Explore the vast range of titles available.

Propolis is a resinous mixture produced by bees from their secretions and plant material, so its composition varies depending on its botanical origin. Propolis has several beneficial bioactivities, but its skin sensitization properties have long been suspected. Nevertheless, the skin sensitization potency of Brazilian green propolis (BGP) has not been scientifically evaluated. Here, we used scientifically reliable tests to evaluate it. In vitro antigenicity test based on the human cell line activation test (OECD TG 442E) was performed by measuring the expression of CD54 and CD86, which are indicators of the antigenicity of test substances, on THP-1 and DC2.4 cells. BGP did not affect the expression of either marker on THP-1 cells, but upregulated the expression of CD86 on DC2.4 cells, suggesting that BGP may be a skin sensitizer. Then, we performed local lymph node assay (LLNA, OECD TG 429) as a definitive in vivo test. LLNA showed that 1.70% BGP primed skin sensitization and is a “moderate sensitizer”. Our results indicate scientific proof of the validity of arbitrary concentrations (1–2%), which have been used empirically, and provide the first scientific information on the safe use of BGP.

To improve the accuracy of skin sensitization prediction of chemicals by conventional alternative methods using cells, it is important to reproduce the environment of skin in vitro, such as the crosstalk between keratinocytes and dendritic cells (DCs). We developed a skin sensitization test system based on the markers and criteria of the human cell line activation test (h-CLAT), which combines THP-1 cells as a surrogate for DCs and keratinized normal human epidermal keratinocytes (NHEK). After exposure to chemicals via keratinized NHEK, the cell surface expression of CD54 and CD86 on THP-1 was measured by flow cytometry. This co-culture system evaluated 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB), a typical sensitizer, as positive, lactic acid (LA), a non-sensitizer, as negative, and isoeugenol (IE), a prohapten that requires biological activation to acquire skin sensitization, as positive. However, the expression levels of CD54 and CD86 in DNCB-treated THP-1 were lower than those in normal h-CLAT. Therefore, we investigated the effects of the medium and secretion by NHEK cells on THP-1 cells. CD54 and CD86 expression was enhanced in monocultured THP-1 in the medium for keratinized NHEK and in the conditioned medium of keratinized NHEK. The increase in CD54 and CD86 by changes in the medium type was higher than that by the NHEK secretion; therefore, it was found that the medium composition has a large effect on the evaluation index among the experimental parameters in the co-culture system. It is necessary to find the optimal medium for immunotoxicity assessment in the co-culture system.

Nanoparticle applications are becoming increasingly popular in fields such as photonics, catalysis, magnetics, biotechnology, manufacturing of cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and medicines. There is still a huge pile of undermining information about the potential toxicity of these products to humans, which can be encountered by neuroprotective antioxidants and anti-inflammatory compounds. Nanoparticles can be administered using a variety of methods, including oronasal, topical applications, and enteral and parenteral routes of administration. There are different properties of these nanomaterials that characterize different pathways. Crossing of the blood-brain barrier, a direct sensory nerve-to-brain pathway whose barriers are bypassed, these checks otherwise prevent the nanoparticles from entering the brain. This inflicts damage to sensory neurons and receptors by nanoparticles that lead to neurotoxicity of the central nervous system. A number of routes make nanoparticles able to penetrate through the skin. Exposure by various routes to these nanoparticles can result in oxidative stress, and immune suppression triggers inflammatory cascades and genome-level mutations after they are introduced into the body. To out-power, these complications, plant-based antioxidants, essential oils, and dietary supplements can be put into use. Direct nanoparticle transport pathways from sensory nerves to the brain via blood have been studied grossly. Recent findings regarding the direct pathways through which nanoparticles cross the blood-brain barriers, how nanoparticles elicit different responses on sensory receptors and nerves, how they cause central neurotoxicity and neurodegeneration through sensory nerve routes, and the possible mechanisms that outcast these effects are discussed.

Cannabinoids have long been known for their bioactive properties, with their topical application as anti-inflammatory compounds being at the forefront of research for the past decade. Concurrently, the cosmetic market is a fast-growing industry in constant need of new biomolecules. In this work, we studied the safety profile for topical applications of two cannabinoids: cannabidiol (CBD) and cannabigerol (CBG) and assessed their potential as skin care ingredients. The CBG used in this work resulted from bio-fermentation, and to the best of our knowledge, there are no extensive reports on its safety and usage as a cosmetic ingredient. Our results show that CBD and CBG do not exhibit cytotoxicity, mutagenicity, or skin sensitization. Moreover, we verified an absence of primary irritability, accumulated irritability, phototoxicity and photosensitization, supporting the claims of dermatologically tested, hypoallergenic and non-irritating. While these cannabinoids did not show significant anti-aging effects by altering the extracellular matrix components (both in vitro and ex vivo), they demonstrated promise as protective agents against inflammation caused by air pollution. Specifically, they reduced the levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines, making them valuable in combating environmental skin damage. Overall, our results validate the safety of topical use of cannabinoids, while paving the way for further research in the beauty and personal care market as soothing agents.

The presented Bayesian network Integrated Testing Strategy (ITS-3) for skin sensitization potency assessment is a decision support system for a risk assessor that provides quantitative weight of evidence, leading to a mechanistically interpretable potency hypothesis, and formulates adaptive testing strategy for a chemical. The system was constructed with an aim to improve precision and accuracy for predicting LLNA potency beyond ITS-2 (Jaworska et al., J Appl Toxicol 33(11):1353–1364, 2013 ) by improving representation of chemistry and biology. Among novel elements are corrections for bioavailability both in vivo and in vitro as well as consideration of the individual assays’ applicability domains in the prediction process. In ITS-3 structure, three validated alternative assays, DPRA, KeratinoSens and h-CLAT, represent first three key events of the adverse outcome pathway for skin sensitization. The skin sensitization potency prediction is provided as a probability distribution over four potency classes. The probability distribution is converted to Bayes factors to: 1) remove prediction bias introduced by the training set potency distribution and 2) express uncertainty in a quantitative manner, allowing transparent and consistent criteria to accept a prediction. The novel ITS-3 database includes 207 chemicals with a full set of in vivo and in vitro data. The accuracy for predicting LLNA outcomes on the external test set ( n  = 60) was as follows: hazard (two classes)—100 %, GHS potency classification (three classes)—96 %, potency (four classes)—89 %. This work demonstrates that skin sensitization potency prediction based on data from three key events, and often less, is possible, reliable over broad chemical classes and ready for practical applications.

The hazard assessment of skin sensitizers relies mainly on animal testing, but much progress is made in the development, validation and regulatory acceptance and implementation of non-animal predictive approaches. In this review, we provide an update on the available computational tools and animal-free test methods for the prediction of skin sensitization hazard. These individual test methods address mostly one mechanistic step of the process of skin sensitization induction. The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) for skin sensitization describes the key events (KEs) that lead to skin sensitization. In our review, we have clustered the available test methods according to the KE they inform: the molecular initiating event (MIE/KE1)—protein binding, KE2—keratinocyte activation, KE3—dendritic cell activation and KE4—T cell activation and proliferation. In recent years, most progress has been made in the development and validation of in vitro assays that address KE2 and KE3. No standardized in vitro assays for T cell activation are available; thus, KE4 cannot be measured in vitro. Three non-animal test methods, addressing either the MIE, KE2 or KE3, are accepted as OECD test guidelines, and this has accelerated the development of integrated or defined approaches for testing and assessment (e.g. testing strategies). The majority of these approaches are mechanism-based, since they combine results from multiple test methods and/or computational tools that address different KEs of the AOP to estimate skin sensitization potential and sometimes potency. Other approaches are based on statistical tools. Until now, eleven different testing strategies have been published, the majority using the same individual information sources. Our review shows that some of the defined approaches to testing and assessment are able to accurately predict skin sensitization hazard, sometimes even more accurate than the currently used animal test. A few defined approaches are developed to provide an estimate of the potency sub-category of a skin sensitizer as well, but these approaches need further independent evaluation with a new dataset of chemicals. To conclude, this update shows that the field of non-animal approaches for skin sensitization has evolved greatly in recent years and that it is possible to predict skin sensitization hazard without animal testing.

Respiratory sensitization as a consequence of exposure to chemical products has increased over the last decades, leading to an increase of morbidity. The increased use of synthetic compounds resulted in an exponential growth of substances to which we are potentially exposed on a daily basis. Some of them are known to induce respiratory sensitization, meaning that they can trigger the development of allergies. In the past, animal studies provided useful results for the understanding of mechanisms involved in the development of respiratory allergies. However, the mechanistic understanding of the involved cellular effects is still limited. Currently, no in vitro or in vivo models are validated to identify chemical respiratory sensitizers. Nonetheless, chemical respiratory sensitizers elicit a positive response in validated assays for skin sensitization. In this review, we will discuss how these assays could be used for respiratory sensitization and if necessary, what can be learnt from these assays to develop a model to assess the respiratory sensitizing potential of chemicals. In the last decades, much work has been done to study the respiratory toxicity of inhaled compounds especially in developing in vitro assays grown at the air–liquid interface. We will discuss how possibly the tests currently used to investigate general particle toxicity could be transformed to investigate respiratory sensitization. In the present review, we describe the most known mechanism involved in the sensitization process and the experimental in vivo and alternative in vitro models, which are currently available and how to adapt and improve existing models to study respiratory sensitization.

Since the 1940s, patch tests in healthy volunteers (Human Predictive Patch Tests, HPPTs) have been used to identify chemicals that cause skin sensitization in humans. Recently, we reported the results of a major curation effort to support the development of OECD Guideline 497 on Defined Approaches (DAs) for skin sensitization (OECD in Guideline No. 497: Defined Approaches on Skin Sensitisation, 2021a. https://doi.org/10.1787/b92879a4-en). In the course of this work, we compiled and published a database of 2277 HPPT results for 1366 unique test substances (Strickland et al. in Arch Toxicol 97:2825–2837, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-023-03530-3). Here we report a detailed analysis of the value of HPPT data for classification of chemicals as skin sensitizers under the United Nations’ Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). As a result, we propose the dose per skin area (DSA) used for classification by the GHS to be replaced by or complemented with a dose descriptor that may better reflect sensitization incidence [e.g., the DSA causing induction of sensitization in one individual (DSA1+) or the DSA leading to an incidence of induction in 5% of the tested individuals (DSA05)]. We also propose standardized concepts and workflows for assessing individual HPPT results, for integrating multiple HPPT results and for using them in concert with Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) data in a weight of evidence (WoE) assessment. Overall, our findings show that HPPT results are often not sufficient for deriving unambiguous classifications on their own. However, where they are, the resulting classifications are reliable and reproducible and can be integrated well with those from other skin sensitization data, such as the LLNA.

Critical to the evaluation of non-animal tests are reference data with which to assess their relevance. Animal data are typically used because they are generally standardized and available. However, when regulatory agencies aim to protect human health, human reference data provide the benefit of not having to account for possible interspecies variability. To support the evaluation of non-animal approaches for skin sensitization assessment, we collected data from 2277 human predictive patch tests (HPPTs), i.e., human repeat insult patch tests and human maximization tests, for skin sensitization from 1555 publications. We recorded protocol elements and positive or negative outcomes, developed a scoring system to evaluate each test for reliability, and calculated traditional and non-traditional dose metrics. We also traced each test result back to its original report to remove duplicates. The resulting database, which contains information for 1366 unique substances, was characterized for physicochemical properties, chemical structure categories, and protein binding mechanisms. This database is publicly available on the National Toxicology Program Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods website and in the Integrated Chemical Environment to serve as a resource for additional evaluation of alternative methods and development of new approach methodologies for skin sensitization assessments.

Skin sensitization is a term used to refer to the regulatory hazard known as allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in humans or contact hypersensitivity in rodents, an important health endpoint considered in chemical hazard and risk assessments. Information on skin sensitization potential is required in various regulatory frameworks, such as the Directive of the European Parliament and the Council on Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals (REACH). The identification of skin-sensitizing chemicals previously required the use of animal testing, which is now being replaced by alternative methods. Alternative methods in the field of skin sensitization are based on the measurement or prediction of key events (KE), i.e., (i) the molecular triggering event, i.e., the covalent binding of electrophilic substances to nucleophilic centers in skin proteins; (ii) the activation of keratinocytes; (iii) the activation of dendritic cells; (iv) the proliferation of T cells. This review article focuses on the current state of knowledge regarding the methods corresponding to each of the key events in skin sensitization and considers the latest trends in the development and modification of these methods.