A botanical reference set illustrating a weight of evidence approach for skin sensitization risk assessment

被引:0
|
作者
Gao, Yuan [1 ]
Ryan, Cindy A. [2 ]
Ellingson, Kim [3 ]
Krutz, Nora [4 ]
Kern, Petra S. [4 ]
机构
[1] Procter & Gamble Technol Beijing Co Ltd, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] ToxTech Solut LLC, Milan, IN USA
[3] Mason Business Ctr, Procter & Gamble, 8700 Mason Montgomery Rd, Mason, OH 45040 USA
[4] Procter & Gamble Serv Co NV, Strombeek-bever, Belgium
关键词
Botanical; Natural substance; Skin sensitization; Risk assessment; Weight of evidence (WoE); ALLERGIC CONTACT-DERMATITIS; THRESHOLD DST APPROACH; CASHEW NUT SHELL; SAFETY ASSESSMENT; POISON OAK; IVY URUSHIOL; INGREDIENTS; IDENTIFICATION; PLANTS; L;
D O I
10.1016/j.fct.2023.114413
中图分类号
TS2 [食品工业];
学科分类号
0832 ;
摘要
Recent years have seen an increase in the use of botanicals and natural substances (BNS) in consumer products such as cosmetics and household care products. Most work conducted to date to assess botanicals for human safety has focused their use as dietary supplements and thus on systemic toxicity. However, the induction of skin sensitization is a possible adverse effect of natural products in particular those that come into skin contact, especially for cosmetics that remain on the skin and are not rinsed off following use. Assessments of BNS ingredients are often challenging for a number of reasons: the BNS are complex mixtures that can be of mostly unknown composition; the composition can be highly variable even within the same plant species and dependent on how processed; the physical form of the BNS raw material can vary from a highly concentrated powdered extract to a liquid extract containing only a small percentage of the BNS; testing of the BNS raw materials in New Approach Methods (NAM) has uncertainty as these methods are often not developed or validated for complex mixtures. In this study, a reference set of 14 selected BNS which span the range of skin sensitization potential was complied. These data were used in a Weight of Evidence (WoE) approach to evaluate their skin sensitization potential with each of the data rich BNS being classified as either having strong evidence of inducing skin sensitization based on human topical use history, animal data, clinical data, composition data and NAM data, or having some but more limited (weak) evidence of inducing skin sensitization, or having strong evidence of no skin sensitization potential. When available data have sufficient potency related information, sensitization potency assessment is also provided based on WoE, classifying these BNS as either strong, moderate, or weak sensitizers, or non-sensitizers. An outline for a BNS skin sensitization risk assessment framework is proposed starting with exposure-based waiving and WoE assessment for higher exposures. In addition to demonstrating the application of the WoE approach, the reference set presented here provides a set of 'data rich' botanicals which cover a range of sensitization potencies that could be used for evaluating existing test methods or aid in the development of new predictive models for skin sensitization.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] In chemico skin sensitization risk assessment of botanical ingredients
    Avonto, Cristina
    Chittiboyina, Amar G.
    Sadrieh, Nakissa
    Vukmanovic, Stanislav
    Khan, Ikhlas A.
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED TOXICOLOGY, 2018, 38 (07) : 1047 - 1053
  • [2] Skin sensitization risk assessment: Considering available data for weight of evidence assessments
    Lewandowski, Thomas A.
    Cohen, Joel M.
    REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY, 2016, 82 : 186 - 187
  • [3] Skin sensitization risk assessment: Considering available data for weight of evidence assessments Response
    Basketter, David
    Safford, Bob
    REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY, 2016, 82 : 188 - 188
  • [4] A Bayes Linear Approach to Weight-of-Evidence Risk Assessment for Skin Allergy
    Gosling, John Paul
    Hart, Andy
    Owen, Helen
    Davies, Michael
    Li, Jin
    MacKay, Cameron
    BAYESIAN ANALYSIS, 2013, 8 (01): : 169 - 186
  • [5] Weight of Evidence Approach for Skin Sensitization Potency Categorization of Fragrance Ingredients
    Na, Mihwa
    O'Brien, Devin
    Lavelle, Maura
    Lee, Isabelle
    Gerberick, G. Frank
    Api, Anne Marie
    DERMATITIS, 2022, 33 (02) : 161 - 175
  • [6] Interspecies assessment factors and skin sensitization risk assessment
    Basketter, D. A.
    Natsch, A.
    Ellis, G.
    Api, A. M.
    Irizar, A.
    Safford, B.
    Ryan, C.
    Kern, P.
    REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY, 2018, 97 : 186 - 188
  • [7] Quantitative risk assessment for skin sensitization: A simplified approach for hair dye ingredients?
    Goebel, Carsten
    Diepgen, Thomas
    Krasteva, Maya
    Schlatter, Harald
    Nicolas, Jean-Francois
    Bloemeke, Brunhilde
    Coenraads, Pieter Jan
    Schnuch, Axel
    Taylor, James S.
    Pungier, Jacquemine
    Fautz, Rolf
    Fuchs, Anne
    Schuh, Werner
    Gerberick, G. Frank
    Kimber, Ian
    TOXICOLOGY LETTERS, 2013, 221 : S87 - S87
  • [8] Skin sensitization: strategies for the assessment and management of risk
    Basketter, D. A.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, 2008, 159 (02) : 267 - 273
  • [9] Derivation of the no expected sensitization induction level for dermal quantitative risk assessment of fragrance ingredients using a weight of evidence approach
    Lee, Isabelle
    Na, Mihwa
    Lavelle, Maura
    Api, Anne Marie
    FOOD AND CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGY, 2022, 159
  • [10] Methyldibromoglutaronitrile: skin sensitization and quantitative risk assessment
    Basketter, David A.
    CUTANEOUS AND OCULAR TOXICOLOGY, 2010, 29 (01) : 4 - 9