Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39590982›Full record

ReviewToxics2024

Chemical-Specific T Cell Tests Aim to Bridge a Gap in Skin Sensitization Evaluation.

Nele Fritsch, Marina Aparicio-Soto, Caterina Curato, Franziska Riedel, Hermann-Josef Thierse, Andreas Luch, Katherina Siewert

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Toxics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Nele FritschGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department of Chemical and Product Safety, Dermatotoxicology Study Centre, 10589 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0009-0000-9504-5559
Marina Aparicio-SotoGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department of Chemical and Product Safety, Dermatotoxicology Study Centre, 10589 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5483-1366
Caterina CuratoGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department of Chemical and Product Safety, Dermatotoxicology Study Centre, 10589 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4938-7288
Franziska RiedelGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department of Chemical and Product Safety, Dermatotoxicology Study Centre, 10589 Berlin, Germany.
Hermann-Josef ThierseGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department of Chemical and Product Safety, Dermatotoxicology Study Centre, 10589 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9655-681X
Andreas LuchGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department of Chemical and Product Safety, Dermatotoxicology Study Centre, 10589 Berlin, Germany.
Katherina SiewertGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department of Chemical and Product Safety, Dermatotoxicology Study Centre, 10589 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0380-1594

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 500312706German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment BfR-CPS-23-1322-848
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

T cell activation is the final key event (KE4) in the adverse outcome pathway (AOP) of skin sensitization. However, validated new approach methodologies (NAMs) for evaluating this step are missing. Accordingly, chemicals that activate an unusually high frequency of T cells, as does the most prevalent metal allergen nickel, are not yet identified in a regulatory context. T cell reactivity to chemical sensitizers might be especially relevant in real-life scenarios, where skin injury, co-exposure to irritants in chemical mixtures, or infections may trigger the heterologous innate immune stimulation necessary to induce adaptive T cell responses. Additionally, cross-reactivity, which underlies cross-allergies, can only be assessed by T cell tests. To date, several experimental T cell tests are available that use primary naïve and memory CD4+ and CD8+ T cells from human blood. These include priming and lymphocyte proliferation tests and, most recently, activation-induced marker (AIM) assays. All approaches are challenged by chemical-mediated toxicity, inefficient or unknown generation of T cell epitopes, and a low throughput. Here, we summarize solutions and strategies to confirm in vitro T cell signals. Broader application and standardization are necessary to possibly define chemical applicability domains and to strengthen the role of T cell tests in regulatory risk assessment.

Indexed as

adverse outcome pathwayallergic contact dermatitischemical-induced T cell epitopescontact allergensin vitro T cell testkey eventsnew approach methodologiesskin sensitizationT cell receptor

Identifiers

PMID39590982
PMCPMC11598016

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.