Contact dermatitis · 2009
Skin sensitization potency and cross-reactivity of p-phenylenediamine and its derivatives evaluated by non-radioactive murine local lymph node assay and guinea-pig maximization test.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yamano Tetsuo, Shimizu Mitsuru
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: p-Phenylenediamine (PPD)-related chemicals have been used as antioxidants in rubber products, and many cases of contact dermatitis caused by these chemicals have been reported.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate relative sensitizing potency and cross-reactivity among PPD derivatives.
METHODS: Five PPD derivatives, p-aminodiphenylamine (PADPA), N,N'-diphenyl-p-phenylenediamine (DPPD), N-isopropyl-N'-phenyl-p-phenylenediamine (IPPD), N-(1,3-dimethylbutyl)-N'-phenyl-p-phenylenediamine (DMBPPD), N-(1-methylheptyl)-N'-phenyl-p-phenylenediamine (MHPPD), and the core chemical PPD were evaluated for their sensitizing potency and cross-reactivity using the non-radioactive murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) and the guinea-pig maximization test (GPMT).
RESULTS: PPD and all the derivatives were identified as primary sensitizers in both tests. The order of potency in the LLNA was as follows: IPPD and PADPA > PPD > DMBPPD and MHPPD > DPPD. In the GPMT, all six groups of animals sensitized with one of these chemicals cross-reacted to four other derivatives. Specifically, the five groups that have a common basic PADPA structure, that is PADPA, DPPD, IPPD, DMBPPD, and MHPPD, all reacted to each other at almost the same scores, while none of them reacted to PPD.
CONCLUSIONS: The cross-reactivity profile found in the study was to some extent different from that in previous human data, where distinction between cross-reaction and concomitant primary sensitization is not always clear.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate relative sensitizing potency and cross-reactivity among PPD derivatives.
METHODS: Five PPD derivatives, p-aminodiphenylamine (PADPA), N,N'-diphenyl-p-phenylenediamine (DPPD), N-isopropyl-N'-phenyl-p-phenylenediamine (IPPD), N-(1,3-dimethylbutyl)-N'-phenyl-p-phenylenediamine (DMBPPD), N-(1-methylheptyl)-N'-phenyl-p-phenylenediamine (MHPPD), and the core chemical PPD were evaluated for their sensitizing potency and cross-reactivity using the non-radioactive murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) and the guinea-pig maximization test (GPMT).
RESULTS: PPD and all the derivatives were identified as primary sensitizers in both tests. The order of potency in the LLNA was as follows: IPPD and PADPA > PPD > DMBPPD and MHPPD > DPPD. In the GPMT, all six groups of animals sensitized with one of these chemicals cross-reacted to four other derivatives. Specifically, the five groups that have a common basic PADPA structure, that is PADPA, DPPD, IPPD, DMBPPD, and MHPPD, all reacted to each other at almost the same scores, while none of them reacted to PPD.
CONCLUSIONS: The cross-reactivity profile found in the study was to some extent different from that in previous human data, where distinction between cross-reaction and concomitant primary sensitization is not always clear.