Abstract
There is a large body of information on testing of chemicals for skin sensitization in the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA), in which potency is quantified by the EC3 value, derived from dose-response data. This information finds use in risk assessment and regulatory classification, and also in assessing the performance of non-animal methods. However, some LLNA results are not straightforward to interpret, and in some cases published EC3 values are questionable. These cases usually arise where the dose-response does not show a monotonic increasing pattern but is bell-shaped, or shows a decrease in response with increasing dose over the whole dose range tested. By analogy with a long-recognised phenomenon in guinea pig sensitization, this is referred to as the overload effect. Here a mechanistic rationale is presented to explain the overload effect, and at the same time to explain the production of danger signals even when the sensitizer is non-irritant. Some illustrative examples are presented where the overload effect can lead to misinterpretation of LLNA results, and chemistry-based read-across is applied to reinterpret the data.