Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by EDWARDS, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by RIBEIRO, P. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by EDWARDS, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by RIBEIRO, P. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1994 Oxford University Press

research-article

Screening Petrochemicals for Contact Hypersensitivity Potential: A Comparison of the Murine Local Lymph Node Assay with Guinea Pig and Human Test Data

D. A. EDWARDS*, T. M. SORANNO{dagger}, M. A. AMORUSO*, R. V. HOUSE{ddagger}, A. C. TUMMEY*, G. W. TRIMMER*, P. T. THOMAS{ddagger} and P. L. RIBEIRO*

*Exxon Biomedical Sciences, Inc. East Millstone, New Jersey {dagger}Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp East Hanover, New Jersey {ddagger}IIT Reasearch Institute Chicago, Illinois

Received February 19, 1993; accepted March 10, 1994

Over the last few years, the Murine Local Lymph Node Assay (MLLNA) has received considerable attention as a more quantitative, less expensive alternative to the guinea pig assays currently employed to identify potential human contact allergens. At this time, several companies are involved in both independent and joint efforts to validate the MLLNA with their products. This report describes the preliminary results of an Exxon-sponsored research effort to validate the assay with selected materials that are representative of our company's diverse chemical and petroleum product groups. Nine test materials were chosen for which there already existed guinea pig and/or human patch sensitization data. When the MLLNA results were compared to those data obtained from currently used predictive tests (guinea pig, human patch test), the MLLNA showed good agreement for moderate and strong sensitizers. However, the assay may be prone to the potential confounding effects of irritation (false positives), may be insensitive to weak sensitizers, and may be influenced by vehicle selection.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.