Probabilistic hazard assessment for skin sensitiza tion potency by dose-response modeling using feature elimination instead of quantitative structure-activity relationships

Journal of Applied Toxicology

Volumn 35, Issue 11, 2015, Pages 1361-1371

  Luechtefeld, Thomas ^a   Maertens, Alexandra ^a   Mckim, James M ^b   Hartung, Thomas ^a,c   Kleensang, Andre ^a   Sá Rocha, Vanessa ^a,d  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b Iontox   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF KONSTANZ   (Germany)

^d NATURA INOVAÇÃO E TECNOLOGIA DE PRODUTOS LTDA   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Feature selection; Hidden Markov model; In vitro; Integrated testing strategy; LLNA; Machine learning; QSAR; Skin sensitization

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADVERSE OUTCOME; ARTICLE; COMPUTER MODEL; CONTACT DERMATITIS; DOSE RESPONSE; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; HIDDEN MARKOV MODEL; IN VITRO STUDY; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; RANDOM FOREST; SKIN SENSITIZATION; ALGORITHM; ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVE; DRUG EFFECTS; FACTUAL DATABASE; HUMAN; MACHINE LEARNING; MARKOV CHAIN; METABOLISM; PROCEDURES; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN; SKIN TEST; TOXICITY TESTING;

BROMINATED HYDROCARBON; BUTYL BROMIDE;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVES; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; HUMANS; HYDROCARBONS, BROMINATED; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; MACHINE LEARNING; MARKOV CHAINS; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN; SKIN TESTS; TOXICITY TESTS;

EID: 84942502605     PISSN: 0260437X     EISSN: 10991263     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jat.3172     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Adler S, Basketter D, Creton S, Pelkonen O, Van Benthem J, Zuang V, Andersen KE, Angers Loustau A, Aptula A, Bal-Price A, Benfenati E, Bernauer U, Bessems J, Bois FY, Boobis A, Brandon E, Bremer S, Broschard T, Casati S, Coecke S, Corvi R, Cronin M, Daston G, Dekant W, Felter S, Grignard E, Gundert-Remy U, Heinonen T, Kimber I, Kleinjans J, Komulainen H, Kreiling R, Kreysa J, Leite SB, Loizou G, Maxwell G, Mazzatorta P, Munn S, Pfuhler S, Phrakonkham P, Piersma A, Poth A, Prieto P, Repetto G, Rogiers V, Schoeters G, Schwarz M, Serafimova R, Tahti H, Testai E, Van Delft J, Van Loveren H, Vinken M, Worth A, Zaldivar JM. 2011. Alternative (non-animal) methods for cosmetics testing: current status and future prospects - 2010. Arch. Toxicol. 85: 367-485.
2. Ashikaga T, Yoshida Y, Hirota M, Yoneyama K, Itagaki H, Sakaguchi H, Miyazawa M, Ito Y, Suzuki H, Toyoda H. 2006. Development of an in vitro skin sensitization test using human cell lines: the human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT). I. Optimization of the h-CLAT protocol. Toxicol. In Vitro 20: 767-773.
3. Basketter D, Pease C, Kasting G, Kimber I, Casati S, Cronin M, Diembeck W, Gerberick F, Hadgraft J, Hartung T, Marty JP, Nikolaidis E, Patlewicz G, Roberts D, Roggen E, Rovida C, Van De Sandt J. 2007. Skin sensitisation and epidermal disposition: the relevance of epidermal disposition for sensitisation hazard identification and risk assessment. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 59. Altern. Lab. Anim. 35: 137-154.
4. Bauch C, Kolle SN, Ramirez T, Eltze T, Fabian E, Mehling A, Teubner W, Van Ravenzwaay B, Landsiedel R. 2012. Putting the parts together: combining in vitro methods to test for skin sensitizing potentials. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 63: 489-504.
5. Baum LE, Petrie T. 1966. Statistical inference for probabilistic functions of finite state Markov chains. Ann. Math. Statist. 37: 1554-1563.
6. Bolton EE, Wang YL, Thiessen PA, Bryant SH. 2010. PubChem: Integrated Platform of Small Molecules and Biological Activities. Annu. Rep. Comput. Chem. 4: 217-241.
7. Breiman L. 2003. Random Forests. Machine Learning 45: 5-32.
8. Casati S, Aeby P, Basketter DA, Cavani A, Gennari A, Gerberick GF, Griem P, Hartung T, Kimber I, Lepoittevin JP, Meade BJ, Pallardy M, Rougier N, Rousset F, Rubinstenn G, Sallusto F, Verheyen GR, Zuang V. 2005. Dendritic cells as a tool for the predictive identification of skin sensitisation hazard. Report and Recommendations of ECVAM Workshop 51. Altern. Lab. Anim. 33: 47-62.
9. Diderich B. 2010. Tools for category formation and read-across: overview of the OECD (Q) SAR Application Toolbox. In: In Silico Toxicology: Principles and Applications, Cronin MTD, Madden JC (eds). RSC Publishing: Cambridge; 385-407.
10. Dimitrov SD, Low LK, Patlewicz GY, Kern PS, Dimitrova GD, Comber MH, Phillips RD, Niemela J, Bailey PT, Mekenyan OG. 2005. Skin sensitization: modeling based on skin metabolism simulation and formation of protein conjugates. Int. J. Toxicol. 24: 189-204.
11. Emter R, Ellis G, Natsch A. 2010. Performance of a novel keratinocyte-based reporter cell line to screen skin sensitizers in vitro. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 245: 281-290.
12. European Commission Joint Research Centre. 2013. EUR 26383 - EURL ECVAM Recommendation on the Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA) for Skin Sensitisation Testing. Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg.
13. European Commission Joint Research Centre. 2014. EUR 26427 - EURL ECVAM Recommendation on the KeratinoSensTM Assay for Skin Sensitisation Testing. Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg.
14. European Union . 2009. Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on Cosmetic Products. Off. J. Eur. Union L342: 59-209.
15. Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Kern PS, Dearman RJ, Kimber I, Patlewicz GY, Basketter DA. 2004. A chemical dataset for evaluation of alternative approaches to skin-sensitization testing. Contact Dermatitis 50: 274-288.
16. Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Kern PS, Schlatter H, Dearman RJ, Kimber I, Patlewicz GY, Basketter DA. 2005. Compilation of historical local lymph node data for evaluation of skin sensitization alternative methods. Dermatitis 16: 157-202.
17. Gerberick GF, Vassallo JD, Foertsch LM, Price BB, Chaney JG, Lepoittevin JP. 2007. Quantification of chemical peptide reactivity for screening contact allergens: a classification tree model approach. Toxicol. Sci. 97: 417-427.
18. Hartung, T. 2009a. A toxicology for the 21st century - mapping the road ahead. Toxicol. Sci. 109: 18-23.
19. Hartung, T. 2009b. Toxicology for the twenty-first century. Nature 460: 208-212.
20. Hartung T, Luechtefeld T, Maertens A, Kleensang A. 2013. Integrated testing strategies for safety assessments. ALTEX 30: 3-18.
21. Hartung T, Rovida C. 2009. Chemical regulators have overreached. Nature 460: 1080-1081.
22. Hirota M, Kouzuki H, Ashikaga T, Sono S, Tsujita K, Sasa H, Aiba S. 2013. Artificial neural network analysis of data from multiple in vitro assays for prediction of skin sensitization potency of chemicals. Toxicol. In Vitro 27: 1233-1246.
23. Jaworska J, Dancik Y, Kern P, Gerberick F, Natsch A. 2013. Bayesian integrated testing strategy to assess skin sensitization potency: from theory to practice. J. Appl. Toxicol. 33(11): 1353-1364.
24. Jaworska J, Harol A, Kern PS, Gerberick GF. 2011. Integrating non-animal test information into an adaptive testing strategy - skin sensitization proof of concept case. ALTEX 28: 211-225.
25. Kirkland DJ, Henderson L, Marzin D, Muller L, Parry JM, Speit G, Tweats DJ, Williams GM. 2005. Testing strategies in mutagenicity and genetic toxicology: an appraisal of the guidelines of the European Scientific Committee for Cosmetics and Non-Food Products for the evaluation of hair dyes. Mutat. Res. 588: 88-105.
26. Klekota J, Roth FP. 2008. Chemical substructures that enrich for biological activity. Bioinformatics 24: 2518-2525.
27. Maxwell G, Mackay C, Cubberley R, Davies M, Gellatly N, Glavin S, Gouin T, Jacquoilleot S, Moore C, Pendlington R, Saib O, Sheffield D, Stark R, Summerfield V. 2014. Applying the skin sensitisation adverse outcome pathway (AOP) to quantitative risk assessment. Toxicol In Vitro 28: 8-12.
28. Mcdonald JC, Beck MH, Chen Y, Cherry NM. 2006. Incidence by occupation and industry of work-related skin diseases in the United Kingdom, 1996-2001. Occup. Med. (Lond.) 56: 398-405.
29. Mckim JM Jr, Keller DJ 3rd, Gorski JR. 2010. A new in vitro method for identifying chemical sensitizers combining peptide binding with ARE/EpRE-mediated gene expression in human skin cells. Cutan. Ocul. Toxicol. 29: 171-192.
30. Mckim JM Jr, Keller DJ 3rd, Gorski JR. 2012. An in vitro method for detecting chemical sensitization using human reconstructed skin models and its applicability to cosmetic, pharmaceutical, and medical device safety testing. Cutan. Ocul. Toxicol. 31: 292-305.
31. National Research Council . 2007. Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy. National Academies Press: Washington, DC.
32. Natsch A, Emter R, Ellis G. 2009. Filling the concept with data: integrating data from different in vitro and in silico assays on skin sensitizers to explore the battery approach for animal-free skin sensitization testing. Toxicol. Sci. 107: 106-121.
33. Natsch A, Ryan CA, Foertsch L, Emter R, Jaworska J, Gerberick F, Kern P. 2013. A dataset on 145 chemicals tested in alternative assays for skin sensitization undergoing prevalidation. J. Appl. Toxicol. 33(11): 1337-1352.
34. Nukada Y, Miyazawa M, Kazutoshi S, Sakaguchi H, Nishiyama N. 2013. Data integration of non-animal tests for the development of a test battery to predict the skin sensitizing potential and potency of chemicals. Toxicol. In Vitro 27: 609-618.
35. OECD. 1992. Test No. 406: Skin Sensitisation. OECD Publishing: Paris, France.
36. OECD. 2010. Test No.429: Skin Sensitisation. OECD Publishing: Paris, France.
37. OECD. 2015a.Test No.442C: In Chemico Skin Sensitisation. OECD Publishing: Paris, France.
38. OECD. 2015b. Test No. 442D: In Vitro Skin Sensitisation. OECD Publishing: Paris, France.
39. Patlewicz G, Kuseva C, Kesova A, Popova I, Zhechev T, Pavlov T, Roberts DW, Mekenyan O. 2014. Towards AOP application - implementation of an integrated approach to testing and assessment (IATA) into a pipeline tool for skin sensitization. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 69: 529-545.
40. Pedregosa F, Varoquaux G, Gramfort A, Michel V, Thirion B, Grisel O, Blondel M, Prettenhofer P, Weiss R, Dubourg V, Vanderplas J, Passos A, Cournapeau D, Brucher M, Perrot M, Duchesnay E. 2011. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. J. Machine Learning Res. 12: 2825-2830.
41. Peiser M, Tralau T, Heidler J, Api AM, Arts JH, Basketter DA, English J, Diepgen TL, Fuhlbrigge RC, Gaspari AA, Johansen JD, Karlberg AT, Kimber I, Lepoittevin JP, Liebsch M, Maibach HI, Martin SF, Merk HF, Platzek T, Rustemeyer T, Schnuch A, Vandebriel RJ, White IR, Luch A. 2012. Allergic contact dermatitis: epidemiology, molecular mechanisms, in vitro methods and regulatory aspects. Current knowledge assembled at an international workshop at BfR, Germany. Cell Mol. Life Sci. 69: 763-781.
42. Python F, Goebel C, Aeby P. 2007. Assessment of the U937 cell line for the detection of contact allergens. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 220: 113-124.
43. Rovida C, Alepee N, Api AM, Basketter DA, Bois FY, Caloni F, Corsini E, Daneshian M, Eskes C, Ezendam J, Fuchs H, Hayden P, Hegele-Hartung C, Hoffmann S, Hubesch B, Jacobs MN, Jaworska J, Kleensang A, Kleinstreuer N, Lalko J, Landsiedel R, Lebreux F, Luechtefeld T, Locatelli M, Mehling A, Natsch A, Pitchford JW, Prater D, Prieto P, Schepky A, Schuurmann G, Smirnova L, Toole C, Van Vliet E, Weisensee D, Hartung T. 2015. Integrated Testing Strategies (ITS) for safety assessment. ALTEX 32: 25-40.
44. 4). ALTEX 26: 187-208.
45. Sakaguchi H, Ashikaga T, Miyazawa M, Yoshida Y, Ito Y, Yoneyama K, Hirota M, Itagaki H, Toyoda H, Suzuki H. 2006. Development of an in vitro skin sensitization test using human cell lines; human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT). II. An inter-laboratory study of the h-CLAT. Toxicol. In Vitro 20: 774-784.
46. Sanderson DM, Earnshaw CG. 1991. Computer prediction of possible toxic action from chemical structure; the DEREK system. Hum. Exp. Toxicol. 10: 261-273.
47. SIDS, OECD. 2005. PHTHALIC ANHYDRIDE CAS N: 85-44-9. UNEP Publications: Paris, France.
48. Tetko IV, Gasteiger J, Todeschini R, Mauri A, Livingstone D, Ertl P, Palyulin VA, Radchenko EV, Zefirov NS, Makarenko AS, Tanchuk VY, Prokopenko VV. 2005. Virtual computational chemistry laboratory - design and description. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 19: 453-463.
49. Thyssen JP, Johansen JD, Menne T. 2007a. Contact allergy epidemics and their controls. Contact Dermatitis 56: 185-195.
50. Thyssen JP, Linneberg A, Menne T, Johansen JD. 2007b. The epidemiology of contact allergy in the general population - prevalence and main findings. Contact Dermatitis 57: 287-299.
51. Todeschini R, Consonni V, Todeschini R. 2009. Molecular Descriptors for Chemoinformatics. Wiley-VCH: Weinheim.
52. Tollefsen KE, Scholz S, Cronin MT, Edwards SW, De Knecht J, Crofton K, Garcia-Reyero N, Hartung T, Worth A, Patlewicz G. 2014. Applying Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOPs) to support Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA). Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 70: 629-640.
53. Urbisch D, Mehling A, Guth K, Ramirez T, Honarvar N, Kolle S, Landsiedel R, Jaworska J, Kern PS, Gerberick F, Natsch A, Emter R, Ashikaga T, Miyazawa M, Sakaguchi H. 2015. Assessing skin sensitization hazard in mice and men using non-animal test methods. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 71: 337-351.
54. Viterbi AJ. 1967. Error bounds for convolutional codes and an asymptotically optimum decoding algorithm. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theor. 13: 260-269.
55. Warshaw EM, Wang MZ, Mathias CG, Maibach HI, Belsito DV, Zug KA, Taylor JS, Zirwas MJ, Fransway AF, Deleo VA, Marks JG Jr, Pratt MD, Storrs FJ, Rietschel RL, Fowler JF Jr, Sasseville D. 2012. Occupational contact dermatitis in hairdressers/cosmetologists: retrospective analysis of North American contact dermatitis group data, 1994 to 2010. Dermatitis 23: 258-268.