Deri duyarlılığı, çeşitli hücreler ve moleküller arasında yüksek koordineli etkileşim gerektiren son derece karmaşık ve sıkı düzenlenmiş biyolojik bir süreçtir. Alerjik kontakt dermatit ile sonuçlanan deri duyarlılığı, önemli bir mesleki ve çevresel sağlık sorunudur. Duyarlılaştırma potansiyelinin ölçümü, kozmetik ve kişisel bakım ürünlerinde kullanılan bileşenlerin geliştirilmesi ve risk değerlendirmesi için temel bir adımdır ve test sonucu, bir kimyasalın alerjik kontakt dermatite neden olma potansiyelini gösterir. Son yıllarda, ürün güvenliğini sağlamak için laboratuvar hayvanlarının kullanılmadığı alternatif yöntemlere öncelik verilir. Bu yolda, 3R kuramı ile bilimsel çalışmanın kalitesinden ödün vermeden rasyonel bir strateji izlenir. Alternatif yöntemler; toksikolojik bir son noktayı belirlerken, test başına hayvan sayısını, acısını ve sıkıntısını azaltan yöntemlerin kullanımı veya yer değiştirme ile sonuçlanan yeni teknikleri içerir. Konu, amaç ve teknik açıdan uygunsa in vivo yöntemlere tercih edilebilir veya entegre biçimde kullanılabilir. Alternatif yöntemlerin entegrasyonu ile in vivo yöntemlere olan gereksinim azalır. Test edilecek kimyasal madde sayısının her geçen gün arttığı düşünülürse, alternatif yöntemlerin kullanılması duyarlılık ölçümünün optimizasyonuna katkı sağlar. Avrupa Birliği ve Güney Kore, kozmetik ve kişisel bakım ürünleri için sadece alternatif hayvan dışı testleri kabul eder. Yasal sınırlamaların ve dünya çapında artan değere sahip olmalarının bir sonucu olarak alternatif yöntemler için çeşitli ülkelerde validasyon merkezleri kurulmuştur. Bu derlemede, deri duyarlılığı testlerinde gelinen son nokta ve entegre yaklaşımlar hakkında bilgi verilmiştir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Hayvan testi alternatifleri; deri duyarlılığı; 3R; in vitro testler; in silico yöntemler
Skin sensitisation is an extremely complex and tightly regulated biological process that requires highly coordinated interaction between various cells and molecules. Skin sensitisation resulting in allergic contact dermatitis is an important occupational and environmental health problem. Measurement of sensitisation potential is a basic step in the development and risk assessment of ingredients used in cosmetics and personal care products, and the test result shows the potential of chemical to cause allergic contact dermatitis. In recent years, alternative methods, that do not use laboratory animals to ensure product safety, have been prioritized. In this way, with the 3R theory a rational strategy without compromising the quality of scientific work is followed. While alternative methods determine a toxicological endpoint, they include new techniques that result in the use of methods that reduce the number of animals, pain and distress per test, or replacement. If subject, purpose and technically appropriate, it can be preferred to in vivo methods or used in an integrated manner. With the integration of alternative methods, the need for in vivo methods is reduced. Considering that the number of chemicals to be tested increases day by day, the use of alternative methods contributes to the optimization of sensitisation measurement. The European Union and South Korea accept only alternative non-animal tests for cosmetics and personal care products. Validation centers have been established in various countries for alternative methods as a result of legal restrictions and increasing value worldwide. In this review, information is given about the endpoint and integrated approaches in skin sensitisation tests.
Keywords: Animal testing alternatives; skin sensitisation; 3Rs; in vitro tests; in silico methods
- United Nations (UN). Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). Sixth revised edition. UN New York and Geneva: United Nations; 2015. p.149. [Link]
- ECHA. Guidance on Information Requirements and Chemical Safety Assessment, Chapter R.7a: Endpoint Specific Guidance, Version 6.0. Helsinki, Finland: European Chemicals Agency; 2017. p.1-610. [Link]
- Kimber, I. The activity of methacrylate esters in skin sensitisation test methods: A review. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 2019;104:14-20. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Almeida A, Sarmento B, Rodrigues F. Insights on in vitro models for safety and toxicity assessment of cosmetic ingredients. Int J Pharm. 2017;519(1-2):178-85. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Hoffmann S, Kleinstreuer N, Alépée N, Allen D, Api AM, Ashikaga T, et al. Non-animal methods to predict skin sensitization (I): the Cosmetics Europe database. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2018;48(5):344-358. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Nassau S, Fonacier L. Allergic contact dermatitis. Med Clin North Am. 2020;104(1):61-76. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Basketter DA, Kimber I. Are skin sensitisation test methods relevant for proteins? Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2018;99:244-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kleinstreuer NC, Hoffmann S, Alépée N, Allen D, Ashikaga T, Casey W, et al. Non-animal methods to predict skin sensitization (II): an assessment of defined approaches*. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2018;48(5):359-74. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- European Chemicals Agency( ECHA). Non-animal approaches Current status of regulatory applicability under the REACH, CLP and Biocidal Products regulations. 2017. p.1-163. [Link]
- Genc B, Salman M. İlaç Araştırma, Geliştirme ve Toksikolojik Çalışmalarda Kullanılan Alternatif Yöntemler. Guvenc D, editör. Neden Alternatif Yontemler. 1. Baskı. Ankara: Turkiye Klinikleri; 2018. p.43-7. [Link]
- Stephens ML, Mak NS. History of the 3Rs in Toxicity Testing: From Russell and Burch to 21st Century Toxicology. Allen, DG, Waters MD, eds. Reducing, Refining and Replacing the Use of Animals in Toxicity Testing. 1th ed. London;UK: Royal Society of Chemistry: 2013. p.1-43. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Mushtaq S, Daş YK, Aksoy A. Alternative methods to animal experiments. Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci. 2018;38(2):161-70. [Crossref]
- Daniel AB, Strickland J, Allen D, Casati S, Zuang V, Barroso J, et al. International regulatory requirements for skin sensitization testing. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2018;95:52-65. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Interim Science Policy: Use of Alternative Approaches for Skin Sensitization as a Replacement for Laboratory Animal Testing. EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention: Office of Pesticide Programs Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. 2018. p.1-13. [Link]
- European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). How to use new or revised in vitro test methods to address skin sensitisation. 2018. p.1-11. [Link]
- OECD. APPENDIX II: In Chemico Skin Sensitisation: Amino acid Derivative Reactivity Assay (ADRA). Test No. 442C. 2019. p.24-39. [Link]
- Grundström G, Borrebaeck CAK. Skin sensitization testing-what's next? Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(3):666. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Türkiye İlaç ve Tıbbi Cihaz Kurumu. Kozmetik Ürünler Üzerinde Yapılan Hayvan Deneylerine Alternatif Test Metotlarina İlişkin Kılavuz Sürüm 1.0. Erişim Tarihi: 1.05.2020. Erişim linki: [Link]
- OECD. OECD Guideline For Testing Of Chemicals. In Chemico Skin Sensitisation: Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA). No. 442C. 2015. [Link]
- OECD. Key Event Based Test Guideline 442D In Vitro Skin Sensitisation Assays Addressing AOP Key Event on Keratinocyte Activation. 2018. [Link]
- OECD. Key Event Based Test Guideline. In vitro Skin Sensitisation Assays Addressing the Key Event on Activation of Dendritic Cells on the Adverse Outcome Pathway for Skin Sensitisation. 442E. 2018. [Link]
- OECD. OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals. Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay No. 429. 2010. [Link]
- OECD. OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals Local Lymph Node Assay: BRDU-ELISA or-FCM. No. 442B. 2010. [Link]
- OECD. OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals. Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay: DA. No. 442A. 2010. [Link]
- Yavuz O, Marangoz Ö. Farmakoloji ve toksikolojide in siliko yöntemlerin kullanımı [Use of in silico methods in pharmacology and toxicology]. Turkiye Klinikleri Veterinary Sciences-Pharmacology and Toxicology-Special Topics. 2018;4(3):35-42. [Link]
- Casati S, Aschberger K, Barroso J, Casey W, Delgado I, Kim TS, et al. Standardisation of defined approaches for skin sensitisation testing to support regulatory use and international adoption: position of the International Cooperation on Alternative Test Methods. Arch Toxicol. 2018;92(2):611-7. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Roberts DW, Patlewicz G. Non-animal assessment of skin sensitization hazard: Is an integrated testing strategy needed, and if so what should be integrated? J Appl Toxicol. 2018;38(1):41-50. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Barentsen HM, Jonis SU, Pelgrom SMGJ, Rijk JCW, Westerink WMA, Paulussen JJC. REACH alternative testing strategy for skin sensitization in practice: Fact or fiction? Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2019;106:292-302. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Thélu A, Catoire S, Kerdine-Römer S. Immune-competent in vitro co-culture models as an approach for skin sensitisation assessment. Toxicol In Vitro. 2020;62:104691. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Marigliani B, Sehn FP, Silva JVMA, Balottin LBL, Augusto EFP, Buehler AM. The overt and hidden use of animal-derived products in alternative methods for skin sensitisation: a systematic review. Altern Lab Anim. 2019;47(5-6):174-95. [Crossref] [PubMed]
.: Process List