Next Article in Journal
Impacts of Environmental Concentrations of Nanoplastics on Zebrafish Neurobehavior and Reproductive Toxicity
Next Article in Special Issue
In Vitro Prediction of Skin-Sensitizing Potency Using the GARDskin Dose–Response Assay: A Simple Regression Approach
Previous Article in Journal
Deltamethrin’s Effect on Nitrogen-Fixing Nodules in Medicago truncatula
Previous Article in Special Issue
Deriving a Continuous Point of Departure for Skin Sensitization Risk Assessment Using a Bayesian Network Model
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Limitations and Modifications of Skin Sensitization NAMs for Testing Inorganic Nanomaterials

by
Britta Wareing
1,†,
Ayse Aktalay Hippchen
1,†,
Susanne N. Kolle
1,
Barbara Birk
2,
Dorothee Funk-Weyer
1 and
Robert Landsiedel
1,3,*
1
BASF SE, Experimental Toxicology and Ecology, 67057 Ludwigshafen, Germany
2
BASF SE, Agriculture Solutions, 67117 Limburgerhof, Germany
3
Pharmacy, Pharmacology and Toxicology, Free University of Berlin, 14195 Berlin, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Toxics 2024, 12(8), 616; https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics12080616
Submission received: 19 July 2024 / Revised: 14 August 2024 / Accepted: 19 August 2024 / Published: 21 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Skin Sensitization Testing Using New Approach Methodologies)

Abstract

Since 2020, the REACh regulation requires toxicological data on nanoforms of materials, including the assessment of their skin-sensitizing properties. Small molecules’ skin sensitization potential can be assessed by new approach methodologies (NAMs) addressing three key events (KE: protein interaction, activation of dendritic cells, and activation of keratinocytes) combined in a defined approach (DA) described in the OECD guideline 497. In the present study, the applicability of three NAMs (DPRA, LuSens, and h-CLAT) to nine materials (eight inorganic nanomaterials (NM) consisting of CeO2, BaSO4, TiO2 or SiO2, and quartz) was evaluated. The NAMs were technically applicable to NM using a specific sample preparation (NANOGENOTOX dispersion protocol) and method modifications to reduce interaction of NM with the photometric and flowcytometric read-outs. The results of the three assays were combined according to the defined approach described in the OECD guideline No. 497; two of the inorganic NM were identified as skin sensitizers. However, data from animal studies (for ZnO, also human data) indicate no skin sensitization potential. The remaining seven test substances were assessed as “inconclusive” because all inorganic NM were outside the domain of the DPRA, and the achievable test concentrations were not sufficiently high according to the current test guidelines of all three NAMs. The use of these NAMs for (inorganic) NM and the relevance of the results in general are challenged in three ways: (i) NAMs need modification to be applicable to insoluble, inorganic matter; (ii) current test guidelines lack adequate concentration metrics and top concentrations achievable for NM; and (iii) NM may not cause skin sensitization by the same molecular and cellular key events as small organic molecules do; in fact, T-cell-mediated hypersensitivity may not be the most relevant reaction of the immune system to NM. We conclude that the NAMs adopted by OECD test guidelines are currently not a good fit for testing inorganic NM.
Keywords: inorganic nanomaterials; skin sensitization; OECD test guidelines; new approach methodologies; applicability; h-CLAT; LuSens; DPRA inorganic nanomaterials; skin sensitization; OECD test guidelines; new approach methodologies; applicability; h-CLAT; LuSens; DPRA

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wareing, B.; Aktalay Hippchen, A.; Kolle, S.N.; Birk, B.; Funk-Weyer, D.; Landsiedel, R. Limitations and Modifications of Skin Sensitization NAMs for Testing Inorganic Nanomaterials. Toxics 2024, 12, 616. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics12080616

AMA Style

Wareing B, Aktalay Hippchen A, Kolle SN, Birk B, Funk-Weyer D, Landsiedel R. Limitations and Modifications of Skin Sensitization NAMs for Testing Inorganic Nanomaterials. Toxics. 2024; 12(8):616. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics12080616

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wareing, Britta, Ayse Aktalay Hippchen, Susanne N. Kolle, Barbara Birk, Dorothee Funk-Weyer, and Robert Landsiedel. 2024. "Limitations and Modifications of Skin Sensitization NAMs for Testing Inorganic Nanomaterials" Toxics 12, no. 8: 616. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics12080616

APA Style

Wareing, B., Aktalay Hippchen, A., Kolle, S. N., Birk, B., Funk-Weyer, D., & Landsiedel, R. (2024). Limitations and Modifications of Skin Sensitization NAMs for Testing Inorganic Nanomaterials. Toxics, 12(8), 616. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics12080616

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop