The Myeloid U937 Skin Sensitization Test (U-SENS) addresses the activation of dendritic cell event in the adverse outcome pathway for skin sensitization

State of the art in non-animal approaches for skin sensitization testing: from individual test methods towards testing strategies

The hazard assessment of skin sensitizers relies mainly on animal testing, but much progress is made in the development, validation and regulatory acceptance and implementation of non-animal predictive approaches. In this review, we provide an update on the available computational tools and animal-free test methods for the prediction of skin sensitization hazard. These individual test methods address mostly one mechanistic step of the process of skin sensitization induction. The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) for skin sensitization describes the key events (KEs) that lead to skin sensitization. In our review, we have clustered the available test methods according to the KE they inform: the molecular initiating event (MIE/KE1)-protein binding, KE2-keratinocyte activation, KE3-dendritic cell activation and KE4-T cell activation and proliferation. In recent years, most progress has been made in the development and validation of in vitro assays that address KE2 and KE3. No standardized in vitro assays for T cell activation are available; thus, KE4 cannot be measured in vitro. Three non-animal test methods, addressing either the MIE, KE2 or KE3, are accepted as OECD test guidelines, and this has accelerated the development of integrated or defined approaches for testing and assessment (e.g. testing strategies). The majority of these approaches are mechanism-based, since they combine results from multiple test methods and/or computational tools that address different KEs of the AOP to estimate skin sensitization potential and sometimes potency. Other approaches are based on statistical tools. Until now, eleven different testing strategies have been published, the majority using the same individual information sources. Our review shows that some of the defined approaches to testing and assessment are able to accurately predict skin sensitization hazard, sometimes even more accurate than the currently used animal test. A few defined approaches are developed to provide an estimate of the potency sub-category of a skin sensitizer as well, but these approaches need further independent evaluation with a new dataset of chemicals. To conclude, this update shows that the field of non-animal approaches for skin sensitization has evolved greatly in recent years and that it is possible to predict skin sensitization hazard without animal testing.

Integrated Computational Solution for Predicting Skin Sensitization Potential of Molecules

Introduction

Skin sensitization forms a major toxicological endpoint for dermatology and cosmetic products. Recent ban on animal testing for cosmetics demands for alternative methods. We developed an integrated computational solution (SkinSense) that offers a robust solution and addresses the limitations of existing computational tools i.e. high false positive rate and/or limited coverage.

Results

The key components of our solution include: QSAR models selected from a combinatorial set, similarity information and literature-derived sub-structure patterns of known skin protein reactive groups. Its prediction performance on a challenge set of molecules showed accuracy = 75.32%, CCR = 74.36%, sensitivity = 70.00% and specificity = 78.72%, which is better than several existing tools including VEGA (accuracy = 45.00% and CCR = 54.17% with ‘High’ reliability scoring), DEREK (accuracy = 72.73% and CCR = 71.44%) and TOPKAT (accuracy = 60.00% and CCR = 61.67%). Although, TIMES-SS showed higher predictive power (accuracy = 90.00% and CCR = 92.86%), the coverage was very low (only 10 out of 77 molecules were predicted reliably).

Conclusions

Owing to improved prediction performance and coverage, our solution can serve as a useful expert system towards Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment for skin sensitization. It would be invaluable to cosmetic/ dermatology industry for pre-screening their molecules, and reducing time, cost and animal testing.

Biology-inspired microphysiological system approaches to solve the prediction dilemma of substance testing

The recent advent of microphysiological systems - microfluidic biomimetic devices that aspire to emulate the biology of human tissues, organs and circulation in vitro - is envisaged to enable a global paradigm shift in drug development. An extraordinary US governmental initiative and various dedicated research programs in Europe and Asia have led recently to the first cutting-edge achievements of human single-organ and multi-organ engineering based on microphysiological systems. The expectation is that test systems established on this basis would model various disease stages, and predict toxicity, immunogenicity, ADME profiles and treatment efficacy prior to clinical testing. Consequently, this technology could significantly affect the way drug substances are developed in the future. Furthermore, microphysiological system-based assays may revolutionize our current global programs of prioritization of hazard characterization for any new substances to be used, for example, in agriculture, food, ecosystems or cosmetics, thus, replacing laboratory animal models used currently. Thirty-six experts from academia, industry and regulatory bodies present here the results of an intensive workshop (held in June 2015, Berlin, Germany). They review the status quo of microphysiological systems available today against industry needs, and assess the broad variety of approaches with fit-for-purpose potential in the drug development cycle. Feasible technical solutions to reach the next levels of human biology in vitro are proposed. Furthermore, key organ-on-a-chip case studies, as well as various national and international programs are highlighted. Finally, a roadmap into the future is outlined, to allow for more predictive and regulatory-accepted substance testing on a global scale.

Analysis of the Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) variability for assessing the prediction of skin sensitisation potential and potency of chemicals with non-animal approaches

The knowledge of the biological mechanisms leading to the induction of skin sensitisation has favoured in recent years the development of alternative non-animal methods. During the formal validation process, results from the Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) are generally used as reference data to assess the predictive capacity of the non-animal tests. This study reports an analysis of the variability of the LLNA for a set of chemicals for which multiple studies are available and considers three hazard classification schemes: POS/NEG, GHS/CLP and ECETOC. As the type of vehicle used in a LLNA study is known to influence to some extent the results, two analyses were performed: considering the solvent used to test the chemicals and without considering the solvent. The results show that the number of discordant classifications increases when a chemical is tested in more than one solvent. Moreover, it can be concluded that study results leading to classification in the strongest classes (1A and EXT) seem to be more reliable than those in the weakest classes. This study highlights the importance of considering the variability of the reference data when evaluating non-animal tests.

Fragment pharmacophore-based in silico screening: a powerful approach for efficient lead discovery

A fragmentation–recombination process coupled with fragment-based pharmacophore in silico screening: a tailor-made approach for the discovery of new cosmetics.

Optimization of the IL-8 Luc assay as an in vitro test for skin sensitization

We previously reported a dataset of the IL-8 Luc assay covering reference chemicals published by ECVAM, in which the effects of chemicals on IL-8 promoter activity were evaluated by an IL-8 reporter cell line, THP-G8 cells. To clarify its performance, we created another dataset of 88 sensitizers and 34 non-sensitizers. Simultaneously, to improve its performance, we changed the incubation time from 5 h to 16 h, deleted the criterion regarding the effects of N-acetylcysteine, and set an exclusion criterion for detergents. These modifications significantly improved its performance. In addition, we examined the following three criteria to judge chemicals as sensitizers: Criterion 1: Fold induction of SLO luciferase activity (FlnSLO-LA)⩾1.4, Criterion 2: the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of FInSLO-LA⩾1.0, Criterion 3: the intersection of criteria 1 and 2. Among them, Criterion 1 produced the best performance, demonstrating that the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity were 81%, 79%, and 90%, respectively. In addition, we found that the IL-8 Luc assay solubilizing chemicals with X-VIVO substantially improved its performance. Finally, the IL-8 Luc assay combined with DPRA and DEREK could improve substantially its performance. These data suggest that the IL-8 Luc assay is a promising test method to screen skin sensitizers.