Mike Comber TIMES-SS Application of Reactivity Principles in Screening for Skin Sensitisers Presented on behalf of the TIMES-SS consortia & International.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Dosimetry in Risk Assessment and a bit More Mel Andersen McKim Conference QSAR and Aquatic Toxicology & Risk Assessment June 27-29, 2006.
Advertisements

BIOC223 – FUNDAMENTALS OF BIOCHEMISTRY Carbohydrate Unit Objectives- Students will be able to C1. Collect/obtain biochemical information from a variety.
Regulatory Toxicology James Swenberg, D.V.M., Ph.D.
Development of an Institutional Knowledge-base at FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition Kirk B. Arvidson 1, Annette McCarthy 1, Chihae Yang.
1 Development & Evaluation of Ecotoxicity Predictive Tools EPA Development Team Regional Stakeholder Meetings January 11-22, 2010.
1 PK/PD modeling within regulatory submissions Is it used? Can it be used and if yes, where? Views from industry 24 September 2008.
William H. Farland, Ph.D. Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Science Office of Research and Development U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Biomarkers:
Chemical Category Formation: Toxicology and REACH Dr Steven Enoch Liverpool John Moores University 14 th May 2009.
Dermal Toxicology Specialty Section What is Dermal Toxicology?The Dermal Toxicology Specialty Section Benefits of DTSS Membership The Officers of the DTSS.
Dynamic Modeling Of Biological Systems. Why Model? When it’s a simple, constrained path we can easily go from experimental measurements to intuitive understanding.
ECVAM Key Area Sensitisation: Overview on Activities Silvia Casati, Chantra Eskes.
SCB : 1 Department of Computer Science Simulation and Complexity SCB : Simulating Complex Biosystems Susan Stepney Department of Computer Science Leo Caves.
Current and Emerging Paradigms in Environmental Toxicology Lecture 2.
1 Enviromatics Decision support systems Decision support systems Вонр. проф. д-р Александар Маркоски Технички факултет – Битола 2008 год.
~ Science for Life not for Grades!. Why choose Cambridge IGCSE Co-ordinated Sciences ? IGCSE Co-ordinated Sciences gives you the opportunity to study.
1 Validation & Verification Chapter VALIDATION & VERIFICATION Very Difficult Very Important Conceptually distinct, but performed simultaneously.
Opportunities for Measuring Amine Reactivity Under LINK Mark Cronin Liverpool John Moores University England.
VISUALIZATION OF ADVERSE EFFECT PATHWAYS Hristo Aladjov.
Metrological Experiments in Biomarker Development (Mass Spectrometry—Statistical Issues) Walter Liggett Statistical Engineering Division Peter Barker Biotechnology.
Exploratory IND Studies
Mike Comber Consulting TIMES-SS Assessment of skin sensitisation hazard Presented on behalf of the TIMES-SS consortia.
University of Durham D Dr Robert Coe University of Durham School of Education Tel: (+44 / 0) Fax: (+44 / 0)
Research & Science Advancing Risk Assessment Presentation March Association of Chemical Industry of the Czech Republic Monique Marrec Fairley.
WWU Chemistry ADDITION-ELIMINATION: NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS NUCLEOPHILES Sections
Bioinformatics MEDC601 Lecture by Brad Windle Ph# Office: Massey Cancer Center, Goodwin Labs Room 319 Web site for lecture:
OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH METHODS Dr. Kimaro. INTRODUCTION Why Research; Increase body of knowledge Explain social phenomena Test theoretical hypothesis Explain.
Big Ideas Technological applications that affect biological processes and cellular functions are used in the food, pharmaceutical, and medical industries.
Toxicological Knowledge Base (a Definition) Response Dose “ An in computero aggregated set of the most germane literature citations and biological activity.
McKim Conference on Predictive Toxicology
The Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) for Skin Sensitisation (SS): How We Got Here and Where We are Going 1 T. W. Schultz Professor Emeritus The University.
The McKim Conferences for the Strategic Use of Testing Gitchee Gumee Conference Center Duluth, Minnesota June 27-29, 2006.
UNDERSTANDING CHEMICAL ALLERGEN POTENCY THROUGH THE MOLECULAR EVENTS THAT TRIGGER IMMUNE CELL ACTIVATION Elena Kummer.
QSAR in CANCER ASSESSMENT PURPOSE and AGENDA Gilman Veith Duluth MN May 19-21, 2010.
Systematic Review: Interpreting Results and Identifying Gaps October 17, 2012.
ADVERSE OUTCOME PATHWAYS LESSONS FROM SENSITISATION DR DAVID BASKETTER, DABMEB CONSULTANCY LTD, SHARNBROOK, UK.
Black Box Lush Prize 2015: Skin Sensitization Adverse Outcome Pathway G. Frank Gerberick The Procter & Gamble Company.
T. W. Schultz Presented at the McKim Conference September 17, 2008.
International Atomic Energy Agency Regulatory Review of Safety Cases for Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities David G Bennett 7 April 2014.
Dr. Hayder kh. Q. Ali School of Bioprocess Engineer UniMAP.
Barcelona April, 2008 Overview of the QSAR Application Toolbox Gilman Veith International QSAR Foundation Duluth, Minnesota.
McKim Conference on Predictive Toxicology The Inn of Lake Superior Duluth, Minnesota September 16-18, 2008 Toxicity Pathways as an Organizing Concept Gilman.
Science Symposium, 26 May 2014, New Delhi, India Dr Gerald Renner Director Technical Regulatory Affairs Cosmetics Europe EU scenario on alternatives in.
Strengthening Research Capabilities Professor John B. Kaneene DVM, MPH, PhD, FAES, FAVES Center for Comparative Epidemiology Michigan State University.
McKim Workshop on Strategic Approaches for Reducing Data Redundancy in Cancer Assessment Duluth, MN, USA 19 May, 2010.
Evaluation of skin metabolism of Benzo(a)pyrene : ex vivo skin explant model validation C. Jacques, E.L. Jamin, E. Perdu, S. Bessou-Touya, D. Zalko and.
McKim Conference on Predictive Toxicology The Inn of Lake Superior Duluth, Minnesota September 25-27, 2007 Toxicity Pathways as an Organizing Concept Gilman.
QSAR in CANCER ASSESSMENT PURPOSE and AGENDA Gilman Veith Duluth MN May 19-21, 2010.
Acute Toxicity Studies Single dose - rat, mouse (5/sex/dose), dog, monkey (1/sex/dose) 14 day observation In-life observations (body wt., food consumption,
Rigor and Transparency in Research
QSAR Application Toolbox: First Steps - Data Gap Filling (Read-Across by Analogue Approach)
Role of Experimentation and Experimental Planning Research Methods CPE 401 / 6002 / 6003 Professor Will Zimmerman.
Laboratory of Mathematical Chemistry,
Skimune™ Technologies for sensitization and potency assessment   Unique tools for the Cosmetic and Chemical Industries.  
QSAR Toolbox Database Import/Export
General Concepts in QSAR for Using the QSAR Application Toolbox
Forming Chemical Categories..
QSAR Application Toolbox: Step 12: Building a QSAR model
Using Derek Nexus to assess the safety of raw materials used in cosmetics and as part of a skin sensitisation ITS. Part 1: Using Derek Nexus to assess.
General Concepts in QSAR for Using the QSAR Application Toolbox
Making it more relevant! Higher-tier data and Weight of Evidence Day 2. Adam Peters and Graham Merrington 2017.
Status of the Glutathione Reactivity Database for Skin Sensitization
Outlook Background Objectives Specific Aims
QSAR Toolbox Database Import/Export
OECD QSAR Toolbox v.4.2 An example illustrating RAAF Scenario 2 and related assessment elements.
Category elements for assessing category consistency
Skin Sensitisation – Chemical Applicability Domain of the LLNA
Evaluating alert performance accounting for a metabolism
Ovanes Mekenyan, Milen Todorov, Ksenia Gerova
The Category Approach for Predicting Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity
T. W. Schultz Presented at the Logan Workshop March 23-24, 2010
Presentation transcript:

Mike Comber TIMES-SS Application of Reactivity Principles in Screening for Skin Sensitisers Presented on behalf of the TIMES-SS consortia & International QSAR Foundation

Outline Goal Goal – to apply the reactivity knowledge base to an economically important hazard assessment endpoint Why TIMES-SS? Why TIMES-SS? Refining TIMES-SS Refining TIMES-SS Consortium & Aims Consortium & Aims Brief overview of the model Brief overview of the model Performance & issues Performance & issues Current programme & developments Current programme & developments Future needs Future needs

Skin sensitisation There are in-vitro alternatives & other models….. There are in-vitro alternatives & other models….. but none are adequate for all classes of sensitisers Greater regulatory acceptance requires greater mechanistic transparency- “no black boxes” Greater regulatory acceptance requires greater mechanistic transparency- “no black boxes” Increasing regulatory acceptance Increasing regulatory acceptance Avoiding the test saves industry money! Avoiding the test saves industry money! Screening chemicals helps direct research Screening chemicals helps direct research

TIMES-SS :Consortium Coordination – Mike Comber – on behalf of the IQF Coordination – Mike Comber – on behalf of the IQF Research team Research team Laboratory of Mathematical Chemistry, University Bourgas Laboratory of Mathematical Chemistry, University Bourgas Dr Dave Roberts Dr Dave Roberts Consortium Consortium ExxonMobil ExxonMobil Procter & Gamble Procter & Gamble Unilever Unilever Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIVM) Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIVM) Dow Dow Danish National Food Institute Danish National Food Institute Funding & data sharing + sweat equity Funding & data sharing + sweat equity

Aims for TIMES-SS To develop a skin sensitisation (Q)SAR model that: To develop a skin sensitisation (Q)SAR model that: Potentially minimises the need for animal testing Potentially minimises the need for animal testing Is scientifically credible and valid to Industry and Regulatory bodies Is scientifically credible and valid to Industry and Regulatory bodies Agrees with the OECD principles for (Q)SAR validation Agrees with the OECD principles for (Q)SAR validation Mechanistically defensible Mechanistically defensible Hence has high potential for acceptance under REACH in place of animal tests Hence has high potential for acceptance under REACH in place of animal tests

Characterisation with the OECD principles OECD principles for (Q)SAR validation: OECD principles for (Q)SAR validation: a defined endpoint  a defined endpoint  an unambiguous algorithm  an unambiguous algorithm  a defined domain of applicability  a defined domain of applicability  appropriate measures of goodness-of-fit, robustness and predictivity  appropriate measures of goodness-of-fit, robustness and predictivity  a mechanistic interpretation  a mechanistic interpretation  where  demonstrates the concordance between TIMES and the OECD principles For full evaluations - see : Patlewicz et al., 2007 Reg Tox Pharm, 48, 225–239 & Roberts et al., 2007, Chem Res Toxicol, 20 (9), 1321–1330

Identifying the cause of an effect Complex toxicological endpoints are biological responses to: Complex toxicological endpoints are biological responses to: Direct molecular interactions dependent on chemical structure Direct molecular interactions dependent on chemical structure Indirect molecular interactions which are dependent on the chemical structure of metabolites Indirect molecular interactions which are dependent on the chemical structure of metabolites AND Biological processes dependent on other properties e.g. pH/chemical reactivity AND Biological processes dependent on other properties e.g. pH/chemical reactivity In TIMES-SS - trying to separate the unknowns associated with metabolism from the unknowns associated with chemical reactivity itself. In TIMES-SS - trying to separate the unknowns associated with metabolism from the unknowns associated with chemical reactivity itself. There has been a continual effort to make sure any plausible mechanism of interactions leading to a protein adduct is consistent: There has been a continual effort to make sure any plausible mechanism of interactions leading to a protein adduct is consistent: With the literature on that specific reaction mechanism, and With the literature on that specific reaction mechanism, and With the more general understanding chemical reactivity. With the more general understanding chemical reactivity.

Process for TIMES-SS What is the hypothesis? What is the hypothesis? How do we then model the endpoint? How do we then model the endpoint? What is the data required to then build the model? What is the data required to then build the model? What are the shortcomings and the gaps? What are the shortcomings and the gaps?

Epidermis Dermis Hypodermis Vein Protein conjugates Penetration Protein conjugates Metabolism Lymph Hypothesis for skin sensitization Subject of modeling Assumptions: 1.Chemicals always penetrate stratum corneum 2.Formation of protein conjugates is a premise for ultimate effect 3.Metabolism may play significant role in skin sensitization

Modeling the hypothesis Modeling skin metabolism Modeling skin metabolism Skin metabolic simulator contains 336 hierarchically ordered spontaneous and enzyme controlled reactions. Skin metabolic simulator contains 336 hierarchically ordered spontaneous and enzyme controlled reactions. Covalent interactions of chemicals/metabolites with skin proteins are described by 67 alerting groups. Covalent interactions of chemicals/metabolites with skin proteins are described by 67 alerting groups. 3D-QSARs are applied for some of these alerting groups to improve the associated predictability. 3D-QSARs are applied for some of these alerting groups to improve the associated predictability.

Different type of principal transformations Phase I reactions Ester hydrolysis Schiff base formation with aldehydes Phase II reactions Glucoronidation Interactions with proteins Nucleophilic substitution on halogenated C sp3 atom

Protein binding alerts requiring 3D QSAR (COREPA) models 1. Aldehydes R = alkyl, H 2. α,β- unsaturated carbonyl compounds acting by Michael addition R = OC, C, N, S

What is the data required to then build the model? Training set of 885 chemicals with experimental data from three sources (LLNA, GPMT, BfR). Training set of 885 chemicals with experimental data from three sources (LLNA, GPMT, BfR). Experimental skin sensitisation data Experimental skin sensitisation data Reaction data – data on reactivity is not available. Discrimination by chemical reactivity is semi qualitative Reaction data – data on reactivity is not available. Discrimination by chemical reactivity is semi qualitative

Ranges of chemical reactivity are introduced - Examples Nucleophilic acyl substitution in azalactones causing Strong skin sensitization effect Chemicals from the training set having observed Strong sensitization effect

Nucleophilic acyl substitution in azalactones causing Weak skin sensitization effect Chemicals from the training set having observed Weak sensitization effect Ranges of chemical reactivity are introduced – Examples (Contd.)

Michael addition on a,b - aldehydes causing Strong skin sensitization effect Chemicals from the training set having observed Strong sensitization effect Ranges of chemical reactivity are introduced – Examples (Contd.)

Michael addition on a,b - aldehydes causing Weak skin sensitization effect Chemicals from the training set having observed Weak sensitization effect Ranges of chemical reactivity are introduced – Examples (Contd.)

Current shortcomings and needs The level of support for reactions is variable The level of support for reactions is variable Some reactions have 1 supporting chemical Some reactions have 1 supporting chemical New reactions are being generated as new data is reviewed – requiring further assessments New reactions are being generated as new data is reviewed – requiring further assessments Reactivity data for the reactions/chemical groups is not available Reactivity data for the reactions/chemical groups is not available A semi qualitative potency scale is used for some of the reactions/chemical groups A semi qualitative potency scale is used for some of the reactions/chemical groups