Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40873532›Full record

ArticleToxicological research2025

Validation study of spectrophotometric direct peptide reactivity assay (spectro-DPRA), a newly modified in chemico skin sensitization test method.

Hye-Jeong Sin, Ji-Young Bae, Sun-A Cho, Minseok Choi, Changwan Ha, Chang Eon Park, Jeong-Ja Oh, Susun An, Bae-Hwan Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Toxicological research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Hye-Jeong SinDepartment of Public Health, College of Natural Sciences, Keimyung University, Daegu, 704-701 Republic of Korea.
Ji-Young BaeDepartment of Public Health, College of Natural Sciences, Keimyung University, Daegu, 704-701 Republic of Korea.
Sun-A ChoAmorePacific Corporation R&D Center, Yongin-si, Republic of Korea.
Minseok ChoiAmorePacific Corporation R&D Center, Yongin-si, Republic of Korea.
Changwan HaAmorePacific Corporation R&D Center, Yongin-si, Republic of Korea.
Chang Eon ParkKorea Testing & Research Institute, Hwasun, Republic of Korea.
Jeong-Ja OhNonclinical Research Institute, Corestem-Chemon Inc, Yongin-Si, Republic of Korea.
Susun AnAmorePacific Corporation R&D Center, Yongin-si, Republic of Korea.
Bae-Hwan KimDepartment of Public Health, College of Natural Sciences, Keimyung University, Daegu, 704-701 Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5898-0748

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study was conducted to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of the Spectro-DPRA, an enhanced method for the OECD TG 442C (direct peptide reactivity assay, DPRA), serving as an alternative to animal testing for skin sensitization. The validation of Spectro-DPRA was executed across four participating laboratories (Lab 1, Lab 2, Lab 3, and Lab 4, the latter only participating in the proficiency test) adhering to GLP principles. It covered transferability, proficiency, within laboratory and between laboratory reproducibility tests, and a predictive capacity test using 40 additional substances. In tests with 10 proficiency substances, results from all participating laboratories fell within the respective reference ranges for 8 of the 10 substances for each peptide. The within laboratory reproducibility for 12 test substances demonstrated success rates of 83.3% for both Lab 1 and Lab 3, and 100% for Lab 2. The between laboratory reproducibility for 20 test substances showed an 85% concordance rate. The predictive capacity for these substances did not align with the test method similarity criteria stipulated in the OECD Series on Testing and Assessment No. 303 (performance standards for the assessment of proposed similar or modified in vitro skin sensitisation DPRA and ADRA test methods, OECD PS No.303), with accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity rates at 74.6%, 70.9%, and 81.4%, respectively. However, the predictive capacity for an additional 40 substances revealed high accuracy (85.2%), sensitivity (82.2%), and specificity (97.0%). Although the Spectro-DPRA did not completely conform to the OECD PS No.303 criteria for test method similarity, it showed high predictive accuracy of over 80% for the 40 additional substances, confirming its reliability as a test method for skin sensitization evaluation.

Indexed as

In chemicoSkin sensitizationSpectro-DPRAValidation

Identifiers

PMID40873532
PMCPMC12378800

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.