Skip Navigation

Local Lymph Node Assay

Table of Contents

  1. Test Submission
    1. Cover Letter
    2. Submission
  2. Appendices
    1. Local Lymph Node Assay Bibliography
    2. List of Chemicals
      1. Chemicals Tested in Local Lymph Node Assay
      2. Discordant Results Between Local Lymph Node Assay and Guinea Pig or Human Test Methods
      3. Disintegrations Per Minute Data and Stimulation Indices for Discordant Results
    3. Key Local Lymph Node Assay Papers
    4. Sample Local Lymph Node Assay Protocol
    5. ICCVAM Local Lymph Node Assay Test Submission Guidelines

APPENDIX D

Sample Local Lymph Node Assay Protocol Test Sheets


THE LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY - STUDY NUMBER

 Sample Accountability
Test substance :
Sub-sample ref. no. :
Appearance of sub-sample :
Active ingredient level :

Data sample received:

ProcedureWt. Sample + ContainerAmount UsedOperatorDate
BeforeAfter
Initial Weight
To Archive
To Analytical
Solvent Determination
Topical Application
Returned to Sample Processing

Comments:


THE LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY - STUDY NUMBER

Test substance :
Sub-sample ref. no. :
Active ingredient level :
Storage :
Handling :

1. Description of test solutions and preparations
Solvent vehicle:

Test Conc. (%)PreparationDescriptionOperatorDate
 
 
 
 
 

2. Method of test solution preparation

Test Conc. (%)Method of PreparationStorage ConditionsOther Comments
 
 
 
 
 

 


THE LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY - STUDY NUMBER

Reagent Preparation

  1. Phosphate Buffered slaine (PBS) - 1 sachet of PBS powder ----> 1000 ml distilled water. Stored at + 4°C. Prepared.
  2. Trichloroacetic acid (TCA) - 7.5g TCA ----> 150 ml tap water. Stored at + 4°C. Prepared.
  3. 3H-methyl thymidine (3HTdR), specific activity 2.0 Ci/mMol (Concentration 1.0 mCi/ml). Stored at + 4°C. 'Radiochemical Batch Analysis' sheets received with each batch of 3HTdR are recorded separately from this study. 80 µCi/ml activity 3HTdR was prepared as follows:
3HTdR Code No.In-Use ActivityPreparationOperatorDate
 80 µCi/ml*ml of 1mCi/ml 3HTdR + ml of sterile PBS.

*Dilution activity of 3HTdR confirmed by removing a 80 µl aliquot, diluting to 200 ml with tap water and removing two 1 ml aliquots (0.032 µCi) and counting these on the ?-scintillation counter:

?-Counter printout inserted here

Mean Count : DPM

Since 1.0 µCi = 2220000 DPM (37000 Bq)
then 0.032 µCi - 71040 DPM

Therefore, DPM = DPM X 80 µCi/ml / 71040 DPM = µCi/ml

More information concerning 3HTdR preparation, use, disposal and monitoring during this study are detailed on the 'Radioactive Log' and 'Radioactive Monitoring Swabs' sheets recorded separately from this study.


THE LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY - STUDY NUMBER
GROUP-POOLED LYMPH NODES

Background and control raw data retrieved from the ?-scintillation counter

Results:

  1. Background and Control Results

Background

3

HTdR in two 1 ml TCA samples was determined and

3

HTdR incorporation into control LNC determined days after the first vehicle topical application.

?-Counter printout inserted here

Rack/Sample PositionSample DescriptionNo. Lymph NodesSample DPM
 
 
 
 

Mean background count : DPM


THE LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY - STUDY NUMBER
GROUP-POOLED LYMPH NODES

Test raw data retrieved from ?-scintillation counter

Test substance :
Sample ref. no. :

3HTdR incorporation into test LNC determined days after the first test substance topical applications.

Results:

  1. Test Results

?-Counter printout inserted here

Rack/Sample PositionSample DescriptionNo. Lymph NodesSample DPM
 
 
 
 

THE LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY - STUDY NUMBER
GROUP-POOLED LYMPH NODES

Expression and interpretation of results

Test substance :
Sample ref. no. :
Exposure period (days) :

The proliferative response of lymph node cells (LNC) is expressed as the number of radioactive disintergrations per minute per lymph node (DPM/NODE) and as the ration of 3HTdR incorporation into LNC of test nodes relative to that recorded for control nodes (TEST/CONTROL RATIO). The test substance can be regarded as a 'sensitizer' if at least one test concentration produces a test/control ration equal to or greater than 3.0. The data must also be compatible with a biological dose response, although allowance must be made, especially at high topical application concentrations, for local toxicity and/or immunological suppression. Where the data does not fulfill these criteria, the test substance can be regarded as 'unlikely to be a strong sensitizer'.

Background count : DPM

Sample DescriptionSample DPM - Background DPMNo. Lymph NodesDPM/NODETEST/CONTROL RATIO+/-
 
 
 
 

Biological dose response - Yes/No.

Comments:


THE LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY - STUDY NUMBER
INDIVIDUAL ANIMAL LYMPH NODES

Control raw data retrieved from the ?-scintillation counter

Results:

  1. Control Results

3

HTdR incorporation into control LNC determined days after the first vehicle topical application.

?-Counter printout inserted here

Rack/Sample PositionSample DescriptionNo. Lymph NodesSample DPM
 
 
 
 

Mean background count : DPM


THE LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY - STUDY NUMBER
INDIVIDUAL ANIMAL LYMPH NODES

Test raw data retrieved from ?-scintillation counter

Test substance :
Sample ref. no. :

3HTdR incorporation into test LNC determined days after the first test substance topical applications.

Results:

  1. Test Results

?-Counter printout inserted here

Rack/Sample PositionSample DescriptionNo. Lymph NodesSample DPM
 
 
 
 

THE LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY - STUDY NUMBER
INDIVIDUAL ANIMAL LYMPH NODES

Expression and interpretation of results

Test substance :
Sample ref. no. :
Exposure period (days) :

The proliferative response of lymph node cells (LNC) is expressed as the number of radioactive disintergrations per minute per lymph node (DPM/NODE) and as the ration of 3HTdR incorporation into LNC of test nodes relative to that recorded for control nodes (TEST/CONTROL RATIO). The test substance can be regarded as a 'sensitizer' if at least one test concentration produces a test/control ration equal to or greater than 3.0. The data must also be compatible with a biological dose response, although allowance must be made, especially at high topical application concentrations, for local toxicity and/or immunological suppression. Where the data does not fulfill these criteria, the test substance can be regarded as 'unlikely to be a strong sensitizer'.

Background count : DPM

Sample Description
Test or Control Group
Group Mean DPMGroup Mean Standard ErrorTEST/CONTROL RATIO+/-
 
 
 
 

Biological dose response - Yes/No.

Comments:


THE LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY - STUDY NUMBER

Mouse maintenance, treatment record, and task sheet

Strain : CBA/_____
Sex : Female
Age :
Source :
Diet :
Water : Ad libitum
Housing :

Test substance :
Sample ref. no. :

Animal GroupTopical ApplicationAdmin. of 3HTdRMice KilledProcessing NodesSamples Counted
Day 0Day 1Day 2 No. Mice Injured No. Nodes Excised
 
 
 
 

More information concerning animal maintenance (including diet batch numbers) are detailed on the 'Animal Log' sheet recorded separately from this study.

Comments:

New ALTEX:1/2018

ALTEX cover 1/2018
 

Support ALTWEB, Make a Gift
Online Humane Science Course

MeetingS

 
Building a Better Epithelium: Breaking the Barrier to the Next Generation of Toxicity Testing
March 10, 2018
San Antonio, TX

SOT Satellite Meeting: Updates on Activities Related to 21st Century Toxicology and Related Efforts: Invited Presentations and Open Mic
March 15, 2018
San Antonio, TX

SAVE THE DATE!
Social Housing Workshop
June 4-5, 2018
Beltsville, MD
Email: kherrma1@jhu.edu

SAVE THE DATE!
2nd Pan-American Conference for Alternative Methods
August 23-24, 2018
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 

Eurotox 2018
September 2-5, 2018
Brussels, Belgium

20th International Congress on In Vitro Toxicology (ESTIV2018)
October 15-18, 2018
Berlin
 

More Meetings...