固体物质职业暴露评价:选择体外经皮吸收实验的载体。

IF 5.7 2区 医学 Q1 TOXICOLOGY
Catherine Champmartin, Lisa Chedik, Fabrice Marquet, Frédéric Cosnier
{"title":"固体物质职业暴露评价:选择体外经皮吸收实验的载体。","authors":"Catherine Champmartin,&nbsp;Lisa Chedik,&nbsp;Fabrice Marquet,&nbsp;Frédéric Cosnier","doi":"10.1080/10408444.2022.2097052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Percutaneous occupational exposure to industrial toxicants can be assessed <i>in vitro</i> on excised human or animal skins. Numerous factors can significantly influence skin permeation of chemicals and the flux determination. Among them, the vehicle used to solubilize the solid substances is a tricky key step. A \"realistic surrogate\" that closely matches the exposure scenario is recommended in first intention. When direct transposition of occupational exposure conditions to <i>in vitro</i> experiments is impossible, it is recommended that the vehicle used does not affect the skin barrier (in particular in terms of structural integrity, composition, or enzymatic activity). Indeed, any such effect could alter the percutaneous absorption of substances in a number of ways, as we will see. Potential effects are described for five monophasic vehicles, including the three most frequently used: water, ethanol, acetone; and two that are more rarely used, but are realistic: artificial sebum and artificial sweat. Finally, we discuss a number of criteria to be verified and the associated tests that should be performed when choosing the most appropriate vehicle, keeping in mind that, in the context of occupational exposure, the scientific quality of the percutaneous absorption data provided, and how they are interpreted, may have long-range consequences. From the narrative review presented, we also identify and discuss important factors to consider in future updates of the OECD guidelines for <i>in vitro</i> skin absorption experiments.</p>","PeriodicalId":10869,"journal":{"name":"Critical Reviews in Toxicology","volume":"52 4","pages":"294-316"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Occupational exposure assessment with solid substances: choosing a vehicle for <i>in vitro</i> percutaneous absorption experiments.\",\"authors\":\"Catherine Champmartin,&nbsp;Lisa Chedik,&nbsp;Fabrice Marquet,&nbsp;Frédéric Cosnier\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10408444.2022.2097052\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Percutaneous occupational exposure to industrial toxicants can be assessed <i>in vitro</i> on excised human or animal skins. Numerous factors can significantly influence skin permeation of chemicals and the flux determination. Among them, the vehicle used to solubilize the solid substances is a tricky key step. A \\\"realistic surrogate\\\" that closely matches the exposure scenario is recommended in first intention. When direct transposition of occupational exposure conditions to <i>in vitro</i> experiments is impossible, it is recommended that the vehicle used does not affect the skin barrier (in particular in terms of structural integrity, composition, or enzymatic activity). Indeed, any such effect could alter the percutaneous absorption of substances in a number of ways, as we will see. Potential effects are described for five monophasic vehicles, including the three most frequently used: water, ethanol, acetone; and two that are more rarely used, but are realistic: artificial sebum and artificial sweat. Finally, we discuss a number of criteria to be verified and the associated tests that should be performed when choosing the most appropriate vehicle, keeping in mind that, in the context of occupational exposure, the scientific quality of the percutaneous absorption data provided, and how they are interpreted, may have long-range consequences. From the narrative review presented, we also identify and discuss important factors to consider in future updates of the OECD guidelines for <i>in vitro</i> skin absorption experiments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Reviews in Toxicology\",\"volume\":\"52 4\",\"pages\":\"294-316\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Reviews in Toxicology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10408444.2022.2097052\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"TOXICOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Reviews in Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10408444.2022.2097052","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

经皮职业性接触工业毒物可在体外对切除的人类或动物皮肤进行评估。许多因素会显著影响化学物质的皮肤渗透和通量的测定。其中,用于溶解固体物质的车辆是一个棘手的关键步骤。在最初的意图中,建议使用一个与暴露情景密切匹配的“现实替代方案”。当不可能将职业暴露条件直接转换为体外实验时,建议所使用的载体不影响皮肤屏障(特别是在结构完整性、组成或酶活性方面)。事实上,任何这样的影响都可能以多种方式改变物质的经皮吸收,我们将会看到。描述了五种单相载具的潜在影响,包括三种最常用的载具:水、乙醇、丙酮;还有两种很少使用,但很现实的方法:人工皮脂和人工汗液。最后,我们讨论了一些需要验证的标准,以及在选择最合适的载体时应该进行的相关测试,记住,在职业暴露的背景下,所提供的经皮吸收数据的科学质量,以及如何解释这些数据,可能会产生长期后果。从所提出的叙述性回顾中,我们还确定并讨论了经合组织体外皮肤吸收实验指南未来更新中需要考虑的重要因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Occupational exposure assessment with solid substances: choosing a vehicle for in vitro percutaneous absorption experiments.

Percutaneous occupational exposure to industrial toxicants can be assessed in vitro on excised human or animal skins. Numerous factors can significantly influence skin permeation of chemicals and the flux determination. Among them, the vehicle used to solubilize the solid substances is a tricky key step. A "realistic surrogate" that closely matches the exposure scenario is recommended in first intention. When direct transposition of occupational exposure conditions to in vitro experiments is impossible, it is recommended that the vehicle used does not affect the skin barrier (in particular in terms of structural integrity, composition, or enzymatic activity). Indeed, any such effect could alter the percutaneous absorption of substances in a number of ways, as we will see. Potential effects are described for five monophasic vehicles, including the three most frequently used: water, ethanol, acetone; and two that are more rarely used, but are realistic: artificial sebum and artificial sweat. Finally, we discuss a number of criteria to be verified and the associated tests that should be performed when choosing the most appropriate vehicle, keeping in mind that, in the context of occupational exposure, the scientific quality of the percutaneous absorption data provided, and how they are interpreted, may have long-range consequences. From the narrative review presented, we also identify and discuss important factors to consider in future updates of the OECD guidelines for in vitro skin absorption experiments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
1.70%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Critical Reviews in Toxicology provides up-to-date, objective analyses of topics related to the mechanisms of action, responses, and assessment of health risks due to toxicant exposure. The journal publishes critical, comprehensive reviews of research findings in toxicology and the application of toxicological information in assessing human health hazards and risks. Toxicants of concern include commodity and specialty chemicals such as formaldehyde, acrylonitrile, and pesticides; pharmaceutical agents of all types; consumer products such as macronutrients and food additives; environmental agents such as ambient ozone; and occupational exposures such as asbestos and benzene.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信