The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Categorization of Chemicals According to Their Relative Human Skin Sensitizing Potency
Abstract
Although adoption of skin sensitization in vivo assays for hazard identification is likely to be successful in the next few years, this does not replace their use in potency prediction. Notably, measurement of potency of skin sensitizers in the local lymph node assay has been important. However, this local lymph node assay potency measure has not been formally assessed against a range of substances of known human sensitizing potential, because the latter is lacking. Accordingly, criteria for human data have been established that characterize 6 categories of human sensitizing potency, with 1 the most potent and 5 the least potent; category 6 represents true nonsensitizers. The literature has been searched, and 131 chemicals assigned into these categories according to their intrinsic potency judged only by the available human information. The criteria and data set generated provide a basis for examination of the capacity of nonanimal approaches for the determination of human sensitization potency.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Cottrez, F., Boitel, E., Ourlin, J.-C., Peiffer, J.-L., Fabre, I., Henaoui, I.-S., Mari, B., Vallauri, A., Paquet, A., Barbry, P., et al. (2016) · Toxicology in Vitro · doi:10.1016/j.tiv.2016.01.007 · Cited by 499
Assessing skin sensitization hazard in mice and men using non-animal test methods
Urbisch, D., Mehling, A., Guth, K., Ramirez, T., Honarvar, N., Kolle, S., Landsiedel, R., Jaworska, J., Kern, P. S., Gerberick, F., et al. (2015) · Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.12.008 · Cited by 398
Self-citationNon-animal methods to predict skin sensitization (I): the Cosmetics Europe database
Hoffmann, S., Kleinstreuer, N., Alépée, N., Allen, D., Api, A. M., Ashikaga, T., Clouet, E., Cluzel, M., Desprez, B., Gellatly, N., et al. (2018) · Critical Reviews in Toxicology · doi:10.1080/10408444.2018.1429385 · Cited by 188
Self-citationLeontaridou, M. (2017) · ALTEX · doi:10.14573/altex.1606271 · Cited by 46
Fragrance Allergens in Cosmetic Products Marketed for Children in Denmark
Botvid, S., Simonsen, A. B., Jørgensen, C., Müller, S., Kirkeby, C. S., Christensen, A. B., & Johansen, J. D. (2023) · Contact Dermatitis · doi:10.1111/cod.14397 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Basketter, D. A., Alépée, N., Ashikaga, T., Barroso, J., Gilmour, N., Goebel, C., Hibatallah, J., Hoffmann, S., Kern, P., Martinozzi-Teissier, S., Maxwell, G., Reisinger, K., Sakaguchi, H., Schepky, A., Tailhardat, M., & Templier, M.
- Venue
- Dermatitis®
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-02
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 11-21
- ISSN
- 1710-3568 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-5220
- OpenAlex
- W1986162358
- Cited by
- 225
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 27.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Categorization of Chemicals According to Their Relative Human Skin Sensitizing Potency. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/der.0000000000000003
- The paper
- Basketter, D. A., Alépée, N., Ashikaga, T., Barroso, J., Gilmour, N., Goebel, C., Hibatallah, J., Hoffmann, S., Kern, P., Martinozzi-Teissier, S., Maxwell, G., Reisinger, K., Sakaguchi, H., Schepky, A., Tailhardat, M., & Templier, M. (2014). Categorization of Chemicals According to Their Relative Human Skin Sensitizing Potency. Dermatitis®. https://doi.org/10.1097/der.0000000000000003
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
