Integrated skin sensitization assessment based on OECD methods (I): Deriving a point of departure for risk assessment
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Three guidelines covering key events in the skin sensitization adverse outcome pathway are endorsed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). A recent guideline covers defined approaches (DA) to combine data from these tests for regulatory (sub)classification. The guideline methods provide continuous data that could characterize the sensitization potency on a more granular scale beyond (sub)classifications. We assembled a comprehensive database of in vitro and in vivo results from OECD guideline tests. Building on a previous approach using regression models, we provide quantitative models using input data from the kinetic direct peptide reactivity assay (kDPRA), the KeratinoSens™ (KS) assay, and the human cell line activation test (h-CLAT) to calculate a point of departure (PoD) in the form of a predicted local lymph node assay (LLNA) EC3 value for use in risk assessment. Predictive models include results from either two or all three assays. Detailed analysis versus in vivo data estimates redundancy between different tests and helps guide model selection. All models were tested on a set of case studies selected for their availability of multiple LLNA reference data in the OECD database. The predicted PoDs were within or close to the range of the variation of the historical LLNA data for most of these cases studies, and overall, the models predicted the in vivo value with a median fold-misprediction factor of around 2.5. The robustness of the models was characterized by comparing a comprehensive historical database versus the curated dataset provided by the OECD working group on DA.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is appropriately cited (CC-BY). Copyright on any article in ALTEX is retained by the author(s).
Api, A. M., Basketter, D., Bridges, J. et al. (2020). Updating exposure assessment for skin sensitization quantitative risk assessment for fragrance materials. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 118, 104805. doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2020.104805
Bernauer, U., Bodin, L., Chaudhry, Q. et al. (2021). The SCCS notes of guidance for the testing of cosmetic ingredients and their safety evaluation, 11th revision, 30-31 March 2021, SCCS/1628/21. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 127, 105052. doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2021.105052
Cottrez, F., Boitel, E., Auriault, C. et al. (2015). Genes specifically modulated in sensitized skins allow the detection of sensitizers in a reconstructed human skin model. Development of the SENS-IS assay. Toxicol In Vitro 29, 787-802. doi:10.1016/j.tiv.2015.02.012
Cottrez, F., Boitel, E., Ourlin, J. C. et al. (2016). SENS-IS, a 3D reconstituted epidermis based model for quantifying chemical sensitization potency: Reproducibility and predictivity results from an inter-laboratory study. Toxicol In Vitro 32, 248-260. doi:10.1016/j.tiv.2016.01.007
Dent, M., Amaral, R. T., Da Silva, P. A. et al. (2018). Principles underpinning the use of new methodologies in the risk assessment of cosmetic ingredients. Comput Toxicol 7, 20-26. doi:10.1016/j.comtox.2018.06.001
Gilmour, N., Kern, P. S., Alépée, N. et al. (2020). Development of a next generation risk assessment framework for the evaluation of skin sensitisation of cosmetic ingredients. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 116, 104721. doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2020.104721
Hirota, M., Fukui, S., Okamoto, K. et al. (2015). Evaluation of combinations of in vitro sensitization test descriptors for the artificial neural network-based risk assessment model of skin sensitization. J Appl Toxicol 35, 1333-1347. doi:10.1002/jat.3105
Hirota, M., Ashikaga, T. and Kouzuki, H. (2018). Development of an artificial neural network model for risk assessment of skin sensitization using human cell line activation test, direct peptide reactivity assay, KeratinoSens™ and in silico structure alert parameter. J Appl Toxicol 38, 514-526. doi:10.1002/jat.3558
Jaworska, J. S., Natsch, A., Ryan, C. et al. (2015). Bayesian integrated testing strategy (ITS) for skin sensitization potency assessment: A decision support system for quantitative weight of evidence and adaptive testing strategy. Arch Toxicol 89, 2355-2383. doi:10.1007/s00204-015-1634-2
Kleinstreuer, N. C., Hoffmann, S., Alépée, N. et al. (2018). Non-animal methods to predict skin sensitization (II): An assessment of defined approaches*. Crit Rev Toxicol 48, 359-374. doi:10.1080/10408444.2018.1429386
Kolle, S. N., Natsch, A., Gerberick, G. F. et al. (2019). A review of substances found positive in 1 of 3 in vitro tests for skin sensitization. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 106, 352-368. doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2019.05.016
Loveless, S. E., Api, A. M., Crevel, R. W. et al. (2010). Potency values from the local lymph node assay: Application to classification, labelling and risk assessment. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 56, 54-66. doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2009.08.016
Natsch, A., Gfeller, H., Rothaupt, M. et al. (2007). Utility and limitations of a peptide reactivity assay to predict fragrance allergens in vitro. Toxicol In Vitro 21, 1220-1226. doi:10.1016/j.tiv.2007.03.016
Natsch, A. and Gfeller, H. (2008). LC-MS-based characterization of the peptide reactivity of chemicals to improve the in vitro prediction of the skin sensitization potential. Toxicol Sci 106, 464-478. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfn194
Natsch, A., Gfeller, H., Kuhn, F. et al. (2010). Chemical basis for the extreme skin sensitization potency of (E)-4-(Ethoxymethylene)-2-phenyloxazol-5(4H)-one. Chem Res Toxicol 23, 1913-1920. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/tx1002707
Natsch, A., Emter, R., Gfeller, H. et al. (2015). Predicting skin sensitizer potency based on in vitro data from KeratinoSens and kinetic peptide binding: Global versus domain-based assessment. Toxicol Sci 143, 319-332. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfu229
Natsch, A., Emter, R., Haupt, T. et al. (2018). Deriving a no expected sensitization induction level for fragrance ingredients without animal testing: An integrated approach applied to specific case studies. Toxicol Sci 165, 170-185. doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfy135
Natsch, A., Haupt, T., Wareing, B. et al. (2020). Predictivity of the kinetic direct peptide reactivity assay (kDPRA) for sensitizer potency assessment and GHS subclassification. ALTEX 37, 652-664. doi:10.14573/altex.2004292
Natsch, A. and Gerberick, G. F. (2022). Integrated skin sensitization assessment based on OECD methods (II): Hazard and potency by combining kinetic peptide reactivity and the “2 out of 3” defined approach. ALTEX 39, 647-655. doi:10.14573/altex.2201142
Nukada, Y., Ashikaga, T., Miyazawa, M. et al. (2012). Prediction of skin sensitization potency of chemicals by human cell line activation test (h-CLAT) and an attempt at classifying skin sensitization potency. Toxicol In Vitro 26, 1150-1160. doi:10.1016/j.tiv.2012.07.001
OECD (2010). Test No. 429: Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4. OECD Publishing, Paris. doi:10.1787/9789264071100-en
OECD (2014). The Adverse Outcome Pathway for Skin Sensitisation Initiated by Covalent Binding to Proteins. OECD Series on Testing and Assessment, No. 168. OECD Publishing, Paris. doi:10.1787/9789264221444-en
OECD (2018a). Test No. 442D: In Vitro Skin Sensitisation: ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase Test Method. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4. OECD Publishing, Paris. doi:10.1787/9789264229822-en
OECD (2018b). Test No. 442E: In Vitro Skin Sensitisation: In Vitro Skin Sensitisation assays addressing the Key Event on activation of dendritic cells on the Adverse Outcome Pathway for Skin Sensitisation. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4. OECD Publishing, Paris. doi:10.1787/9789264264359-en
OECD (2021a). Guideline No. 497: Defined Approaches on Skin Sensitisation. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4. OECD Publishing, Paris. doi:10.1787/b92879a4-en
OECD (2021b). Series on Testing and Assessment No. 336: Supporting document to the Guideline (GL) on Defined Approaches (DAs) for Skin Sensitisation – Annex 3. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/series-testing-assessment-publications-number.htm
OECD (2021c). Series on Testing and Assessment No. 336: Supporting document to the Guideline (GL) on Defined Approaches (DAs) for Skin Sensitisation – Annex 2. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/series-testing-assessment-publications-number.htm
OECD (2021d). Test No. 442C: In Chemico Skin Sensitisation: Assays addressing the Adverse Outcome Pathway key event on covalent binding to proteins. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4. OECD Publishing, Paris. doi:10.1787/9789264229709-en
Takenouchi, O., Fukui, S., Okamoto, K. et al. (2015). Test battery with the human cell line activation test, direct peptide reactivity assay and DEREK based on a 139 chemical data set for predicting skin sensitizing potential and potency of chemicals. J Appl Toxicol 35, 1318-1332. doi:10.1002/jat.3127
Urbisch, D., Mehling, A., Guth, K. et al. (2015). Assessing skin sensitization hazard in mice and men using non-animal test methods. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 71, 337-351. doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.12.008
Wareing, B., Urbisch, D., Kolle, S. N. et al. (2017). Prediction of skin sensitization potency sub-categories using peptide reactivity data. Toxicol In Vitro 45, 134-145. doi:10.1016/j.tiv.2017.08.015
Zang, Q., Paris, M., Lehmann, D. M. et al. (2017). Prediction of skin sensitization potency using machine learning approaches. J Appl Toxicol 37, 792-805. doi:10.1002/jat.3424
Zeller, K. S., Forreryd, A., Lindberg, T. et al. (2017). The GARD platform for potency assessment of skin sensitizing chemicals. ALTEX 34, 539-559. doi:10.14573/altex.1701101