Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31364015›Full record

ArticleMolecular biology reports2019

A dual luciferase assay for evaluation of skin sensitizing potential of medical devices.

Elisabeth Mertl, Elisabeth Riegel, Nicole Glück, Gabriele Ettenberger-Bornberg, Grace Lin, Sabrina Auer, Magdalena Haller, Angelika Wlodarczyk, Christoph Steurer, Christian Kirchnawy and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular biology reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Quantitative Comparison of HSF1 Activators.Molecular biotechnology · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Elisabeth Mertl *OFI - Austrian Research Institute for Chemistry and Technology, Brehmstraße 14 A, 1110, Vienna, Austria.
Elisabeth Riegel *Department of Applied Life Sciences, University of Applied Sciences, FH Campus Wien, Helmut-Qualtinger-Gasse 2, 1030, Vienna, Austria.
Nicole GlückDepartment of Applied Life Sciences, University of Applied Sciences, FH Campus Wien, Helmut-Qualtinger-Gasse 2, 1030, Vienna, Austria.
Gabriele Ettenberger-BornbergOFI - Austrian Research Institute for Chemistry and Technology, Brehmstraße 14 A, 1110, Vienna, Austria.
Grace LinOFI - Austrian Research Institute for Chemistry and Technology, Brehmstraße 14 A, 1110, Vienna, Austria.
Sabrina AuerOFI - Austrian Research Institute for Chemistry and Technology, Brehmstraße 14 A, 1110, Vienna, Austria.
Magdalena HallerOFI - Austrian Research Institute for Chemistry and Technology, Brehmstraße 14 A, 1110, Vienna, Austria.
Angelika WlodarczykOFI - Austrian Research Institute for Chemistry and Technology, Brehmstraße 14 A, 1110, Vienna, Austria.
Christoph SteurerDepartment of Applied Life Sciences, University of Applied Sciences, FH Campus Wien, Helmut-Qualtinger-Gasse 2, 1030, Vienna, Austria.
Christian KirchnawyOFI - Austrian Research Institute for Chemistry and Technology, Brehmstraße 14 A, 1110, Vienna, Austria.
Thomas CzernyDepartment of Applied Life Sciences, University of Applied Sciences, FH Campus Wien, Helmut-Qualtinger-Gasse 2, 1030, Vienna, Austria. thomas.czerny@fh-campuswien.ac.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5119-3872

Funding

Magistrat der Stadt Wien MA23 - 18-18Österreichische Forschungsförderungsgesellschaft 839053
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

According to standing regulations animal tests are still state of the art for the evaluation of the sensitization potential of medical devices. The aim of our study was to develop an in vitro method that can be used for testing of extracts of medical devices. The novel MDA-ARE assay is a cell based reporter gene assay focused on the ARE-Nrf2 pathway, which is involved in the dermal sensitization process. Optimization of the reporter construct and the cell line resulted in an improvement of the detection limit and a reduction of the incubation time to 6 h, which lowers cytotoxic side effects of the extracts on the cells. Using the assay, 21 out of 22 pure chemicals were identified correctly as skin sensitizers or non-sensitizers. All sensitizers could be detected at far lower concentrations compared to the local lymph node assay, the state-of-the-art animal test. To evaluate the assay's suitability for the testing of medical devices, medical grade silicone containing 0.1% of known skin sensitizers was prepared as positive controls and extracts of these positive controls were tested in comparison to extracts from pure silicone samples. All silicone samples were correctly and reproducibly identified as sensitizing or non-sensitizing demonstrating that the MDA-ARE assay is a sensitive and reliable tool for the detection of skin sensitizers in extracts of medical devices. The developed and validated test protocol was used for medical device extracts and showed its applicability for real samples and thus can contribute to reduce or even to replace the need for animal tests.

Indexed as

Cell LineEquipment and SuppliesGenes, ReporterHEK293 CellsHumansHypersensitivityIn Vitro TechniquesLimit of DetectionLuciferasesModels, BiologicalNF-E2-Related Factor 2Signal TransductionSiliconesLuciferasesNFE2L2 protein, humanNF-E2-Related Factor 2SiliconesAREIn vitroLuciferaseMedical devicesNrf2Skin sensitization

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.