Search

Background: Histone lysine demethylases (KDMs) are of interest as drug targets due to their regulatory roles in chromatin organization and their tight associations with diseases including cancer and mental disorders. The first KDM inhibitors for KDM1 have entered clinical trials, and efforts are ongoing to develop potent, selective and cell-active 'probe' molecules for this target class. Robust cellular assays to assess the specific engagement of KDM inhibitors in cells as well as their cellular selectivity are a prerequisite for the development of high-quality inhibitors. Here we describe the use of a high-content cellular immunofluorescence assay as a method for demonstrating target engagement in cells., Results: A panel of assays for the Jumonji C subfamily of KDMs was developed to encompass all major branches of the JmjC phylogenetic tree. These assays compare compound activity against wild-type KDM proteins to a catalytically inactive version of the KDM, in which residues involved in the active-site iron coordination are mutated to inactivate the enzyme activity. These mutants are critical for assessing the specific effect of KDM inhibitors and for revealing indirect effects on histone methylation status. The reported assays make use of ectopically expressed demethylases, and we demonstrate their use to profile several recently identified classes of KDM inhibitors and their structurally matched inactive controls. The generated data correlate well with assay results assessing endogenous KDM inhibition and confirm the selectivity observed in biochemical assays with isolated enzymes. We find that both cellular permeability and competition with 2-oxoglutarate affect the translation of biochemical activity to cellular inhibition., Conclusions: High-content-based immunofluorescence assays have been established for eight KDM members of the 2-oxoglutarate-dependent oxygenases covering all major branches of the JmjC-KDM phylogenetic tree. The usage of both full-length, wild-type and catalytically inactive mutant ectopically expressed protein, as well as structure-matched inactive control compounds, allowed for detection of nonspecific effects causing changes in histone methylation as a result of compound toxicity. The developed assays offer a histone lysine demethylase family-wide tool for assessing KDM inhibitors for cell activity and on-target efficacy. In addition, the presented data may inform further studies to assess the cell-based activity of histone lysine methylation inhibitors.

The Polypropylene Glycol (PPG) Butyl Ethers function as skinand hair-conditioning agents in cosmetics. Intestinal absorption of the PPG Butyl Ethers was inversely proportional to the molecular weight. In general, the toxicity of the PPG Butyl Ethers decreased as the molecular weight increased. In acute studies, moderate intraperitoneal (IP) doses of various PPG Butyl Ethers caused convulsive seizures in mice and anesthetized dogs, and large oral doses caused decreased activity, anuria, renal tubular swelling and necrosis, and hepatic swelling and necrosis. PPG-2 Butyl Ether vapors were nontoxic by the inhalation route. PPG-2 Butyl Ether was nontoxic in short-term feeding and dermal exposure studies in rats. In animal irritation studies, PPG-2 Butyl Ether caused minor, transient erythema and desquamation; in addition, erythema, edema, ecchymosis, necrosis, and other changes were observed during an acute percutaneous study. PPG-2 Butyl Ether also caused minor to moderate conjunctival irritation and minor corneal injury. PPG-2 Butyl Ether when dermally applied was nontoxic to pregnant rats and was nonteratogenic at doses up to 1.0 ml/kg/day. PPG BE800 at concentrations of 0.001% to 0.26% in feed was noncarcinogenic to rats after 2 years of treatment. In clinical studies, PPG BE800 was nonirritating and nonsensitizing to the skin when tested using 200 subjects. PPG-40 Butyl Ether was neither an irritant nor a sensitizer in a repeat-insult patch test using 112 subjects. Although clinical testing did not indicate significant skin irritation is produced by these ingredients, the animal test data did indicate the potential that these ingredients can be irritating. Therefore, it was concluded that the PPG Butyl Ethers can be used safely in cosmetic products if they are formulated to avoid irritation. Data on the component ingredients, Propylene Glycol, PPG, and n-Butyl Alcohol, from previous cosmetic ingredient safety assessments were also considered and found to support the safety of PPG Butyl Ethers.

This safety assessment addresses cosmetic ingredients that are N-acyl derivatives of sarcosine and are generally referred to as acyl sarcosines, and those that are salts, known generally as acyl sarcosinates. Previous assessments have addressed the safety of each of the fatty acids that appear in these acyl sarcosines and sarcosinates (Coconut Acid, Oleic Acid, Lauric Acid, and Myristic Acid). In each case the fatty acid was either safe for use or safe as used in cosmetic formulations. Acyl sarcosines are considered modified fatty acids with greater solubility and increased acidity of the carboxylic acid group compared to the parent fatty acid. They are used in a large number of cosmetic formulations as hair-conditioning agents and surfactant-cleansing agents. In soaps, concentrations are reported to be as high as 12.9%. These ingredients have low oral toxicity in rats. Although cytotoxic to Chinese hamster cells in culture, acyl sarcosines and sarcosinates are not mutagenic in those cells, nor in bacterial cells in culture. Carcinogenicity data were not available. These ingredients are nonirritating and nonsensitizing to animal and human skin, although they can enhance the penetration of other ingredients through the skin. For that reason, caution should be exhibited in formulating cosmetic products that contain these ingredients in combination with other ingredients whose safety is based on their lack of absorption or where dermal absorption is a concern (e.g., HC Yellow No. 4, Disperse Yellow 3). Because sarcosine can be nitrosated to form N-nitrososarcosine, a known animal carcinogen, these ingredients should not be used in cosmetic products in which N-nitroso compounds may be formed. With the above caveat, and based on the available data, it was concluded that these acyl sarcosines and sarcosinates are safe as used in rinse-off products. They may be safely used in leave-on products at concentrations up to 5%, the highest concentration tested in clinical irritation and sensitization studies. Oleoyl Sarcosine is used as a corrosion inhibitor in some aerosol products, at extremely low concentrations. In this circumstance, the ingredient is not being used as a cosmetic ingredient and this report is not intended to limit that use. Because of the absence of data on inhalation toxicity, however, it was concluded that the available data were not sufficient to support the safety of acyl sarcosines and sarcosinates as cosmetic ingredients in products where they are likely to be inhaled.

These inorganic polyphosphate salts all function as chelating agents in cosmetic formulations. In addition, Sodium Metaphosphate functions as an oral care agent, Sodium Trimetaphosphate as a buffering agent, and Sodium Hexametaphosphate as a corrosion inhibitor. Only Sodium Hexametaphosphate is currently reported to be used. Although the typical concentrations historically have been less than 1%, higher concentrations have been used in products such as bath oils, which are diluted during normal use. Sodium Metaphosphate is the general term for any polyphosphate salt with four or more phosphate units. The four-phosphate unit version is cyclic, others are straight chains. The hexametaphosphate is the specific six-chain length form. The trimetaphosphate structure is cyclic. Rats fed 10% Sodium Trimetaphosphate for a month exhibited transient tubular necrosis; rats given 10% Sodium Metaphosphate had retarded growth and those fed 10% Sodium Hexametaphosphate had pale and swollen kidneys. In chronic studies using animals, growth inhibition, increased kidney weights (with calcium deposition and desquamation), bone decalcification, parathyroid hypertrophy and hyperplasia, inorganic phosphaturia, hepatic focal necrosis, and muscle fiber size alterations. Sodium Hexametaphosphate was a severe skin irritant in rabbits, whereas a 0.2% solution was only mildly irritating. A similar pattern was seen with ocular toxicity. These ingredients were not genotoxic in bacterial systems nor were they carcinogenic in rats. No reproductive or developmental toxicity was seen in studies using rats exposed to Sodium Hexametaphosphate or Sodium Trimetaphosphate. In clinical testing, irritation is seen as a function of concentration; concentrations as high as 1% produced no irritation in contact allergy patients. Because of the corrosive nature of Sodium Hexametaphosphate, it was concluded that these ingredients could be used safely if each formulation was prepared to avoid skin irritation; for example, low concentration in a leave-on product or dilution of a higher concentration as part of product usage.

Polyethylene Glycol (PEG)-6, -8, and -20 Sorbitan Beeswax are ethoxylated derivatives of Beeswax that function as surfactants in cosmetic formulations. Only PEG-20 Sorbitan Beeswax is currently reported to be used, at concentrations up to 11%. Few data on the PEGs Sorbitan Beeswax ingredients were available. This safety assessment relied upon the available data from previous safety assessments of Beeswax, Synthetic Beeswax, Sorbitan Esters, PEGs, and PEG Sorbitan fatty acid esters, also known as Polysorbates. The ester linkage of PEG Sorbitan fatty acid esters was hydrolyzed after oral administration, and the PEG Sorbitan moiety was poorly absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract. Sorbitan Stearate was hydrolyzed to stearic acid and anhydrides of sorbitol in the rat. PEGs are readily absorbed through damaged skin and are associated with contact dermatitis and systemic toxicity in burn patients. PEGs were not sensitizing to normal skin. PEGs did not cause reproductive toxicity, nor were tested PEGs mutagenic or carcinogenic. Sorbitol was not a reproductive or developmental toxin in multigenerational studies in rats. Neither Beeswax nor Synthetic Beeswax produced significant acute animal toxicity, ocular irritation, skin irritation, or skin sensitization. Polysorbates produced no acute or long-term effects, were generally not irritating or sensitizing, and were noncarcinogenic, although studies did demonstrate enhancement of the activity of chemical carcinogens. Sorbitan fatty acid esters were relatively nontoxic via ingestion, generally were not skin irritants or sensitizers, and were not mutagenic or carcinogenic. Sorbitan Laurate was a cocarcinogen in a mouse skin-painting study. PEG-6 Sorbitan Beeswax delivered via a stomach tube was nontoxic in rats in acute studies. Undiluted PEG-6 Sorbitan Beeswax was nonirritating to the eyes of rabbits and was non-irritating to intact and abraded skin of rabbits. PEG-20 Sorbitan Beeswax was only minimally irritating to rabbit eyes at concentrations as high as 30%, and was not a significant skin irritant in rabbits exposed to a product with PEG-20 Sorbitan Beeswax at 2%. In clinical tests, PEG-6 and -20 Sorbitan Beeswax at concentrations up to 3% were only minimally irritating and were nonsensitizers. Careful consideration was made of the data on the cocarcinogenesis, but the high exposure levels, high frequency of exposure, and absence of a dose-response led to the conclusion that there was not a cocarcinogenesis risk with the use of these ingredients in cosmetic formulations. Accordingly, these ingredients were considered safe for use in cosmetic formulations under the present practices of use.

The Polypropylene Glycol (PPG) Stearyl Ethers are polypropylene ethers of stearyl ether that function as skin-conditioning agent in cosmetic formulations. Few data on the PPG Stearyl Ethers were available. Data on chemically related PPG Butyl Ethers were reviewed as a further basis for the assessment of safety. The amounts of PPG Butyl Ethers absorbed from the digestive tract were inversely proportional to the molecular weights on the compounds; skin penetration was slow to nil. During metabolism, the butyl group was removed and oxidized, and the chains were fragmented, oxidized to weak acids, and eliminated in the urine. Little acute oral toxicity was seen in animal studies. In general, the PPG Butyl Ethers were very toxic by the intravenous route and were slightly toxic to nontoxic by the intraperitoneal and subcutaneous routes. The smaller molecular weight ethers were generally more toxic than the larger molecular weight ethers. PPG-2 Butyl Ether vapor was nontoxic by the inhalation route. Undiluted PPG-15 Stearyl Ether was practically nonirritating to the eyes of rabbits, and PPG Butyl Ethers had minor to moderate conjunctival irritation, opacity, and iritis. PPG-15 Stearyl Ether was slightly irritating to rabbit skin. PPG-2 Butyl Ether caused minor, transient erythema and desquamation during a 4-hour occlusive patch test. PPG-2 Butyl Ether did not irritate the skin of pregnant mice, was nontoxic to dams, and was not teratogenic. PPG-9-13 Butyl Ether was noncarcinogenic when fed to rats. PPG-40 Butyl Ether was nonsensitizing in clinical tests. These data were considered by the Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel to support the safety of PPG Stearyl Ethers at their current use concentrations (2% to 10%, but not greater than 25%). Data on the component ingredients, Propylene Glycol, PPG, and Steraryl Alcohol, from previous cosmetic ingredient safety assessments were also considered and found to support the safety of PPG Stearyl Ethers.

Stearamide DIBA-Stearate is a substituted dihydroxyisobutylamine (DIBA) that functions in cosmetic formulations as an opacifying agent, a surfactant-foam booster, and a viscosity increasing agent. Stearamide DIBA-Stearate was reportedly used in four cosmetic formulations, at concentrations of 1% to 3%. Few data on this ingredient were available. Data on related ingredients, including Dibutyl Adipate, Diisopropyl Adipate, Stearamide DEA, and Stearamide MEA, were considered in the assessment of safety. A formulation containing 1.3% Stearamide DIBA-Stearate (further diluted to 4% of the formulation) was mildly irritating but nonsensitizing in an repeated-insult patch test (RIPT). The same dilution was noncomedogenic. At a concentration of 20%, Dibutyl Adipate had an oral LD50 of 2 g/kg. Subchronic dermal exposure of rabbits (1.0 ml/kg/day) caused a reduction in weight gain that was not observed at a dose of 0.5 ml/kg/day. In studies using rabbits, undiluted Dibutyl Adipate caused mild to moderate skin irritation and minimal ocular irritation. When pregnant rats were treated intraperitoneally with approximately 1.75 ml/kg Dibutyl Adipate during gestation, the incidence of fetal gross abnormalities was increased. No effect was observed at smaller doses. Diisopropyl Adipate had low acute oral and percutaneous toxicity, and was only a very mild ocular irritant. In skin irritation studies using rabbits, 5.0% to 100% Diisopropyl Adipate caused minimal to mild irritation; these results were also seen in clinical testing with only moderate cumulative irritation, and no sensitization or photosensitization. A formulation containing 5.27% Stearamide MEA was not toxic to rats when applied topically daily for 13 weeks. In studies using rabbits, Stearamide DEA (35% to 40%) was not a skin or ocular irritant, and Stearamide MEA (5.27%) was not an ocular irritant. At 17%, Stearamide MEA was not irritating to the skin, but caused minimal to moderate irritation to the eyes of rabbits. Stearamide MEA (5.27%) did not cause sensitization during a clinical study. It was not possible, however, to determine the relevance of these data on related ingredients. Therefore, it was concluded that the available data are insufficient. Additional data needs are (1) method of manufacture; (2) chemical characterization, including impurities; (3) dermal absorption; if significantly absorbed, then a 28-day dermal toxicity study and a reproductive and developmental toxicity study may be needed; (4) two genotoxicity assays, at least one in a mammalian system; if positive, then a 2-year dermal carcinogenesis study using National Toxicology Program (NTP) methods may be needed; (5) ultraviolet (UV) absorption data; if significant absorption occurs in the UVA or UVB range, photosensitization data are needed. Absent these data, it was concluded that the available data are insufficient to support the safety of Stearamide DIBA-Stearate as used in cosmetic products.

Octyldodecyl Stearoyl Stearate functions as an occlusive skin-conditioning agent and as a nonaqueous viscosity-increasing agent in many cosmetic formulations. Current concentrations of use are between 0.7% and 23%, although historically higher concentrations were used. The chemical is formed by a high-temperature, acid-catalyzed esterification reaction of long-chain alcohols (primarily C-20) and a mixture of primarily C-18 fatty acids. Levels of stearic acid, octyldodecanol, and octylydocecyl hydroxystearate in the final product are 5% or less--no other residual compounds are reported. Only limited safety test data were available on Octyldodecyl Stearoyl Stearate, but previous safety assessments of long-chain alcohols and fatty acids found these precursors to be safe for use in cosmetic formulations. Octyldodecyl Stearoyl Stearate produced no adverse effects in acute exposures in rats. The chemical was mostly nonirritating to animal skin at concentrations ranging from 7.5% to 10%; one study did find moderate irritation in rabbit skin at a concentration of 7.5%. Clinical tests at a concentration of 10.4% confirmed the absence of significant irritation in humans. An ocular toxicity study in rabbits found no toxicity. No evidence of genotoxicity was found in either a mammalian test system or in the Ames test system, with or without metabolic activation. The available data on Octyldodecyl Stearoyl Stearate and the previously considered data on long-chain alcohols and fatty acids, however, did not provide a sufficient basis to make a determination of safety. Additional data needs include (1) chemical properties, including the octanol/water partition coefficient; and (2) if there is significant dermal absorption or if significant quantities of the ingredient may contact mucous membranes or be ingested, then reproductive and developmental toxicity data may be needed. Until such time as these data are received, the available data do not support the safety of Octyldodecyl Stearoyl Stearate as used in cosmetic formulations.