NEXT GENERATION RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CONSUMER SAFETY OF COSMETICS: A CASE STUDY APPROACH

Similar documents
Skin Sensitization MoA/AOP pathway elucidation: Applying the Skin Sensitization AOP to Risk Assessment

Challenges of 21 st Century Toxicology

CASE STUDY PRESENTATION: A QUANTITATIVE AOP FOR SKIN SENSITISATION RISK ASSESSMENT

May 24, 2018 OpenTox Asia

Regulatory need for non-animal approaches for skin sensitisation hazard assessment. Janine Ezendam

Prof. Jean-Pierre Lepoittevin University of Strasbourg, France SCCS WG on methodology Luxemburg, July 1st 2015

FROM PATHWAYS TO PEOPLE: APPLYING THE SKIN SENSITISATION AOP TO RISK ASSESSMENT

Multivariate Models for Skin Sensitization Hazard and Potency

Skin sensitization non-animal risk assessment Determination of a NESIL for use in risk assessment

Computational Systems Biology Modeling of DNA-damage Stress Pathways for Assessing Mutation Rates at Low Doses

Case study 1: The AOP-based two out of three skin sensitization ITS for hazard identification

An Example of Cross-Sector Dialogue at a Global Scale: The Case of Skin Sensitization

Numbers behind Infographic Assuming Future is around 10 years from now For explanation of scaling see the end of the document CURRENT PREDICTIVE POWER

Best practices to develop artificial intelligence models for predicting multilevel effects in Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOP)

How to use new or revised in vitro test methods to address skin sensitisation

Dose response relationships: biological and modeling aspects

U.S. EPA Strategic Plan to Promote the Development and Implementation of Alternative Test Methods

PREDICTING PHARMACOKINETICS FOLLOWING TOPICAL APPLICATION USING NON-ANIMAL METHODS IAN SORRELL, MI-YOUNG LEE, RICHARD CUBBERLEY

Guidance on use of alternative methods for testing in the safety assessment of cosmetics and quasi-drug

10/31/2014. Skin Sensitization: Development of Alternative Methods. The 3 Rs of Alternatives

Dermal Sensitization Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) For Fragrance Ingredients

U.S. EPA Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program

An In Vitro Alternative For Predicting Systemic Toxicity. By: James McKim, Ph.D., DABT Chief Science Officer

Ensuring Safety for Early Life Exposures: Adequacy of Current Methods and Opportunities to Advance the Science

STUDIES TO EVALUATE THE SAFETY OF RESIDUES OF VETERINARY DRUGS IN HUMAN FOOD: GENERAL APPROACH TO ESTABLISH AN ACUTE REFERENCE DOSE

Non-animal testing in the assessment of Skin sensitization

Mandates of the FQPA. ES/RP 532 Applied Environmental Toxicology. Tolerance. Mandate of FIFRA. FQPA Mandate. How Tolerance Is Developed

Application of the KeratinoSens Assay for Prediction of Dermal Sensitization Hazard for Botanical Cosmetic Ingredients

Potency classification of skin sensitizers (EC WG on Sensitization)

CHEMICAL IDENTITY. INCI NAME: propylene glycol IUPAC: propane-1,2-diol CAS: EC NUMBER: EMPIRICAL FORMULA: C3H8O2 STRUCTURAL FORMULA:

ToxStrategies, Inc. and Summit Toxicology

Systems Modeling: a perspective from analysis of ToxCast assays

SAFETY DATA SHEET BICOWHITE COMPLEX. SECTION 1: IDENTIFICATION OF THE SUBSTANCE/MIXTURE AND OF THE COMPANY/UNDERTAKING 1.1 Product Identifier BW_S3

Thought Starter Combined Exposures to Multiple Chemicals Second International Conference on Risk Assessment

10/31/2014. The Pieces of an AOP. Moving AOP thinking forward

Hexavalent Chromium Oral Reference Dose

Tocopherols (E ) used in foods for infants below 16 weeks of age

CiPA, Pre-clinical Testing. Derek Leishman PhD DSP & ICH S7B

IFRA & Safety Assessment of Fragrance Materials

EFSA GD on dermal absorption Industry feedback and considerations on bridging opportunities

The world of chemicals

IL-8 Luciferase (IL-8 Luc) Assay. Report of the Peer Review Panel

: Sweat Controls for Cystic Fibrosis Testing

SAFETY DATA SHEET Dish Wash Juniper Wood Date of issue: Version: 1 Revision: - Page: 1

Reverse Dosimetry From Human Biomonitoring and In Vitro Concentration- Response Data

Designing Safety Into Products

In Vitro Lecture and Luncheon. Sponsored by the Colgate Palmolive Company

Annotation Of FDA Labels For The Understanding Of Drug Induced Liver Injury

Risk Assessment in Drug Development (or How much of compound X is safe? ) (EYP 2006) Colin Fish

Micheal Carathers, Bennett Varsho, Puneet Vij, and George DeGeorge

Criteria for toxicological characterization metabolites and testing strategy

Genotoxicity Testing Strategies: application of the EFSA SC opinion to different legal frameworks in the food and feed area

Threshold Establishment and Rationale. Douglas J Ball, MS, DABT Research Fellow Pfizer Worldwide R&D

Application of a systems biology approach for skin allergy risk assessment

Substance Evaluation Conclusion document EC No SUBSTANCE EVALUATION CONCLUSION DOCUMENT. as required by REACH Article 48.

Lisa F. Pratt 1, Matthew Troese 1, Dirk Weisensee 2, Oliver Engelking 2, Horst W. Fuchs 2 and George DeGeorge 1

ADVANCES ON RISK ASSESSMENT FOR ALLERGENS IN FOOD: AN OVERVIEW AND SUPPORTING TOOLS

How to overcome limitations of new approach methodologies in the context of regulatory science

EFSA Info Session on Applications. Technical meeting on food flavourings applications. Parma, 20 th January 2015

Risk Assessment Report on Tris (nonylphenyl)phosphite (TNPP)

Assessing the sensitization/irritation properties of micro organisms. Gregorio Loprieno Prevention Medicine Local Health Authority 2 Lucca (Italy)

Application of the WHO Framework for Combined Exposures; Implications for Combined Exposures Assessment

: Pro 1 Oil Supplement

OIL, CINNAMON STICKS*

Case Study Application of the WHO Framework for Combined Exposures. Presented by: M.E. (Bette) Meek University of Ottawa

Data and Knowledge Fusion: Supporting Toxicology, Health Effects Endpoints Analysis & Human Health Risk Assessment

PRESENTATION LAYOUT Introduction to chemical allergy. In vivo models. In vitro models

HYDROXYCITRONELLAL 3,7-dimethyl-7-hydroxyoctanal (CAS )

Validity of the QRA Methodology & Possibilities of Further Refinement

Application of human epidemiological studies to pesticide risk assessment

SYSTEMS BASED APPROACH FOR PREDICTON OF DRUG- INDUCED LIVER INJURY (DILI)

Presentation of the SEURAT-1 COSMOS Project: Prediction of Systemic Toxicity Following Dermal Exposure

Ecopa REACH Animal Use Calculator

In vitro models for assessment of the respiratory sensitization potential of compounds.

SAFETY EVALUATION OF FOODS: NOVEL INGREDIENTS & ADDITIVES

Risk Characterization

REVISION NUMBER: N/A SAFETY DATA SHEET. Use as a horticultural/amenity fertiliser

Pesticide Risk Assessment-- Dietary Exposure

Margosa Extract Evaluation of Classification and Labelling Proposal with regard to Skin Sensitisation

Contribution to the European Commission s Public Consultation on. 15 January 2015

TTC NON-CANCER ORAL DATABASES

Toxicogenomic Investigation into False Positive Responses in the Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA)

Risk Assessment of Chemicals in Foods- WHO Principles and Methods

Research Framework for Evaluating the Potential Mode(s)

S A F E T Y D A T A S H E E T IntelliBond Vital 3

Sens-it-iv Proof-of-concept studies

BRIDGE THE GAP A Human Pathways Approach to Disease Research

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Objective To determine the immediate irritation effects and the irritation power of a particular materials.

MechoA (Mechanism of Action) SAR Model and Skin Sensitisation Screening:

Pharmacokinetic and absolute bioavailability studies in early clinical development using microdose and microtracer approaches.

Minutes of EFSA-ANSES Expert Meeting on Bisphenol A (BPA) Art. 30 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 Held on 3 December 2014, Paris (France)

The Comet Assay Tails of the (Un)expected

Dermal Technology Laboratory Ltd

Maria João Silva H. Louro 1, T. Borges 2, J. Lavinha 1, J.M. Albuquerque 1

Safety Data Sheet. according to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006. SECTION 1: Identification of the substance/mixture and of the company/undertaking

Animal testing versus calculation method

The potential impact of toxicogenomics on modern chemical risk assessment 3-MCPD and 3-MCPD fatty acid esters as examples

What differentiates respiratory sensitizers from skin sensitizers?

Transcription:

NEXT GENERATION RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CONSUMER SAFETY OF COSMETICS: A CASE STUDY APPROACH CARL WESTMORELAND SAFETY & ENVIRONMENTAL ASSURANCE CENTRE, UNILEVER, UK

CAN WE USE A NEW INGREDIENT SAFELY? Can we safely use x% of ingredient y in product z?

MAXIMISING USE OF EXISTING INFORMATION AND NON- ANIMAL APPROACHES All available safety data in silico predictions Exposure-based waiving approaches History of safe use Read across Use of existing OECD in vitro approaches

ICCR PRINCIPLES OF RISK ASSESSMENT WITHOUT ANIMAL TESTING

ICCR NINE PRINCIPLES OF NGRA Main overriding principles: The overall goal is a human safety risk assessment The assessment is exposure led The assessment is hypothesis driven The assessment is designed to prevent harm Principles describe how a NGRA should be conducted: Following an appropriate appraisal of existing information Using a tiered and iterative approach Using robust and relevant methods and strategies Principles for documenting NGRA: Sources of uncertainty should be characterized and documented The logic of the approach should be transparently and documented

A CASE STUDY APPROACH IMAGINE WE HAD NO DATA...

EXPOSURE-LED Exposure scenario: Worst case in US 32.97 µg/cm2 Used one time per day Skin surface area: 4712.5 cm 2 (95 percentile) Amount of product used per day: 5.18 g/day Amount of ingredient in contact with skin: 155 mg/day Laundry scenarios Systemic exposure (mg/kg bw Local dermal exposure per day) (ug/cm2) Pre-Treatment 0.19 50 Main wash 0.3 8.4 Residues on clothes 0.06 0.04 Total (Main wash+ residues 0.36 8.44 on clothes) Total (pre-treatment+ main wash+ residues on clothes) 0.55 58.44 Skin penetration Caffeine Free Concentration PBPK model predicted free concentrations (µm) plasma heart liver brain adipose 3.1-41.7 0.6-7.2 0.2-3.0 0.01-0.15 0.002-0.03 Parameters Model 4 output for Model 4 output for Pre-treatment Main wash Cmax (ug/ml) 0.1 (0.68 µm) 0.46 (3.15 µm) Tmax (h) 48.85 48.85 AUC 0-inf (ug-h/ml) 1.73 8.64 AUC 0-t (ug-h/ml) 1.74 8.57 Cmax Liver 0.01 (0.068 µm) 0.061 (0.4 µm)

A TIERED AND ITERATIVE APPROACH See Also: Poster P25-04 Teixeira et al High-throughput and non-depletive quantification in 3D liver microtissue in vitro assay e.g. Atlas of Molecular Initiating Events See Also: Poster P05-13 Allen et al Computational approaches for predicting molecular initiating events

PREDICTING SKIN SENSITISATION AOP for skin sensitisation https://aopwiki.org/aops/40 The SARA Weight of Evidence (WoE) human potency model* is a highdimensional probability distribution describing data from the following sources: DPRA OECD TG442D (cys/lys depletion) KeratinoSens TM OECD TG442C (EC 1.5, EC 3, IC 50 ) H-Clat OECD TG442E (CD54 EC 200, CD86 EC 150, CV75) U-SENS TM OECD TG 442E (CD86) * Reynolds, J, MacKay C, Gilmour N, Miguel-Vilumbrales D and Maxwell G (Submitted for publication: Computational Toxicology) Probabilistic prediction of human skin sensitiser potency for use in next generation risk assessment

PREDICTION OF PROBABILITY OF SENSITISATION OCCURRING IN HRIPT FOR CASE STUDY CHEMICALS DNCB Methyl heptine carbonate Coumarin Lactic acid = No Expected Sensitization Induction Level (www.ifraorg.org) See Also: Poster P13-05 Vandenbossche et al Evaluation of an integrated strategy for skin allergy risk assessment using six ingredients and two cosmetic products

PROBABILITY OF CONSUMER BECOMING SENSITISED Face cream Shampoo Probability of sensitising one individual See Also: Poster P13-05 Vandenbossche et al Evaluation of an integrated strategy for skin allergy risk assessment using six ingredients and two cosmetic products

TOXCAST: COMBINING IN VITRO ACTIVITY AND DOSIMETRY Rotroff, et al. Tox.Sci 2010 Slide from Dr Rusty Thomas, EPA, with thanks

UNILEVER/US EPA 2015-2020: JOINT CRADA CASE STUDY CHEMICALS 1. Caffeine 2. Curcumin 3. Bisdemethoxycurcumin 4. Tetrahydrocurcumin 5. 6-Gingerol 6. Coumarin 7. Hydroquinone 8. Doxorubicin

CELL STRESS PANEL Stress pathways Mitochondrial Toxicity Oxidative Stress DNA damage Inflammation ER Stress Metal Stress Osmotic Stress Heat Shock Hypoxia Cell Health 14 chemicals, including Low-risk compounds: Phenoxyethanol Niacinamide Caffeine Known high-risk compounds: Doxorubicin Diclofenac Troglitazone Platform Technology: High content imaging Cell line: HepG2 Timepoints: 1, 6 & 24 hours Calculate free concentration Use in vitro exposure models: Groothuis et al (2015) Toxicology, 332, 30-40

CELL STRESS PANEL Coumarin 6 hours 24 hours Doxorubicin 6 hours 24 hours

HIGH THROUGHPUT TRANSCRIPTOMICS NOTEL* is the derived concentration of a compound that does not elicit a meaningful change in gene expression (i.e. the threshold of the concentration that elicits minimal mechanistic activity). Thomas et al (2013). Toxicol Sci, 134, 180-94 Recommended approaches in the application of toxicogenomics to derive points of departure for chemical risk assessment Farmahin et al (2017) Arch Tox 91, 2045-65 *NOTEL = No observed transcriptional effect level

Accumulation HIGH THROUGHPUT TRANSCRIPTOMICS Fold change >1.5 Genes in pathway >3 Fishers exact test >0.1 (3 independent experiments) HepG2 BMD minimum 295 BMD medium 450 BMD maximum 962 POD - NOTEL value MCF7 BMD minimum 117 BMD medium 167 BMD maximum 290 Conc Phenoxyethanol (µm) SEAC HepaRG BMD minimum 237 BMD medium 344 BMD maximum 913 See also poster: P12-35 Nepelska et al Unilever Information: Internal Use 17

Log (10) Consumer Exposure (µm) NGRA EXPOSURE-DRIVEN CASE STUDIES Log (10) POD (µm)

Log (10) Consumer Exposure (µm) NGRA EXPOSURE-DRIVEN CASE STUDIES Log (10) POD (µm)

ICCR PRINCIPLES OF RISK ASSESSMENT AND WHAT WE RE LEARNING FROM CASE STUDIES Importance of understanding consumer exposure including the relevance of metabolism Non-standard, bespoke data generation driven by the risk assessment question Ensuring quality, robustness of non-standard (non-tg, non-glp?) work. In silico modelling approaches and bespoke in vitro solutions Importance of defining points-of-departure and understanding adverse vs. adaptive responses Understanding uncertainty in risk assessments to allow informed decision-making

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AMMS Prof Peng Jiabin Guo Haitao Yuan US EPA Josh Harrell Richard Judson Imran Shah Rusty Thomas Cyprotex Paul Walker SEAC Unilever The SEAC NGRA Team with special thanks to the following for their help with this talk: Maria Baltazar Sarah Cooper Matt Dent Nicky Gilmour Steve Gutsell Julia Head Cameron MacKay Sophie Malcomber Gavin Maxwell Alistair Middleton Victor Oreffo Gurjit Phgura Paul Russell Hequn Li Jin Li Paul Carmichael Joe Reynolds Andy White Unilever Information: Internal Use 21