PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Dermatitis· 2020Q2

Fragrance Skin Sensitization Evaluation and Human Testing: 30-Year Experience

Mihwa Na, G. Ritacco, Devin O’Brien, M. Lavelle et al.

Short summary

Over 30 years and 154 studies involving 16,512 volunteers, the Human Repeated Insult Patch Test (HRIPT) demonstrated that fragrance sensitization is rare (0.12% of subjects) and has significantly decreased in the last 11 years (0.03%).

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • 154 HRIPT studies on 134 substances with 16,512 volunteers were analyzed.
  • Overall, 0.12% of subjects (20 individuals) showed induced allergy.
  • In the last 11 years, only 0.03% of 9854 subjects became sensitized.
  • Improved HRIPT dose definition and protocol adherence likely contributed to the decline in sensitization.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The human repeated insult patch test (HRIPT) has a history of use in the fragrance industry as a component of safety evaluation, exclusively to confirm the absence of skin sensitization at a defined dose. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to document the accumulated experience from more than 30 years of conducting HRIPTs. METHODS: A retrospective collation of HRIPT studies carried out to a consistent protocol was undertaken, with each study comprising a minimum of 100 volunteers. CONCLUSIONS: The HRIPT outcomes from 154 studies on 134 substances using 16,512 volunteers were obtained. Most studies confirmed that at the selected induction/challenge dose, sensitization was not induced. In 0.12% of subjects (n = 20), there was induction of allergy. However, in the last 11 years, only 3 (0.03%) of 9854 subjects became sensitized, perhaps because of improved definition of a safe HRIPT dose from the local lymph node assay and other skin sensitization methodologies, as well as more rigorous application of the standard protocol after publication in 2008. This experience with HRIPTs demonstrates that de novo sensitization induction is rare and becoming rarer, but it plays an important role as an indicator that toxicological predictions from nonhuman test methods (in vivo and in vitro methods) can be imperfect.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Dermatitis, 2020 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Dermatology

DermatologyMedicine