Premium
An interlaboratory evaluation of the Buehler test for the identification and classification of skin sensitizers
Author(s) -
Basketter D. A.,
Gerberick G. F.
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
contact dermatitis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.524
H-Index - 96
eISSN - 1600-0536
pISSN - 0105-1873
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1996.tb02332.x
Subject(s) - european union , skin sensitization , context (archaeology) , legislation , test (biology) , directive , identification (biology) , protocol (science) , skin test , medicine , member states , cosmetics , sensitization , environmental health , risk analysis (engineering) , computer science , law , business , biology , immunology , political science , pathology , paleontology , tuberculosis , botany , alternative medicine , economic policy , programming language
The correct identification of potential skin sensitizers is an essential first step in enabling a proper risk assessment to be made and to permit the implementation of appropriate risk management practices designed to avoid the induction of sensitization, Consequently, regulatory guidelines around the world demand that new substances are evaluated to assess their skin sensitization potential. There are two guinea pig test methods which are generally recognised, the guinea pig maximisation test (GPMT) and the occluded patch test described by Buehler. In different countries, one procedure seems to be more prevalent and acceptable to regulatory authorities than the other. Notably, in the European Union, the latest revision of the Annex V (Directive 92/32/EC) Test Method for skin sensitization asks that justification should be given in the situation where the notifi this paper, the validity of the Buehler protocol in the context of European legislation is critically examined. Results from two laboratories are collated. showing that the method can identify significant contact allergens, particularly those which would he registered formally as such according to European legislation. It is demonstrated that minor methodological variations can he tolerated without compromising tesi sensitivity, hut it is recommended that suitable positive control testing is the best way to ensure proper test conduct.