`
`Available online at www.5ciencedirect.com
`
`scusnc2@ninEc-ra
`
`Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 39 {2004) 271 281
`
`Regulatory
`
`Toxicology and
`Pharmacology
`
`www.elsevier.comilocate.-‘yrtph
`
`In vitro predictions of skin absorption of caffeine, testosterone,
`and benzoic acid: a multi-centre comparison study
`
`J .J .M. van de Sandt,“-‘* JA. van Burgsteden,’dl S. Cage,E P.L. Carmichael,“ I. Dick,f
`S. Kenyon,C G. Korinth,h F. Larese,C J .C. Limasset,‘l W.J.M. Maas,a L. Montomoli,b
`J .B. Nielsen,lg J .-P. Payan,d E. Robinson,f P. Sartorelli,b K.H. Schaller,h
`S.C. Wilkinson,J and FM. WilliamsJ
`
`“ TNO Nutrition and Riot} Research, Zt't'xt. The M’therinndr
`1’ i.\'titttto iii Medicine tie! Lrn'nro. Sierra. imir
`u Unit‘ersita ch' Trieste.
`itctiy
`d itrxtitttt Nrtiifltmi tie Recherche et tie Sét’iii‘iié.
`thtdoettrre Cerittr. France
`“- Bioiogir'ai C'irettrivttjr, Fat'ttity (bl-Medicine. intmritti Cniieg’ ixmdon, London, UK
`r Hertith and Safety Laboratory. Sheffiehi. UK
`3 University of Southern Demttrn'ir, Oriense, Denmark
`h University ofErinrtgm—Nttretnbetg. Eriangen. Gertmny
`i Huntingdnn Life Science Ltd, Eye. UK
`5 The Medical Schmi. University of Newcastle. Nell‘cm‘tie upon Tyne. UK
`Received 18 November 2003
`Available online 22 April 2004
`
`Abstract
`
`To obtain better insight into the robustness of in vitro percutaneous absorption methodology, the intra— and inter—laboratory
`variation in this type of study was investigated in 10 European laboratories. To this purpose, the in vitro absorption of three
`compounds through human skin {9 laboratories) and rat skin {1 laboratory) was determined. The test materials were benzoic acid,
`cafi'eine, and testosterone, representing a range of difi‘erent physico-chernical properties. All laboratories performed their studies
`according to a detailed protocol in which all experimental details were described and each laboratory performed at least three
`independent experiments for each test chemical. All laboratories assigned the absorption of benzoic acid through human skin, the
`highest ranking of the three compounds (overall mean flux of 16.54i 11.87 pgicmzih}. The absorption of caffeine and testosterone
`through human skin was similar, having overall mean maximum absorption rates of 2.24 :l: 1.43 ngicmzih and L63 :t 1.94 ugt'cmzi‘h,
`respectively. In 7 out of 9 laboratories, the maximum absorption rates of cafleine were ranked higher than testosterone. No dif—
`ferences were observed between the mean absorption through human skin and the one rat study for benzoic acid and testosterone.
`For caffeine the maximum absorption rate and the total penetration through rat skin were clearly higher than the mean value for
`human skin. When evaluating all data, it appeared that no consistent relation existed between the dilTusion cell type and the ab—
`sorption of the test compounds. Skin thickness only slightly influenced the absorption of benzoic acid and cafi'eine. In contrast, the
`maximum absorption rate of testosterone was clearly higher in the laboratories using thin, dermatomed skin membranes. Testos-
`terone is the most lipophilic compound and showed also a higher presence in the skin membrane after 24h than the two other
`compounds. The results of this study indicate that the in vitro methodology for assessing skin absorption is relatively robust. A
`major effort was made to standardize the study performance. but. unlike in a formal validation study. not all variables were
`controlled. The variation observed may be largely attributed to human variability in dermal absorption and the skin source. For the
`most lipophilic compound, testosterone, skin thickness proved to be a critical variable.
`((3) 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
`
`
`'Corresponding author. Fax: +31-30-6960264.
`Email address: vandesandl@:\-'oeding.lno,nl (.l ,J.M. van de Sandl).
`' Present address: Unilever Colworth, Sharnbrook, UK
`.
`.
`0273-23005 - see front matter © 2004 Elsevter Inc. All rights reserved.
`doi:[0.1016ij_ynph_2(}04_02_004
`0001
`
`Noven Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
`EX2023
`
`Mylan Tech., Inc. v. Noven Pharma, Inc.
`IPR2018—01 119
`
`
`
`272
`
`11M. van de Sand! et‘ (If. I Regulatory Toxicology and Pbarmm'oingv 39 {HIM} 2' 71'—28 I
`
`I. Introduction
`
`Reproducible data on percutaneous absorption in
`humans are required to predict the systemic risk from
`dermal exposure to chemicals, such as hazardous sub-
`stances at the workplace, agrochemicals, and cosmetic
`ingredients (EC 2002; EEC 1991; SCCNFP 2003). In
`this context, there is a need for reliable in vitro models
`since the European Union advocates this approach and
`national legislation stipulates that animal experiments
`should be avoided whenever scientifically feasible. Fur-
`thermore, owing to the difference in skin structure, an-
`imal studies do not always reflect the human situation.
`Absorption through the skin is the primary route
`of exposure for most pesticides both occupationally
`(Benford et a1. 1999) and in residential settings (Ross
`ct a1. 1992). Despite the often relatively high dermal
`(and inhalation) exposure in occupational settings, reg-
`ulations for pesticides and other chemical exposure have
`evolved from concern about the oral route of exposure.
`In the absence of reliable dermal absorption data, route-
`to-route extrapolation has been used to assess dermal
`risk. It should be noted that this extrapolation is not
`always straightforward in cases when differences in
`biotransformation exist between the oral and dermal
`
`route, excessive first pass effects occur andl'or large dif-
`ferences in rate of absorption exist between the various
`routes of exposure. When no information is available on
`percutaneous absorption, risk assessments may assume
`an absorption percentage of 100%, a worst case scenario
`(EC 2002). This is a very conservative approach and a
`more accurate measure of absorption would have a
`major impact on risk assessments for many chemicals in
`regulatory toxicology. The specific need for a valid
`method of assessing human dermal absorption has led
`the OECD (2000a,b,c) and EPA (1996, 1999) to produce
`guidelines for in vitro and in vivo assessment of percu-
`taneous absorption.
`A review of available data from published literature
`on in vitro dermal absorption was performed under the
`auspices of the OECD in order to evaluate the perfor-
`mance of in vitro and in vivo percutaneous absorption
`measurements. It was concluded that evaluation of in
`
`vitro test methods from published literature was difficult
`(OECD 2000d) because studies containing direct com-
`parisons of in vitro and in vivo measurements were
`very limited. There were too many variables, such as
`different species, thickness and types of the skin, expo-
`
`sure duration, and vehicles. Also, very few multi-centre
`studies have been performed (Beck ct a1. 1994) and these
`studies were limited in their approach (e.g., with respect
`to the number of laboratories involved). Therefore, no
`proper data on the intra- and inter-laboratory repro-
`ducibility of the in vitro methodology are available.
`The purpose of the present research was therefore to
`assess intra- and inter-laboratory variability in deter-
`mination of percutaneous penetration by in vitro
`methods on a larger scale than done previously. This
`report contains data generated by 10 independent lab-
`oratories from within the European Union, each testing
`the percutaneous absorption of three chemicals that are
`recommended by the OECD as suitable reference com-
`pounds for regulatory studies (OECD 2000c). The ex-
`perimental conditions (amount applied, exposure time,
`vehicle, receptor fluid, preparation of membranes, and
`analysis) were standardized according to a detailed
`protocol that adopted many of the guidelines proposed
`by the OECD.
`
`2. Materials and methods
`
`2.1. Test substances and preparation ofdose solutions
`
`The test substances were chosen on the basis of their
`
`range in physico-ehemieal properties (Table l) and their
`recommendation as reference compounds by the OECD
`(OECD 2000c). All participating laboratories used the
`same batches of test substances. Non-radiolabelled tes-
`
`tosterone, caffeine, and benzoic acid were purchased
`from Steraloids
`(Newport, RI, USA) and Sigma
`Chemical Company by the study coordinator and were
`then supplied to the participants.
`[$14C]tcstosteronc
`(53.6mCi/mmol) and [l-methyl-14C]cafi‘eine (51.2 mCii‘
`mmol) were purchased from Perkin-Elmer Life Sci-
`ences, while [ring-UL-'4C]benzoic acid (6.2mCilmmol)
`was obtained from Sigma Chemical Company. The dose
`solutions were prepared freshly by each laboratory in
`ethanolt'water (1:1, vlv), yielding a concentration of
`4.0 mglmL for each compound. Participants with a li-
`cense to handle radiochemicals prepared the dose solu-
`tions by mixing appropriate amounts of radiolabelled
`and non-radiolabelled test substances. The dose solu-
`
`tions were measured for exact total radioactivity prior to
`and directly after the application to the skin membranes.
`The
`radioactive
`concentration was
`approximately
`
`Table 1
`Test substances
`
`Test substance
`
`Benzoic acid (benzcncearboxylic acid)
`Testosterone (ll-and rostcn-ITB-ol-IS-onc)
`Caffeine (3.?-dihydro-1.3.T-1rimclhy1-iH-purine—2.6-dionc)
`
`MW
`
`122.1
`288.4
`194.2
`
`log Po_.-'w
`
`1.33
`3.32
`0.01
`
`CAS No.
`
`65-85-13
`58-22-0
`53-08-2
`
`0002
`
`
`
`1.1M. can 0'? Sand! at (If.
`
`I Regtn’mnry Toxit'ofogy and Pharmm'm'ogy 39 (2004) 27f—2r’i'f
`
`273
`
`lMqu'mL for testosterone and cafleine and approxi-
`mately 4 MBqlmL for benzoic acid.
`
`2. 4. Experimental design
`
`2.2. Preparation ofskt'n membranes
`
`Both human and rat skin membranes were prepared
`from frozen skin. Whole skin was cleaned of subcuta-
`
`neous fat and the skin was stored at approximately
`—20 °C (participants 1 and 2 at approximately —70 °C)
`for a maximum period of one year. The supply and use
`of human and animal tissue was in full accordance with
`
`national ethical guidelines. Detailed information on the
`human skin source was recorded (Table 2). Most par-
`ticipants used human skin with a thickness between 0.7—
`1.1 mm, while one participant used skin that was 0.8—
`1.8 mm. Three laboratories used dermatomed skin with
`
`a thickness of 0.5—0.7 mm (participants l and 7) or 0.3—
`0.4mm (participant 10). The range of skin thickness
`used by the various participants allowed for the assess-
`ment of the influence of skin thickness on the absorption
`characteristics of the test compounds. Skin from more
`than one donor was used in each experiment and each
`experimental group consisted of 5—? skin membranes
`form different individuals. Rat full-thickness skin was
`
`used by participant 5 and was collected from the back
`(clipped carefully) of four weeks old male Sprague
`Dawley rats.
`
`2.3. Diffusion cells and receptor fluid
`
`Each participant used the diffusion cell that was es-
`tablished in their laboratory (details are shown in Table
`3). For experiments with caffeine and benzoic acid, the
`receptor fluid consisted of saline (0.9%. NaCl), while for
`experiments with testosterone,
`the
`receptor
`fluid
`consisted of saline (0.9% NaCl)+S% Bovine Serum
`Albumin (BSA), adjusted to pH 3".4. For systems using
`flow-through diffusion cells. the flow of receptor fluid
`was approximately 1.5 mLih.
`
`All participating laboratories performed their studies
`according to a detailed study protocol in which the ex-
`perimental design and parameters such as the dose of
`the test chemical, vehicle, duration of the experiment,
`preparation of the skin membranes, receptor fluid type,
`occlusion, temperature, sampling times, and number of
`replicates were defined. Skin membranes were thawed,
`mounted in the diffusion cell and the skin integrity was
`assessed by either visual assessment, permeation of tri-
`tiated water (cut-off K,, > 3.5x10‘3cmlh) or capaci-
`tance (cut-ofl: SSnF), depending on the participant.
`Subsequently,
`the test substances were applied at a
`concentration of 4.0mglmL ethanoliwater (l:l, vlv).
`The application volume was 25 uLi‘cm2 which is con-
`sidered the minimum volume necessary to produce a
`homogeneous distribution on the skin surface. This
`represented a finite dose (100 ug/cmz), in order to mimic
`occupationally relevant situations. The exposure time
`was 24h, during which the donor compartment
`re-
`mained occluded. Aliquots of the receptor fluid were
`collected at various time points (minimally at l, 2, 4, 8,
`and 24h post-dosing). For static cells, the original vol-
`ume of the receptor fluid was restored by adding fresh
`receptor fluid to the receptor compartment directly after
`each sampling. In case of non-radiolabelled test com-
`pounds, the receptor fiuid samples were stored at ap-
`proximately — 0°C until analysis. At the end of the
`experiment, the test compound remaining at the appli-
`cation site was
`removed, using five cotton swabs
`dampened with ethanolt'water {1:1, vlv), followed by one
`dry cotton swab. When a radioactive test compound was
`used, the cotton swabs, donor compartment rinse, re-
`ceptor compartment rinse, and skin membranes [after
`digestion with 1.5 M KOH in waterlethanol (1:4)] were
`analysed for presence of the test compound by I3-
`counting. Each laboratory performed 3—5 independent
`experiments for each test chemical.
`
`Table 2
`Details of source of human skin
`
`Participant
`
`Number of
`donors
`
`Post-mortemf
`surgical waste
`
`Sex and age donor
`
`Body site
`
`Skin thickness
`(mm)
`
`1. University of Newcastle. UK
`2. Institute di Medicina del Lavoro. Italy
`3. Universita di Trieste. Italy
`4. TNO Nutrition and Food Research.
`The Netherlands
`6. Imperial College London. UK
`7. Health and Safety Laboratory. UK
`8. University of Southern Denmark.
`Denmark
`9. University of Erlangen—Nurcmbcrg.
`Germany
`
`10. Huntingdon Life Sciences. UK 0.3 0.4 5 Post—moflem Male. female (40 72 y) Abdomen, leg
`Participant No. 5 used rat skin.
`
`Surgical waste Male, female (40 79 y)
`
`Breast. leg
`
`0.9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`0003
`
`Surgical waste
`Post—mortcm
`Post—modem
`Surgical waste
`
`Female (20 59 y)
`Male (6? 90 y}
`Male. female (6? 89 y)
`Female (28—69 y)
`
`Breast
`Leg
`Abdomen
`Abdomen
`
`Surgical waste
`Surgical waste
`Surgical waste
`
`Female (29—50 y)
`Female (26—60 y)
`Female (16—68 y)
`
`Abdomen
`Abdomen
`Breast. abdomen
`
`0.5
`0.? 0.9
`0.8 1.8
`0.?
`
`0.9
`0.5—0.7
`0.?'—l.l
`
`17
`6
`'r'
`6
`
`3
`3
`22
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`274
`
`J.J.M. van de Sand! et‘ al. I Regulatory Toxicology and Pbarmm'ologv 39 {20614) 2' 71'—28 I
`
`Table 3
`
`Details of diffusion cell systems
`
`Participant
`
`Diffusion
`cell type
`
`Exposed skin
`urea (cmz)
`
`Receptor
`compartment
`
`Reference
`
`1. University of Newcastle. UK
`
`Flow-through
`
`2. Institute di Medicina del Lavoro. Italy
`
`Flow—through
`
`3. Universita di Trieste. Italy
`
`Static
`
`4. TNO Nutrition and Food Research.
`The Netherlands
`5. Institut National dc Recherche et de
`Sécurité. France
`6. Imperial College London. UK
`
`Flow—through
`
`Static
`
`Flow-through
`
`'r'. Health and Safety Laboratory, UK
`
`Flow—through
`
`8. University of Southern Denmark,
`Denmark
`9. University of Erlangen-Nuremberg.
`Germany
`10. Huntingdon Life Sciences Ltd.. UK
`
`Static
`
`Static
`
`Flow-through
`
`0.64-
`
`0.95
`
`3.14
`
`0.64
`
`1.?6
`
`0.32
`
`2.12
`
`0.64
`
`0.64
`
`Volume: 0.25 mL:
`stirrer bar: yes
`Volume: 3.5 mL:
`stirrer bar: yes
`Volume: 15mL:
`stirrer bar: yes
`Volume: 0.2 mL:
`stirrer bar: no
`Volume: 5.15mL:
`stirrer bar: yes
`Volume: 0.4 mL:
`stirrer bar: no
`Volume: 035ng
`stirrer bar: yes
`Volume: 17.? mL:
`stirrer bar: yes
`Volume: 5.0 mL:
`stirrer bar: yes
`Volume: 0.25 mL:
`stirrer bar: yes
`
`Clowes et al. (1994)
`
`Reifcnrath et al. (1994)
`
`Larcse Filon et a]. (1999)
`
`Bronaugh and Stewart (1985)
`
`—
`
`Bronaugh and Stewart (1985)
`
`Nielsen and Nielsen (2000)
`
`Franz (1975)
`
`Clowes et al. (1994)
`
`2.5. Analysis of aort-mdiolahclk’d test substances
`
`The analysis of non-radiolabelled test substances in
`the dose solutions and receptor fluid samples was per-
`formed centrally: benzoic acid by the Health and Safety
`Laboratory (UK), caffeine by the University of Trieste
`(Italy), and testosterone by TNO Nutrition and Food
`Research (The Netherlands). Established protocols were
`used for the HPLC-UV analysis of benzoic acid (Phe-
`nomenex column, SphereClone ODS (2), eluent:metha-
`nol:phosphate buffer
`(pH 6)
`(4:6),
`flow lmLi‘min,
`x“. = 229nm), caffeine (Hypersil ODS column, eluent:
`methanol:water (1:3), flow l lemin, 1'. = 276 nm), and
`testosterone (according to Bogaards et al. 1995). The
`amount of non-radiolabelled test substance was not
`determined in the skin tissue and therefore total recov-
`
`ery values were not calculated.
`
`2.6. Analysis ofradiolabefled test substances
`
`Radioactivity measurements were made by individual
`participating laboratories. Radioactivity in the various
`samples (receptor
`fluid,
`skin,
`skin swabs, and cell
`washings) was determined by liquid scintillation count-
`ing. Receptor fluid samples were added directly to an
`appropriate scintillation fluid. For analysis of the skin
`membranes, an aliquot of the tissue digest (1.5 M KOH
`in 20% aqueous ethanol) was used.
`
`time course was constructed from the amount of test
`
`substance in the receptor fluid and the maximum ab-
`sorption rate was determined from the steepest, linear
`portion of the curve. The time to maximum rate,
`the
`percentage of the dose recovered in the receptor fluid in
`24h,
`the percentage in the skin membrane, and the
`percentage total recovery (for radiolabelled studies) was
`also calculated. The data of each laboratory were pre-
`sented as mean :tstandard deviation, together with the
`coefficient of variation (CV), The presence of the test
`compound in the skin membrane after washing the ap-
`plication area at 24h was expressed by the ratio between
`the percentage of the dose in skin and receptor fluid
`[total penetration (TP)] and the percentage of the dose in
`receptor fluid (RF).
`
`3. Results
`
`The absorption of caflcine. benzoic acid. and testos-
`terone through the skin was defined on the basis of
`
`maximum absorption rate, time to maximum rate, per-
`centage dose recovered in the skin membrane (at 24h
`post-dosing), and percentage dose recovered in the
`receptor
`fluid (at 24h post-dosing). The results of
`individual
`laboratory measurements are shown in
`Tables 4—6 and overviews of the mean values are given
`in Figs. 1—4.
`
`2. 7. Calculation of results
`
`3.]. Benzoic acid
`
`The calculations were performed using a standardized
`Excel spreadsheet prepared by the study coordinator. A
`cumulative amount absorbed per unit skin area versus
`
`The mean maximum absorption rate of benzoic acid
`through human skin membranes was 16.54ill.87 pg!
`cmzi’h, while the amount in the receptor fluid after 24 h
`
`0004
`
`
`
`J.J.M. mm dc Sand! e: (d. I Regykuary Tatt'cofogy and Pharmacm'agy 39 (2004) 2N—28f
`
`ZTS
`
`mmumh
`
`2;...
`
`an...
`
`d...
`
`DZ
`
`10..
`
`no.
`
`N...
`
`DZ
`
`3..
`
`DZ
`
`No.—
`
`.33heat
`
`.3963.
`
`.38.
`
`...n.Hmafia
`
`ad...
`
`mdm
`
`Gm
`
`«Aha.
`
`aim
`
`m3.
`
`Q;
`
`add.
`
`h...»
`
`it5:53ch
`
`Eon.o4...
`
`.30...
`
`K5:h.n.Hm.3
`
`Eon
`
`d._nado
`
`ma...
`
`Nam
`
`Emu
`
`W3
`
`0.3..
`
`Vdmflhsé
`
`$53.
`
`xndmh.mfiflh.on
`
`ddfidfio
`
`End
`
`5.33:?
`
`x:
`
`.33
`
`«.3
`
`dam
`
`0.8
`
`0.;
`
`mam
`
`Ea.aNN.D.anwfih
`
`a...v
`
`ad.»
`
`vdh
`
`DZ
`
`fie...
`
`mam
`
`q:
`
`v.3
`
`adfihfim.
`
`R5:
`
`w...an«do
`
`Re.h.
`
`Qaa
`
`ndo
`
`N...-
`
`9Nann.3
`
`Rn.m
`
`n..m
`
`who
`
`v.3
`
`Vumfinuw
`
`X52.
`
`DZ
`
`fimm
`
`Now
`
`fine
`
`ofifiafih
`
`RR...”
`
`ada
`
`2....
`
`nunfl3%.
`
`Sad
`
`flan
`
`dfim
`
`Nam
`
`RR.m.aNflN.2.
`
`mda
`
`«.2
`
`n60
`
`n._a0.3
`
`Em.EB.
`
`.8303”—
`
`“omen.0ex...
`
`may“9%
`
`$6.3.
`
`flan
`
`add
`
`add
`
`VanH“in
`
`SHHM
`
`Wan.”MWa
`
`fin
`
`0.0m
`
`Qua
`
`ndm
`
`Waflmda
`
`Kb...
`
`mfia
`
`.wfia
`
`mfiw
`
`awn.”ada
`
`Q3
`
`93
`
`0.8
`
`Rafi
`
`.dm
`
`”.mm
`
`ado
`
`X“;h.nau.Hh.mV
`
`Wm...
`
`finm
`
`fimm
`
`fima
`
`dam
`
`DZ
`
`v.3
`
`”.2.
`
`find
`
`tam.
`
`adu.Hmac
`
`«36.
`
`a._m
`
`.wdm
`
`m.md.
`
`ad...“«.3
`
`$9.?
`
`5..m.flmy...“
`
`Rh;
`
`0.9...
`
`mi...
`
`mdw
`
`A30.“moaxon.
`
`o.—
`
`_..
`
`mam
`
`a...H«N
`
`“and“.
`
`«Mm
`
`“.2
`
`in
`
`9m
`
`a.n
`
`N5.flNH.
`
`$5.6
`
`1m
`
`m.m
`
`m.m
`
`fidflmd
`
`Rm...
`
`ad
`
`_._v
`
`n...”
`
`Nd
`
`dd
`
`0...“
`
`DZ
`
`9n
`
`r99w
`
`n.”
`
`“I.u.Hh..V
`
`EASE
`
`m.—
`
`m...
`
`m..
`
`mafia...
`
`Sufi.
`
`.3."
`
`EquoFin
`.59::E:£an22b....
`
`9::5:3an
`
`E.._"Eu._.m3
`
`EEEE
`
`$9.3m.h.h.u.H3..
`
`Km6M.du.Han“
`
`ad
`
`nd
`
`ad
`
`and.Had
`
`Rain
`
`Wm
`
`Wm
`
`hum
`
`fin
`
`a.“
`
`van.fl3...
`
`S“:
`
`0.“
`
`d."
`
`N.—
`
`.3.fin._..
`
`«3.2
`
`w.—II
`
`Ndfim...
`
`RV“...
`
`ad
`
`ad
`
`ad
`
`._\.aanN.danad
`
`«2.12..Mdann.6n6
`
`ed
`
`dd
`
`QZ
`
`o.“
`
`0..
`
`0.0
`
`adflm4a..
`
`szhh
`
`Ndfin6ad
`
`
`
`Rn..Vm
`
`n6
`
`ad
`
`ad
`
`ad
`
`ad
`
`.1...flad
`
`K66
`
`@000
`
`mméflmnfin
`
`«3.9.
`
`3.:
`
`ofimm
`
`«.me
`
`vowfl3.“.
`
`RN.Nh
`
`on...
`
`2...”
`
`cm...
`
`and
`
`3.:flMMMan.“
`
`find
`
`film
`
`063
`
`3.3
`
`«Yummmvfim
`
`Rm“.
`
`5mm.
`
`mmdu
`
`mm...“
`
`an...fi..m...m
`
`$3M
`
`cm...”fined
`
`Ru.3.
`
`DZ
`
`gaunt.»
`
`Xfifin
`
`vmfiumum.VN
`
`five“...
`
`mnfiflnmdm
`
`Rd...
`
`5.:
`
`3.:
`
`3.3
`
`on._N
`
`01mm
`
`.ném
`
`3.x
`
`no.0
`
`dnfi
`
`3....
`
`find
`
`.36
`
`3......
`
`ha.“
`
`9....“
`
`W...“
`
`5E3:
`
`:mEaz
`
`:mEni
`
`:mEai
`
`553..
`
`5E3:
`
`FEE”...
`
`5:5:
`
`5E2...
`
`5E3:
`
`:mFSI
`
`52.5:
`
`52.5:
`
`2.3.3...
`
`:3.
`
`:3.
`
`SM
`
`£53...
`
`cuEnz
`
`Egg:
`
`55:...
`
`5E3:
`
`Egg...
`
`FEE"...
`
`DZ
`
`cmEn...
`
`:33:
`
`:mFEI
`
`52.5:
`
`555:
`
`52.3...
`
`\n
`
`sonar-1H1
`
`h
`
`h
`
`w
`
`(h
`
`l""-("‘-I"‘-I"‘-
`
`h
`
`o
`
`DZ
`
`QM.fl29¢...mm_
`
`AU
`
`mum.H:53.nvmN_
`
`AU
`
`GmH:35...mn_
`
`Ab
`
`an“25¢...mN_
`
`Ab
`
`Gm.HEmu...mm.
`
`AU
`
`Qm.u.H.Ewkwmm.
`
`AU
`
`DZ
`
`—(~Imv
`
`\GaaE:
`
`QMfi:33.mnH
`
`no
`
`
`
` QnflEmu...mm_
`
`AU
`
`03_
`
`Um:—m
`
`>D.U.E:m
`
`Um:—w
`
`Um...n
`
`Um...o
`
`DZ5..
`
`Um...w
`
`>D.U.E:a
`
`HES
`
`3.3mm
`
`
`
`3.3..92._o.0Z
`
`.0ZEoEEEG
`
`
`
`m.m..._a:<.533.Em
`
`dz
`
`Eon0.0.33v932.
`
`
`
`2?6
`
`JJ. M. van de Sand! 8! at f Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacal'ogy 39 {2004) 217L287
`
`
`
`.32”..0ax....30.....Ho.3..03.”..0ax...
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`.9963.a...5...:sen.Em.Ea....38.3Q...
`.So....58...5533.23:35.5H_.H...nEo...u39::
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`9.38%..firficfiw«.mHHHS.Nufimfim...“m...Rfifinfimmafia»:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ngmflvdo«.mflz...mfiflod.osflfimm._.flm.wmmdflmndQmflnfiax.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`«3.2.fihfim«3:2.3...RN«$2.33.52Lb
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`9?.”ngV.N..fih..«_w36....Hnuvmmfifiod«Sinus.ahdfivmfiQMHHEEE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NfiumhdmQ.Vfim....oafiumhfin«Jinanman.”on...definmdhiyaak.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ndumwfimnufihfim~.mn.nn.__.wmafia:w...u.nm.memdfiem...Qhum=§wt
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`wuflfioomdflmfim.19Hmfimficflawwcdflaw«$63....Qmflemk.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`.99.«$5.Rafi.«3.2.«SH...«$.13.30
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`N.Nfl...3«.mflnamNunflkiam...afla...udfladg...flm.a.mQu%......a3.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`mooo
`
`
`
`:mEsxhNw..H«.8.mamHana«.v«H3.25E2...0HUm;H
`0.3H.0.mg.m.”«.0on.H5E3:nmv.9...«.dmad.a...”o.HNo...”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`”—ng2.BEFEE?aEcaHHEampmmuHauHHHHE.a2
`
`
`
`
`
`Rh...$960«3.3Rafi.“«an...1$.13LU
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`auras:omEH33H.m.Hm.m«m...«man”a.fin.n.”mdmm...52.5.:mnH.8H.m.m.m.o.”«dH..HfiEEHmwH6“oo.H.wn.”finan...
`
`fiEEHmN3Hnew5...0.0.m.H..mmm...Egg...mHUm;n
`
`
`
`DZ|Ima...|WmHWe:mEaromI|«6IH...H«dSufismH.mDZ||0.0.|h."on...:mEarnH>:.U..Hn_1m
`
`
`
`||«.nflmf.|mdflmfiEdflnwfi.Qhflmzfim...
`
`
`
`
`
`||«3.3.|Rh.m.Khan.LU
`
`
`
`m...mamfin”9m3.SH5:33hn0.?fine«.2adm...anfiEn...hHmm;m?mfim“.2.03mdmm.”SpamhHUm..—w
`
`
`
`$3$65..«a..3.E....3«39.Ryan«6
`
`"Hm0....0Hh...»Hamhnv..Hmg20gm..m3v:3mmHUm...n
`3....mancan3.m.and3mhnv.00”.mn
`
`
`
`RN5Eu.0xv.“$.12RE...Sew...:U
`
`“.3gm.5..H3.mm.H:mEHinm3%9mmm.nnE...H.”om.”5E3:nn3..Hhumm.H.»Won«.2m3.H55:3hHUm...a
`
`
`
`$3..Rn.MNfins...$0.3$0.5.Soanab
`
`
`I|n.2,Im.How.“FEEEHmm|IOwn|o.H.3.H:mEax
`
`
`.wmDZI|«.3|m.Hno.“ENEBHmH.50......HH.
`
`
`
`
`
`||twaummdv|“cu.”m...hmdfiwmfiGui—ask.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`||Khan|RM...“Rnfim:0
`
`Wm...H.n_1m.H..Ha.“and5E3:hmmdnaim«Rm9m9.”RH.355hma..H0.3”.mmn.Hma.”a.“«e.HEgg...hHUm;m
`
`
`|Ima...|v.“andauras:hmI|w.mmIH...
`
`
`
`2mm5:33hmDZ||Ham"|..Han.”cmEszhH>D.U.Hn=.Hm
`
`
`
`Yoflefi.59H“...mmdflmmdQmflnaax.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`||«amfim|«nhfihKarenLb
`
`XVfiKin«33wKW:«31:Rafi.LU
`
`
`fig«Hmflow_.Hw."m...“
`
`:mEaromE?.3.3..._.Hw.“mudSufismmm3H0.3nfi.0.0.0.0m.Ha...”cured:nHUm..—OH
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`0.5;_.H«m9"EC.Haggai3......on.Ho.07..9...EuEEonm£9.35...Enagznm
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`”Eubaon0.2E.
`
`
`
`
`J.J.M. van de Sand: e: (d. I Regykuary Toxicofogy and Pharmacm'agy 39 (2004) 2?I—28f
`
`2T7
`
`
`
`
`
`Humanmo«.3Home"...moexam.A32....3a3
`
`
`
`boggy.E:5:55anHHS:Home.“.Hcfin
`H53.H30...23.BaooomE25,...:meH_._.__~Eo.__m3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`H.._H._H.fih.m.2Qvfivfi.mfium«2mhfifimfimdfihdmdfifinmfiGunman»:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`33...;3.3.9.«.333.43..«NH?»2633gang:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`.12finfia9.3.4.“anYamunfi.52.4.“vaodfiwfimndfiaadQmfigafl.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Rn:Ru.2..XfidoRafi»XE...-Rfiwo\HU
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2.3.13flmflmfi.mgfiwéWmflfib.«6&2.Edflvm...mafia»:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`mfiflnfigmdflngmH....fl.n.mafiflnsm64“.?»-mafiflmvdQmflzafl.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Namfihfinfihfinnma.“NfiwafimfiTmfimfidefimmdQhflzgwk.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`mtwfinwfi.wdfihaw“fin.”mam...atmfimfimdfifiqBfifiqmfiQhunzgwe.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`nooo
`
`
`
`:mEazcm”.3Ev.w...m.mad.nmé5E3:nn3.;H.nmWm.n...miv.0nod5.5.:nHUm..._
`m6.Hmd«dof9.0mg...
`
`
`
`"Emu...Eas...E:E_§E3.253.83.»3:232.02
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Rh.3.$59»..393E...”.2.Shy...Eh.P.AU
`
`
`
`
`
`amend:mnno."a._am}..._adad3»andcmEnzmHUm;n
`0.33..3.wemfimed52:;omminQw—m.nn.~Hhofind:mEaxmw1%ENw...0.2H.mand:mEaxmm0.3Ev.m...ad3»Hm.c
`
`
`
`$3...$5.5.Roi.Sci.RwdmSn.3AU
`
`IIadIa.“Ed553mwn|Ima|3mg:mEsxmNDZ||o.—|w.»2.0:mEsxnH>D.U..Exm
`
`
`
`
`
`||adflafi|«.mflas.neéfltdQhflgafl.
`
`
`
`
`
`||Rush|Rafi.Kn.2.AU
`
`32..“anada:5...and:ufinmnmflowSH3..m9.Wm2355:3nmHarmv.9303mumcanWm2355:3nHUm..—H.
`
`
`
`“2.6“at?”Rm.3.RVQNR93.R59.:0
`
`Hdacan_m9:9.”3H3mwm92..v.3n.~n9:Ham3.”3mwnv:a?flan9o”h:a.”mg3mwHUm...n
`
`SufiRm.0.5..3ShawRafi...Raw:9
`
`
`Ham«.3adad“QvHmd
`
`EWEHinm5%Han9wH_mHv.0and553mnmEdGR.Q...”h...HdmH.nmmd553xnHUm...a
`
`
`||Q:|9H3mEWEEHwm]Iwém]m.”84..
`
`
`
`SufismuNDzI|3...Ihm3.“.cafiamnH>D.U.._n_:...
`
`
`
`
`
`||ofiflafim|adflwfi.36...“deQMHHHHEE...
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Rafi$0.2.«3.3..$52.39.2.$53AU
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`|lmin“MM|H..Qfim.mamdfiewdQhHHEwE.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`||«35.|«3.5“3M6AU
`
`0.2.mamo.—m9..”modcmEnzH...wcanflmm__QH9.”EdEgg:H.min“m.“m...ado.vmad5E3:nnv...HH.mm3:ha.3.3.and553mnHUm...w
`
`
`
`ShamRh.3.N...”._:._H.RadoXhfim«3...:AU
`
`cmEszH...nDzI|adIa.“3.0cuEnznH>D.U.EH.Ha
`
`||H.v|h.”and..EE::H...m||m.m|a.”Hm.o
`
`||Ems...|Ra.V3.“:AU
`
`5E3:nmH.3v.2.2...adad.365E3:nn9303ed.h...3”n.H3.“Egg:oHU32
`mamcanH.mmn6H.Hmm...
`
`
`
`
`
`23¢_.Hv"a.35.H52528.535._o.02.ozEuEtEKm”3:55.Emflacmm
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ouougmosfl.aasE.
`
`
`
`278
`
`JJ. M. van de Some? 2! a1. f Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 39 {2004) 217L253}
`
`0.0
`35.0
`33.0
`25.0
`23.0
`15.0
`10.0
`5.0
`0.0
`
`Humgfih
`
`/
`
`Q
`
`I?
`
`f
`
`6'
`
`ND
`
`)
`
`f
`
`.9
`
`memm.
`
`J
`9
`
`J
`5"
`'%
`
`Fig. 1. Overview of the maximum absorption rates of benzoic acid (grey), caffeine (white) and testosterone (black). ND is not determined.
`
`%ofdose
`
`1WD
`”.0
`$3.0
`‘33.0
`cm:
`53.0
`‘fill?!
`310
`33.0
`10.0
`0.0
`
`Fig. 2. In vitro skin absorption of benzoie acid. expressed as percentage of the dose present in the receptor fluid (grey) or present in the receptor
`fluid + skin membrane (total penetration—white). ND is not determined.
`
`memm.
`
`%w«»3EEEEEE3
`
`I
`
`w‘
`
`ND
`.9
`
`V
`
`0‘
`
`ND
`)
`
`e
`
`ND
`‘9
`
`human
`
`I
`0
`
`J‘
`“(a
`'
`
`Fig. 3. In vitro skin absorption of eafi'eine. exprfised as percentage of the dose present in the receptor fluid (grey) or present in the receptor
`fluid+sitin membrane [total penetration—white). ND is not determined.
`
`110
`
`83.0
`33.0
`010
`
`96ofdose 310
`
`93.0
`10.0
`01]
`
`2
`
`.-»
`
`.9
`
`r
`
`o-
`
`)
`
`e
`
`.9
`
`J9
`
`Pmmmm.
`
`0‘
`fig
`
`Fig. 4. In vitro skin absorption of testosterone, expressed as percentage of the dose present in the receptor fluid (grey) or present in the receptor
`fluid + skin membrane (total penetration—white). ND is not determined.
`
`0008
`
`
`
`1.1M. can 0'? Sand! e! of.
`
`I Rt’gtrfamry Toxit'ofogy and Pharmacology 39 (RIM) 27f—28'f
`
`279
`
`was 70.6:t 17.2% of the dose applied (8 laboratories).
`The mean maximum absorption rate of benzoic acid
`through rat skin (1 laboratory) was 21.21 ug/cmzlh and
`the amount in the receptor fluid after 24h was 89.8%.
`For both human and rat skin,
`the ratio TP:RF was
`approximately 1.0,
`indicating that almost no benzoic
`acid remained in the skin membrane after washing the
`application area. The total recovery of the radioactivity
`ranged between 53.6 and 98.5% (7 laboratories).
`Each laboratory performed 3- -5 independent experi-
`ments. The coefficient of variation (CV) of the maxi-
`mum absorption rate varied from 6.3“" (lab 4) to 52.2%
`(lab 2). For the percentage in the receptor fluid (at 24 h),
`the CV values ranged between 1.6% (lab 4) and 57.1%
`(lab 2).
`
`3.2. Ctfleirte
`
`The mean maximum absorption rate of caffeine
`through human skin membranes was 2.24 i 1.43 uglcmzl
`h, while the amount in the receptor fluid after 24h was
`24.5:tll.6% of the dose applied (9 laboratories). The
`mean maximum absorption rate of caffeine through rat
`skin (1 laboratory) was 6.82 ug/cmth and the amount in
`the receptor fluid after 24 h was 53.7%. For both human
`and rat skin, the ratio TP:RF was only slightly higher
`than 1.0, indicating that only a small amount caffeine
`remained in the skin membrane after washing the ap-
`plication area. The total recovery of the radioactivity
`ranged between 66.4 and 100.6% (7 laboratories).
`Each laboratory performed 3—5 independent experi-
`ments. The CV value of the maximum absorption rate
`varied from 12.0% (lab 5) to 91.4% (lab 1). For the
`percentage in the receptor fluid (at 24 h), the CV values
`ranged between 5.4"» (lab 5) and 66.0% (lab 1).
`
`3.3. Testosterone
`
`The mean maximum absorption rate of testosterone
`through human skin was l.63:tl.94uglcm2fh, while
`the amount
`in the receptor
`fluid after 24h was
`11.8:t 10.9% of the dose applied (9 laboratories). The
`mean maximum absorption
`rate of
`testosterone
`through rat skin (I laboratory) was 1.84 ug/cmzlh and
`the amount in the receptor fluid after 24h was 21.4%.
`For both human and rat skin, the ratio TPzRF ranged
`between 1.35 and 3.54, indicating that a considerable
`amount testosterone remained in the skin membrane
`
`after washing the application area. The total rec0very
`of the radioactivity ranged between 52.3 and 103.5%
`(7 laboratories).
`Each laboratory performed 3- -5 independent experi-
`ments. The CV value of the maximum absorption rate
`ranged from 6.3% (lab 7) to 111.0% (lab 8). For the
`percentage in the receptor fluid (at 24 h), the CV values
`ranged between 12.6% (lab 7) and 111.7% (lab 8).
`
`4. Discussion
`
`The presence of international guidelines has led to a
`partial standardization of in vitro skin absorption
`studies for regulatory purposes. On the other hand, the
`guidelines allow for certain flexibility in order to study
`compounds with widely
`differing physicochemical
`properties and under circumstances which are the most
`relevant for its use, resulting in e.g., different exposure
`times, dose levels, and vehiclelformulations.
`In the
`OECD guidance document (OECD 2000c), useful
`in-
`formation is pr0vidcd on how to properly design in vitro
`and in vivo skin absorption studies. Both static and
`flow-through diffusion cell types are considered suitable.
`In order to prevent underestimation of skin absorption,
`the test compound should be soluble in the receptor
`fluid, but the receptor fluid should not alter the barrier
`properties of the skin membrane. Skin membranes can
`be prepared in various ways, but the use of skin mem-
`branes with a thickness of more than 1.0 mm (epidermis
`and dermis) is not recommended and must be justified
`by the researcher, since the absorption of lipophilic
`compounds may be impeded by a thick dermis. This
`guidance has been proved useful for both investigators
`in the laboratory and for regulatory agencies which
`evaluate this type of data for risk assessment purposes.
`Only very limited data exist on the intra-laboratory
`and inter-laboratory variation of in vitro skin absorp-
`tion studies. In 1994, Beck et al. reported a good cor-
`relation of in vitro absorption of hair dyes through full-
`thickness pig skin in 2 laboratories. Recently, using an
`artificial (silicone rubber) membrane, the intra-labora-
`tory and inter-laboratory variation of methyl paraben
`absorption was assessed in 18 laboratories (Chilcott
`et al. submitted). In their study, the CV values between
`laboratories were appr0ximate1y 35%, while the intra-
`laboratory variation averaged 10%.
`In the study presented here, the in vitro absorption of
`three compounds through human skin (9 laboratories)
`and rat skin (1 laboratory} was investigated. The com-
`pounds (testosterone, caffeine. and benzoic acid) have a
`wide spread in their physico-chemical properties and
`have been recommended as reference compounds by the
`OECD (2000c). The studies were performed according
`to a very detailed protocol. Two participants were GLP-
`compliant while the other laboratories adhered to this
`quality system as much as possible. Analysis of samples
`from studies using non-radiolabelled test compounds
`was performed centrally in order to limit analytical
`variation and data analysis of all laboratories was car-
`ried out according to a study-specific Excel spreadsheet.
`The total rec0vcry of the radioactivity at the end of the
`experiment was not always as high as required by the
`guidelines (10011094: for OECD and 100i 15% for
`SCCNFP). Of the 7 laboratories that determined mass
`balance, 3 (benzoic acid), 4 {cafleine), and 5 (testoster-
`
`0009
`
`
`
`280
`
`J_J'. M. can dc Sand! er of. 1 Regulatory Toxirofogy and Pbummmfogv 39 {2fNJ4} Ell—2'8!
`
`one) obtained a mass balance larger than 85%. The most
`probable cause of the low recOvcry observed in some
`cases is the technical difficulty of evenly spreading the
`small volume of the dose solution on the skin surface
`
`(25 uUcmZ). It may be that part of the dose solution
`may have adhered to the pipet tip and therefore was not