Application of IATA–A case study in evaluating the global and local performance of a Bayesian network model for skin sensitization

SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 297-310

  Fitzpatrick, J M ^a   Patlewicz, G ^a  

^a Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)   (United States)

Author keywords

Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP); IATA; ITS; OECD QSAR Toolbox; QSAR; reaction domains; Skin sensitization; TIMES SS; Toxtree

Indexed keywords

BAYESIAN NETWORKS; DECISION MAKING; EXPERT SYSTEMS; INTEGRATION TESTING;

ADVERSE OUTCOME PATHWAY; ADVERSE OUTCOMES; INTEGRATED APPROACH; INTEGRATED APPROACH TO TESTING AND ASSESSMENT; ITS; OECD QSAR TOOLBOX; QSAR; REACTION DOMAIN; SKIN SENSITIZATION; TESTING AND ASSESSMENTS; TIMES-SS; TOXTREE;

FORECASTING;

ALLERGEN;

ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVE; BAYES THEOREM; CHEMISTRY; DRUG EFFECTS; EXPERT SYSTEM; HUMAN; IMMUNOLOGY; METABOLISM; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROCEDURES; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN;

ALLERGENS; ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVES; BAYES THEOREM; EXPERT SYSTEMS; HUMANS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN;

EID: 85018480249     PISSN: 1062936X     EISSN: 1029046X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1062936X.2017.1311941     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, Corrigendum to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC, OJEU. L136(2007), pp. 3–280.
2. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC, OJEU. R1907 (2006), pp. 1–101.
3. National Assembly in Korea, Revised Korea REACH–The Act on the Registration and Evaluation of Chemicals, Chemical Inspection and Regulation Service (2016). Available at http://www.cirs-reach.com/news-and-articles/revised-korea-reach—the-act-on-the-registration-and-evaluation-of-chemicals.html.
4. Chinese Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP), The Measures for Environmental Administration of New Chemical Substances (China MEP Order 7) (2010) Available at http://www.chemsafetypro.com/Topics/China/China_REACH_MEP_Order_7_New_Substance_Notification.html.
5. th Congress, Washington, DC, 2016.
6. G., Ankley, R., Bennett, R., Erickson, D., Hoff, M., Hornung, R., Johnson, D., Mount, J., Nichols, C., Russom, P., Schmieder, J., Serrano, J., Tietge, and D., Villeneuve, Adverse outcome pathways:A conceptual framework to support ecotoxicology research and risk assessment, Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 29 (2010), pp. 730–741.
7. D., Villeneuve, In response:The path forward for the adverse outcome pathway framework—A regulatory perspective, Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 34 (2015), pp. 1938–1940.
8. OECD, The Adverse Outcome Pathway for Skin Sensitisation Initiated by Covalent Binding to Proteins, OECD Publishing, Paris, France, 2014.
9. G., Patlewicz, C., Kuseva, A., Kesova, I., Popova, T., Zhechev, T., Pavlov, D., Roberts, and O., Mekenyan, Towards AOP application–Implementation of an integrated approach to testing and assessment (IATA) into a pipeline tool for skin sensitization, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 69 (2014), pp. 529–545.
10. OECD, OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals, In Chemico Skin Sensitisation:Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA) TG 442C (2015). Available at http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/iccvam/suppdocs/feddocs/oecd/oecd-tg442c-508.pdf.
11. OECD, OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals, In Vitro Skin Sensitisation:ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase Test Method TG 442D. OECD, Paris, France, 2015.
12. OECD, OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals, 1 Draft Proposal for a New Test Guideline 2 In Vitro Skin Sensitisation:human Cell Line Activation Test (h-CLAT). OECD, Paris, France, 2014.
13. D., Urbisch, A., Mehling, K., Guth, T., Ramirez, N., Honarvar, S., Kolle, R., Landsiedel, J., Jaworska, P., Kern, F., Gerberick, A., Natsch, R., Emter, T., Ashikaga, M., Miyazawa, and H., Sakaguchi, Assessing skin sensitization hazard in mice and men using non-animal test methods, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 71 (2015), pp. 337–351.
14. M., Hirota, H., Kouzuki, T., Ashikaga, S., Sono, K., Tsujita, H., Sasa, and S., Aiba, Artificial neural network analysis of data from multiple in vitro assays for prediction of skin sensitization potency of chemicals, Toxicol In Vitro 27 (2013), pp. 1233–1246.
15. M., Hirota, S., Fukui, K., Okamoto, S., Kurotani, N., Imai, M., Fujishiro, D., Kyotani, Y., Kato, T., Kasahara, M., Fujita, A., Toyoda, D., Sekiya, S., Watanabe, H., Seto, O., Takenouchi, T., Ashikaga, and M., Miyazawa, Evaluation of combinations of in vitro sensitization test descriptors for the artificial neural network-based risk assessment model of skin sensitization:Evaluation of the descriptor for ANN risk assessment of skin sensitization, J. Appl. Toxicol. 35 (2015), pp. 1333–1347.
16. J., van der Veen, E., Rorije, R., Emter, A., Natsch, H., van Loveren, and J., Ezendam, Evaluating the performance of integrated approaches for hazard identification of skin sensitizing chemicals, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 69 (2014), pp. 371–379.
17. J., Jaworska, Y., Dancik, P., Kern, F., Gerberick, and A., Natsch, Bayesian integrated testing strategy to assess skin sensitization potency:From theory to practice, J. Appl. Toxicol. 33 (2013), pp. 1353–1364.
18. J., Pirone, M., Smith, N., Kleinstreuer, T., Burns, J., Strickland, Y., Dancik, R., Morris, L., Rinckel, W., Casey, and J., Jaworska, Reproducing the ITS-2 model using R, (2014) Available from:http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/iccvam/methods/immunotox/ITS-OS/ITS2_R_version-508.pdf.
19. J., Jaworska, A., Natsch, C., Ryan, J., Strickland, T., Ashikaga, and M., Miyazawa, 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 (2015), pp. 2355–2383.
20. I., Kimber, D., Basketter, M., Butler, A., Gamer, J., Garrigue, G., Gerberick, C., Newsome, W., Steiling, and H., Vohr, Classification of contact allergens according to potency:Proposals, Food Chem. Toxicol. 41 (2003), pp. 1799–1809.
21. D., Basketter, C., Clapp, D., Jefferies, B., Safford, C., Ryan, F., Gerberick, R., Dearman, and I., Kimber, Predictive identification of human skin sensitization thresholds, Contact Derm. 53 (2005), pp. 260–267.
22. D., Roberts, O., Mekenyan, S., Dimitrov, and G., Dimitrova, What determines skin sensitization potency–Myths, maybes and realities. Part 1. The 500 molecular weight cut-off, Contact Derm. 68 (2012), pp. 32–41.
23. J., Fitzpatrick, D., Roberts, and G., Patlewicz, What determines skin sensitization potency:Myths, maybes and realities. The 500 molecular weight cut-off:An updated analysis, J. Appl. Toxicol. 37 (2017), pp. 105–116.
24. J., Fitzpatrick, D., Roberts, and G., Patlewicz, Is skin penetration a determining factor in skin sensitization potential and potency? Refuting the notion of a LogKow threshold for skin sensitization, J. Appl. Toxicol. 37 (2017), pp. 117–127.
25. S., Dimitrov, L., Low, G., Patlewicz, P., Kern, G., Dimitrova, M., Comber, R., Phillips, J., Niemela, P., Bailey, and O., Mekenyan, Skin sensitization:Modelling based on skin metabolism simulation, Int. J. Toxicol. 24 (2005), pp. 189–204.
26. G., Patlewicz, C., Kuseva, A., Mehmed, Y., Popova, G., Dimitrova, G., Ellis, R., Hunziker, P., Kern, L., Low, S., Ringeissen, D., Roberts, and O., Mekenyan, TIMES-SS–Recent refinements resulting from an industrial skin sensitisation consortium, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 25 (2014), pp. 367–391.
27. D., Roberts and A., Aptula, Determinants of skin sensitisation potential, J. Appl. Toxicol. 28 (2008), pp. 377–387.
28. S., Enoch, J., Madden, and M., Cronin, Identification of mechanisms of toxic action for skin sensitisation using a SMARTS pattern based approach, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 19 (2008), pp. 555–578.
29. D., Roberts, A., 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 assay, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 20 (2007), pp. 44–60.
30. D., Roberts, G., Patlewicz, P., Kern, F., Gerberick, I., Kimber, R., Dearman, C., Ryan, D., Basketter, and A., Aptula, Mechanistic applicability domain classification of a local lymph node assay dataset for skin sensitization, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 20 (2007), pp. 1019–1030.
31. S., Højsgaard, Graphical independence networks with the gRain package for R, J. Stat. Softw. 46 (2012), pp. 1–26.
32. D., Linzer and J., Lewis, poLCA:An R package for polytomous variable latent class analysis, J. Stat. Softw. 42 (2011), pp. 1–29.
33. S., Weston, Getting Started with doMC and foreach, CRAN, Malden, MA, USA, 2015, pp. 1–6.
34. T., Luechtefeld, A., Maertens, J., McKim, T., Hartung, A., Kleensang, and V., Sá-Rocha, Probabilistic hazard assessment for skin sensitization potency by dose-response modeling using feature elimination instead of quantitative structure–activity relationships:Probabilistic hazard assessment for skin sensitization potency, J. Appl. Toxicol. 35 (2015), pp. 1361–1371.
35. Personal communication with C. Grulke, EPA-NCCT.
36. D., Roberts, T., Schultz, and A., Api, Chemical applicability domain of the Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) for skin sensitization potency. Part 3. Apparent discrepancies between LLNA and GPMT sensitization potential:False positives or differences in sensitivity?, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 80 (2016), pp. 260–267.
37. S., Anderson, P., Siegel, and B., Meade, The LLNA:A brief review of recent advances and limitations, J. Allergy 2011 (2011), pp. 1–10.
38. D., Urbisch, M., Becker, N., Honarvar, S., Kolle, A., Mehling, W., Teubner, B., Wareing, and R., Landsiedel, Assessment of pre- and pro-haptens using nonanimal test methods for skin sensitization, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 29 (2016), pp. 901–913.