Ocular Irritation: Microscopic Changes Occurring Over Time in the Rat with Surfactants of Known Irritancy

Abstract

The pathology of surfactant-induced ocular irritation, especially in the context of accidental human exposures and animal tests used to assess a surfactant's potential ocular irritation, is not well understood. The purpose of this study was to characterize the microscopic changes in rats at 3 hr and on days 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 14, and 35 following treatment with anionic, cationic, and nonionic surfactants of differing irritancy. The right eye of each rat was treated by placing 10 μl of a surfactant directly on the cornea. Untreated left eyes served as the controls. At each time point, eyes and eyelids were macroscopically examined and collected for microscopic examination. Macroscopically, the differing levels of irritation were characterized by differences in incidence and magnitude of scores, reflecting involvement of the cornea, conjunctiva, and iris, as well as by the incidence of neovascularization and time to recovery. Microscopically, differences in the area and depth of injury paralleled the differences seen grossly and the relative irritancies of the various surfactants. All surfactants affected the corneal and conjunctival epithelium. All surfactants, except the slightly irritating anionic surfactant, caused corneal stromal changes, with this involvement being proportional to their overall level of irritation. Corneal endothelial cell effects principally occurred with only the severely irritating cationic surfactant. Over time, responses to surfactants of differing irritancy were qualitatively and quantitatively different, and these differences correlated with the extent of initial injury. Qualitative differences in response included presence of keratocyte regeneration, corneal neovascularization, and conjunctivalization of the corneal epithelium with all of the surfactants except the slight irritant. Quantitative differences in response occurred in the extent of epithelial regeneration, edema, and inflammation for surfactants of slight to severe irritancy, and with neovascularization, keratocyte regeneration, and conjunctivalization for surfactants of mild to severe irritancy. These results suggest that by defining initial area and depth of injury associated with an ocular irritant, it may be possible to predict the subsequent response and final outcome. Such an approach would be applicable to the development of mechanistically based in vitro assays.

Keywords

Cornea conjunctiva wound healing histopathology pathobiology eye testing

References

1. Bailer AJ (1988). Testing for the equality of area under the curves when using destructive measurement techniques. J. Pharmacokinet. Biopharm. 16: 303–309.

2. Bruner LH (1992). Ocular irritation. In: In Vitro Toxicity Testing. Applications to Safety Evaluation, JM Frazier (ed). Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 149–190.

3. Draize JH , Woodard G , and Calvery HO (1944). Methods for the study of irritation and toxicity of substances applied topically to the skin and mucous membranes. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 82: 377–390.

4. Green K (1992). A brief history of ocular toxicology. Lens Eye Tox. Res. 9: 153–159.

5. Green S (1992). In vitro test validation and regulatory animal testing: A house built on sand versus a house of cards? Altern. Lab. Anim. 20: 567–570.

6. Green S , Chambers WA , Gupta KC , Hill RN , Hurley PM , Lambert LA , Lee CC , Lee JK , Liu PT , Lowther DK , Roberts CD , Seabaugh VM , Springer JA , and Wilcox NL (1993). Criteria for in vitro alternatives for the eye irritation test. Food Chem. Toxicol. 31: 81–85.

7. Heywood R and James RW (1978). Towards objectivity in the assessment of eye irritation. J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem. 29: 25–29.

8. Jester JV , Maurer JK , Petroll WM , Wilkie DA , Parker RD , and Cavanagh HD (1996). Application of in vivo confocal microscopy to the understanding of surfactant-induced ocular irritation. Toxicol. Pathol. 24: 412–428.

9. Martins T , Pauluhn J , and Machemer L (1992). Analysis of alternative methods for determining ocular irritation. Food Chem. Toxicol. 30: 1061–1067.

10.

10. Maurer JK , Li HF , Petroll WM , Parker RD , Cavanagh HD , and Jester JV (1997). Confocal microscopic characterization of initial corneal changes of surfactant-induced eye irritation in the rabbit. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 143: 291–300.

11.

11. Maurer JK and Parker RD (1996). Light microscopic comparison of surfactant-induced eye irritation in rabbits and rats at 3 hours and recovery/day 35. Toxicol. Pathol. 24: 403–411.

12.

12. Muller-Decker K , Furstenberger G , and Marks F (1994). Keratin-ocyte-derived proinflammatory key mediators and cell viability as in vitro parameters of irritancy: A possible alternative to the Draize skin irritation test. Toxicol Appl. Pharmacol. 127: 99–108.

13.

13. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (1996). Final Report of the OECD Workshop on Harmonization of Validation and Acceptance Criteria for Alternative Toxicologic Test Methods. Solna. Sweden, 22-24 January 1996. Document: ENV/ MC/CHEM/TG(96)9, OECD, Paris.

14.

14. US Department of Health and Human Services (1985). Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Animal Resources Program, Division of Research Resources, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.

15.

15. Weil CS and Scala RA (1971). Study of intra- and interlaboratory variability in the results of rabbit eye and skin irritation tests. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 19: 276–360.

16.

16. Williams SJ , Graepel GJ , and Kennedy GL (1982). Evaluation of ocular irritancy potential: Intralaboratory variability and effect of dosage volume. Toxicol. Lett. 12: 235–241.