TIMES-SS - Recent refinements resulting from an industrial skin sensitisation consortium

SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research

Volumn 25, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 367-391

  Patlewicz, G ^a   Kuseva, C ^b   Mehmed, A ^b   Popova, Y ^b   Dimitrova, G ^b   Ellis, G ^c   Hunziker, R ^d   Kern, P ^e   Low, L ^f   Ringeissen, S ^g   Roberts, D W ^h   Mekenyan, O ^b  

^a DUPONT COMPANY   (United States)

^b As Zlatarov   (Bulgaria)

^c Givaudan SA   (Switzerland)

^d DOW EUROPE GMBH   (Switzerland)

^e PROCTER AND GAMBLE COMPANY   (United States)

^f EXXONMOBIL UPSTREAM RESEARCH COMPANY   (United States)

^g L'Oréal R and I   (France)

^h LIVERPOOL JOHN MOORES UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

(Q)SAR; expert system; skin sensitisation; TIMES SS

Indexed keywords

BODY FLUIDS; COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY; EXPERT SYSTEMS; PHYSIOLOGY; TOXICITY;

(Q)SAR; BOURGAS; FUNDINGS; HYBRID EXPERT SYSTEM; LYMPH NODE; MECHANISTICS; SKIN METABOLISM; SKIN SENSITIZATION; TIME METABOLISM SIMULATOR PLATFORM FOR PREDICTING SKIN SENSITIZATION;

METABOLISM;

ANIMALIA; CAVIA;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVE; CONTACT DERMATITIS; EXPERT SYSTEM; GUINEA PIG; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; METABOLISM; PROCEDURES; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN; SKIN TEST;

ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVES; ANIMALS; DERMATITIS, CONTACT; EXPERT SYSTEMS; GUINEA PIGS; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN; SKIN TESTS;

EID: 84902244908     PISSN: 1062936X     EISSN: 1029046X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1062936X.2014.900520     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. S. Dimitrov, L. Low, G. Patlewicz, P.S. Kern, G.D. Dimitrova, M.H. Comber, R.D. Phillips, J. Niemela, P.T. Bailey, and O.G. Mekenyan, Skin sensitization: Modelling based on skin metabolism simulation, Int. J. Toxicol. 24 (2005), pp. 189-204.
2. OECD, The OECD Principles for the Validation of (Q)SARs, (2004). Available at http://www.oecd.org/env/ehs/risk-assessment/37849783.pdf
3. G. Patlewicz, S. Dimitrov, L.K. Low, P.S. Kern, G.D. Dimitrova, M.I. Comber, A.O. Aptula, R.D. Phillips, J. Niemelä, C. Madsen, E.B. Wedebye, D.W. Roberts, P.T. Bailey, and O.G. Mekenyan, TIMES-SS - A promising tool for the assessment of skin sensitization hazard: A characterization with respect to the OECD validation principles for (Q)SARs and an external evaluation for predictivity, Reg. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 48 (2007), pp. 225-239.
4. D.W. Roberts, G. Patlewicz, S. Dimitrov, L.K. Low, A.O. Aptula, P.S. Kern, G.D. Dimitrova, M.I. Comber, R.D. Phillips, J. Niemelä, C. Madsen, E.B. Wedebye, P.T. Bailey, and O.G. Mekenyan, TIMES-SS - A mechanistic evaluation of an external validation study using reaction chemistry principles, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 20 (2007), pp. 1321-1330.
5. G. Patlewicz, D.W. Roberts, and E. Uriarte, A comparison of reactivity schemes for the prediction skin sensitisation potential, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 21 (2008), pp. 521-541.
6. OECD, The Adverse Outcome Pathway for skin sensitisation initiated by covalent binding to proteins, Part 1: Scientific Evidence, OECD Environment, Health and Safety Publication, Series on Testing and Assessment, No 168 (2012).
7. ECHA, Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Chapter R.7a: Endpoint Specific Guidance, (2008). Available at http://guidance.echa.europa.eu/docs/guidance_document/information_requirements_r7a_en.pdf?vers=20_08_08.
8. E. Schelde, W. Aberer, T. Fuchs, I. Gerner, H. Lessmann, T. Maurer, R. Rossbacher, G. Stropp, E. Wagner, and D. Kayser, Chemical substances and contact allergy - 244 substances ranked according to allergenic potency, Toxicology 193 (2003), pp. 219-259.
9. OECD, Test Guidance 429 Skin sensitisation Local Lymph Node Assay (2010).
10. N. Ball, S. Cagen, J.C. Carrilo, H. Certa, D. Eigler, R. Emter, F. Faulhammer, C. Garcia, C. Graham, C. Haux, S.N. Kolle, R. Kreiling, A. Natsch, and A. Mehling, Evaluating the sensitisation potential of surfactants: Integrating data from the local lymph node assay, guinea pig maximization test and in vitro methods in a weight of evidence approach, Reg. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 60 (2011), pp. 389-400.
11. A. Natsch, C.A. Ryan, L. Foertsch, R. Emter, J. Jaworska, F. Gerberick, and P. Kern, A dataset on 145 chemicals tested in alternative assays for skin sensitisation undergoing prevalidation, J. Appl. Toxicol. 33 (2013), pp. 1337-1352.
12. US EPA, EPI Suite™, software available at http://www.epa.gov/oppt/exposure/pubs/episuitedl.htm
13. W.J. Lyman, W.F. Reehl, and D.H. Rosenblatt, Handbook of Chemical Property Estimation Methods, American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 1990.
14. W.J. Lyman, Estimation of physical properties, in Environmental Exposure from Chemicals, W.B. Neely, and G.E. Blau, eds., CRC Press Inc, Boca Raton, FL, 1985.
15. A.-T. Karlberg, M.A. Bergström, A. Börje, K. Luthman, J. Lars, and G. Nilsson, Allergic contact dermatitis - Formation, structural requirements, and reactivity of skin sensitizers, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 21 (2008), pp. 53-69.
16. L. Hagvall, Formation of skin sensitizers from fragrance terpenes via oxidative activation routes: Chemical analysis, structure elucidation and experimental sensitization studies, PhD diss., University of Gothenburg, 2009.
17. L. Hagvall, C. Bäcktorp, P-O. Norrby, A-T. Karlberg, and A. Börje, Experimental and theoretical investigations of the autoxidation of geranial: A dioxolane hydroperoxide identified as a skin sensitizer, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 24 (2011), pp. 1507-1515.
18. S. Dimitrov, G. Dimitrova, T. Pavlov, N. Dimitrova, G. Patlewicz, J. Niemala, and O. Mekenyan, A stepwise approach for defining the applicability domain of SAR and QSAR models, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 45 (2005), pp. 839-849.
19. T.I. Netzeva, A.P. Worth, T. Aldenberg, R. Benigni, M.T.D. Cronin, P. Gramatica, J.S. Jaworska, S. Kahn, G. Klopman, et al., Current status of methods for defining the applicability domain of (quantitative) structure-activity relationships. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 52, Altern. Lab. Anim. 33 (2005), pp. 155-173.
20. ECVAM ESAC, Statement on the reduced local lymph node assay (rLLNA), European Commission Directorate General, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Health and Consumer Protection, European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods, March 2000. Available at: [http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/immunotox/llnadocs/llna_val-508.pdf]
21. ICCVAM, The murine local lymph node assay: A test method for assessing the allergic contact dermatitis potential of chemicals/compounds, the results of an independent peer review evaluation coordinated by the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) and the National Toxicology Program Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM), NIH Publication No. 99-4494 (1999). Available at http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/docs/immunotox_docs/llna/llnarep.pdf
22. E. Estrada, G. Patlewicz, M. Chamberlain, D.A. Basketter, and S. Larbey, Computer-aided knowledge generation for understanding skin sensitization mechanisms: The TOPS-MODE approach, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 16 (2003), pp. 1226-1235.
23. M.T.D. Cronin and D.A. Basketter, Multivariate QSAR analysis of a skin sensitization database, SAR and QSAR Env. Res. 2 (1994), pp. 159-179.
24. A.O. Aptula, S.J. Enoch, and D.W. Roberts, Chemical mechanisms for skin sensitization by aromatic compounds with hydroxy and amino groups, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 22 (2009), pp. 1541-1547.
25. D.A. Basketter, Z.M. Wright, E.V. Warbrick, R.J. Dearman, I. Kimber, C.A. Ryan, G.F. Gerberick, and I.R. White, Human potency predictions for aldehydes using the local lymph node assay, Contact Dermatitis 45 (2001), pp. 89-94.
26. G.F. Gerberick, C.A. Ryan, P.S. Kern, H. Schlatter, R.J. Dearman, I. Kimber, G. Patlewicz, and D.A. Basketter, Compilation of historical local lymph node assay data for the evaluation of skin sensitization alternatives, Dermatitis 16 (2005), pp. 157-202.
27. R. Kashima, Y. Oyake, J. Okaua, and Y. Ikeda, Studies of a new short-period method for delayed contact hypersensitivity assay in the guinea pig: (I), Development and comparison with other methods, Contact Dermatitis 28 (1993), pp. 235-242.
28. M.D. Barratt and D.A. Basketter, Possible origin of the skin sensitization potential of isoeugenol and related compounds, (I) Preliminary studies of potential reaction mechanisms, Contact Dermatitis 27 (1992), pp. 98-104.
29. D.W. Roberts, A.O. Aptula, and G. Patlewicz, Electrophilic chemistry related to skin sensitization: Reaction mechanistic applicability domain classification for a published data set of 106 chemicals tested in the mouse local lymph node, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 20 (2007), pp. 44-60.
30. OECD Toolbox v3.1 software available at http://www.oecd.org/env/ehs/risk-assessment/theoecdqsartoolbox.htm
31. D.W. Roberts and A. Natsch, High throughput kinetic profiling approach for covalent binding to peptides: Application to skin sensitising potency of Michael acceptor electrophiles, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 22 (2009), pp. 592-603.
32. D.W. Roberts, A.O. Aptula, and G. Patlewicz, Mechanistic applicability domains for non-animal based prediction of toxicological endpoints. QSAR analysis of the Schiff base applicability domain for skin sensitization, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 19 (2006), pp. 1228-1233.
33. G.Y. Patlewicz, D.A. Basketter, C.K. Pease, K. Wilson, Z.M. Wright, D.W. Roberts, G. Bernard, E.G. Arnau, and J-P. Lepoittevin, Further evaluation of quantitative structure-activity relationship models for the prediction of the skin sensitization potency of selected fragrance allergens, Contact Dermatitis 50 (2004), pp. 91-97.
34. O. Mekenyan, G. Patlewicz, C. Kuseva, I. Popova, A. Mehmed, S. Kotov, T. Zhechev, T. Pavlov, S. Temelkov, and D.W. Roberts, A mechanistic approach to modelling respiratory sensitization, Chem. Res. Toxicol. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/tx400345b.
35. D.A. Basketter and I. Kimber, Skin sensitization, false positives and false negatives: Experience with guinea pig assays, J. Appl. Toxicol. 30 (2010), pp. 381-386.
36. G.F. Gerberick, C.A. Ryan, P.S. Kern, R.J. Dearman, I. Kimber, G.Y. Patlewicz, and D.A. Basketter, A chemical dataset for evaluation of alternative approaches to skin-sensitization testing, Contact Dermatitis 50 (2004), pp. 274-288.
37. B.F. Goodwin, R.W. Crevel, and A.W. Johnson, A comparison of three guinea-pig sensitization procedures for the detection of 19 reported human contact sensitizers, Contact Dermatitis 7 (1981), pp. 248-258.
38. E.W. Scholes, D.A. Basketter, A.E. Sarll, I. Kimber, C.D. Evans, K. Miller, M.C. Robbins, P.T. Harrison, and S.J. Waite, The local lymph node assay: Results of a final inter-laboratory validation under field conditions, J. Appl. Toxicol. 12 (1992), pp. 217-222.
39. D.A. Basketter, E.W. Scholes, M. Cumberbatch, C.D. Evans, and I. Kimber, Sulphanilic acid: Divergent results in the guinea pig maximization test and the local lymph node assay, Contact Dermatitis 27 (1992), pp. 209-213.
40. D.A. Basketter, J. McFadden, P. Evans, K.E. Andersen, and I. Jowsey, Identification and classification of skin sensitizers: Identifying false positives and false negatives, Contact Dermatitis 55 (2006), pp. 268-273.
41. F. Bertrand, D.A. Basketter, D.W. Roberts, and J.P. Lepoittevin, Skin sensitization to eugenol and isoeugenol in mice: Possible metabolic pathways involving ortho-quinone and quinone methide intermediates, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 10 (1997), pp. 335-343.
42. G.Y. Patlewicz, Z.M. Wright, D.A. Basketter, C.K. Pease, J.-P. Lepoittevin, and E. Giménez, Arnau, Structure-activity relationships for selected fragrance allergens, Contact Dermatitis 47 (2002), pp. 219-226.
43. B.M. Hausen, A. Krueger, J. Mohnert, H. Hahn, and W.A. König, Contact allergy due to colophony (III), Sensitizing potency of resin acids and some related products, Contact Dermatitis 20 (1989), pp. 41-50.
44. A.-T. Karlberg, A. Boman, U. Hacksell, S. Jacobsson, and J.L.G. Nilsson, Contact allergy to dehydroabietic acid derivatives isolated from Portuguese colophony, Contact Dermatitis 19 (1988), pp. 166-174.
45. D.A. Basketter and C.F. Allenby, Studies of the quenching phenomenon in delayed contact hypersensitivity reactions, Contact Dermatitis 25 (1991), pp. 160-171.
46. A.C. de Groot, I.R. White, M.A. Flyvholm, G. Lensen, and P.J. Coenraads, Formaldehyde-releasers in cosmetics: Relationship to formaldehyde contact allergy. Part 1: Characterization, frequency and relevance of sensitization, and frequency of use in cosmetics, Contact Dermatitis 62 (2010), pp. 2-17.
47. K.G. Dossou, C. Sicard, G. Kalopissis, D. Reymond, and H. Schaefer, Method for assessment of experimental allergy in guinea pigs adapted to cosmetic ingredients, Contact Dermatitis 13 (1985), pp. 226-234.
48. P.S. Kern, G.F. Gerberick, C.A. Ryan, I. Kimber, A. Aptula, and D.A. Basketter, Local lymph node data for the evaluation of skin sensitization alternatives: A second compilation, Dermatitis 21 (2010), pp. 8-32.
49. CIR Expert Panel, Final report on the safety assessment of 4-amino-2-hydroxytoluene, J. Am. Coll. Toxicol. 8 (1989), pp. 569-587.