Peptide reactivity assays for skin sensitisation - scope and limitations.

IF 5.7 2区 医学 Q1 TOXICOLOGY Critical Reviews in Toxicology Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI:10.1080/10408444.2022.2111252
David W Roberts
{"title":"Peptide reactivity assays for skin sensitisation - scope and limitations.","authors":"David W Roberts","doi":"10.1080/10408444.2022.2111252","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA) is an OECD test guideline method that aims to determine if a chemical is reactive enough to be a skin sensitiser. It involves incubation of the test chemical at 5 mMolar concentration for 24 h with a cysteine-based peptide at 0.5 mMolar concentration and measurement of the percentage depletion (DP) of the peptide. The kinetic direct peptide reactivity assay (kDPRA) is derived from the DPRA and involves incubating the peptide with the test chemical at a range of concentrations and incubation times to produce a data matrix of DP values, which is analysed to give a reactivity parameter log<i>k</i><sub>max</sub> that assigns chemicals to the 1A potency class (high potency) if log<i>k</i><sub>max</sub> reaches the threshold value of -2. Here the DPRA, with a threshold of 47% DP, is compared against the kDPRA for their abilities to distinguish between the 1A and non-1A potency classes. It is found that they perform very similarly against a dataset of 157 chemicals with known potency, with only marginal differences in predictive performance. The thresholds of -2.0 (kDPRA) and 47% DP (DPRA) to distinguish 1A sensitisers are not scientific absolutes but the best compromises for a heterogenous set of data containing classes of chemicals for which different thresholds would be applicable. It is concluded that although the kDPRA represents a major advance towards predicting skin sensitisation potency on a continuous basis without animal testing, it offers no significant advantage over the DPRA for the purpose of 1A classification.</p>","PeriodicalId":10869,"journal":{"name":"Critical Reviews in Toxicology","volume":"52 6","pages":"420-430"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Reviews in Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10408444.2022.2111252","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA) is an OECD test guideline method that aims to determine if a chemical is reactive enough to be a skin sensitiser. It involves incubation of the test chemical at 5 mMolar concentration for 24 h with a cysteine-based peptide at 0.5 mMolar concentration and measurement of the percentage depletion (DP) of the peptide. The kinetic direct peptide reactivity assay (kDPRA) is derived from the DPRA and involves incubating the peptide with the test chemical at a range of concentrations and incubation times to produce a data matrix of DP values, which is analysed to give a reactivity parameter logkmax that assigns chemicals to the 1A potency class (high potency) if logkmax reaches the threshold value of -2. Here the DPRA, with a threshold of 47% DP, is compared against the kDPRA for their abilities to distinguish between the 1A and non-1A potency classes. It is found that they perform very similarly against a dataset of 157 chemicals with known potency, with only marginal differences in predictive performance. The thresholds of -2.0 (kDPRA) and 47% DP (DPRA) to distinguish 1A sensitisers are not scientific absolutes but the best compromises for a heterogenous set of data containing classes of chemicals for which different thresholds would be applicable. It is concluded that although the kDPRA represents a major advance towards predicting skin sensitisation potency on a continuous basis without animal testing, it offers no significant advantage over the DPRA for the purpose of 1A classification.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
皮肤致敏的肽反应性测定。范围和限制
直接肽反应性测定法(DPRA)是经合组织的一种测试指南方法,旨在确定一种化学物质是否具有足够的反应性,足以成为皮肤致敏剂。它包括以5mmol / l浓度的测试化学品与0.5 mmol / l浓度的半胱氨酸肽孵育24小时,并测量肽的消耗百分比(DP)。动态直接肽反应性测定(kDPRA)源于ddpra,涉及在一定浓度和孵育时间下将肽与测试化学品一起孵育,以产生DP值的数据矩阵,如果logkmax达到阈值-2,则对其进行分析以给出反应性参数logkmax,该参数将化学品分配到1A效力类(高效能)。在这里,DPRA的阈值为47% DP,与kDPRA进行比较,以区分1A和非1A效力类的能力。研究发现,它们在157种已知效力的化学物质的数据集上的表现非常相似,在预测性能上只有微小的差异。区分1A致敏物的阈值-2.0 (kDPRA)和47% DP (DPRA)不是科学上的绝对值,但对于包含不同阈值适用的化学品类别的异质数据集来说,这是最佳折衷。结论是,尽管kDPRA代表了在没有动物试验的情况下持续预测皮肤致敏效力方面的重大进步,但在1A分类方面,它与ddpra相比没有明显的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
1.70%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Critical Reviews in Toxicology provides up-to-date, objective analyses of topics related to the mechanisms of action, responses, and assessment of health risks due to toxicant exposure. The journal publishes critical, comprehensive reviews of research findings in toxicology and the application of toxicological information in assessing human health hazards and risks. Toxicants of concern include commodity and specialty chemicals such as formaldehyde, acrylonitrile, and pesticides; pharmaceutical agents of all types; consumer products such as macronutrients and food additives; environmental agents such as ambient ozone; and occupational exposures such as asbestos and benzene.
期刊最新文献
Xylene: weight of evidence approach case study to determine the need for an extended one generation reproductive study with a developmental neurotoxicity animal cohort. A critical review to identify data gaps and improve risk assessment of bisphenol A alternatives for human health. Review of epidemiological and toxicological studies on health effects from ingestion of asbestos in drinking water. Objective causal predictions from observational data. Mode of action of dieldrin-induced liver tumors: application to human risk assessment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1