Literature DB >> 32621976

Skin sensitization in silico protocol.

Candice Johnson1, Ernst Ahlberg2, Lennart T Anger3, Lisa Beilke4, Romualdo Benigni5, Joel Bercu6, Sol Bobst7, David Bower8, Alessandro Brigo9, Sarah Campbell10, Mark T D Cronin11, Ian Crooks12, Kevin P Cross8, Tatyana Doktorova13, Thomas Exner13, David Faulkner14, Ian M Fearon15, Markus Fehr16, Shayne C Gad17, Véronique Gervais18, Amanda Giddings19, Susanne Glowienke20, Barry Hardy13, Catrin Hasselgren3, Jedd Hillegass21, Robert Jolly22, Eckart Krupp23, Liat Lomnitski24, Jason Magby25, Jordi Mestres26, Lawrence Milchak27, Scott Miller8, Wolfgang Muster9, Louise Neilson28, Rahul Parakhia29, Alexis Parenty20, Patricia Parris30, Alexandre Paulino31, Ana Theresa Paulino31, David W Roberts10, Harald Schlecker32, Reinhard Stidl33, Diana Suarez-Rodrigez34, David T Szabo35, Raymond R Tice36, Daniel Urbisch37, Anna Vuorinen16, Brian Wall25, Thibaud Weiler18, Angela T White19, Jessica Whritenour38, Joerg Wichard32, David Woolley39, Craig Zwickl40, Glenn J Myatt8.   

Abstract

The assessment of skin sensitization has evolved over the past few years to include in vitro assessments of key events along the adverse outcome pathway and opportunistically capitalize on the strengths of in silico methods to support a weight of evidence assessment without conducting a test in animals. While in silico methods vary greatly in their purpose and format; there is a need to standardize the underlying principles on which such models are developed and to make transparent the implications for the uncertainty in the overall assessment. In this contribution, the relationship between skin sensitization relevant effects, mechanisms, and endpoints are built into a hazard assessment framework. Based on the relevance of the mechanisms and effects as well as the strengths and limitations of the experimental systems used to identify them, rules and principles are defined for deriving skin sensitization in silico assessments. Further, the assignments of reliability and confidence scores that reflect the overall strength of the assessment are discussed. This skin sensitization protocol supports the implementation and acceptance of in silico approaches for the prediction of skin sensitization.
Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  (Q)SAR; Computational toxicology; Computational toxicology protocols; Defined approach; Expert alerts; Expert review; Extractables and leachables; In silico; In silico toxicology; Integrated approaches to testing and assessment (IATA); Skin sensitization

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32621976      PMCID: PMC7518315          DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2020.104688

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol        ISSN: 0273-2300            Impact factor:   3.271


  40 in total

1.  Determinants of skin sensitisation potential.

Authors:  David W Roberts; Aynur O Aptula
Journal:  J Appl Toxicol       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 3.446

2.  High throughput kinetic profiling approach for covalent binding to peptides: application to skin sensitization potency of Michael acceptor electrophiles.

Authors:  David W Roberts; Andreas Natsch
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2009-03-16       Impact factor: 3.739

3.  Utility of rat liver S9 fractions to study skin-sensitizing prohaptens in a modified KeratinoSens assay.

Authors:  Andreas Natsch; Tina Haupt
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2013-07-19       Impact factor: 4.849

Review 4.  Understanding controlled trials. Why are randomised controlled trials important?

Authors:  B Sibbald; M Roland
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-01-17

5.  LLNA variability: An essential ingredient for a comprehensive assessment of non-animal skin sensitization test methods and strategies.

Authors:  Sebastian Hoffmann
Journal:  ALTEX       Date:  2015-07-13       Impact factor: 6.043

6.  Principles for identification of High Potency Category Chemicals for which the Dermal Sensitisation Threshold (DST) approach should not be applied.

Authors:  David W Roberts; Anne Marie Api; Robert J Safford; Jon F Lalko
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2015-03-09       Impact factor: 3.271

7.  Is a combination of assays really needed for non-animal prediction of skin sensitization potential? Performance of the GARD™ (Genomic Allergen Rapid Detection) assay in comparison with OECD guideline assays alone and in combination.

Authors:  David W Roberts
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 3.271

8.  Chemistry-based risk assessment for skin sensitization: quantitative mechanistic modeling for the S(N)Ar domain.

Authors:  D W Roberts; A O Aptula; G Y Patlewicz
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2011-06-23       Impact factor: 3.739

9.  The underlying factors that explain why nucleophilic reagents rarely co-elute with test chemicals in the ADRA.

Authors:  Masaharu Fujita; Yusuke Yamamoto; Sayaka Wanibuchi; Yasuhiro Katsuoka; Toshihiko Kasahara
Journal:  J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods       Date:  2019-02-15       Impact factor: 1.950

10.  CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.

Authors:  Kenneth F Schulz; Douglas G Altman; David Moher
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-03-23
View more
  9 in total

1.  Implementation of in silico toxicology protocols within a visual and interactive hazard assessment platform.

Authors:  Glenn J Myatt; Arianna Bassan; Dave Bower; Candice Johnson; Scott Miller; Manuela Pavan; Kevin P Cross
Journal:  Comput Toxicol       Date:  2021-10-28

Review 2.  In Silico Models for Skin Sensitization and Irritation.

Authors:  Gianluca Selvestrel; Federica Robino; Matteo Zanotti Russo
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

3.  Implementation of In Silico Toxicology Protocols in Leadscope.

Authors:  Kevin Cross; Candice Johnson; Glenn J Myatt
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

4.  In silico approaches in organ toxicity hazard assessment: current status and future needs in predicting liver toxicity.

Authors:  Arianna Bassan; Vinicius M Alves; Alexander Amberg; Lennart T Anger; Scott Auerbach; Lisa Beilke; Andreas Bender; Mark T D Cronin; Kevin P Cross; Jui-Hua Hsieh; Nigel Greene; Raymond Kemper; Marlene T Kim; Moiz Mumtaz; Tobias Noeske; Manuela Pavan; Julia Pletz; Daniel P Russo; Yogesh Sabnis; Markus Schaefer; David T Szabo; Jean-Pierre Valentin; Joerg Wichard; Dominic Williams; David Woolley; Craig Zwickl; Glenn J Myatt
Journal:  Comput Toxicol       Date:  2021-09-09

5.  Evaluating Confidence in Toxicity Assessments Based on Experimental Data and In Silico Predictions.

Authors:  Candice Johnson; Lennart T Anger; Romualdo Benigni; David Bower; Frank Bringezu; Kevin M Crofton; Mark T D Cronin; Kevin P Cross; Magdalena Dettwiler; Markus Frericks; Fjodor Melnikov; Scott Miller; David W Roberts; Diana Suarez-Rodriguez; Alessandra Roncaglioni; Elena Lo Piparo; Raymond R Tice; Craig Zwickl; Glenn J Myatt
Journal:  Comput Toxicol       Date:  2021-11-08

6.  In Silico Approaches In Carcinogenicity Hazard Assessment: Current Status and Future Needs.

Authors:  Raymond R Tice; Arianna Bassan; Alexander Amberg; Lennart T Anger; Marc A Beal; Phillip Bellion; Romualdo Benigni; Jeffrey Birmingham; Alessandro Brigo; Frank Bringezu; Lidia Ceriani; Ian Crooks; Kevin Cross; Rosalie Elespuru; David M Faulkner; Marie C Fortin; Paul Fowler; Markus Frericks; Helga H J Gerets; Gloria D Jahnke; David R Jones; Naomi L Kruhlak; Elena Lo Piparo; Juan Lopez-Belmonte; Amarjit Luniwal; Alice Luu; Federica Madia; Serena Manganelli; Balasubramanian Manickam; Jordi Mestres; Amy L Mihalchik-Burhans; Louise Neilson; Arun Pandiri; Manuela Pavan; Cynthia V Rider; John P Rooney; Alejandra Trejo-Martin; Karen H Watanabe-Sailor; Angela T White; David Woolley; Glenn J Myatt
Journal:  Comput Toxicol       Date:  2021-09-23

7.  Current status and future directions for a neurotoxicity hazard assessment framework that integrates in silico approaches.

Authors:  Kevin M Crofton; Arianna Bassan; Mamta Behl; Yaroslav G Chushak; Ellen Fritsche; Jeffery M Gearhart; Mary Sue Marty; Moiz Mumtaz; Manuela Pavan; Patricia Ruiz; Magdalini Sachana; Rajamani Selvam; Timothy J Shafer; Lidiya Stavitskaya; David T Szabo; Steven T Szabo; Raymond R Tice; Dan Wilson; David Woolley; Glenn J Myatt
Journal:  Comput Toxicol       Date:  2022-03-17

8.  In silico approaches in organ toxicity hazard assessment: Current status and future needs for predicting heart, kidney and lung toxicities.

Authors:  Arianna Bassan; Vinicius M Alves; Alexander Amberg; Lennart T Anger; Lisa Beilke; Andreas Bender; Autumn Bernal; Mark T D Cronin; Jui-Hua Hsieh; Candice Johnson; Raymond Kemper; Moiz Mumtaz; Louise Neilson; Manuela Pavan; Amy Pointon; Julia Pletz; Patricia Ruiz; Daniel P Russo; Yogesh Sabnis; Reena Sandhu; Markus Schaefer; Lidiya Stavitskaya; David T Szabo; Jean-Pierre Valentin; David Woolley; Craig Zwickl; Glenn J Myatt
Journal:  Comput Toxicol       Date:  2021-09-13

9.  Medical Device Industry Approaches for Addressing Sources of Failing Cytotoxicity Scores.

Authors:  Helin Räägel; Audrey Turley; Trevor Fish; Jeralyn Franson; Thor Rollins; Sarah Campbell; Matthew R Jorgensen
Journal:  Biomed Instrum Technol       Date:  2021-05-01
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.