Guinea Pig Maximization Test

Wahlberg, J.E.; Boman, Anders

doi:10.1159/000411607

Cited by 96 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sensitizing activity (Ashby et al, 1995;Basketter and Schole, 1992;Basketter et al, 1994;Hayes et al, 1998;Kimber and Basketter, 1992;Klecak et al, 1977;Magnusson and Kligman, 1969;Wahlberg and Boman, 1985) or our unpublished data. +: Positive, −: Negative.…”

Section: Chemicalmentioning

confidence: 64%

Peptide-Binding Assessment Using Mass Spectrometry as a New Screening Method for Skin Sensitization

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Skin sensitization potential of low molecular weight chemicals was assessed by analyzing peptide-conjugate formation. Chemicals were incubated with a peptide, glutathione, and resultant mixtures were analyzed by mass spectrometry. Eighteen chemicals were assessed, and new peaks corresponding to chemical-peptide conjugates were detected for 13 of 14 known sensitizers. Conjugates were not detected for 4 negative chemicals. The method has advantages as a simple screening assay for assessing the sensitization potential of chemicals.

show abstract

Section: Chemicalmentioning

confidence: 64%

Peptide-Binding Assessment Using Mass Spectrometry as a New Screening Method for Skin Sensitization

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…* Guinea pig maximization test is the official method (7,8). ** Buehler test is the official method (9-11).…”

Section: Human Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the OECD guidelines (6), 2 guinea pig methods are recommended. 1 method is the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT) (7,8), with both intradermal and epicutaneous exposure of the compound and the use of Freund's complete adjuvant (FCA) to increase the immune response. The other is the Buehler method with only epicutaneous exposure and no FCA treatment (9)(10)(11).…”

Section: Human Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Regulatory classification of substances oxidized to skin sensitizers on exposure to air

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regulatory classification of substances in the European Union (EU) is intended to identify their hazardous toxicological properties in a formal and harmonized manner. In the regulatory work, a specific chemical with its molecular structure is classified as a skin sensitizer. This implies that the compound is stable throughout its lifetime. The purpose of the present paper is to discuss the problem of skin sensitizing oxidation/degradation products formed by air exposure of various materials or substances with very low allergenic activity. In regulatory classification work on skin sensitizers, the intrinsic suspectibility of a chemical to air oxidation (autoxidation) should be taken into consideration. We give examples of natural terpenoid materials, but the concept of allergens formed by air oxidation can apply to other materials widely used in industrial products. If a positive classification is made for a substance with a known chemical structure, a note should indicate that the primary chemical structure of the notified substance is not a skin sensitizer, but that (some of) its oxidation products are. Complex mixtures which inevitably contain sensitizing oxidation products should (on the basis of sufficient evidence) be classified as skin sensitizing.

show abstract

“…Usually 1 or 2 of these are potential allergens, while the remainder is water and minimally or non-allergenic substances, which may affect the choice of induction concentration. A locally irritating non-allergenic ingredient will decrease the test concentration and might prevent the detection of the allergen by giving "false-negative" results (38,39).…”

Section: Cross-sensitization Sensitizing Impurity and Formulationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The value and limitations of rechallenge in the guinea pig maximization test

1996

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The guinea pig maximization test (GPMT) has played a primary role in the evaluation of potential skin contact sensitizers for 25 years. In the OECD Guideline 406 from 1993, it is specifically suggested that equivocal results from the initial challenge in the GPMT should be evaluated further with a repeated challenge. However, there exist few published rechallenge data and the guideline does not describe how rechallenge data should be interpreted. In this paper, we have used examples from published results to illustrate both the positive value and the limitations of repeated challenges, including cross challenge. Testing with modified concentrations may also help to indicate whether or not the response is allergic in nature, particularly where there has been a low level of skin reaction observed in shamtreated controls, or where a low level of skin reaction is the dominant response in the test animals. In conclusion, the data presented demonstrate that, as a tool for the investigation of skin sensitizing potential, the GPMT can benefit from an experienced scientific evaluation of rechallenge data, but that this information should not be treated in a mechanistic fashion.

show abstract

Guinea Pig Maximization Test

Cited by 96 publications

References 0 publications

Peptide-Binding Assessment Using Mass Spectrometry as a New Screening Method for Skin Sensitization

Peptide-Binding Assessment Using Mass Spectrometry as a New Screening Method for Skin Sensitization

Regulatory classification of substances oxidized to skin sensitizers on exposure to air

The value and limitations of rechallenge in the guinea pig maximization test

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About