Bayesian integrated testing strategy (ITS) for skin sensitization potency assessment: a decision support system for quantitative weight of evidence and adaptive testing strategy

Archives of Toxicology

Volumn 89, Issue 12, 2015, Pages 2355-2383

  Jaworska, Joanna S ^a   Natsch, Andreas ^b   Ryan, Cindy ^a   Strickland, Judy ^c   Ashikaga, Takao ^d   Miyazawa, Masaaki ^e  

^a PROCTER AND GAMBLE COMPANY   (United States)

^b GIVAUDAN SCHWEIZ AG   (Switzerland)

^c ILS Contractor Supporting NICEATM   (United States)

^d Shisheido Company Limited   (Japan)

^e KAO CORPORATION   (Japan)

Author keywords

Bayesian network; Integrated testing strategy; LLNA potency class; Skin sensitization

Indexed keywords

WATER;

ADAPTIVE TESTING STRATEGY; ARTICLE; BAYESIAN LEARNING; CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; CONTROL STRATEGY; CYTOTOXICITY; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; DIRECT PEPTIDE REACTIVITY ASSAY; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL LINE ACTIVATION TEST; IN VITRO STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; INTEGRATED TESTING STRATEGY; KERATINOSENS ASSAY; LIMIT OF QUANTITATION; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; MEASUREMENT PRECISION; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN SENSITIZATION; SKIN TEST; SOLUBILITY; STANDARDIZATION; TOXICITY TESTING; UNCERTAINTY; WATER SOLUBILITY; ANIMAL; ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVE; BAYES THEOREM; CHEMICAL DATABASE; DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC CONTACT; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; STATISTICAL BIAS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVES; ANIMALS; BAYES THEOREM; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); DATABASES, CHEMICAL; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC CONTACT; HUMANS; LOCAL LYMPH NODE ASSAY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN TESTS;

EID: 84949319770     PISSN: 03405761     EISSN: 14320738     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00204-015-1634-2     Document Type: Article

References (93)

1. Adler S, Basketter D, Creton S, Pelkonen O, van Benthem J, Zuang V, Andersen KE et al (2011) Alternative (non-animal) methods for cosmetics testing: current status and future prospects-2010. Arch Toxicol 85(5):367–485
2. Alves VM, Muratov E, Fourches D, Strickland J, Kleinstreuer N, Andrade CH, Tropsha A (2015) Predicting chemically-induced skin reactions. Part II: QSAR models of skin permeability and the relationships between skin permeability and skin sensitization. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 284(2):273–280
3. AP (2014) federal ban sought for animal testing on cosmetics USA Today. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/11/15/federal-ban-animal-testing-cosmetics/19090873/. Accessed 26 Oct 2015
4. Api AM, Basketter DA, Cadby PA, Cano MF, Ellis G, Gerberick GF, Griem P et al (2008) Dermal sensitization quantitative risk assessment (QRA) for fragrance ingredients. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 52(1):3–23
5. Ashikaga T, Yoshida Y, Hirota M, Yoneyama K, Itagaki H, Sakaguchi H, Miyazawa M et al (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(5):767–773
6. Ball N, Cagen S, Carrillo JC, Certa H, Eigler D, Emter R, Faulhammer F et al (2011) Evaluating the sensitization 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. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 60:389–400
7. Basketter DA, Kimber I (2009) Updating the skin sensitization in vitro data assessment paradigm in 2009. J Appl Toxicol 29(6):545–550
8. Basketter D, Kimber I (2010) Re: updating the skin sensitization in vitro data assessment paradigm in 2009—a chemistry and QSAR perspective. J Appl Toxicol 30(3):289
9. Basketter DA, Clewell H, Kimber I, Rossi A, Blaauboer B, Burrier R, Daneshian M et al (2012) A roadmap for the development of alternative (non-animal) methods for systemic toxicity testing. ALTEX 29:3–89
10. Bauch C, Kolle SN, Ramirez T, Eltze T, Fabian E, Mehling A, Teubner W et al (2012) Putting the parts together: combining in vitro methods to test for skin sensitizing potentials. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 63(3):489–504
11. Beltrani VS, Bernstein IL, Cohen DE, Fonacier L (2006) Contact dermatitis: a practice parameter. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 97(SUPPL. 2):S1–S38
12. Bodin A, Linnerborg M, Nilsson JL, Karlberg AT (2003) Structure elucidation, synthesis, and contact allergenic activity of a major hydroperoxide formed at autoxidation of the ethoxylated surfactant C12E5. Chem Res Toxicol 16(5):575–582
13. Boeniger MF, Ahlers HW (2003) Federal government regulation of occupational skin exposure in the USA. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 76(5):387–399
14. Bohme A, Thaens D, Paschke A, Schuurmann G (2009) Kinetic glutathione chemoassay to quantify thiol reactivity of organic electrophiles–application to alpha, beta-unsaturated ketones, acrylates, and propiolates. Chem Res Toxicol 22(4):742–750
15. Brase JM, Brown DL (2009) Modeling, simulation and analysis of complex networked systems. A program plan. U.S. Department of Energy
16. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2014) Employer-reported workplace injuries and illnesses–2013. Supplemental News Release Tables. Table SNR10. Numbers of nonfatal occupational illnesses by industry and category of illness. http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/os/ostb3971.pdf. Accessed 26 Oct 2015
17. Bus JS, Becker RA (2009) Toxicity testing in the 21st century: a view from the chemical industry. Toxicol Sci 112(2):297–302
18. Cohen S, Cohen S (1966) Preparation and reactions of derivatives of squaric acid. Alkoxy-, hydroxy-, and aminocyclobutenediones. J Am Chem Soc 88(7):1533–1536
19. Dancik Y, Miller MA, Jaworska J, Kasting GB (2013) Design and performance of a spreadsheet-based model for estimating bioavailability of chemicals from dermal exposure. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 65(2):221–236
20. De Groot AC (1994) Patch testing: test concentrations and vehicles for 3700 chemicals, 2nd edn. Elsevier, New York
21. De Wever B, Fuchs HW, Gaca M, Krul C, Mikulowski S, Poth A, Roggen EL et al (2012) Implementation challenges for designing integrated in vitro testing strategies (ITS) aiming at reducing and replacing animal experimentation. Toxicol In Vitro 26:526–534
22. Dimitrov SD, Low LK, Patlewicz GY, Kern PS, Dimitrova GD, Comber MH, Phillips RD et al (2005) Skin sensitization: modeling based on skin metabolism simulation and formation of protein conjugates. Int J Toxicol 24(4):189–204
23. Dinkova-Kostova AT, Holtzclaw WD, Kensler TW (2005) The role of Keap1 in cellular protective responses. Chem Res Toxicol 18(12):1779–1791
24. El Ali Z, Gerbeix C, Hemon P, Esser PR, Martin SF, Pallardy M, Kerdine-Romer S (2013) Allergic skin inflammation induced by chemical sensitizers is controlled by the transcription factor Nrf2. Toxicol Sci 134(1):39–48
25. 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(3):281–290
26. Esser PR, Wolfle U, Durr C, von Loewenich FD, Schempp CM, Freudenberg MA, Jakob T et al (2012) Contact sensitizers induce skin inflammation via ROS production and hyaluronic acid degradation. PLoS One 7(7):e41340
27. European Union (2009) Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on cosmetic products. OJL 342(59):59–209
28. Gerberick GF, Robinson MK, Felter SP, White IR, Basketter DA (2001) Understanding fragrance allergy using an exposure-based risk assessment approach. Contact Dermat 45(6):333–340
29. Gerberick GF, Vassallo JD, Bailey RE, Chaney JG, Morrall SW, Lepoittevin JP (2004) Development of a peptide reactivity assay for screening contact allergens. Toxicol Sci 81(2):332–343
30. Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Kern PS, Schlatter H, Dearman RJ, Kimber I, Patlewicz GY et al (2005) Compilation of historical local lymph node data for evaluation of skin sensitization alternative methods. Dermatitis 16(4):157–202
31. 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(2):417–427
32. Goodman SN (1999) Toward evidence-based medical statistics. 2: the Bayes factor. Ann Intern Med 130(12):1005–1013
33. Groothuis FA, Heringa MB, Nicol B, Hermens JL, Blaauboer BJ, Kramer NI (2015) Dose metric considerations in in vitro assays to improve quantitative in vitro-in vivo dose extrapolations. Toxicology 332:30–40
34. Hartung T, Luechtefeld T, Maertens A, Kleensang A (2013) Integrated testing strategies for safety assessments. ALTEX 30(1):3–18
35. Hoffmann S (2015) LLNA variability: an essential ingredient for a comprehensive assessment of non-animal skin sensitization test methods and strategies. ALTEX. http://dx.doi.org/10.14573/altex.1505051. Accessed 26 Oct 2015
36. ICCVAM (2011) ICCVAM test method evaluation report: usefulness and limitations of the murine local lymph node assay for potency categorization of chemicals causing allergic contact dermatitis in humans. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park
37. Jaworska J, Hoffmann S (2010) Integrated Testing Strategy (ITS)—opportunities to better use existing data and guide future testing in toxicology. Altex 27(4):231–242
38. Jaworska J, Gabbert S, Aldenberg T (2010) Towards optimization of chemical testing under REACH: a Bayesian network approach to Integrated Testing Strategies. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 57(2–3):157–167
39. Jaworska J, Harol A, Kern PS, Frank Gerberick G (2011) Integrating non-animal test information into an adaptive testing strategy—skin sensitization proof of concept case. ALTEX 28(3):211–225
40. 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
41. Joint Research Centre of the European Union (2013) EURL ECVAM recommendation on the Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA) for skin sensitisation testing. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg
42. Joint Research Centre of the European Union (2014) EURL ECVAM recommendation on the KeratinoSens™ assay for skin sensitisation testing. Publications Office of the European Union, Lusembourg
43. Joint Research Centre of the European Union (2015) EURL ECVAM recommendation on the human cell line activation test (h-CLAT) for skin sensitisation testing. Publications Office of the European Union, Lusembourg
44. Jowsey IR, Basketter DA, Westmoreland C, Kimber I (2006) A future approach to measuring relative skin sensitising potency: a proposal. J Appl Toxicol 26(4):341–350
45. Kagatani S, Sasaki Y, Hirota M, Mizuashi M, Suzuki M, Ohtani T, Itagaki H et al (2010) Oxidation of cell surface thiol groups by contact sensitizers triggers the maturation of dendritic cells. J Invest Dermatol 130:175–183
46. Kimber I, Basketter DA, Butler M, Gamer A, Garrigue JL, Gerberick GF, Newsome C et al (2003) Classification of contact allergens according to potency: proposals. Food Chem Toxicol 41(12):1799–1809
47. Kimber I, Basketter DA, Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Dearman RJ (2011) Chemical allergy: translating biology into hazard characterization. Toxicol Sci 120(SUPPL.1):S238–S268
48. Kjaerulff UB, Madsen AL (2013) Bayesian networks and influence diagrams: a guide to construction and analysis, 2nd edn. Springer, New York
49. Kramer NI, Krismartina M, Rico-Rico A, Blaauboer BJ, Hermens JL (2012) Quantifying processes determining the free concentration of phenanthrene in Basal cytotoxicity assays. Chem Res Toxicol 25(2):436–445
50. Lucas PJ, van der Gaag LC, Abu-Hanna A (2004) Bayesian networks in biomedicine and health-care. Artif Intell Med 30(3):201–214
51. Luechtefeld T, Maertens A, McKim JM, Hartung T, Kleensang A, Sa-Rocha V (2015) Probabilistic hazard assessment for skin sensitization potency by dose-response modeling using feature elimination instead of quantitative structure-activity relationships. J Appl Toxicol 35(11):1361–1371
52. Maxwell G, Mackay C (2008) Application of a systems biology approach to skin allergy risk assessment. Altern Lab Anim 36(5):521–556
53. 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(3):171–192
54. Mehling A, Eriksson T, Eltze T, Kolle S, Ramirez T, Teubner W, van Ravenzwaay B et al (2012) Non-animal test methods for predicting skin sensitization potentials. Arch Toxicol 86(8):1273–1295
55. Middleton E, Reed CE, Ellis EF, Adkinson NF, Yunginger JW, Busse WW (eds) (1998) Allergy principles and practice. Mosby, St. Louis
56. 4. J Toxicol Sci 33(1):51–59
57. Natsch A (2010) The Nrf2-Keap1-ARE toxicity pathway as a cellular sensor for skin sensitizers–functional relevance and a hypothesis on innate reactions to skin sensitizers. Toxicol Sci 113(2):284–292
58. Natsch A (2014) Integrated approaches to safety testing: general principles and skin sensitization as a test case. In: Reducing, refining and replacing the use of animals in toxicity testing. Issues in toxicology, vol 19. Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, UK, pp 364–288
59. 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(1):106–121
60. Natsch A, Haupt T, Laue H (2011) Relating skin sensitizing potency to chemical reactivity: reactive Michael acceptors inhibit NF-κB signaling and are less sensitizing than S NAr- and S N2-reactive chemicals. Chem Res Toxicol 24(11):2018–2027
61. 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
62. Natsch A, Emter R, Gfeller H, Haupt T, Ellis G (2015a) Predicting skin sensitizer potency based on in vitro data from keratinosens and kinetic peptide binding: global versus domain-based assessment. Toxicol Sci 143(2):319–332
63. Natsch A, Emter R, Gfeller H, Haupt T, Ellis G (2015b) Predicting skin sensitizer potency based on In Vitro data from KeratinoSens and kinetic peptide binding: global versus domain-based assessment. Toxicol Sci 143(2):319–332
64. NIOSH (2012) Skin exposures and effects. Workplace safety and health. In: Centers for disease control and prevention. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/skin/ Accessed 3 Apr 2013
65. Nukada Y, Ashikaga T, Miyazawa M, Hirota M, Sakaguchi H, Sasa H, Nishiyama N (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(7):1150–1160
66. 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(2):609–618
67. OECD (2010) Test No. 429. Skin sensitisation: local lymph node assay OECD guidelines for the testing of chemicals, section 4: health effects. OECD Publishing, Paris
68. OECD (2012) OECD series on testing and assessment no. 168. The adverse outcome pathway for skin sensitisation initiated by covalent binding to proteins. Part 1: scientific assessment. OECD Publishing, Paris
69. OECD (2015a) Adverse outcome pathways, molecular screening and toxicogenomics. In: OECD Publishing. http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/adverse-outcome-pathways-molecular-screening-and-toxicogenomics.htm Accessed 22 Jul 2015
70. OECD (2015b) Draft proposal for a new test guideline. In Vitro skin sensitisation: human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT). In: OECD Publishing. http://www.oecd.org/env/ehs/testing/Draft-Proposal-for-a-new-Test-Guideline-on-invitro-skin-sensitisation-h-CLAT.pdf. Accessed 12 Aug 2015
71. OECD (2015c) Test No. 442C. In chemico skin sensitization: direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA) OECD guidelines for the testing of chemicals, section 4: health effects. OECD Publishing, Paris
72. OECD (2015d) Test No. 442D. In vitro skin sensitisation: ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase Test Method OECD guidelines for the testing of chemicals, section 4: health effects. OECD Publishing, Paris
73. Patlewicz G, Kuseva C, Kesova A, Popova I, Zhechev T, Pavlov T, Roberts DW et al (2014a) Towards AOP application–implementation of an integrated approach to testing and assessment (IATA) into a pipeline tool for skin sensitization. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 69(3):529–545
74. Patlewicz G, Kuseva C, Mehmed A, Popova Y, Dimitrova G, Ellis G, Hunziker R et al (2014b) TIMES-SS–recent refinements resulting from an industrial skin sensitisation consortium. SAR QSAR Environ Res 25(5):367–391
75. Pirone JR, Smith M, Kleinstreuer NC, Burns TA, Strickland J, Dancik Y, Morris R et al (2014) Open source software implementation of an integrated testing strategy for skin sensitization potency based on a Bayesian network. ALTEX 31(3):336–340
76. Reisinger K, Hoffmann S, Alepee N, Ashikaga T, Barroso J, Elcombe C, Gellatly N et al (2015) Systematic evaluation of non-animal test methods for skin sensitisation safety assessment. Toxicol In Vitro 29(1):259–270
77. Roberts DW, Aptula AO (2008) Determinants of skin sensitisation potential. J Appl Toxicol 28(3):377–387
78. Roberts DW, Patlewicz G, Dimitrov SD, Low LK, Aptula AO, Kern PS, Dimitrova GD et al (2007) TIMES-SS—a mechanistic evaluation of an external validation study using reaction chemistry principles. Chem Res Toxicol 20(9):1321–1330
79. Rovida C, Alepee N, Api AM, Basketter DA, Bois FY, Caloni F, Corsini E et al (2015) Integrated testing strategies (ITS) for safety assessment. ALTEX 32(1):25–40
80. Sasseville D (2008) Occupational contact dermatitis. Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol 4(2):59–65
81. Skold M, Borje A, Matura M, Karlberg AT (2002) Studies on the autoxidation and sensitizing capacity of the fragrance chemical linalool, identifying a linalool hydroperoxide. Contact Dermatitis 46(5):267–272
82. Su B, Zhou W, Dorman KS, Jones DE (2009) Mathematical modelling of immune response in tissues. Comput Math Method M 10(1):9–38
83. Takenouchi O, Miyazawa M, Saito K, Ashikaga T, Sakaguchi H (2013) Predictive performance of the human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT) for lipophilic chemicals with high octanol-water partition coefficients. J Toxicol Sci 38(4):599–609
84. Tsujita-Inoue K, Hirota M, Ashikaga T, Atobe T, Kouzuki H, Aiba S (2014) Skin sensitization risk assessment model using artificial neural network analysis of data from multiple in vitro assays. Toxicol In Vitro 28(4):626–639
85. Tsujita-Inoue K, Atobe T, Hirota M, Ashikaga T, Kouzuki H (2015) In silico risk assessment for skin sensitization using artificial neural network analysis. J Toxicol Sci 40(2):193–209
86. UN (2013) Globally harmonised system of classification and labelling of chemicals (GHS), Fifth revised edition. United Nations, New York
87. UNEP (2005) OECD SIDS. Phthalic anhydride. CAS No: 85-44-9. UNEP Publishing. http://www.inchem.org/documents/sids/sids/85449.pdf. Accessed 26 Oct 2015
88. Urbisch D, Mehling A, Guth K, Ramirez T, Honarvar N, Kolle S, Landsiedel R et al (2015) Assessing skin sensitization hazard in mice and men using non-animal test methods. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 71(2):337–351
89. van der Veen JW, Gremmer ER, Vermeulen JP, van Loveren H, Ezendam J (2013) Induction of skin sensitization is augmented in Nrf2-deficient mice. Arch Toxicol 87(4):763–766
90. van der Veen JW, Rorije E, Emter R, Natsch A, van Loveren H, Ezendam J (2014) Evaluating the performance of integrated approaches for hazard identification of skin sensitizing chemicals. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 69(3):371–379
91. Villeneuve DL, Crump D, Garcia-Reyero N, Hecker M, Hutchinson TH, LaLone CA, Landesmann B et al (2014a) Adverse outcome pathway (AOP) development I: strategies and principles. Toxicol Sci 142(2):312–320
92. Villeneuve DL, Crump D, Garcia-Reyero N, Hecker M, Hutchinson TH, LaLone CA, Landesmann B et al (2014b) Adverse outcome pathway development II: best practices. Toxicol Sci 142(2):321–330
93. Weber FC, Esser PR, Muller T, Ganesan J, Pellegatti P, Simon MM, Zeiser R et al (2010) Lack of the purinergic receptor P2X(7) results in resistance to contact hypersensitivity. J Exp Med 207(12):2609–2619