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

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

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

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

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

May 24, 2018 OpenTox Asia

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

Non-animal testing in the assessment of Skin sensitization

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

Multivariate Models for Skin Sensitization Hazard and Potency

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

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

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

Why me? 35 years in toxicology, incl. 28 with Unilever. Director of DABMEB Consultancy Ltd for 6 years

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

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

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

Final Report. Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS), Viale Regina Elena 299,Rome 00161, Italy

Important issues in immunotoxicity testing of chemicals

Innovative. Quantitative. Recognized.

Sherlock Holmes goesmolecular: Allergische Kontaktdermatitis von PatchTest zu Prohaptenen(I)

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

Modern Approaches and Special Cases. Whitney V. Christian, Ph.D.

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

The COLIPA strategy for the development of in vitro alternatives: Skin sensitisation

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

VITOSENS, Gene expression in denritic cells

The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) has gained popularity

Advanced Tests for Skin and Respiratory Sensitization Assessment

EURL ECVAM Strategy for Replacement of Animal Testing for Skin Sensitisation Hazard Identification and Classification

Potency classification of skin sensitizers (EC WG on Sensitization)

Sens-it-iv Proof-of-concept studies

Pre & Pro Haptens in Fragrance: Part 2 - Hydrolysis

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

T-cell activation T cells migrate to secondary lymphoid tissues where they interact with antigen, antigen-presenting cells, and other lymphocytes:

T-cell activation T cells migrate to secondary lymphoid tissues where they interact with antigen, antigen-presenting cells, and other lymphocytes:

High Content Imaging : Meaningful pictures for relevant results in dermocosmetology

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

Webinar: use of alternative methods to animal testing in your REACH registration

Introduction to Immunopathology

Guidance on information requirements and Chemical Safety Assessment. Chapter R.7a: Endpoint specific guidance

EURL ECVAM Recommendation on the human Cell Line Activation Test (h-clat) for skin sensitisation testing

CELL BIOLOGY - CLUTCH CH THE IMMUNE SYSTEM.

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

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

Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

OECD GUIDELINE FOR THE TESTING OF CHEMICALS

TCR, MHC and coreceptors

Sensitization testing in the frame of REACH: Any reliable in vitro alternatives in sight?

Background on skin sensitization hazard identification: Aspects in the development of «in-vitro based alternatives for sensitization testing»

Use of the Caenorhabditis elegans as an alternative model for evaluating the allergen potential of skin sensitizers

The Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC)

Untargeted strategy for identification of Toxic Chemicals in OSPW

Plate-Based Assay Methods for the Assessment of Cellular Health

Previous Class. Today. Detection of enzymatic intermediates: Protein tyrosine phosphatase mechanism. Protein Kinase Catalytic Properties

IFRA & Safety Assessment of Fragrance Materials

EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH & CONSUMER PROTECTION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL. Directorate C - Public Health and Risk Assessment C7 - Risk assessment SCCP

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

We are IntechOpen, the world s leading publisher of Open Access books Built by scientists, for scientists. International authors and editors

Keratinocytes Improve Prediction of Sensitization Potential and Potency of Chemicals with THP-1 Cells

Immunological response to metallic implants

Deciphering multiple stressor effects of gamma radiation and uranium on Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar): Transcriptomics-based mixture modeling

Contribution of microglia to tissue injury and repair in MS

What differentiates respiratory sensitizers from skin sensitizers?

Validity of the QRA Methodology & Possibilities of Further Refinement

Immunology - Lecture 2 Adaptive Immune System 1

Antigen Presentation and T Lymphocyte Activation. Abul K. Abbas UCSF. FOCiS

NFκB What is it and What s the deal with radicals?

1. to understand how proteins find their destination in prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells 2. to know how proteins are bio-recycled

Lecture 9: T-cell Mediated Immunity

Defensive mechanisms include :

Research Article Evaluation of the GARD assay in a blind Cosmetics Europe study 1

LYMPHOCYTES & IMMUNOGLOBULINS. Dr Mere Kende, Lecturer SMHS

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

The T cell receptor for MHC-associated peptide antigens

Redox regulated transcription factors

Overview B cell development T cell development

Revision of GHS Chapter 3.2 to fully incorporate non-animal test methods

OECD GUIDELINE FOR THE TESTING OF CHEMICALS

Effects of Diet, Packaging and Irradiation on Protein Oxidation, Lipid Oxidation of Raw Broiler Thigh Meat

Antigen Presentation and T Lymphocyte Activation. Shiv Pillai MD, PhD Massachusetts General Hospital Harvard Medical School. FOCiS

Immunogens and Antigens *

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Principles of Adaptive Immunity

OECD GUIDELINE FOR THE TESTING OF CHEMICALS

Adaptive immune responses: T cell-mediated immunity

Metal swap between Zn 7 metallothionein 3 and amyloid β Cu protects against amyloid β toxicity

CD90 + Human Dermal Stromal Cells Are Potent Inducers of FoxP3 + Regulatory T Cells

Biomolecules: amino acids

5/1/13. The proportion of thymus that produces T cells decreases with age. The cellular organization of the thymus

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

COURSE: Medical Microbiology, MBIM 650/720 - Fall TOPIC: Antigen Processing, MHC Restriction, & Role of Thymus Lecture 12

The Effects of Induced Aggregation of IgG and Insulin Preparations on In Vitro T Cell Stimulation

Allergic contact dermatitis: epidemiology, molecular mechanisms, in vitro methods and regulatory aspects

Adaptive (acquired) immunity. Professor Peter Delves University College London

Mechanistic Toxicology

Cytokines modulate the functional activities of individual cells and tissues both under normal and pathologic conditions Interleukins,

Immune response. This overview figure summarizes simply how our body responds to foreign molecules that enter to it.

NANO 243/CENG 207 Course Use Only

1. Overview of Adaptive Immunity

Application of a systems biology approach for skin allergy risk assessment

Transcription:

Potency classification of skin sensitizers: development and use of in vitro methods Prof. Jean-Pierre Lepoittevin University of Strasbourg, France SCCS WG on methodology Luxemburg, July 1st 2015

Research funding sources Cosmetics Europe Research Institute for Fragrance Material (RIFM) L Oréal Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) Université de Strasbourg

Risk assessment Step 1 Chemical Step 2 Hazard Potency

in vitro models Development of alternative methods to animal testing in silico models Structure activity relationships Hapten Intracellular signaling Epidermis in chemico models hapten-protein Interactions Dendritic cells Keratinocytes Intracellular signaling Transcriptome Maturation Phenotypical modifications Migration T Production of soluble factors TC activation Draining lymphnode in vivo models

Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) chemical structures & properties molecular initiating events cellular response Organ response Lymph node Organism response Skin (epidermis) metabolism penetration electrophilic substance covalent interaction with proteins Dendritic cells Keratinocytes MHC presentation Activation of T-cells Proliferation of activated T-cells Inflammation upon challenge Toxicity pathway Mode of action Adverse outcome

Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) chemical structures & properties molecular initiating events cellular response Organ response Lymph node Organism response Skin (epidermis) metabolism penetration electrophilic substance covalent interaction with proteins Dendritic cells Keratinocytes MHC presentation Activation of T-cells Proliferation of activated T-cells Inflammation upon challenge In vitro skin absorption (Q)SARs Peptide depletion Adduct formation Activation (Keap-1/Nrf2-ARE Gene expression In vitro T-cell priming / proliferation In silico toxicokinetics Relative reactivity rate Pro-inflammatory mediators Co-stimulatory adhesion molecules

Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) chemical structures & properties molecular initiating events KE3 cellular response KE4 Organ response Lymph node Organism response Skin (epidermis) metabolism penetration electrophilic substance KE1 covalent interaction with proteins KE2 Dendritic cells Keratinocytes MHC presentation Activation of T-cells Proliferation of activated T-cells Inflammation upon challenge In vitro skin absorption (Q)SARs Peptide depletion Adduct formation Activation (Keap-1/Nrf2-ARE Gene expression In vitro T-cell priming / proliferation In silico toxicokinetics Relative reactivity rate Pro-inflammatory mediators Co-stimulatory adhesion molecules

in vitro models KE1: hapten-protein interactions in silico models in chemico models Structure activity relationships hapten-protein Interactions Hapten Dendritic cells Epidermis Intracellular signaling Keratinocytes Intracellular signaling Transcriptome Maturation Phenotypical modifications Migration T Production of soluble factors TC activation Draining lymphnode in vivo models

Development of alternative methods to animal testing

KE1: Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA) Mechanistic basis: address haptenization of proteins Test system: synthetic heptapeptides containing either Cys or Lys residues End-point: Cys and Lys peptide % depletion Protocol: Test chemical in acetonitrile; Cysteine peptide in phosphate buffer, ph 7.5; Lysine peptide in ammonium acetate, ph 10.2; Test chemical reacted with peptide (10:1 or 50:1) for 24 hours Controls: cinnamic aldehyde (positive)

KE1: Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA) 2 synthetic peptides: Pep-Cys Pep-Lys Gerberick F et al. Toxicol Sci, 2004, 81, 332-343

KE1: Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA) Test chemical in acetonitrile Cysteine peptide in phosphate buffer, ph 7.5 Lysine peptide in ammonium acetate, ph 10.2 Test chemical reacted with peptide (10:1 or 50:1) for 24 hours Peptide loss monitored by HPLC at 220 nm Un-reacted Peptide Test Chemical Reaction Mixture

KE1:Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA) Prediction model: mean percent cysteine and lysine peptide depletion value of 6.38 is used as threshold to discriminate between negative and positive predictions Applicability: not applicable for metals, oxidizers, highly hydrophobic substances, pre- prohaptens

Potential for relation reactivity vs sensitization potential 22.6 % Molecule Pep-Cys > 22.6 % Molecule Molecule 6.4 % > 6.4 % Pep-Lys 42.5 % Pep-Lys > 42.5 % Minimal Reactivity Low reactivity Moderate reactivity High reactivity Non sensitiser Weak sensitiser Moderate sensitisers Strong sensitisers Gerberick GF et al. Toxicol Sci 2007, 97, 417-427

Development of alternative methods to animal testing in silico models Structure activity relationships Hapten Intracellular signaling Epidermis in chemico models hapten-protein Interactions Dendritic cells Keratinocytes in vitro models Transcriptome Phenotypical modifications Production of soluble factors Maturation Intracellular signaling Migration T TC activation Draining lymphnode in vivo models

Development of alternative methods to animal testing

KE2: KeratinoSens Mechanistic basis: address response of keratinocytes by measuring activation of the electrophile response (Nrf2-Keap1-ARE pathway) Test system: human keratinocyte-derived cell line with a luciferase gene under the control of an ARE element End-point: luciferase gene fold induction Protocol: cell exposed for 48h to 12 concentrations of test chemical; luciferase fold induction quantified by luminescence analysis Controls: cinnamic aldehyde (positive) Natsch A. Toxicol Sci 2010, 113, 284-292

Keap1 SH SH Nrf2 Proteasomal degradation Stress inducers Nrf2 Keap1 S S Target gene functions P Nrf2 Nrf2 smaf ARE Gene transcription NUCLEUS HMOX NQO1 NRF-2 Antioxidant genes Detoxication Cell Survival

KE2: KeratinoSens Prediction model: luciferase activity 1.5 fold higher at a concentration with >70% cell viability in at least 2 of 3 independent repetitions Applicability: not applicable for chemicals only reacting with lysine, non soluble substances (W/DMSO), prohaptens requiring P450 activation Natsch A. Toxicol Sci 2010, 113, 284-292

KE3: Human Cell Line Activation Test (h-clat) Mechanistic basis: address response of dendritic cells (DC) by measuring modulation of costimulatory and adhesion molecules Test system: human monocytic leukemia cell line (THP-1) End-point: relative fluorescence intensity (RFI) of CD86 and CD54 and cytotoxicity Protocol: Cells exposed for 24h to 8 concentrations of test chemical; RFI of CD86 and CD54 compared to vehicle controls quantified by flow cytometry Controls: DNCB (positive) Ashikaga, T. et al. Toxicol in Vitro 2006, 20, 767-773

KE3: Human Cell Line Activation Test (h-clat) Prediction model: A chemical is rated positive if the RFI of CD86 is 150% and/or if the RFI of CD54 is 200% at any tested dose ( 50% of cell viability) in at least 2 independent repetitions Applicability: not applicable for chemicals with logk ow greater than 3.5; prohaptens requiring metabolic activation Ashikaga, T. et al. Toxicol in Vitro 2006, 20, 767-773

Compared predictive capacity? DPRA KeratinoSens h-clat Data set size N = 82 N = 145 N = 53 Compared to LLNA LLNA Human Accuracy 89.0% 77.0% 83.0% Sensitivity 88.0% 79.0% 85.0% Specificity 90.0% 72.0% 76.9%

Major pitfalls Solubility / Toxicity Complex mixtures

Major pitfalls Activation (Pre- and prohaptens) Detoxication

Potency prediction? Potential to access Not validated

Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA) How to combine the results of in silico, in chemico and in vitro tests

Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA) Nukada et al. Toxicol in Vitro 2013, 27, 609-618 Bauch et al. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2012, 63, 489-504 Van der Veen et al. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2014, 69, 371-379

Conclusion Alternative methods developed have a potential to approach potency However they have been validated only for danger prediction IATA s are still under development for danger prediction and need to be validated All categories of sensitizers are not yet covered