Amino Acid Derivative Reactivity Assay Research Articles

Comparison of in chemico skin sensitization methods and development of an in chemico skin photosensitization assay.

Chemical substances that induce an allergic response in skin upon contact are called skin allergens or sensitizers, while chemical substances that elicit an allergic response only in presence of light are called photoallergens or photo sensitizers. The Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA, OECD N⁰ 442C, 2015) and the Amino Acid Derivative Reactivity Assay (ADRA) are in chemico assays used to discriminate between allergens and non-allergens. The DPRA and the ADRA, respectively, monitor the depletion of model peptides and modified amino acids induced by crosslinking with test chemicals. In the current study we compared these two assays and analyzed their suitability to predict skin sensitization potential of several chemical substances. In order to study the combined effect of a chemical compound and UV light, we modified DPRA (photo-DPRA) as well as ADRA (photo-ADRA) by introduction of a photo-irradiation parameter. Analysis using photo-DPRA and photo-ADRA correctly distinguished known photoallergens from non-photoallergens. Upon irradiation, photoallergens selectively showed higher depletion of model peptides or modified amino acids. Thus, photo-DPRA and/or photo-ADRA can serve as non-animal in vitro methods for the identification and assessment of photoallergens/ photosensitizers.

Cause of and countermeasures for oxidation of the cysteine-derived reagent used in the amino acid derivative reactivity assay.

The amino acid derivative reactivity assay (ADRA) is an in chemico alternative to animal testing for skin sensitization that solves certain problems found in the use of the direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA). During a recent validation study conducted at multiple laboratories as part of the process to include ADRA in an existing OECD test guideline, one of the nucleophilic reagents used in ADRA-N-(2-(1-naphthyl)acetyl)-l-cysteine (NAC)-was found to be susceptible to oxidation in much the same manner that the cysteine peptide used in DPRA was. Owing to this, we undertook a study to clarify the cause of the promotion of NAC oxidation. In general, cysteine and other chemicals that have thiol groups are known to oxidize in the presence of even minute quantities of metal ions. When metal ions were added to the ADRA reaction solution, Cu2+ promoted NAC oxidation significantly. When 0.25μm of EDTA was added in the presence of Cu2+ , NAC oxidation was suppressed. Based on this, we predicted that the addition of EDTA to the NAC stock solution would suppress NAC oxidation. Next, we tested 82 chemicals used in developing ADRA to determine whether EDTA affects ADRA's ability to predict sensitization. The results showed that the addition of EDTA has virtually no effect on the reactivity of NAC with a test chemical, yielding an accuracy of 87% for predictions of skin sensitization, which was roughly the same as ADRA.

A novel in chemico method to detect skin sensitizers in highly diluted reaction conditions.

The direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA) is a simple and versatile alternative method for the evaluation of skin sensitization that involves the reaction of test chemicals with two peptides. However, this method requires concentrated solutions of test chemicals, and hydrophobic substances may not dissolve at the concentrations required. Furthermore, hydrophobic test chemicals may precipitate when added to the reaction solution. We previously established a high-sensitivity method, the amino acid derivative reactivity assay (ADRA). This method uses novel cysteine (NAC) and novel lysine derivatives (NAL), which were synthesized by introducing a naphthalene ring to the amine group of cysteine and lysine residues. In this study, we modified the ADRA method by reducing the concentration of the test chemicals 100-fold. We investigated the accuracy of skin sensitization predictions made using the modified method, which was designated the ADRA-dilutional method (ADRA-DM). The predictive accuracy of the ADRA-DM for skin sensitization was 90% for 82 test chemicals which were also evaluated via the ADRA, and the predictive accuracy in the ADRA-DM was higher than that in the ADRA and DPRA. Furthermore, no precipitation of test compounds was observed at the initiation of the ADRA-DM reaction. These results show that the ADRA-DM allowed the use of test chemicals at concentrations two orders of magnitude lower than that possible with the ADRA. In addition, ADRA-DM does not have the restrictions on test compound solubility that were a major problem with the DPRA. Therefore, the ADRA-DM is a versatile and useful method.

Development of a prediction method for skin sensitization using novel cysteine and lysine derivatives

IntroductionThe Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA) was developed as an alternative simple and versatile method for predicting skin sensitization. Here, we describe a novel Amino acid Derivative Reactivity Assay (ADRA) involving 2 amino acid derivatives: N-(2-(1-naphthyl)acetyl)-l-cysteine (NAC) and α-N-(2-(1-naphthyl)acetyl)-l-lysine (NAL), in which each amino-terminal residue is introduced into a naphthalene ring. ADRA measurements were conducted at 281nm, which improved baseline stability, and were less influenced by other substances in the reaction solutions than DPRA measurements that are conducted at 220nm. Methods:Chemically synthesized NAC and NAL were dissolved in phosphate buffers of pH9.5 and 12.0, respectively. Each solution, test chemical solution, and phosphate buffer, were mixed in 96-well microplates and incubated in the dark for 24h at 25°C. Following incubation, samples were diluted 10 times with a mixed solution of 25% acetonitrile/0.5% trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) in water, and NAC and NAL levels were quantified in each sample and control using a high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) system. The reactivity of NAC/NAL was calculated as the percent depletion based on the decrease in the non-reacted NAC/NAL concentration in the samples relative to the average concentration in the control; the average NAC/NAL reduction score was calculated. A 2-class classification model was developed using ADMEWORKS/ModelBuilder, and an optimal average score that could discriminate between sensitizers and non-sensitizers was determined. Results:A total of 82 test chemicals were applied to ADRA for comparison against DPRA. The prediction accuracy of ADRA was 88%, which was similar to that of DPRA. Discussion:ADRA was used to quantify NAC/NAL at 281nm, which showed high accuracy for the prediction of skin sensitization, similar to that of DPRA. Therefore, ADRA could be used to expand the range of chemicals tested in skin sensitization analyses.