shipp BK, Bartow TA, Mehendale HM (1995) Topical exposure to chlordane reduces the contact hypersensitivity response to oxazolone in BALB/c mice. Toxicol Lett 81:205–211
Singh P, Morris B, Zhao S, Blaylock BL (2002) Suppression of the contact hypersensitivity response following topical exposure to 2-butoxyethanol in female BALB/c mice. Int J Toxicol 21:107–114
Belsito DV, Kerdel FA, Potozkin J, Soter NA (1990) Cimetidine-induced augmenÂtation of allergic contact hypersensitivity reactions in mice. J Invest Dermatol 94:441–445
Zeligman I (1954) Experimental contact dermatitis. I. Dinitrochlorobenzene contact dermatitis in guinea pigs. J Invest Dermatol 22:109–120
Maguire HC Jr, Maibach HI (1961) Effect of cyclophosphoramide, 6-mercaptopurine, actinomycin D and vincaleukoblastine on the acquisition of delayed hypersensitivity (DNCB contact dermatitis) in the guinea-pig. J Invest Dermatol 37:427–431
Descotes J, Evreux JC (1982) Effect of chlorpromazine on contact hypersensitivity to DNCB in the guinea-pig. J Neuroimmunol 2(1):21–25
Nakagawa S, Oka D, Jinno Y, Takei Y, Bang D, Ueki H (1988) Topical application of cyclosporine on guinea pig allergic contact dermatitis. Arch Dermatol 124:907–910
Luster MI, Dean JH, Boorman GA (1982) Cell-mediated immunity and its application in toxicology. Environ Health Perspect 43:31–36
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Humana Press, a part of Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Descotes, J. (2010). Use of Contact Hypersensitivity in Immunotoxicity Testing. In: Dietert, R. (eds) Immunotoxicity Testing. Methods in Molecular Biology™, vol 598. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60761-401-2_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60761-401-2_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana Press
Print ISBN: 978-1-60761-400-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-60761-401-2
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols