[Code of Federal Regulations]

[Title 40, Volume 31]

[Revised as of July 1, 2006]

From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access

[CITE: 40CFR798.4100]



[Page 172-173]

 

                   TITLE 40--PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT

 

         CHAPTER I--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED)

 

PART 798_HEALTH EFFECTS TESTING GUIDELINES--Table of Contents

 

                Subpart E_Specific Organ/Tissue Toxicity

 

Sec.  798.4100  Dermal sensitization.





    (a) Purpose. In the assessment and evaluation of the toxic 

characteristics of a substance, determination of its potential to 

provoke skin sensitization reactions is important. Information derived 

from tests for skin sensitization serves to identify the possible hazard 

to a population repeatedly exposed to a test substance. While the 

desirability of skin sensitization testing is recognized, there are some 

real differences of opinion about the best method to use. The test 

selected should be a reliable screening procedure which should not fail 

to identify substances with significant allergenic potential, while at 

the same time avoiding false negative results.

    (b) Definitions. (1) Skin sensitization (allergic contact 

dermatitis) is an immunologically mediated cutaneous reaction to a 

substance. In the human, the responses may be characterized by pruritis, 

erythema, edema, papules, vesicles, bullae, or a combination of these. 

In other species the reactions may differ and only erythema and edema 

may be seen.

    (2) Induction period is a period of at least 1 week following a 

sensitization exposure during which a hypersensitive state is developed.

    (3) Induction exposure is an experimental exposure of a subject to a 

test substance with the intention of inducing a hypersensitive state.

    (4) Challenge exposure is an experimental exposure of a previously 

treated subject to a test substance following an induction period, to 

determine whether the subject will react in a hypersensitive manner.

    (c) Principle of the test method. Following initial exposure(s) to a 

test substance, the animals are subsequently subjected, after a period 

of not less than 1 week, to a challenge exposure with the test substance 

to establish whether a hypersensitive state has been induced. 

Sensitization is determined by examining the reaction to the challenge 

exposure and comparing this reaction to that of the initial induction 

exposure.

    (d) Test procedures. (1) Any of the following seven test methods is 

considered to be acceptable. It is realized, however, that the methods 

differ in their probability and degree of reaction to sensitizing 

substances.

    (i) Freund's complete adjuvant test.

    (ii) Guinea-pig maximization test.

    (iii) Split adjuvant technique.

    (iv) Buehler test.

    (v) Open epicutaneous test.

    (vi) Mauer optimization test.

    (vii) Footpad technique in guinea pig.

    (2) Removal of hair is by clipping, shaving, or possibly by 

depilation, depending on the test method used.

    (3) Animal selection--(i) Species and strain. The young adult guinea 

pig is the preferred species. Commonly used laboratory strains should be 

employed. If other species are used, the tester should provide 

justification/reasoning for their selection.



[[Page 173]]



    (ii) Number and sex. (A) The number and sex of animals used will 

depend on the method employed.

    (B) The females should be nulliparous and nonpregnant.

    (4) Control animals. (i) Periodic use of a positive control 

substance with an acceptable level of reliability for the test system 

selected is recommended;

    (ii) Animals may act as their own controls or groups of induced 

animals can be compared to groups which have received only a challenge 

exposure.

    (5) Dose levels. The dose level will depend upon the method 

selected.

    (6) Observation of animals. (i) Skin reactions should be graded and 

recorded after the challenge exposures at the time specified by the 

methodology selected. This is usually at 24, 48, and 72, hours. 

Additional notations should be made as necessary to fully describe 

unusual responses;

    (ii) Regardless of method selected, initial and terminal body 

weights should be recorded.

    (7) Procedures. The procedures to be used are those described by the 

methodology chosen.

    (e) Data and reporting. (1) Data should be summarized in tabular 

form, showing for each individual animal the skin reaction, results of 

the induction exposure(s) and the challenge exposure(s) at times 

indicated by the method chosen. As a minimum, the erythema and edema 

should be graded and any unusual finding should be recorded.

    (2) Evaluation of the results. The evaluation of results will 

provide information on the proportion of each group that became 

sensitized and the extent (slight, moderate, severe) of the 

sensitization reaction in each individual animal.

    (3) Test report. In addition to the reporting requirements as 

specified under 40 CFR part 792, subpart J, the following specific 

information should be reported:

    (i) A description of the method used and the commonly accepted name.

    (ii) Information on the positive control study, including positive 

control used, method used, and time conducted.

    (iii) The number and sex of the test animals.

    (iv) Species and strain.

    (v) Individual weights of the animals at the start of the test and 

at the conclusion of the test.

    (vi) A brief description of the grading system.

    (vii) Each reading made on each individual animal.

    (f) References. For additional background information on this test 

guideline the following references should be consulted:

    (1) Buehler, E.V. ``Delayed Contact Hypersensitivity in the Guinea 

Pig,'' Archives Dermatology. 91:171 (1965).

    (2) Draize, J.H. ``Dermal Toxicity,'' Food Drug Cosmetic Law 

Journal. 10:722-732 (1955).

    (3) Klecak, G. ``Identification of Contact Allergens: Predictive 

Tests in Animals,'' Advances in Modern Toxicology: Dermatology and 

Pharmacology. Ed. F.N. Marzulli and H.I. Maibach. (Washington, D.C.: 

Hemisphere Publishing Corp., 1977) 4:305-339).

    (4) Klecak, G., Geleick, H., Grey, J.R. ``Screening of Fragrance 

Materials for Allergenicity in the Guinea Pig.-1. Comparison of Four 

Testing Methods,'' Journal of the Society of Cosmetic Chemists. 28:53-64 

(1977).

    (5) Magnusson, B., Kligman, A.M. ``The Identification of Contact 

Allergens by Animal Assay,'' The Guinea Pig Maximization Test. The 

Journal of Investigative Dermatology. 52:268-276 (1973).

    (6) Maguire, H.C. ``The Bioassay of Contact Allergens in the Guinea 

Pig'' Journal of the Society of Cosmetic Chemists. 24:151-162 (1973).

    (7) Maurer, T., Thomann, P., Weirich, E.G., Hess, R. ``The 

Optimization Test in the Guinea Pig. A Method for the Predictive 

Evaluation of the Contact Allergenicity of Chemicals,'' Agents and 

Actions. (Basel: Birkhauser Verlag, 1975) Vol. 5/2.

    (8) Maurer, T., Thomann, P., Weirich, E.G., Hess, R. ``The 

Optimization Test in the Guinea Pig: A Method for the Predictive 

Evaluation of the Contact Allergenicity of Chemicals,'' International 

Congress Series Excerpta Medica No. 376, (1975) Vol. 203.