Literature DB >> 15254333

Development of a peptide reactivity assay for screening contact allergens.

G Frank Gerberick1, Jeff D Vassallo, Ruth E Bailey, Joel G Chaney, Steve W Morrall, Jean-Pierre Lepoittevin.   

Abstract

Allergic contact dermatitis resulting from skin sensitization is a common occupational and environmental health problem. In recent years, the local lymph node assay (LLNA) has emerged as a practical option for assessing the skin sensitization potential of chemicals. In addition to accurate identification of skin sensitizers, the LLNA can also provide a reliable measure of relative sensitization potency; information that is pivotal in successful management of human health risks. However, even with the significant animal welfare benefits provided by the LLNA, there is still interest in the development of nonanimal test methods for skin sensitization testing. One characteristic of a chemical allergen is its ability to react with proteins prior to the induction of skin sensitization. The majority of chemical allergens is electrophilic and as such reacts with nucleophilic amino acids like cysteine or lysine. In order to determine if reactivity correlates with sensitization potential, 38 chemicals representing allergens of different potencies (weak to extreme) and nonsensitizers were evaluated for their ability to react with glutathione or three synthetic peptides containing either cysteine, lysine, or histidine. Following a 15-min reaction time for glutathione or a 24 h reaction period for the three synthetic peptides, the samples were analyzed by HPLC. UV detection was used to monitor the depletion of glutathione or the peptide following reaction. The results demonstrate that a significant correlation (Spearman correlation) exists between allergen potency and the depletion of glutathione (p = 0.001), lysine (p = 0.025), and cysteine (p = 0.020), but not histidine. The peptide with the highest sensitivity was cysteine (80.8%) whereas histidine was the least sensitive (11.5%). The data presented show that measuring peptide reactivity has utility for screening chemicals for their skin sensitization potency and thus potential for reducing our reliance on animal test methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15254333     DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfh213

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Toxicol Sci        ISSN: 1096-0929            Impact factor:   4.849


  49 in total

1.  A plasmacytoid dendritic cell (CD123+/CD11c-) based assay system to predict contact allergenicity of chemicals.

Authors:  Seyoum Ayehunie; Maureen Snell; Matthew Child; Mitchell Klausner
Journal:  Toxicology       Date:  2009-08-07       Impact factor: 4.221

2.  Predicting the future: opportunities and challenges for the chemical industry to apply 21st-century toxicity testing.

Authors:  Raja S Settivari; Nicholas Ball; Lynea Murphy; Reza Rasoulpour; Darrell R Boverhof; Edward W Carney
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 1.232

3.  Mechanistic understanding of molecular initiating events (MIEs) using NMR spectroscopy.

Authors:  Paul N Sanderson; Wendy Simpson; Richard Cubberley; Maja Aleksic; Stephen Gutsell; Paul J Russell
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 3.524

Review 4.  Application of proteomics in the elucidation of chemical-mediated allergic contact dermatitis.

Authors:  Tessa Höper; Franz Mussotter; Andrea Haase; Andreas Luch; Tewes Tralau
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2017-06-13       Impact factor: 3.524

5.  Predicting chemically-induced skin reactions. Part I: QSAR models of skin sensitization and their application to identify potentially hazardous compounds.

Authors:  Vinicius M Alves; Eugene Muratov; Denis Fourches; Judy Strickland; Nicole Kleinstreuer; Carolina H Andrade; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol       Date:  2015-01-03       Impact factor: 4.219

6.  Prediction of skin sensitization potency using machine learning approaches.

Authors:  Qingda Zang; Michael Paris; David M Lehmann; Shannon Bell; Nicole Kleinstreuer; David Allen; Joanna Matheson; Abigail Jacobs; Warren Casey; Judy Strickland
Journal:  J Appl Toxicol       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 3.446

Review 7.  Skin and respiratory chemical allergy: confluence and divergence in a hybrid adverse outcome pathway.

Authors:  Ian Kimber; Alan Poole; David A Basketter
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2018-01-26       Impact factor: 3.524

Review 8.  Biology-inspired microphysiological system approaches to solve the prediction dilemma of substance testing.

Authors:  Uwe Marx; Tommy B Andersson; Anthony Bahinski; Mario Beilmann; Sonja Beken; Flemming R Cassee; Murat Cirit; Mardas Daneshian; Susan Fitzpatrick; Olivier Frey; Claudia Gaertner; Christoph Giese; Linda Griffith; Thomas Hartung; Minne B Heringa; Julia Hoeng; Wim H de Jong; Hajime Kojima; Jochen Kuehnl; Marcel Leist; Andreas Luch; Ilka Maschmeyer; Dmitry Sakharov; Adrienne J A M Sips; Thomas Steger-Hartmann; Danilo A Tagle; Alexander Tonevitsky; Tewes Tralau; Sergej Tsyb; Anja van de Stolpe; Rob Vandebriel; Paul Vulto; Jufeng Wang; Joachim Wiest; Marleen Rodenburg; Adrian Roth
Journal:  ALTEX       Date:  2016-05-15       Impact factor: 6.043

9.  Pyridoxylamine reactivity kinetics as an amine based nucleophile for screening electrophilic dermal sensitizers.

Authors:  Itai Chipinda; Wilbes Mbiya; Risikat Ajibola Adigun; Moshood K Morakinyo; Brandon F Law; Reuben H Simoyi; Paul D Siegel
Journal:  Toxicology       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 4.221

10.  Site of reactivity models predict molecular reactivity of diverse chemicals with glutathione.

Authors:  Tyler B Hughes; Grover P Miller; S Joshua Swamidass
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2015-03-16       Impact factor: 3.739

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.