Literature DB >> 33320000

Mapping Chemical Respiratory Sensitization: How Useful Are Our Current Computational Tools?

Emily Golden1, Mikhail Maertens1, Thomas Hartung1,2, Alexandra Maertens1.   

Abstract

Chemical respiratory sensitization is an immunological process that manifests clinically mostly as occupational asthma and is responsible for 1 in 6 cases of adult asthma, although this may be an underestimate of the prevalence, as it is under-diagnosed. Occupational asthma results in unemployment for roughly one-third of those affected due to severe health issues. Despite its high prevalence, chemical respiratory sensitization is difficult to predict, as there are currently no validated models and the mechanisms are not entirely understood, creating a significant challenge for regulatory bodies and industry alike. The Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) for respiratory sensitization is currently incomplete. However, some key events have been identified, and there is overlap with the comparatively well-characterized AOP for dermal sensitization. Because of this, and the fact that dermal sensitization is often assessed by in vivo, in chemico, or in silico methods, regulatory bodies are defaulting to the dermal sensitization status of chemicals as a proxy for respiratory sensitization status when evaluating chemical safety. We identified a data set of known human respiratory sensitizers, which we used to investigate the accuracy of a structural alert model, Toxtree, designed for skin sensitization and the Centre for Occupational and Environmental Health (COEH)'s model, a model developed specifically for occupational asthma. While both models had a reasonable level of accuracy, the COEH model achieved the highest balanced accuracy at 76%; when the models agreed, the overall accuracy was 87%. There were important differences between the models: Toxtree had superior performance for some structural alerts and some categories of well-characterized skin sensitizers, while the COEH model had high accuracy in identifying sensitizers that lacked identified skin sensitization reactivity domains. Overall, both models achieved respectable accuracy. However, neither model addresses potency, which, along with data quality, remains a hurdle, and the field must prioritize these issues to move forward.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33320000      PMCID: PMC8906240          DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.0c00320

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol        ISSN: 0893-228X            Impact factor:   3.739


  49 in total

1.  American Thoracic Society Statement: Occupational contribution to the burden of airway disease.

Authors:  John Balmes; Margaret Becklake; Paul Blanc; Paul Henneberger; Kathleen Kreiss; Cristina Mapp; Donald Milton; David Schwartz; Kjell Toren; Giovanni Viegi
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2003-03-01       Impact factor: 21.405

2.  Bias in toxicology.

Authors:  Birgitte Wandall; Sven Ove Hansson; Christina Rudén
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2007-03-14       Impact factor: 5.153

3.  Food for thought... on animal tests.

Authors:  Thomas Hartung
Journal:  ALTEX       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 6.043

4.  Structure-activity model of chemicals that cause human respiratory sensitization.

Authors:  C Graham; H S Rosenkranz; M H Karol
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 3.271

5.  Development of mechanism-based structural alerts for respiratory sensitization hazard identification.

Authors:  S J Enoch; M J Seed; D W Roberts; M T D Cronin; S J Stocks; R M Agius
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2012-10-19       Impact factor: 3.739

Review 6.  Skin and respiratory chemical allergy: confluence and divergence in a hybrid adverse outcome pathway.

Authors:  Ian Kimber; Alan Poole; David A Basketter
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2018-01-26       Impact factor: 3.524

7.  Can the Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay Be Used for the Identification of Respiratory Sensitization Potential of Chemicals?

Authors:  Sander Dik; Emiel Rorije; Paul Schwillens; Henk van Loveren; Janine Ezendam
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2016-07-29       Impact factor: 4.849

Review 8.  Animal models to test respiratory allergy of low molecular weight chemicals: a guidance.

Authors:  Josje H E Arts; C Frieke Kuper
Journal:  Methods       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 3.608

Review 9.  A primer on systematic reviews in toxicology.

Authors:  Sebastian Hoffmann; Rob B M de Vries; Martin L Stephens; Nancy B Beck; Hubert A A M Dirven; John R Fowle; Julie E Goodman; Thomas Hartung; Ian Kimber; Manoj M Lalu; Kristina Thayer; Paul Whaley; Daniele Wikoff; Katya Tsaioun
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2017-05-13       Impact factor: 5.153

10.  Inflammatory findings on species extrapolations: humans are definitely no 70-kg mice.

Authors:  Marcel Leist; Thomas Hartung
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2013-03-19       Impact factor: 5.153

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.