Meizora Aripima Meza1*, Ema
Hermawati2
Universitas Indonesia, Jawa Barat, Indonesia1,2
Email: meizora.bia@gmail.com
|
KEYWORDS |
ABSTRACT |
|
In
Vivo, Toxicity Test, Acute Dermal |
The
aim of the dermal acute toxicity test is to identify the intrinsic toxicity
of a product by assessing its hazard potential following acute skin exposure.
This test also provides preliminary data that can be used to determine the
appropriate dosage level and guide the design of subsequent toxicity studies,
including determining the LD50 value and information about skin absorption.
In this study, female rats (Rattus Nervegicus) are used as test subjects. The
test material is prepared by diluting 15 ml of the sample to a final
concentration of 994.9 mg/mL. The rats are exposed to the material for 24
hours. Post-exposure, microanatomical observations, and surgery in the
abdominal and thoracic areas revealed no abnormalities. |
|
DOI: 10.58860/ijsh.v3i9.240 |
|
Corresponding Author: Meizora Aripima Meza*
Email: meizora.bia@gmail.com
INTRODUCTION
The effect of
exposure to a substance on humans can be understood by investigating its
cumulative effects, toxic, carcinogenic, teratogenic, mutagenic, and other
harmful impacts
Animal models
are instrumental in assessing biochemical, physiological, and pathological
reactions to a substance
The primary
objectives of the dermal acute toxicity test are to identify the intrinsic
toxicity of a substance, determine hazard information following acute skin
exposure, and provide preliminary data that informs the dosage levels and
designs of future toxicity studies
In the case of
Dugstrip Turbo, acute dermal toxicity testing using experimental animals is
essential to detect toxic effects that manifest shortly after exposure. This
test will not only provide a systemic overview of the product's safety but also
generate important data regarding the LD50 value, hazard classification, and
absorption through the skin
In summary,
previous studies focusing on acute dermal toxicity tests, including tests
performed on similar substances, provide a foundational understanding of the
procedures and outcomes
METHOD
The test
animal used was a rat (Rattus norvegicus) with 12 female Wistar strains. The
animals are caged individually in a room with a temperature of ±24°C with a
relative humidity of 30-70%. Lighting is set at 12 hours of light and 12 hours
of darkness. Feed and drink are given ad libitum.
The test
animals were anesthetized first using ketamine to minimize stress. Ketamine
injection through the intra-peritoneal route
The Dugstrip
Turbo test material was taken as much as 50mL and then diluted in 100mL so that
the concentration of the solution was 50%. The test material was measured using
a pycnometer. The specific period is used as the concentration of the sample in
the calculation of the volume of the dose
The test doses
used were 50 mg/Kg Bb, 200 mg/Kg Bb, 1000 mg/Kg Bb, and 2000 mg/Kg Bb. The
volume of test material given to rats assuming a rat weight of 200 grams and a
solution concentration of 994.9 mg/mL was:

Provision of Test
Materials
The test
material is presented thinly and evenly on the shaved back area as much as the
calculated volume of the give
Categorization of Test
Materials
The test
material is evaluated based on the onset of toxicity symptoms. The test results
in the form of Lethal Dose (LD) values of 50 or dose values that can cause
death in 50% of the population are categorized according to GHS values
Table
1.
Criteria
for Classification of Test Materials
|
Dosage (mg/Kg BB) |
Population Parameters |
Category |
|
50 |
2 out of 3
dead |
1 |
|
1 in 3
dead |
2 |
|
|
200 |
No deaths
and symptoms of toxicity |
|
|
1 in 3
dead |
3 |
|
|
1000 |
2 out of 3
dead |
|
|
1 in 3 dead |
4 |
|
|
2000 |
2 out of 3
dead |
|
|
1 in 3
dead |
5 |
|
|
No
symptoms of toxicity |
5/Unclassified |
Calculation of doses
between species
The table of
human equivalent doses (HED) based on body surface area between species is as
follows:
Table 1.
Human Equivalent Dose
Calculation Based on Body Surface Area
|
Species |
Reference Body Weight (kg) |
Working Weight Range (kg) |
Body Surface Area (m²) |
To Convert Dose in mg/kg to Dose in mg/m², Multiply by Km |
To Convert Animal Dose in mg/kg to HED in mg/kg, Either: Divide Animal Dose by |
Multiply Animal Dose by |
|
Human |
60 |
- |
1.62 |
37 |
- |
- |
|
Mouse |
0.02 |
0.011-0.034 |
0.007 |
3 |
12.3 |
0.081 |
|
Hamster |
0.08 |
0.047-0.157 |
0.016 |
5 |
7.4 |
0.135 |
|
Rat |
0.15 |
0.08-0.27 |
0.025 |
6 |
6.2 |
0.162 |
|
Ferret |
0.30 |
0.16-0.54 |
0.043 |
7 |
5.3 |
0.189 |
|
Guinea Pig |
0.40 |
0.208-0.700 |
0.05 |
8 |
4.6 |
0.216 |
|
Rabbit |
1.8 |
0.90-3.0 |
0.15 |
12 |
3.1 |
0.324 |
|
Dog |
10 |
5-17 |
0.50 |
20 |
1.8 |
0.541 |
|
Monkeys (rhesus) |
3 |
1.4-4.9 |
0.25 |
12 |
3.1 |
0.324 |
|
Marmoset |
0.35 |
0.14-0.72 |
0.06 |
6 |
6.2 |
0.162 |
|
Squirrel Monkey |
0.60 |
0.29-0.97 |
0.09 |
7 |
5.3 |
0.189 |
|
Baboon |
12 |
7-23 |
0.60 |
20 |
1.8 |
0.541 |
|
Micro Pig |
20 |
10-33 |
0.74 |
27 |
1.4 |
0.730 |
|
Mini Pig |
40 |
25-64 |
1.14 |
35 |
1.1 |
0.946 |
The
calculation of the dose level of human equivalent test (HED) against other
species based on the body surface area factor to convert animal and human doses
into HED is determined by the Equation:
HED (mg/kg) = Animal Dose
(mg/kg) x (Animal Km / Human Km).
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Observation of Toxic
Symptoms and Death
After 24 hours
of exposure to the test material, no mice showed symptoms of toxicity and death
at doses of 50 mg/Kg Bb, 200 mg/Kg Bb, 1000 mg/Kg Bb, and 2000 mg/Kg Bb, so
there was no need for further testing. The skin exposed to the test material
also did not change. Observation continued for 48 hours, 72 hours, day 7, and
day 14. In follow-up observation, no mice were found to experience symptoms of
toxicity and death at all doses tested. Documentation of the test material
exposure area is attached to Appendix 2.
Weight and Macroanatomical
Observations
The body
weight of the rats decreased in the first few days after the treatment (Figure
1). This can occur because the rats experience stress conditions due to the
installation of porous gauze and non-irritating plaster as well as individual
cages for 24 hours. After the stress period passed, the animal's weight
increased again according to the growth phase of the rats

Figure
1. The average weight of the test rats was 14 days. A: Dose 50mg/kgBB, B: Dose
200 mg/kgBB, C: Dose 1000mg/kgBB, D: Dose 2000mg/kgBB.
After 14 days
of observation, the animals were euthanized in accordance with animal welfare
protocols, followed by surgical examination of the abdominal and thoracic
areas. Organs in these regions were carefully observed for potential changes
resulting from toxin exposure
CONCLUSION
The results of
the acute toxicity test of dermal Dugstrip Turbo 50% on the skin of rats in the
four dose groups, namely group A 50mg/kgBB, group B 200mg/kgBB, group C
1000mg/kgBB and group D 2000mg/kgBB did not show any harm due to direct
exposure to the skin. The results of
macroanatomical necropsy on the organ did not show any abnormalities; according
to GHS in the OECD, The LD50 value of Dugstrip Turbo products is categorized as
Unclassified/Category 5 where the parameters do not have symptoms of toxicity.
Based on the
predetermined dose test group, it can be equated to the human equivalent dose
(HED) namely, Group A 50mg/kg obtained HED is 8.1 mg/kg, Group B 200mg/kg
obtained HED is 32 mg/kg, Group C 1000mg/kg obtained HED is 162 mg/kg, Group D
2000mg/kg obtained HED is 323 mg/kg. The results of the dermal acute toxicity
test can be implicated in humans, this is based on the fact that the tests
carried out on the selected test animals are indeed more sensitive than humans.
It's just that in the claim for safety in humans, limited clinical trial steps
in humans are needed.
REFERENCES
Berggren, E., White, A., Ouedraogo, G., Paini, A., Richarz, A.-N., Bois,
F. Y., … Mahony, C. (2017). Ab initio chemical safety assessment: A workflow
based on exposure considerations and non-animal methods. Computational
Toxicology, 4, 31–44. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comtox.2017.10.001
De Santis, S., Carozzi, F. G., de Felice, G., & Poggi, C. (2017).
Test methods for Textile Reinforced Mortar systems. Composites Part B:
Engineering, 127, 121–132. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.03.016
Deasy Andani, G. A. S., Lesmana, R., & Pratiwi, Y. S. (2022). The
Role of Herbs Supplementation in Modulating Injury-induced Inflammatory
Response in Skeletal Muscle: A Systematic Review. The Natural Products
Journal, 12(7), 62–72.
Demirci, T., & Sahin, E. (2019). The effect of chronic stress and
obesity on sperm quality and testis histology in male rats; a morphometric and
immunohistochemical study.
Development, O. for E. C. and. (2015). Test No. 404: acute dermal
irritation/corrosion. OECD Publishing.
Erkekoglu, P., & Kocer-Gumusel, B. (2018). Toxicity assessment of
nanopharmaceuticals. In Inorganic Frameworks as Smart Nanomedicines
(pp. 565–603). Elsevier. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813661-4.00013-4
Guérin, G., Christophe, C., Philippe, A., Murray, A. S., Thomsen, K. J.,
Tribolo, C., … Lahaye, C. (2017). Absorbed dose, equivalent dose, measured
dose rates, and implications for OSL age estimates: Introducing the Average
Dose Model. Quaternary Geochronology, 41, 163–173. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quageo.2017.04.002
Hamm, J., Sullivan, K., Clippinger, A. J., Strickland, J., Bell, S.,
Bhhatarai, B., … Allen, D. (2017). Alternative approaches for identifying
acute systemic toxicity: Moving from research to regulatory testing. Toxicology
in Vitro, 41, 245–259. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tiv.2017.01.004
Hernández-López, V., Reyes, R., García-Álvarez, N., Real, F.,
Díaz-Marrero, A. R., & Fernández, J. J. (2024). Changes at small intestine
induced by food-fish contaminated with ciguatoxins. Ecotoxicology and
Environmental Safety, 282, 116741. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2024.116741
McGonigle, P. (2014). Animal models of CNS disorders. Biochemical
Pharmacology, 87(1), 140–149. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcp.2013.06.016
Strickland, J., Clippinger, A. J., Brown, J., Allen, D., Jacobs, A.,
Matheson, J., … Casey, W. (2018). Status of acute systemic toxicity testing
requirements and data uses by U.S. regulatory agencies. Regulatory
Toxicology and Pharmacology, 94, 183–196. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2018.01.022
Sun, K., Song, Y., He, F., Jing, M., Tang, J., & Liu, R. (2021). A
review of human and animals exposure to polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons: Health risk and adverse effects, photo-induced toxicity
and regulating effect of microplastics. Science of The Total Environment,
773, 145403. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145403
Tollefsen, K. E., Scholz, S., Cronin, M. T., Edwards, S. W., de Knecht,
J., Crofton, K., … Patlewicz, G. (2014). Applying Adverse Outcome Pathways
(AOPs) to support Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA). Regulatory
Toxicology and Pharmacology, 70(3), 629–640. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.09.009
Yun, J.-W., Kwon, E., Kim, Y.-S., Kim, S.-H., You, J.-R., Kim, H.-C., …
Jang, J.-J. (2018). Assessment of acute, 14-day, and 13-week repeated oral
dose toxicity of Tiglium seed extract in rats. BMC Complementary and
Alternative Medicine, 18, 1–12.
Zwickl, C. M., Graham, J. C., Jolly, R. A., Bassan, A., Ahlberg, E.,
Amberg, A., … Myatt, G. J. (2022). Principles and procedures for assessment of
acute toxicity incorporating in silico methods. Computational Toxicology,
24, 100237. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comtox.2022.100237
|
©
2023 by the authors. It was submitted for possible open-access publication
under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY SA)
license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). |