An Integrated Decision-tree Testing Strategy for Skin Sensitisation with Respect to the Requirements of the EU REACH Legislation

This report presents some of the results of a joint research project, sponsored by Defra and conducted by FRAME and Liverpool John Moores University, on the status of alternatives to animal testing with regard to the European Union REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals) system for the safety testing and risk assessment of chemicals. The project covered all the main toxicity endpoints associated with the REACH system. This report focuses on the use of alternative (non-animal) methods (both in vitro and in silico) for skin sensitisation testing. The manuscript reviews in vitro tests based on protein-ligand binding, dendritic/Langerhans cells and T-lymphocyte activation, and also the QSAR models and expert systems available for this endpoint. These tests are then incorporated into an integrated, decision-tree testing strategy, which also includes the Local Lymph Node Assay (in its original and new reduced protocols) and the traditional guinea-pig tests (which should only be used as a last resort). The aim of the strategy is to minimise the use of animals in testing for skin sensitisation, while satisfying the scientific and logistical demands of the EU REACH legislation.

[1]  Carl Westmoreland,et al.  A future approach to measuring relative skin sensitising potency: a proposal , 2006, Journal of applied toxicology : JAT.

[2]  Grace Patlewicz,et al.  Chemical reactivity indices and mechanism‐based read‐across for non‐animal based assessment of skin sensitisation potential , 2008, Journal of applied toxicology : JAT.

[3]  J. Prins.  Directive 2003/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council , 2006 .

[4]  D W Roberts,et al.  Molecular orbital parameters as predictors of skin sensitization potential of halo- and pseudohalobenzenes acting as SNAr electrophiles. , 1997, Chemical research in toxicology.

[5]  J. Streilein,et al.  Naïve, hapten-specific human T lymphocytes are primed in vitro with derivatized blood mononuclear cells. , 1998, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[6]  C Benezra,et al.  A systematic search for structure-activity relationships of skin contact sensitizers: methodology. , 1985, Journal of Investigative Dermatology.

[7]  I. Kimber,et al.  Dendritic cells and skin sensitisation hazard assessment. , 2004, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[8]  I. Kimber,et al.  Cell and molecular biology of chemical allergy , 1997, Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology.

[9]  G Patlewicz,et al.  Mechanism based structure-activity relationships for skin sensitisation--the carbonyl group domain , 2002, SAR and QSAR in environmental research.

[10]  D. Basketter,et al.  Irritant thresholds in subjects withcolophony allergy , 2000, Contact dermatitis.

[11]  Grace Patlewicz,et al.  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. , 2007, Chemical research in toxicology.

[12]  D. Schmitt,et al.  In vitro human T cell sensitization to haptens by monocyte-derived dendritic cells. , 2000, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[13]  Grace Patlewicz,et al.  Mechanistic applicability domains for non-animal based prediction of toxicological endpoints. QSAR analysis of the schiff base applicability domain for skin sensitization. , 2006, Chemical research in toxicology.

[14]  D. Basketter,et al.  Investigating protein haptenation mechanisms of skin sensitisers using human serum albumin as a model protein. , 2007, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[15]  J. Lepoittevin,et al.  Mechanism of allergic contact dermatitis from propacetamol: sensitization to activated N,N‐diethylglycine , 1998, Contact dermatitis.

[16]  David W. Roberts,et al.  QSARs for the skin sensitization potential of aldehydes and related compounds , 2003 .

[17]  Christina Grindon.  The New EU REACH Regulation Has Finally Been Adopted: Is this the End of the Campaign Trail… or Just the Beginning? , 2007, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[18]  Z. Berneman,et al.  Expression analysis of immune-related genes in CD34(+) progenitor-derived dendritic cells after exposure to the chemical contact allergen DNCB. , 2005, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[19]  I Kimber,et al.  Skin sensitization risk assessment: a comparative evaluation of 3 isothiazolinone biocides , 1999, Contact dermatitis.

[20]  John D. Walker,et al.  Use of QSARs in international decision-making frameworks to predict health effects of chemical substances. , 2003, Environmental health perspectives.

[21]  I. Nelissen,et al.  Flow cytometric characterisation of antigen presenting dendritic cells after in vitro exposure to diesel exhaust particles. , 2005, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[22]  J. Hostýnek,et al.  Performance of an SAR-QSAR model predictive of human ACD , 1999 .

[23]  M. D. Barratt,et al.  Prediction of toxicity from chemical structure , 2004, Cell Biology and Toxicology.

[24]  Adam Fedorowicz,et al.  Evaluation of the contact and respiratory sensitization potential of volatile organic compounds generated by simulated indoor air chemistry. , 2007, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[25]  S. Katz,et al.  Generation and Characterization of T‐helper Cells by Primary in vitro Sensitization using Langerhans Cells , 1990, Immunological reviews.

[26]  M Régnier,et al.  Reactivity of Langerhans cells in human reconstructed epidermis to known allergens and UV radiation. , 2005, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[27]  Philip S. Magee.  Exploring the Potential for Allergic Contact Dermatitisvia Computed Heats of Reaction of Haptens with Protein End-groups Heats of Reaction of Haptens with Protein End-groups by Computation , 2000 .

[28]  Christina Grindon,et al.  A review of the status of alternative approaches to animal testing and the development of integrated testing strategies for assessing the toxicity of chemicals under REACH--a summary of a DEFRA-funded project conducted by Liverpool John Moores University and FRAME. , 2006, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[29]  D. Roberts,et al.  Quantitative structure‐activity relationships for skin sensitization potential of urushiol analogues , 1993, Contact dermatitis.

[30]  P. S. Magee,et al.  Fragrance allergens: Classification and ranking by QSAR. , 1997, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[31]  Methyl groups as antigenic determinants in skin sensitisation , 1988, Contact dermatitis.

[32]  Orest T. Macina,et al.  QSAR FOR ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS , 1996 .

[33]  Emanuela Corsini,et al.  Alternative Methods for Skin Sensitisation Testing , 1996 .

[34]  Silvia Casati,et al.  Skin Sensitisation and Epidermal Disposition: The Relevance of Epidermal Disposition for Sensitisation Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment , 2007, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[35]  J. Banchereau,et al.  Human dendritic Langerhans cells generated in vitro from CD34+ progenitors can prime naive CD4+ T cells and process soluble antigen. , 1995, Journal of immunology.

[36]  S. Grabbe,et al.  Immunoregulatory mechanisms involved in elicitation of allergic contact hypersensitivity. , 1996, Immunology today.

[37]  D. Heresbach,et al.  Regulation by allergens of chemokine receptor expression on in vitro-generated dendritic cells. , 2005, Toxicology.

[38]  A. Enk,et al.  Early molecular events in the induction phase of contact sensitivity. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[39]  G. Patlewicz,et al.  Further evaluation of quantitative structure–activity relationship models for the prediction of the skin sensitization potency of selected fragrance allergens , 2004, Contact dermatitis.

[40]  Scheper,et al.  Human T lymphocyte priming in vitro by haptenated autologous dendritic cells , 1999, Clinical and experimental immunology.

[41]  David W Roberts,et al.  Determinants of skin sensitisation potential , 2008, Journal of applied toxicology : JAT.

[42]  M. P. Payne,et al.  Structure-activity relationships for skin sensitization potential: Development of structural alerts for use in knowledge-based toxicity prediction systems , 1994, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[43]  Ernesto Estrada,et al.  From Knowledge Generation to Knowledge Archive. A General Strategy Using TOPS-MODE with DEREK To Formulate New Alerts for Skin Sensitization , 2004, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[44]  M. Barratt.  The Role of Structure-activity Relationships and Expert Systems in Alternative Strategies for the Determination of Skin Sensitisation, Skin Corrosivity and Eye Irritation , 1995 .

[45]  Julia Fentem,et al.  The Feasibility of Replacing Animal Testing for Assessing Consumer Safety: A Suggested Future Direction , 2004, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[46]  D A Basketter,et al.  Multivariate QSAR analysis of a skin sensitization database. , 1994, SAR and QSAR in environmental research.

[47]  I. Fabre,et al.  The cytokine-dependent MUTZ-3 cell line as an in vitro model for the screening of contact sensitizers. , 2006, Toxicology and applied pharmacology.

[48]  D W Roberts,et al.  Quantitative structure‐activity relationships: sulfonate esters in the local lymph node assay , 2000, Contact dermatitis.

[49]  H. Maibach,et al.  Scope and limitation of some approaches to predicting contact hypersensitivity. , 1998, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[50]  Petra S. Kern,et al.  Skin Sensitization: Modeling Based on Skin Metabolism Simulation and Formation of Protein Conjugates , 2005, International journal of toxicology.

[51]  Eva Schlede,et al.  Evaluation of a Rule Base for Identifying Contact Allergens by using a Regulatory Database: Comparison of Data on Chemicals Notified in the European Union with “Structural Alerts” Used in the DEREK Expert System , 2002, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[52]  Grace Patlewicz,et al.  Non-enzymatic glutathione reactivity and in vitro toxicity: a non-animal approach to skin sensitization. , 2006, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[53]  I Kimber,et al.  Skin sensitisation testing--new perspectives and recommendations. , 2001, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[54]  Robert Combes,et al.  The Use of Expert Systems for Toxicity Prediction: Illustrated with Reference to the DEREK Program , 2004 .

[55]  Ira Mellman,et al.  Cell biology of antigen processing in vitro and in vivo. , 2005, Annual review of immunology.

[56]  K. Hatch,et al.  A Discriminant Model for Allergic Contact Dermatitis in Anthraquinone Disperse Dyes , 1998 .

[57]  J. Squire,et al.  Occupational skin disease. , 1950, British medical bulletin.

[58]  A. Worth,et al.  Skin sensitisation. , 2005, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[59]  M. Régnier,et al.  Langerhans cells integrated into human reconstructed epidermis respond to known sensitizers and ultraviolet exposure. , 2004, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[60]  J. Dearden,et al.  Correspondence Analysis of the Skin Sensitization Potential of Organic Chemicals , 1997 .

[61]  G. Patlewicz,et al.  Ranking of hair dye substances according to predicted sensitization potency: quantitative structure–activity relationships , 2004, Contact dermatitis.

[62]  H. Sakaguchi,et al.  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. , 2006, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[63]  George Loizou,et al.  Possibilities for a New Approach to Chemicals Risk Assessment — The Report of a FRAME Workshop a , 2006, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[64]  Andrew Worth,et al.  Metabolism: A Bottleneck in In Vitro Toxicological Test Development , 2006, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[65]  H. Sakaguchi,et al.  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. , 2006, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[66]  David W Roberts,et al.  Mechanistic applicability domains for nonanimal-based prediction of toxicological end points: general principles and application to reactive toxicity. , 2006, Chemical research in toxicology.

[67]  D W Roberts,et al.  Further evaluation of the quantitative structure‐activity relationship for skin‐sensitizing alkyl transfer agents , 1997, Contact dermatitis.

[68]  Petra S Kern,et al.  The local lymph node assay and skin sensitization: a cut‐down screen to reduce animal requirements? , 2006, Contact dermatitis.

[69]  Michael Balls,et al.  A scientific and animal welfare assessment of the OECD Health Effects Test Guidelines for the safety testing of chemicals under the European Union REACH system. , 2004, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[70]  J. Lepoittevin.  Development of structure–activity relationships (SARs) in allergic contact dermatitis , 1999, Cell Biology and Toxicology.

[71]  D. Roberts,et al.  The value of the local lymph node assay in quantitative structure‐activity investigations , 1992, Contact dermatitis.

[72]  Harshinder Singh,et al.  QSAR Study of Skin Sensitization Using Local Lymph Node Assay Data , 2004 .

[73]  G Frank Gerberick,et al.  Development of a peptide reactivity assay for screening contact allergens. , 2004, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[74]  Petra S Kern,et al.  TIMES-SS--a promising tool for the assessment of skin sensitization hazard. A characterization with respect to the OECD validation principles for (Q)SARs and an external evaluation for predictivity. , 2007, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[75]  H. Maibach,et al.  A local lymph-node assay validation study of a structure-activity relationship model for contact allergens , 2005, Archives of Dermatological Research.

[76]  D. Roberts,et al.  Haptens, prohaptens and prehaptens, or electrophiles and proelectrophiles , 2007, Contact dermatitis.

[77]  Christina Grindon,et al.  Integrated Testing Strategies for Use in the EU REACH System , 2006, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[78]  D W Roberts,et al.  The derivation of quantitative correlations between skin sensitisation and physio-chemical parameters for alkylating agents, and their application to experimental data for sultones. , 1982, Journal of theoretical biology.

[79]  I. Kimber,et al.  REVIEWCytokines and chemokines in the initiation and regulation of epidermal Langerhans cell mobilization , 2000, The British journal of dermatology.

[80]  D. Roberts,et al.  Skin sensitization structure-activity relationships for phenyl benzoates. , 1994, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[81]  Valérie Zuang,et al.  Dendritic Cells as a Tool for the Predictive Identification of Skin Sensitisation Hazard , 2005, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[82]  Carol A Marchant,et al.  Structure–activity relationships for skin sensitization: recent improvements to Derek for Windows , 2006, Contact dermatitis.

[83]  G. Patlewicz,et al.  Skin‐sensitization structure‐activity relationships for aldehydes , 2001, Contact dermatitis.

[84]  G Patlewicz,et al.  Global (Q)SARs for skin sensitisation–assessment against OECD principles , 2007, SAR and QSAR in environmental research.