Cargando…
Comparison of structural characteristics and molecular markers of rabbit skin, pig skin, and reconstructed human epidermis for an ex vivo human skin model
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development approved a reconstructed human epidermis (RHE) model for in vitro skin irritation and corrosion tests as an alternative to animal testing for cosmetics, which has been banned in the European Union since 2013. However, RHE models have several...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Nature Singapore
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10313609/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37398575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43188-023-00185-1 |
_version_ | 1785067157807169536 |
---|---|
author | Uhm, Chanyang Jeong, Haengdueng Lee, Su Hyon Hwang, Jae Sung Lim, Kyung-Min Nam, Ki Taek |
author_facet | Uhm, Chanyang Jeong, Haengdueng Lee, Su Hyon Hwang, Jae Sung Lim, Kyung-Min Nam, Ki Taek |
author_sort | Uhm, Chanyang |
collection | PubMed |
description | The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development approved a reconstructed human epidermis (RHE) model for in vitro skin irritation and corrosion tests as an alternative to animal testing for cosmetics, which has been banned in the European Union since 2013. However, RHE models have several limitations, such as high manufacturing costs, a loose skin barrier, and inability to simulate all cellular and non-cellular components of the human epidermis. Therefore, new alternative skin models are needed. Ex vivo skin models have been suggested as promising tools. Here, we investigated the structural similarities in the epidermis of pig and rabbit skin, a commercial RHE model (Keraskin), and human skin. To compare the structural similarity, the thickness of each epidermal layer was compared using molecular markers. Among the candidate human skin surrogates, the epidermal thickness of the pig skin was the most similar to that of human skin, followed by rabbit skin and Keraskin. Keraskin showed thicker cornified and granular layers than human skin, while rabbit skin displayed thinner layers. Moreover, the proliferation indices of Keraskin and rabbit skin were higher than those of human skin, whereas the proliferation index of the pig skin was similar to that of human skin. Some or none of the human skin barrier proteins FLG, CLDN1, and CDH1 were expressed in pig and rabbit skin, whereas all human proteins were expressed in Keraskin. Collectively, we propose ex vivo pig skin as the most suitable model for skin irritation testing because of its similarity to human skin. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43188-023-00185-1. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10313609 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Nature Singapore |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103136092023-07-02 Comparison of structural characteristics and molecular markers of rabbit skin, pig skin, and reconstructed human epidermis for an ex vivo human skin model Uhm, Chanyang Jeong, Haengdueng Lee, Su Hyon Hwang, Jae Sung Lim, Kyung-Min Nam, Ki Taek Toxicol Res Original Article The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development approved a reconstructed human epidermis (RHE) model for in vitro skin irritation and corrosion tests as an alternative to animal testing for cosmetics, which has been banned in the European Union since 2013. However, RHE models have several limitations, such as high manufacturing costs, a loose skin barrier, and inability to simulate all cellular and non-cellular components of the human epidermis. Therefore, new alternative skin models are needed. Ex vivo skin models have been suggested as promising tools. Here, we investigated the structural similarities in the epidermis of pig and rabbit skin, a commercial RHE model (Keraskin), and human skin. To compare the structural similarity, the thickness of each epidermal layer was compared using molecular markers. Among the candidate human skin surrogates, the epidermal thickness of the pig skin was the most similar to that of human skin, followed by rabbit skin and Keraskin. Keraskin showed thicker cornified and granular layers than human skin, while rabbit skin displayed thinner layers. Moreover, the proliferation indices of Keraskin and rabbit skin were higher than those of human skin, whereas the proliferation index of the pig skin was similar to that of human skin. Some or none of the human skin barrier proteins FLG, CLDN1, and CDH1 were expressed in pig and rabbit skin, whereas all human proteins were expressed in Keraskin. Collectively, we propose ex vivo pig skin as the most suitable model for skin irritation testing because of its similarity to human skin. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43188-023-00185-1. Springer Nature Singapore 2023-05-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10313609/ /pubmed/37398575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43188-023-00185-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Uhm, Chanyang Jeong, Haengdueng Lee, Su Hyon Hwang, Jae Sung Lim, Kyung-Min Nam, Ki Taek Comparison of structural characteristics and molecular markers of rabbit skin, pig skin, and reconstructed human epidermis for an ex vivo human skin model |
title | Comparison of structural characteristics and molecular markers of rabbit skin, pig skin, and reconstructed human epidermis for an ex vivo human skin model |
title_full | Comparison of structural characteristics and molecular markers of rabbit skin, pig skin, and reconstructed human epidermis for an ex vivo human skin model |
title_fullStr | Comparison of structural characteristics and molecular markers of rabbit skin, pig skin, and reconstructed human epidermis for an ex vivo human skin model |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of structural characteristics and molecular markers of rabbit skin, pig skin, and reconstructed human epidermis for an ex vivo human skin model |
title_short | Comparison of structural characteristics and molecular markers of rabbit skin, pig skin, and reconstructed human epidermis for an ex vivo human skin model |
title_sort | comparison of structural characteristics and molecular markers of rabbit skin, pig skin, and reconstructed human epidermis for an ex vivo human skin model |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10313609/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37398575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43188-023-00185-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT uhmchanyang comparisonofstructuralcharacteristicsandmolecularmarkersofrabbitskinpigskinandreconstructedhumanepidermisforanexvivohumanskinmodel AT jeonghaengdueng comparisonofstructuralcharacteristicsandmolecularmarkersofrabbitskinpigskinandreconstructedhumanepidermisforanexvivohumanskinmodel AT leesuhyon comparisonofstructuralcharacteristicsandmolecularmarkersofrabbitskinpigskinandreconstructedhumanepidermisforanexvivohumanskinmodel AT hwangjaesung comparisonofstructuralcharacteristicsandmolecularmarkersofrabbitskinpigskinandreconstructedhumanepidermisforanexvivohumanskinmodel AT limkyungmin comparisonofstructuralcharacteristicsandmolecularmarkersofrabbitskinpigskinandreconstructedhumanepidermisforanexvivohumanskinmodel AT namkitaek comparisonofstructuralcharacteristicsandmolecularmarkersofrabbitskinpigskinandreconstructedhumanepidermisforanexvivohumanskinmodel |