4.7 Article

Assessment of primary eye and skin irritants by in vitro cytotoxicity and phototoxicity models:: an in vitro approach of new arginine-based surfactant-induced irritation

期刊

TOXICOLOGY
卷 197, 期 3, 页码 229-237

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.tox.2004.01.011

关键词

cytotoxicity model; skin irritation; photoirritation; culture cells; surfactants

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Extensive efforts have been made, recently, to find surfactants with lower irritation potential than those presently commercially available, for use in pharmaceutical and cosmetic preparations. Cytotoxic and phototoxic effects of a novel family of dicationic arginine-diglyceride surfactant compounds, 1,2-diacyl,3-O-(L-arginyl)-rac-glycerol with alkyl chain lengths in the range from 8 to 14 carbon atoms, were compared to three commercial surfactants. The end-points used to assess toxicity were the red blood cell lysis assay and uptake of the vital dye neutral red 24h after dosing (NRU), respectively. Two immortalized cell lines, murine fibroblast cell line, 3T3, and one human keratinocyte, cell line, HaCaT, were used as in vitro models to predict the potential phototoxicity which could result in irritation, determined by resazurin reduction to resorufin and neutral red uptake (NRU). All tested surfactants had cytotoxicity effects as demonstrated by and decrease of NR uptake, which showed a clear concentration-response relationship. Concentrations resulting in 50% inhibition of NR uptake (IC50) range from 1 mumol l(-1) (hexadecyl trimethyl ammonium bromide) to 565 mumol l(-1) (12,12-L-arginine). Erythrocyte haemolysis also showed a clear concentration-response relationship, the 50% of haemolysis ranged from 37 mumol l(-1) (10,10-L-arginine) to 151 mumol l(-1) (sodium lauryl sulphate). Phototoxicity was performed with 12,12-L-acetyl-arginine, the most stable chemical structure. The validated 3T3 NRU photoxicity assay was used and revealed a phototoxic potential. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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