SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • 1
    Kimber I, Dearman R J. Contact hypersensitivity: immunological mechanisms. In: Toxicology of Contact Hypersensitivity, Kimber, I, Maurer, T, eds. London: Taylor & Francis 1996, pp. 425.
  • 2
    Kimber I, Dearman R J. T lymphocyte subpopulations and immune responses to chemical allergens. In: T Lymphocyte Subpopulations in Immunotoxicology, Kimber, I, Selgrade, M K, eds. Chichester: Wiley 1998, pp. 199231.
  • 3
    Grabbe S, Schwarz T. Immunoregulatory mechanisms involved in the elicitation of allergic contact hypersensitivity. Immunol Today 1998: 19: 3744.
  • 4
    Basketter D A, Gerberick G F, Kimber I, Willis C M. Toxicology of Contact Dermatitis. Allergy, Irritancy and Urticaria. Chichester: Wiley 1999.
  • 5
    Rustemeyer T, Van Hoogstraten I M W, Von Blomberg B M A. Mechanisms in allergic contact dermatitis. In: Textbook of Contact Dermatitis, 3rd edn. Rycroft, R J G, Menne, T et al., eds. Berlin: Springer 2001, pp. 1458.
  • 6
    Smith C K, Hotchkiss S A M. Allergic Contact Dermatitis. Chemical and Metabolic Mechanisms. London: Taylor & Francis 2001.
  • 7
    Kimber I, Dearman R J. Allergic contact dermatitis: the cellular effectors. Contact Dermatitis 2002: 46: 15.
  • 8
    Kimber I, Cumberbatch M. Dendritic cells and cutaneous immune responses to chemical allergens. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1992: 117: 137146.
  • 9
    Kimber I, Cumberbatch M, Dearman R J, Knight S C. Langerhans cell migration and cellular interactions. In: Dendritic Cells. Biology and Clinical Applications. San Diego: Academic Press 1999, pp. 295310.
  • 10
    Kimber I, Dearman R J, Cumberbatch M, Huby R J D. Langerhans cells and chemical allergy. Curr Opinion Immunol 1998: 10: 614619.
  • 11
    Kimber I, Cumberbatch M, Dearman R J et al. Cytokines and chemokines in the initiation and regulation of epidermal Langerhans cell mobilization. Br J Dermatol 2000: 142: 401412.
  • 12
    Cumberbatch M, Dearman R J, Griffiths C E M, Kimber I. Langerhans cell migration. Clin Exp Dermatol 2000: 25: 413418.
  • 13
    Kimber I, Dearman R J. Investigation of lymph node cell proliferation as a possible immunological correlate of contact sensitising potential. Fd Chem Toxic 1991: 29: 125129.
  • 14
    Kimber I, Basketter D A. The murine local lymph node assay: a commentary on collaborative trials and new directions. Fd Chem Toxic 1992: 30: 165169.
  • 15
    Kimber I, Dearman R J, Scholes E W, Basketter D A. The local lymph node assay: developments and applications. Toxicology 1994: 93: 1331.
  • 16
    Kimber I. The local lymph node assay. In: Dermatotoxicology, 5th edn. Marzulli, F N, Maibach, H I, eds. Washington DC: Taylor & Francis 1996, pp. 469475.
  • 17
    Dearman R J, Basketter D A, Kimber I. Local lymph node assay: use in hazard and risk assessment. J Appl Toxicol 1999: 19: 299306.
  • 18
    Gerberick G F, Basketter D A, Kimber I. Contact sensitization hazard identification. Comments Toxicol 1999: 7: 3141.
  • 19
    Gerberick G F, Ryan C A, Kimber I, Dearman R J, Lea L J, Basketter D A. Local lymph node assay: validation assessment for regulatory purposes. Am J Contact Dermatitis 2000: 11: 318.
  • 20
    Basketter D A, Kimber I. Predictive testing in contact allergy: facts and future. Allergy 2001: 56: 937943.
  • 21
    Basketter D A, Gerberick G F, Kimber I. Measurement of allergenic potential using the local lymph node assay. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2001: 22: 264265.
  • 22
    Basketter D A, Evans P, Fielder R J, Gerberick G F, Dearman R J, Kimber I. Local lymph node assay – validation and use in practice. Fd Chem Toxic 2002: 40: 593598.
  • 23
    Kimber I, Mitchell J A, Griffin A C. Development of a murine local lymph node assay for the determination of sensitizing potential. Fd Chem Toxic 1986: 24: 585586.
  • 24
    Kimber I, Weisenberger C. A murine local lymph node assay for the identification of contact allergens. Assay development and results of an initial validation study. Arch Toxicol 1989: 63: 274282.
  • 25
    Kimber I, Hilton J, Weisenberger C. The murine local lymph node assay for identification of contact allergens: a preliminary evaluation of the in situ measurement of lymphocyte proliferation. Contact Dermatitis 1989: 21: 215220.
  • 26
    Kimber I, Weisenberger C. A modified murine local lymph node assay for identification of contact allergens. In: Current Topics in Contact Dermatitis. FroschP J, Dooms-GoossensA, LachapelleJ-M, RycroftR J, ScheperR J, eds. Berlin: Springer-Verlag 1989, pp. 592595.
  • 27
    Gerberick G F, House R V, Fletcher E R, Ryan C A. Examination of the local lymph node assay for use in contact sensitization risk assessment. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1992: 19: 438445.
  • 28
    Hilton J, Kimber I. The murine local lymph node assay. In: Methods in Molecular Biology, Vol. 43: in Vitro Toxicity Testing Protocols, O'HareS, AtterwillC K, eds. Totawa, NJ: Human Press 1995, pp. 227235.
  • 29
    Kimber I. The local lymph node assay. In: Dermatotoxicology Methods: the Laboratory Worker's Vade Mecum, Marzulli, F H, Maibach, H I, eds. Washington DC: Taylor & Francis 1998, pp. 145152.
  • 30
    Basketter D A, Kimber I. Olive oil: suitability for use as a vehicle in the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 1996: 35: 190191.
  • 31
    Cumberbatch M, Scott R C, Basketter D A, et al. Influence of sodium lauryl sulphate on 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene induced lymph node activation. Toxicology 1993: 77: 181191.
  • 32
    Dearman R J, Cumberbatch M, Hilton J, et al. Influence of dibutylphthalate on dermal sensitization to fluorescein isothiocyanate. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1996: 33: 2430.
  • 33
    Heylings J R, Clowes H M, Cumberbatch M, et al. Sensitization to 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene: influence of vehicle on absorption and lymph node activation. Toxicology 1996: 109: 5765.
  • 34
    Warbrick E V, Dearman R J, Basketter D A, Kimber I. Influence of application vehicle on skin sensitization to methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone: an analysis using the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 1999: 41: 325329.
  • 35
    Basketter D A, Gerberick G F, Kimber I. Skin sensitization, vehicle effects and the local lymph node assay. Fd Chem Toxic 2001: 39: 621627.
  • 36
    Wright Z M, Basketter D A, Blaikie L, Cooper K J, Dearman R J, Kimber I. Vehicle effects on skin sensitizing potency of four chemicals: assessment using the local lymph node assay. Int J Cosmet Sci 2001: 23: 7583.
  • 37
    De Jong Wh, Tentij M, Spiekstra S W, Vandebriel R J, Van Loveren H. Determination of the sensitizing activity of the rubber contact sensitizers TMTD, ZDMC, MBT and DEA in a modified local lymph assay and the effect of sodium dodecyl sulfate pre-treatment on local lymph node responses. Toxicology 2002: 176: 123134.
  • 38
    Dearman R J, Hilton J, Evans P, Harvey P, Basketter D A, Kimber I. Temporal stability of local lymph node assay responses to hexyl cinnamic aldehyde. J Appl Toxicol 1998: 18: 281284.
  • 39
    Dearman R J, Wright Z M, Basketter D A, Ryan C A, Gerberick G F, Kimber I. The suitability of hexyl cinnamic aldehyde as a calibrant for the murine local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2001: 44: 357361.
  • 40
    Basketter D A, Lea L J, Cooper K, et al. Threshold for classification as a skin sensitizer in the local lymph node assay: a statistical evaluation. Fd Chem Toxic 1999: 37: 11671174.
  • 41
    Ladics G S, Smith C, Heaps K L, Loveless S E. Comparison of I125-iododeoxyuridine (125IUdR) and [3H] thymidine ([3H]TdR) for assessing cell proliferation in the mouse local lymph node assay. Toxicol Methods 1995: 5: 143152.
  • 42
    Takeyoshi M, Yamasaki K, Yakabe Y, Takatsuki M, Kimber I. Development of a non-radio isotopic endpoint of murine local lymph node assay based on 5-bromo-2′-deoxyuridine (BrdU) incorporation. Toxicol Lett 2001: 119: 203208.
  • 43
    Woolhiser M R, Munson A E, Meade B J. Comparison of mouse strains using the local lymph node assay. Toxicology 2000: 146: 221227.
  • 44
    De Jong Wh, Van Och F M M, Den Hartog Jager C F, et al. Ranking of allergenic potency of rubber chemicals in a modified local lymph node assay. Toxicol Sci 2002: 66: 226232.
  • 45
    Sailstad D M, Krishnan S D, Tepper J S, Doerfler D L, Selgrade M K. Dietary vitamin A enhances sensitivity of the local lymph node assay. Toxicology 1995: 96: 157163.
  • 46
    Homey B, Von Schilling C, Blumel J, et al. An integrated skin model for the differentiation of chemical-induced allergic and irritant skin reactions. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1998: 153: 8394.
  • 47
    Ikarashi Y, Tsuchiya T, Nakamura A. A sensitive mouse lymph node assay with two application phases for detection of contact allergens. Arch Toxicol 1993: 67: 629636.
  • 48
    Ikarashi Y, Ohno K, Momma J, Tsuchiya T, Nakamura A. Assesment of contact sensitivity of four thiourea rubber accelerators: comparison of two mouse lymph node assays with the guinea pig maximization test. Fd Chem Toxic 1994: 32: 10671072.
  • 49
    Ikarashi Y, Tsuchiya T, Nakamura A. Application of a sensitive mouse lymph node assay for detection of contact sensitization capacity of dyes. J Appl Toxicol 1996: 16: 349354.
  • 50
    Ulrich P, Homey B, Vohr H-W. A modified murine local lymph node assay for the differentiation of contact photoallergy from phototoxicity by analysis of cytokine expression in skin-draining lymph node cells. Toxicology 1998: 125: 149168.
  • 51
    Ulrich P, Streich J, Suter W. Intralaboratory validation of alternative endpoints in the murine local lymph node assay for the identification of contact allergic potential: primary ear skin irritation and ear-draining lymph node hyperplasia induced by topical chemicals. Arch Toxicol 2001: 74: 733744.
  • 52
    Van Och F M M, Slob W, De Jong Wh, Vandebriel R J, Van Loveren H. A quantitative method for assessing the sensitizing potency of low molecular weight chemicals using a local lymph node assay: employment of a regression method that includes determination of uncertainty factors. Toxicology 2000: 146: 4959.
  • 53
    Van Och F M M, Vandebriel R J, Prinsen M K, De Jong Wh, Slob W, Van Loveren H. Comparison of dose–response of contact allergens using the guinea pig maximization test and the local lymph node assay. Toxicology 2001: 167: 207215.
  • 54
    Arts J E, Droge S C M, Bloksma N, Kuper C F. Local lymph node activation in rats after dermal application of the sensitizers 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene and trimellitic anhydride. Fd Chem Toxic 1996: 34: 5562.
  • 55
    Clottens F L, Breyssens A, De Raeve H, Demedts M, Nemery B. Assessment of the ear swelling test and local lymph node assay in hamsters. Toxicol Methods 1996: 35: 167172.
  • 56
    Ikarashi Y, Ohno K, Tsuchiya T, Nakamura A. Differences in draining lymph node cell proliferation among mice, rats and guinea pigs following exposure to metal allergens. Toxicology 1992: 76: 283292.
  • 57
    Kashima R, Oyake Y, Okada J, Ikeda Y. Improved ex vivo/in vitro lymph node cell proliferation assay in guinea pigs for a screening test of contact hypersensitivity to chemical compounds. Toxicology 1996: 114: 4755.
  • 58
    Maurer T, Kimber I. Draining lymph node cell activation in guinea pigs: comparisons with the murine local lymph node assay. Toxicology 1991: 69: 209218.
  • 59
    Kimber I, Hilton J, Botham P A, et al. The murine local lymph node assay: results of an interlaboratory trial. Toxicol Lett 1991: 55: 203213.
  • 60
    Basketter D A, Scholes E W, Kimber I, et al. Interlaboratory evaluation of the local lymph node assay with 25 chemicals and comparison with guinea pig test data. Toxicol Methods 1991: 1: 3043.
  • 61
    Scholes E W, Basketter D A, Sarll A E, et al. The local lymph node assay: results of a final inter-laboratory validation under field conditions. J Appl Toxicol 1992: 12: 217222.
  • 62
    Kimber I, Hilton J, Dearman R J, et al. An international evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay and comparison of modified procedures. Toxicology 1995: 103: 6373.
  • 63
    Basketter D A, Gerberick G F, Kimber I, Loveless S E. The local lymph node assay: a viable alternative to currently accepted skin sensitisation tests. Fd Chem Toxic 1996: 34: 986997.
  • 64
    Loveless S E, Ladics G S, Gerberick G F, et al. Further evaluation of the local lymph node assay in the final phase of an international collaborative trial. Toxicology 1996: 108: 141152.
  • 65
    Kimber I, Hilton J, Dearman R J, et al. Assessment of the skin sensitizing potential of topical medicaments using the local lymph node assay: an inter-laboratory evaluation. J Toxicol Environ Health 1998: 53: 563579.
  • 66
    Kimber I, Hilton J, Botham P A. Identification of contact allergens using the murine local lymph node assay: comparisons with the Buehler occluded patch test in guinea pigs. J Appl Toxicol 1990: 10: 173180.
  • 67
    Basketter D A, Scholes E W. Comparison of the local lymph node assay with the guinea-pig maximization test for detection of a range of contact allergens. Fd Chem Toxic 1992: 60: 6569.
  • 68
    Basketter D A, Scholes E W, Cumberbatch M, Evans C D, Kimber I. Sulphanilic acid: divergent results in the guinea pig maximization test and the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 1992: 27: 209213.
  • 69
    Basketter D A, Selbie E, Scholes E W, Lees D, Kimber I, Botham P A. Results with OECD recommended positive control sensitisers in the maximization, Buehler and local lymph node assays. Fd Chem Toxic 1993: 31: 6367.
  • 70
    Basketter D A, Scholes E W, Kimber I. The performance of the local lymph node assay with chemicals identified as contact allergens in the human maximization test. Fd Chem Toxic 1994: 32: 543547.
  • 71
    Ryan C A, Gerberick G F, Cruse L W, et al. Activity of human contact allergens in the murine local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 43: 95102.
  • 72
    Edwards D A, Sorrano T M, Amoruso M A, et al. Screening petrochemicals for contact hypersensitivity potential: a comparison of the murine local lymph node assay with guinea pig and human test data. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1994: 23: 179187.
  • 73
    Sailstad D, Tepper J S, Doerfler D L, Qasim M, Selgrade M K. Evaluation of an azo and two anthraquinone dyes for allergic potential. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1994: 23: 569577.
  • 74
    Botham P A, Hilton J, Evans C D, Lees D, Hall T J. Assessment of the relative skin sensitising potency of 3 biocides using the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 1991: 25: 172177.
  • 75
    Hilton J, Dearman R J, Harvey P, Evans P, Basketter D A, Kimber I. Estimation of relative skin sensitizing potency using the local lymph node assay: a comparison of formaldehyde with glutaraldehyde. Am J Contact Dermatitis 1998: 9: 2933.
  • 76
    Basketter D A, Rodford R, Kimber I, Smith I, Wahlberg J E. Skin sensitization risk assessment: a comparative evaluation of 3 isothiazolinone biocides. Contact Dermatitis 1999: 40: 150154.
  • 77
    Basketter D A, Lea L J, Cooper K J, et al. Identification of metal allergens in the local lymph node assay. Am J Contact Dermatitis 1999: 10: 207212.
  • 78
    Hilton J, Dearman R J, Fielding I, Basketter D A, Kimber I. Evaluation of the sensitising potential of eugenol and isoeugenol in mice and guinea pigs. J Appl Toxicol 1996: 16: 459464.
  • 79
    Ashby J, Hilton J, Dearman R J, Callander R D, Kimber I. Mechanistic relationship among mutagenicity, skin sensitisation and skin carcinogenicity. Environ Health Perspect 1993: 101: 6267.
  • 80
    Warbrick E V, Dearman R J, Ashby J, Schmezer P, Kimber I. Preliminary assessment of the skin sensitizing activity of selected rodent carcinogens using the local lymph node assay. Toxicology 2001: 163: 6369.
  • 81
    Chamberlain M, Basketter D A. The local lymph node assay: status of validation. Fd Chem Toxic 1996: 34: 9991002.
  • 82
    National Institutes of Health (NIH). The Murine Local Lymph Node Assay: A Test Method for Assessing the Allergic Contact Dermatitis Potential of Chemicals/Compounds. NIH no. 99–4494, 1999.
  • 83
    Dean J H, Twerdok L E, Tice R R, Sailstad D M, Hattan D G, Stokes W S. ICCVAM evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay. II. Conclusions and recommendations of an independent scientific peer review panel. Reg Toxicol Pharmacol 2001: 34: 258273.
  • 84
    Haneke K E, Tice R R, Carson B L, Margolin B, Stokes W S. ICCVAM evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay. III. Data analyses completed by the National Toxicology Program Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods. Reg Toxicol Pharmacol 2001: 34: 274286.
  • 85
    Sailstad D M, Hattan D, Hill R N, Stokes W S. ICCVAM evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay. I. The ICCVAM review process. Reg Toxicol Pharmacol 2001: 34: 249257.
  • 86
    Balls M, Hellsten E. Statement on the validity of the local lymph node assay for skin sensitisation testing. ECVAM Joint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra. ATLA 2000: 28: 366367.
  • 87
    Kimber I, Bentley A, Hilton J. Contact sensitization to nickel sulphate and potassium dichromate. Contact Dermatitis 1990: 23: 325330.
  • 88
    Buehler E V. Delayed contact hypersensitivity in the guinea pig. Arch Dermatol 1965: 91: 171177.
  • 89
    Goodwin B F J, Crevel R W R, Johnson A W. A comparison of 3 guinea pig sensitization procedures for the detection of 19 human contact sensitizers. Contact Dermatitis 1981: 7: 248258.
  • 90
    Montelius J, Wahlkvist H, Boman A, Fernstrom P, Grabergs L, Wahlberg J E. Experience with the murine local lymph node assay: inability to discriminate between allergens and irritants. Acta Dermatol Venereol 1994: 74: 2227.
  • 91
    Basketter D A, Gerberick G F, Kimber I. Strategies for identifying false positive responses in predictive skin sensitization tests. Fd Chem Toxic 1998: 36: 327333.
  • 92
    Friedmann P. The immunology of allergic contact dermatitis: the DNCB story. Adv Dermatol 1990: 5: 175196.
  • 93
    Andersen K E, Volund A, Frankild S. The guinea pig maximization test – with a multiple dose design. Acta Dermatol Venereol 1995: 75: 463469.
  • 94
    Nakamura A, Momma J, Sekiguchi H, et al. A new protocol and criteria for quantitative determination of sensitization potencies of chemicals by guinea pig maximization test. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 31: 7285.
  • 95
    Momma J, Kitajima S, Inoue T. The guinea-pig sensitization test revisited: an evaluation formula to predict possible sensitization levels for eight chemicals used in household products. Toxicology 1998: 126: 7582.
  • 96
    Kimber I, Basketter D A. Contact sensitization: a new approach to risk assessment. Human Ecol Risk Assess 1997: 3: 385395.
  • 97
    Kimber I, Basketter D A, Berthold K, et al. Skin sensitization testing in potency and risk assessment. Toxicol Sci 2001: 59: 198208.
  • 98
    Kimber I, Gerberick G F, Basketter D A. Thresholds in contact sensitization: theoretical and practical applications. Fd Chem Toxic 1999: 37: 553560.
  • 99
    Basketter D A, Lea L J, Dickens A, et al. A comparison of statistical approaches to the derivation of EC3 values from local lymph node assay dose–responses. J Appl Toxicol 1999: 19: 261266.
  • 100
    Warbrick E V, Dearman R J, Lea L J, Basketter D A, Kimber I. Local lymph node responses to paraphenylene diamine: intra and inter-laboratory studies. J Appl Toxicol 1999: 19: 255260.
  • 101
    Basketter D A, Wright Z M, Warbrick E V, et al. Human potency predictions for aldehydes using the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 2001: 45: 8994.
  • 102
    Basketter D A, Dearman R J, Hilton J, Kimber I. Dinitrohalobenzenes: evaluation of relative skin sensitization potential using the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 1997: 36: 97100.
  • 103
    Basketter D A, Blaikie L, Dearman R J, et al. Use of the local lymph node assay for the estimation of relative contact allergenic potency. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 344348.
  • 104
    Gerberick G F, Robinson M K, Ryan C A, et al. Contact allergenic potency: correlation of human and local lymph node assay data. Am J Contact Dermatitis 2001: 12: 156161.
  • 105
    Lea L J, Warbrick E V, Dearman R J, Kimber I, Basketter D A. The impact of vehicle on assessment of relative skin sensitization potency of 1,4-dihydroquinone in the local lymph node assay. Am J Contact Dermatitis 1999: 10: 231218.
  • 106
    Robinson M K, Stotts J, Danneman P J, Nusair T L, Bay Ph. A risk assessment process for allergic contact dermatitis. Fd Chem Toxic 1989: 27: 479489.
  • 107
    Gerberick G F, Robinson M K, Stotts J. An approach to allergic contact sensitization risk assessment of new chemicals and product ingredients. Am J Contact Dermatitis 1993: 4: 205211.
  • 108
    Basketter D A. Skin sensitization: risk assessment. Int J Cosmet Sci 1998: 20: 141150.
    Direct Link:
  • 109
    Gerberick G F, Robinson M K. A skin sensitization risk assessment approach for evaluation of new ingredients and products. Am J Contact Dermatitis 2000: 11: 6573.
  • 110
    Basketter D A, Evans P, Gerberick G F, Kimber I. Chemical allergy: estimation of potency, thresholds and risk assessments. Comments Toxicol 1999: 7: 7989.
  • 111
    Robinson M K, Gerberick G F, Ryan C A, McNamee P, White I R, Basketter D A. The importance of exposure estimation in the assessment of skin sensitization risk. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 251259.
  • 112
    Gerberick G F, Robinson M K, Felter S P, White I R, Basketter D A. Understanding fragrance allergy using an exposure-based risk assessment approach. Contact Dermatitis 2001: 45: 333340.
  • 113
    Ryan C A, Cruse L W, Skinner R A, Dearman R J, Kimber I, Gerberick G F. Examination of a vehicle for use with water soluble materials in the murine local lymph node assay. Fd Chem Toxic 2002: 40: 17191735.
  • 114
    Sikorski E E, Gerberick G F, Ryan C A, Miller C M, Ridder G M. Phenotypic analysis of lymphocyte subpopulations in lymph nodes draining the ear following exposure to contact allergens and irritants. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1996: 34: 2535.
  • 115
    Gerberick G F, Cruse L W, Miller C M, Ridder G M. Selective modulation of B-cell activation markers CD86 and I-Ak on murine draining lymph node cells following allergen or irritant treatment. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1999: 159: 142151.
  • 116
    Gerberick G F, Cruse L W, Miller C M, Sikorski E E, Ridder G M. Selective modulation of T cell memory markers CD62L and CD44 on murine lymph node cells following allergen and irritant treatment. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1997: 146: 110.
  • 117
    Manetz T S, Meade J B. Development of a flow cytometry assay for the identification and differentiation of chemicals with the potential to elicit irritation, IgE-mediated, or T cell-mediated hypersensitivity responses. Toxicol Sci 1999: 48: 206217.
  • 118
    Gerberick G F, Cruse L W, Ryan C A, et al. Use of a B cell marker (B220) to discriminate between allergens and irritants in the local lymph node assay. Toxicol Sci 2002: 68: 420428.
  • 119
    Dearman R J, Hope J C, Hopkins S J, Debicki R J, Kimber I. Interleukin 6 (IL-6) production by lymph node cells. an alternative endpoint for the murine local lymph node assay. Toxicol Methods 1993: 4: 268278.
  • 120
    Dearman R J, Scholes E W, Ramdin L S P, Basketter D A, Kimber I. The local lymph node assay: an interlaboratory evaluation of interleukin 6 (IL-6) production by draining lymph node cells. J Appl Toxicol 1994: 14: 287291.
  • 121
    Dearman R J, Kimber I. Cytokine production and the local lymph node assay. In: In Vitro Skin Toxicology, Rougier, A, Goldberg, A M, Maibach, H I, eds. New York: Mary Ann Liebert 1994, pp. 367372.
  • 122
    Dearman R J, Hilton J, Basketter D A, Kimber I. Cytokine endpoints for the local lymph node assay: consideration of interferon-γ and interleukin 12. J Appl Toxicol 1999: 19: 149155.
  • 123
    Hariya T, Hatao M, Ichikawa H. Development of a non-radioactive endpoint in a modified local lymph node assay. Fd Chem Toxicol 1999: 37: 8793.
  • 124
    Pennie W D, Tugwood J D, Oliver G J A, Kimber I. The principles and practice of toxicogenomics: applications and opportunities. Toxicol Sci 2000: 54: 277283.
  • 125
    Orphanides G, Pennie W D, Moffat G J, Kimber I. Toxicogenomics: theoretical and practical considerations. Comments Toxicol 2001: 7: 333346.
  • 126
    Pennie W D, Kimber I. Toxicogenomics; transcript profiling and potential application to chemical allergy. Toxicol Vitro 2002: 16: 319326.
  • 127
    Betts C J, Moggs J G, Caddick H T, et al. Assessment of glycosylation dependent cell adhesion molecule 1 (GlyCAM-1) as a correlate of allergen-stimulated lymph node activation. Toxicology 2003: 185: 103117.