The new OECD guideline 429 (skin sensitization: local lymph node assay) is based upon a protocol, which utilises the incorporation of radioactivity into DNA as a measure for cell proliferation in vivo. The guideline also enables the use of alternative endpoints in order to assess draining lymph node (LN) cell proliferation. Here we describe the first round of an inter-laboratory validation of alternative endpoints in the LLNA conducted in seven laboratories. The validation study was managed and supervised by the Swiss Agency for Therapeutic Products, Swissmedic. Statistical analyses of all data were performed by an independent centre at the University of Bern, Department of Statistics. Ear-draining, LN weight and cell count were used to assess proliferation instead of radioactive labeling of lymph node cells. In addition, the acute inflammatory skin reaction was measured by ear swelling and weight of circular biopsies of the ears to identify skin irritating properties of the test items. Hexylcinnamaldehyde (HCA) and three blinded test items were applied to female, 8--10 weeks old NMRI and BALB/c mice. Results were sent via the independent study coordinator to the statistician. The results of this first round showed that the alternative endpoints of the LLNA are sensitive and robust parameters. The use of ear weights added an important parameter assessing the skin irritation potential, which supports the differentiation of pure irritative from contact allergenic potential. There were absolute no discrepancies between the categorisation of the three test substances A--C determined by each single participating laboratories. The results highlighted also that many parameters do have an impact on the strength of the responses. Therefore, such parameters have to be taken into consideration for the categorisation of compounds due to their relative sensitizing potencies.

The accepted approach to the interpretation of local lymph node assay (LLNA) data requires comparison of responses in the test groups with background activity found in concurrent vehicle-treated controls. However, of established value in the interpretation of toxicity test data is the use of historical control values that provide one criterion against which to judge the integrity of individual experiments. Specifically, the availability of robust and relevant historical control data permits examination of whether, in any individual experiment, control values fall within the expected range. With the most commonly used vehicle employed in the LLNA, acetone/olive oil (4 : 1) (v/v), the mean values, standard deviations and normal ranges are increasingly well established for a given laboratory, although there is some variation between laboratories, particularly with regard to expected ranges. Against this background, it is possible to identify (and, if appropriate, eliminate) a concurrent vehicle-control value that falls well outside the expected range. To explore critically the potential merits of this approach, one specific example is examined in detail.

Abstract:The Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) is now regarded as the worldwide standard. The analysis of accumulated LLNA data reveals that the animal strains and vehicles employed are likely to affect LLNA results. Here we show that an obvious strain difference in the local lymph node response was observed between DMSO-treated CBA/CaOlaHsd and CBA/ CaHsdRcc mice. We also show that a vehicle difference in the response was observed when CBA/CaHsdRcc mice were exposed to 6 vehicles; 4:1 v/v acetone/olive oil (AOO), ethanol/ water (70% EtOH), N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF), 2-butanone (BN), propylene glycol (PG), and dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO). The dpm/LN level was lowest in the 70% EtOH group and highest in the DMSO group. When alpha-hexylcinnamaldehyde (HCA) was used as a sensitizer for the LLNA, HCA was a weak sensitizer when AOO or DMSO was used as a vehicle, but a moderate sensitizer when the other 4 vehicles were used. This study showed that there are vehicle differences in the local lymph node response (dpm/LN level) in the LLNA and that the sensitization potency of HCA may be classified in different categories when using different vehicles. This suggests that careful consideration should be exercised in selecting a vehicle for the LLNA. A further comprehensive study will be needed to investigate why vehicle differences are observed in the LLNA. Key words: animal strain, local lymph node assay, vehicle-effect The local lymph node assay (LLNA) is the most commonly used among several alternatives of skin sensitization tests [1,8,10], including the human cell line activation test (h-CLAT), the peptide-binding test [7], and the quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) system. Furthermore, a three-dimensional human skin model is now being actively developed as an in vitro model for the assessment of primary skin irritation [15], and put into trials for use as an in vitro model for the evaluation of skin sensitization. These newly developed alternative methods are expected to be implemented for practical use in the future. However, a considerable time will be required for these in vitro test methods to become reliable and accepted international standard test methods.In 2001, Takeyoshi et al. developed the non-radioisotope (non-RI) LLNA [12,13] in Japan. The novel test method was expected to become an alternative to the tra--Note-

The mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA) has become the preferred test for evaluating the dermal sensitization potential of chemicals and requirements are now emerging for its use in the evaluation of their formulated products, especially in the European Union. However, despite its widespread use and extensive validation, the use of this assay for directly testing mixtures and formulated products has been questioned, which could lead to repeat testing using multiple animal models. As pesticide formulations are typically a specific complex blend of chemicals for use as aqueous-based dilutions, traditional vehicles prescribed for the LLNA may change the properties of these formulations leading to inaccurate test results and hazard identification. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an aqueous solution of Pluronic L92 block copolymer surfactant (L92) as a vehicle in the mouse LLNA across five laboratories. Three chemicals with known sensitization potential and four pesticide formulations for which the sensitization potential in guinea pigs and/or humans had previously been assessed were used. Identical LLNA protocols and test materials were used in the evaluation. Assessment of the positive control chemicals, hexylcinnamaldehyde, formaldehyde, and potassium dichromate revealed positive results when using 1% aqueous L92 as the vehicle. Furthermore, results for these chemicals were reproducible among the five laboratories and demonstrated consistent relative potency determinations. The four pesticide formulations diluted in 1% aqueous L92 also demonstrated reproducible results in the LLNA among the five laboratories. Results for these test materials were also consistent with those generated previously using guinea pigs or from human experience. These data support testing aqueous compatible chemicals or pesticide formulations using the mouse LLNA, and provide additional support for the use of 1% aqueous L92 as a suitable, aqueous-based vehicle.

No abstract