title: Potency values from the local lymph node assay: application to classification, labelling and risk assessment.
abstract: Hundreds of chemicals are contact allergens but there remains a need to identify and characterise accurately skin sensitising hazards. The purpose of this review was fourfold. First, when using the local lymph node assay (LLNA), consider whether an exposure concentration (EC3 value) lower than 100% can be defined and used as a threshold criterion for classification and labelling. Second, is there any reason to revise the recommendation of a previous ECETOC Task Force regarding specific EC3 values used for sub-categorisation of substances based upon potency? Third, what recommendations can be made regarding classification and labelling of preparations under GHS? Finally, consider how to integrate LLNA data into risk assessment and provide a rationale for using concentration responses and corresponding no-effect concentrations. Although skin sensitising chemicals having high EC3 values may represent only relatively low risks to humans, it is not possible currently to define an EC3 value below 100% that would serve as an appropriate threshold for classification and labelling. The conclusion drawn from reviewing the use of distinct categories for characterising contact allergens was that the most appropriate, science-based classification of contact allergens according to potency is one in which four sub-categories are identified: 'extreme', 'strong', 'moderate' and 'weak'. Since draining lymph node cell proliferation is related causally and quantitatively to potency, LLNA EC3 values are recommended for determination of a no expected sensitisation induction level that represents the first step in quantitative risk assessment.
authors.affiliation: DuPont Haskell Global Centers for Health and Environmental Sciences, Newark, DE, USA. scott.e.loveless@usa.dupont.com
authors.forename: S E
authors.initials: SE
authors.lastname: Loveless
authors.forename: A-M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Api
authors.forename: R W R
authors.initials: RW
authors.lastname: Crevel
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Debruyne
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Gamer
authors.forename: I R
authors.initials: IR
authors.lastname: Jowsey
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Kern
authors.forename: I
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: Kimber
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Lea
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Lloyd
authors.forename: Z
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Mehmood
authors.forename: W
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Steiling
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Veenstra
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Woolhiser
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Hennes
mesh_terms: D000485:Allergens / Q000145:classification*; D000818:Animals; D001681:Biological Assay / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards; D017449:Dermatitis, Allergic Contact / Q000145:classification* / Q000517:prevention & control; D004195:Disease Models, Animal; D004305:Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; D004348:Drug Labeling; D006801:Humans; D023441:Local Lymph Node Assay; D011356:Product Labeling; D018570:Risk Assessment / Q000592:standards*; D012882:Skin Tests / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*
chemical_list: D000485:Allergens