Is chronic AhR activation by rapidly metabolized ligands safe for the treatment of immune-mediated diseases?

There is a long standing perception that AhR ligands are automatically disqualified from pharmaceutical development due to their induction of Cyp1a1 as well as their potential for causing "dioxin-like" toxicities. However, recent discoveries of new AhR ligands with potential therapeutic applications have been reported, inviting reconsideration of this policy. One area of exploration is focused on the activation of AhR to promote the generation of regulatory T cells, which control the intensity and duration of immune responses. Rapidly metabolized AhR ligands (RMAhRLs), which do not bioaccumulate in the same manner as 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) have been discovered that induce Tregs and display impressive therapeutic efficacy in a broad range of preclinical models of immune-mediated diseases. Given the promise of these RMAhRLs, is the bias against AhR activators still valid? Can RMAhRLs be given chronically to maintain therapeutic levels of AhR activation without producing the same toxicity profile as dioxin-like compounds? Based on our review of the data, there is little evidence to support the indiscriminate exclusion of AhR activators/Cyp1a1 inducers from early drug developmental pipelines. We also found no evidence that short-term treatment with RMAhRLs produce "dioxin-like toxicity" and, in fact, were well tolerated. However, safety testing of individual RMAhRLs under therapeutic conditions, as performed with all promising new drugs, will be needed to reveal whether or not chronic activation of AhR leads to unacceptable adverse outcomes.