Human skin in vitro permeation of bentazon and isoproturon formulations with or without protective clothing suit.

Skin exposures to chemicals may lead, through percutaneous permeation, to a significant increase in systemic circulation. Skin is the primary route of entry during some occupational activities, especially in agriculture. To reduce skin exposures, the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) is recommended. PPE efficiency is characterized as the time until products permeate through material (lag time, Tlag). Both skin and PPE permeations are assessed using similar in vitro methods; the diffusion cell system. Flow-through diffusion cells were used in this study to assess the permeation of two herbicides, bentazon and isoproturon, as well as four related commercial formulations (Basagran(®), Basamais(®), Arelon(®) and Matara(®)). Permeation was measured through fresh excised human skin, protective clothing suits (suits) (Microchem(®) 3000, AgriSafe Pro(®), Proshield(®) and Microgard(®) 2000 Plus Green), and a combination of skin and suits. Both herbicides, tested by itself or as an active ingredient in formulations, permeated readily through human skin and tested suits (Tlag < 2 h). High permeation coefficients were obtained regardless of formulations or tested membranes, except for Microchem(®) 3000. Short Tlag, were observed even when skin was covered with suits, except for Microchem(®) 3000. Kp values tended to decrease when suits covered the skin (except when Arelon(®) was applied to skin covered with AgriSafe Pro and Microgard(®) 2000), suggesting that Tlag alone is insufficient in characterizing suits. To better estimate human skin permeations, in vitro experiments should not only use human skin but also consider the intended use of the suit, i.e., the active ingredient concentrations and type of formulations, which significantly affect skin permeation.

A new alternative method for testing skin irritation using a human skin model: a pilot study.

Studies assessing skin irritation to chemicals have traditionally used laboratory animals; however, such methods are questionable regarding their relevance for humans. New in vitro methods have been validated, such as the reconstructed human epidermis (RHE) model (Episkin®, Epiderm®). The comparison (accuracy) with in vivo results such as the 4-h human patch test (HPT) is 76% at best (Epiderm®). There is a need to develop an in vitro method that better simulates the anatomo-pathological changes encountered in vivo. To develop an in vitro method to determine skin irritation using human viable skin through histopathology, and compare the results of 4 tested substances to the main in vitro methods and in vivo animal method (Draize test). Human skin removed during surgery was dermatomed and mounted on an in vitro flow-through diffusion cell system. Ten chemicals with known non-irritant (heptylbutyrate, hexylsalicylate, butylmethacrylate, isoproturon, bentazon, DEHP and methylisothiazolinone (MI)) and irritant properties (folpet, 1-bromohexane and methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI/MI)), a negative control (sodiumchloride) and a positive control (sodiumlaurylsulphate) were applied. The skin was exposed at least for 4h. Histopathology was performed to investigate irritation signs (spongiosis, necrosis, vacuolization). We obtained 100% accuracy with the HPT model; 75% with the RHE models and 50% with the Draize test for 4 tested substances. The coefficients of variation (CV) between our three test batches were <0.1, showing good reproducibility. Furthermore, we reported objectively histopathological irritation signs (irritation scale): strong (folpet), significant (1-bromohexane), slight (MCI/MI at 750/250ppm) and none (isoproturon, bentazon, DEHP and MI). This new in vitro test method presented effective results for the tested chemicals. It should be further validated using a greater number of substances; and tested in different laboratories in order to suitably evaluate reproducibility.