Literature DB >> 30776483

The underlying factors that explain why nucleophilic reagents rarely co-elute with test chemicals in the ADRA.

Masaharu Fujita1, Yusuke Yamamoto2, Sayaka Wanibuchi2, Yasuhiro Katsuoka2, Toshihiko Kasahara2.   

Abstract

The Amino acid Derivative Reactivity Assay (ADRA) is an in chemico alternative to animal testing for skin sensitization potential that uses two different nucleophilic reagents and it is known that ADRA hardly exhibts co-elution compared with the Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA) based on the same scientific principles. In this study, we have analyzed the factors underlying why co-elution, which is sometimes an issue during DPRA testing, virtually never occurs during ADRA testing. Chloramine T and dimethyl isophthalate both exhibited co-elution during DPRA testing, but when quantified at both DPRA's 220 nm and ADRA's 281 nm, we found that when the later detection wavelength was used, these test chemicals produced extremely small peaks that did not interfere with quantification of the peptides. And although both salicylic acid and penicillin G exhibited co-elution during DPRA testing, when tested at a concentration just 1% of that used in DPRA, the very broad peak produced at the higher concentration was reduced significantly. However, both these test chemicals exhibited very sharp peaks when the pH of the injection sample was adjusted to be acidic. Based on these results, we were able to clarify that the reasons why nucleophlic reagents hardly co-elute with test chemicals during ADRA testing are depend on the following three major reasons: (1)differences in the detection wavelength, (2)differences in test chemical concentrations in the injection sample, (3)differences in composition of the injection solvent.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ADRA; Carboxylic acid; Co-elution; Cysteine peptide; DPRA; HPLC-UV; Lysine peptide; NAC; NAL; Overload

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30776483     DOI: 10.1016/j.vascn.2019.02.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods        ISSN: 1056-8719            Impact factor:   1.950


  1 in total

1.  Skin sensitization in silico protocol.

Authors:  Candice Johnson; Ernst Ahlberg; Lennart T Anger; Lisa Beilke; Romualdo Benigni; Joel Bercu; Sol Bobst; David Bower; Alessandro Brigo; Sarah Campbell; Mark T D Cronin; Ian Crooks; Kevin P Cross; Tatyana Doktorova; Thomas Exner; David Faulkner; Ian M Fearon; Markus Fehr; Shayne C Gad; Véronique Gervais; Amanda Giddings; Susanne Glowienke; Barry Hardy; Catrin Hasselgren; Jedd Hillegass; Robert Jolly; Eckart Krupp; Liat Lomnitski; Jason Magby; Jordi Mestres; Lawrence Milchak; Scott Miller; Wolfgang Muster; Louise Neilson; Rahul Parakhia; Alexis Parenty; Patricia Parris; Alexandre Paulino; Ana Theresa Paulino; David W Roberts; Harald Schlecker; Reinhard Stidl; Diana Suarez-Rodrigez; David T Szabo; Raymond R Tice; Daniel Urbisch; Anna Vuorinen; Brian Wall; Thibaud Weiler; Angela T White; Jessica Whritenour; Joerg Wichard; David Woolley; Craig Zwickl; Glenn J Myatt
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 3.271

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.