4.5 Article

Assessment of the utility of the novel Phenion® full thickness human skin model for detecting the skin irritation potential of antimicrobial cleaning products

期刊

TOXICOLOGY IN VITRO
卷 94, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.tiv.2023.105726

关键词

Skin irritation; In vitro; Formulations; Antimicrobial cleaning products; Disinfectants; Phenion (R) FT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study developed a new method to assess the skin irritation of antimicrobial cleaning products. The method utilized a more human-like model and demonstrated its effectiveness through comparison with in vivo rabbit skin irritation data.
The skin is a potential route of exposure to antimicrobial cleaning products (ACP). Skin irritation, reversible damage to the skin, is an endpoint for protecting consumers and operators accidently exposed to these complex mixtures. To assess skin irritation of 24 ACP formulations, a new protocol was developed and adapted from OECD Test Guideline No. 439 with EpiDerm (TM) (epidermis model) replaced by Phenion (R) FT (full thickness tissue, including epidermis and dermis) as the test system. A full thickness tissue was utilized to provide a more human in vivo-like model. Formulations were applied to Phenion (R) FT and cell viability measured by MTT reduction after a 15-min exposure and 42 h post exposure period. A prediction model was applied, and results compared with in vivo rabbit skin irritation data. Concordance between in vivo and in vitro was demonstrated to be suitable (i.e., sensitivity 78%, specificity 83%, and accuracy 79%) using this modified OECD Test Guideline No. 439 method with a 70% cell viability selected as the most reasonable cut off for discriminating non-irritants (EPA Class IV). These results were considered suitable to develop a draft IATA i.e., with any ACP formulation identified as EPA Category IV in this test. The method will be further refined to distinguish irritant categories.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据